The Longevity of dSLRs

[Pioneer]

When I was younger I used to love taking pictures in the rain. Sometimes light drizzles turn to roaring downpours. I have had my Canon 1Ds and 17-40 in the midst of a pouring rainstorm with no problems but I do admit I was extremely nervous the entire time.

I have also used a Minolta SRT in the same conditions and ended up having to send it in for a complete teardown, parts repair and lubrication when things began gumming up inside. Just because those old cameras were not packed full of electronics does not mean they were immune to water. Corrosion can be just as crippling as fried electronics.

The only mechanical camera I have ever successfully used in the rain with no serious trouble has been my LX, and it was also well sealed. Unfortunately the lenses were not so I ended up with a nice 35mm that had to be sent in for cleanup and lubrication. It did take several exposures to reach that point but it still happened.

I hear that the Pentax K7 and K5 are also well sealed but again you need a lens that is also sealed to be confident.

 

[StoneNYC]

Just thought I'd chime in here with the story of my Canon 7D that got rained on (fairly wet) and died after I'd only owned it 2 weeks. Never had any other camera die so quickly! The 7D was originally marketed as weather sealed but when I approached Canon about this they said "weather resistant" and pointed out that just about everywhere is sealed, except the shutter button. Which leads straight to the main board,

I've got a 400D from 2007 which is still fine, except for the batteries. So I suppose it's anyone's guess how long they'll last. With that amount of electronics inside, they are definitely not as robust as the mechanical units of the past.

I like to point out I'm Canon's behalf, that all the cameras are rated for certain kinds of rainfall. The 7D if not all rated for heavy rainfall and in fact is not even rated for a light drizzle only for humidity levels as far as I understand, The 5D and all of the L series lenses are rated for a light drizzle, and only the 1D series and the more expensive L series lenses are rated for heavy drizzle.

You should check your documentation before taking her camera out into the rain to see what levels your cameras rated for.

I once took both my 5D, and my 1V, out during Hurricane Sandy and ended up getting covered with a giant 20 foot wave after being out in the storm for over two hours, after that my 5D stopped functioning but my 1V was still working, I knew that my camera wasn't rated for that kind of rainfall but I took the chance anyway and got some amazing pictures, that said it does show that the even the 5D is fairly robust considering what I put it through. I'm sure if I had a 1D series camera I probably wouldn't have had the breakdown issues with water that I did with my 5D. next time I will use a rain cover...


Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[RalphLambrecht]

DSLR longevity is limited by it's time 'til obsolecense, which is likely shorter

 

[indigo]

DSLR longevity is limited by it's time 'til obsolecense, which is likely shorter

But what is obsolecense? To me it's obsolete only if you can not use it any more although it still works like new. For example you can't buy the memory card or battery that fit it any more. You can not open the files from it any more. And those things do happen but it would take a long time.

 

[spacer]

I've been using and abusing my XSi since they were still bragging about it, and other than a few scuffs and wear spots, it's still chugging along nicely.

Still, this is an issue that the apug side of this thing can use as a pretty firm soapbox. I have cameras far older than I am, still fully functional and capable of taking marvelous photos. It's just a pain to get 'em processed these days.

 

[toyotadesigner]

Just google for 'tin whiskers' and you know how long a DSLR will live. It's a problem that has not yet been solved.

I'm working with cameras from 1974 and a tad younger with film. Most people think I am crazy or mad, because I don't work with digital. But I am glad I have these old and proven tools in my box. OK, I do some work (layouts) with digital, but the real jobs are done with film. Guess why... no electronics! No tin whiskers. No failure of kinky or mad PCBs or sensors.

 

[rbultman]

There are mitigations for tin whisker growth including gold contacts and lubrication of connectors and conformal coating of PCBs. These merely extend the life however. How much so is dependent on the materials used. A design life of 20 years is economically possible.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

 

[Pioneer]

Just google for 'tin whiskers' and you know how long a DSLR will live. It's a problem that has not yet been solved.

I'm working with cameras from 1974 and a tad younger with film. Most people think I am crazy or mad, because I don't work with digital. But I am glad I have these old and proven tools in my box. OK, I do some work (layouts) with digital, but the real jobs are done with film. Guess why... no electronics! No tin whiskers. No failure of kinky or mad PCBs or sensors.

Everything built by man has potential failure issues, even the pyramids. Tin whiskers are just one more to add to the list.

To be completely honest, if any of my digital cameras keep trucking along for 20 years I will be thrilled. However I suspect that they will be hopelessly obsolete long before they reach that age.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

For the last 7 years, I shot most things with a Pentax *ist D (one of the earlier Pentax dSLRs) with some degree of success. Last week, however, my trusty *ist D died. The electronics have burnt themselves out. I've switched to a Pentax MX because I can't afford the Pentax K-5 of my dreams, and I never used automatic settings anyway. Even still… I wonder how long a K-5 would last if I bought one new. My MX is certainly old, at least 27 years old, and it survived this long. My *ist D didn't last to 4 years good before needing a $250 repair to its electronics, and now the same problem has taken the camera out for good. It doesn't inspire much confidence, but I've only ever owned one dSLR.

Here are a couple questions for you good folk: how long do you expect your dSLR(s) to last? What have been your experiences with the average dSLR's repairability and longevity?

I expect them to be technically outdated before they die.So far, every Nikon DSLRI bought lasted at least5 years before I replaced it with a newer model

 

[John_M_King]

I have not looked through all of the pages but those I did read have made no mention of the Nikon D100. My 1st DSLR. Isn't it odd that you only very rarely see one for sale 2nd hand now and they are only 16/17 yrs old at the most. OK, they had quite a low pixel count but I was able to get a decent A3 out of mine. I went back to film then dabbled a bit more, didn't like it that much so stayed with film for most of the time> Currently have 2 DSLR's a D90 and a D700. and 4 film cameras, only one of which is relatively new (F6) and I enjoy using them far more than the DSLR's. Two of the film cameras (Minolta SRT100 and and XE1) are at least 35 to 40 years old and one a Nikon F601 must be at least 25 years old. All woprk perfectly and simply do the job.

 

[Chan Tran]

Things do failed but I believe my cameras will out last myself.

 

[Eric Rose]

I have a Nikon D70s that I use exclusively for macro shots. Still works like a charm.

 

[Agulliver]

I don't have that much experience with different DSLR's because my Nikon D50 has been doing what it was bought to do for over a decade. However, it's shutter has fired 87% of it's expected life, according to the info embedded in the files....so can I expect it to last another decade? Probably not...but it's done well. Especially compared to any level of compact digital camera I've ever used, which all seem to die in around five years.

However....my Zeiss Ikon 516/20 is still trucking after nearly 80 years, and has had no repairs of any sort since about 1960.
My beloved Praktica BX20S is going well after 23 years and one major repair after I dropped it on a stone floor. The Nikon F601M has also been dropped such that the case is cracked but works like the day it was unboxed.

I guess the amount and complexity of electronics in a DSLR...in any digital camera...is orders of magnitude greater than any film camera. More to go wrong means a shorter life span on average. Almost all film SLRs are over 10 years old now, and any problematic ones would have showed themselves. It is not a huge surprise that an electromechanical device which has been giving good service for 20 years continues to do so.

While I am still happy with the D50, if it dies in the next couple of years I will have the perfect reason to upgrade. And I know I've had my money's worth out of the D50.

 

[cooltouch]

I'm late to this discussion, but I thought I should add my own experiences.

I have a Canon EOS Rebel XS (aka 1000D) that my wife bought for me as a Christmas present for Christmas 2008. During my first year of ownership, I had to send it in to Canon for warranty repair 3 times! But since then it has been problem free and it's approaching 9 years old now. I still use it occasionally, but I bought a Sony NEX 7 -- used -- a couple years ago and it gets most of my digital use now. I don't know how old my NEX is. Anyway, I anticipate perhaps still a few more years of life out of my Canon XS? Who knows.

Back in about 2003, I bought my first decent digital camera. It's a Fuji 3000s -- a 3.1mp "dslr" and I used the snot out of that thing before I got my Canon. I put quotes around dslr because it's one of those fixed-lens jobs that Fuji makes but which is still a ttl camera. I don't think it has a mirror box, though. Anyway, that old thing still works too. Plus I have a Canon A1000IS, a point and shoot digicam, that is as old as my EOS, and it is still going strong. Now, will any of these cameras last as long as my Canon old F-1s or FTbs? That I really doubt. Will they last as long as my T90 or my F4? Again, doubtful. But it is at least within the realm of possibility. Perhaps a more realistic question that I would ask myself though would be, why would I want to bother with that ancient technology, except in a fit of reminiscence? And I am seldom reminiscent over old electronics technology. But I guess there's always a first time for anything. Who knows, those pieces that survive may end up being collectible someday? That I kind of doubt, though. I don't see any appreciation in prices for the Minolta Maxxum 7000, the camera that ushered in the AF boom.

 

[removed account4]

i still use a D100 purchased in around 2000, and a d200 that has a lot of miles on it too
they both work perfectly fine. ( just used the 200 yesterday and the 100 a few months ago )
maybe eventually they will break down, and by that time i will need something new to use.
sometimes it is called "planned obsolescence" like when the dishwasher breaks after 7 years and
can't be fixed or the dehumidifier ... but since the dishwasher or dehumidifier were new in those 7 years
things that are more efficient have taken their place and cost less than the dishwasher or dehumidifier cost 7 years before.
i would like it if i could use my d200 for a few more years after it dies, but i am guessing nikon's low-entry dslr that will
take the same lenses i use will be 100x better than the d200 and cost less than i bought the 200 for to begin with.
i am the kind of person who uses stuff until they can't be fixed anymore ( i used to use a cobbler to fix my shoes until i was told by the cobbler
i could get a new pair of the same shoes for less than what it would cost to fix the old ones ) ...
my watch's main spring is being replaced as i type this ...

 

[RalphLambrecht]

For the last 7 years, I shot most things with a Pentax *ist D (one of the earlier Pentax dSLRs) with some degree of success. Last week, however, my trusty *ist D died. The electronics have burnt themselves out. I've switched to a Pentax MX because I can't afford the Pentax K-5 of my dreams, and I never used automatic settings anyway. Even still… I wonder how long a K-5 would last if I bought one new. My MX is certainly old, at least 27 years old, and it survived this long. My *ist D didn't last to 4 years good before needing a $250 repair to its electronics, and now the same problem has taken the camera out for good. It doesn't inspire much confidence, but I've only ever owned one dSLR.

Here are a couple questions for you good folk: how long do you expect your dSLR(s) to last? What have been your experiences with the average dSLR's repairability and longevity?

I typically upgrade to a newer Nikon model every 3-5 years,started with D70 and are now using D800;never had a complete system failure yet

 

[blockend]

My Canon DSLR is almost 7 years old and hasn't missed a beat. In that time 3 mirrorless cameras have died.

 

[Ai Print]

I usually upgrade them every new body cycle since they are usually fairly worn in by then anyway, 100,000-150,000 shutter cycles.

 

[Cholentpot]

Still using a T2i. It's getting a bit dated though...

 

[wiltw]

Of course, I'm more interested in how long dSLRs are supposed to last than what to do about my own situation. I'm set on shooting film. It's fun. (;

So, you buy fairly close to most camera manufacturer's ~18month release cycle. I do this with cellphones, as they tend to start failing after 2 years anyway (mostly the LCD starts yellowing and slowly burning inside).

Why do you sell your cameras? Professional needs? (lol—I'm starting to sound like a survey, but I think that's okay.)

Electronic items have 'indefinite' lifetimes, it is the mechanical parts that are more prone to failure! Manufacturers have MTBF figures, but that is an average of 'all causes of failure'...and they have mean lifetime for mechanical parts like shutters, but shutters fail BEFORE the mean as well as well passed the mean!

Why do I sell my cameras? In the past it was to get new features and IQ improvements, and selling the old camera financed the upgrade. But now I have a Canon 7DII yet I kept my Canon 40D...it serves as a backup spare camera, as it has little residual value on the used market although the camera is still very usable, takes great photos, and has less than 20k exposure actuations on a shutter tha is supposed to last 100k.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

My Canon 5DII works as well as it did when new, but my Wireless File Transmitter (WFT-E4IIA) for that body is experiencing obsolesence. It has a USB port for GPS devices and writing to external drives. It's convenient to be able to back up to a flash drive, or write in two different formats to the card in the camera and to an external flash drive, but it only can write to such devices formatted as FAT32, and Windows--even old versions of Windows that have been kept up to date--will format USB flash drives to exFAT, which the Canon WFT doesn't understand. So I keep a couple of old USB drives just for the Canon and hope I don't have to reformat them at some point. I doubt there's any chance of a firmware update for something that's 7 years old, but I've written to Canon about it.

100+ year old American Optical 11x14" camera still running fine.

 

[Tom Cross]

We are getting to the point with dslrs that even the latest models are only a modest improvement from their predecessors. There are limits to what we actually need and what is physically possible/economically viable and I think only in the next 10 years or so will we start seeing just how well made these cameras really are.

A friend recently found an old Nikon D50 he was given for work, he didn't have the charger and the battery was either flat or knackered. He asked me to have a look at it (knowing I'm not frightened of dismantling stuff!) Not wanting to spend any money on it we chopped up a USB lead and charged it with bare wires for an hour and it fired up and worked perfectly. We've since treated it to a new charger but considering it is "only" 6.1mp it's a very good camera. I've no experience with Nikon gear but if a 2005 camera can be ressurected after 5 years of living in a damp workshop I think there is definitely hope for newer stuff.

 

[Pioneer]

I have two or three Pentax *ist DL cameras that record at "only" 6.1 mp but with the newer post processing software out there I don't normally find it to be a real limitation. RAW files still hold an amazing amount of information that can be accessed. There are some menu limitations that need to be worked with but these are not that big a deal.

I don't know about the older Nikons but the Pentax digitals have excellent color capabilities.

Of course, if you need 3 meter by 4 meter enlargements you probably won't be happy with your results. Additionally, if you are in the habit of cropping your photographs quite heavily then you quickly begin to run out of space. But if you're careful with your compositions then the RAW files give excellent, resizable results that look pretty good at 13x19.

My Pentax K10D is even better and gives amazing enlargement and manipulation capability from its 10mp files.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

I occasionally post stock photos to Alamy, and once when I had an upload problem, around 3 years ago, they were already saying that maybe the full-res 21Mpix JPEGs from my Canon 5DII were larger than necessary for their purposes. I haven't felt any need to upgrade the camera body. If I want a higher resolution digital image, I can shoot large format and scan.

 

[mshchem]

I recently bought a mint Nikon D3, 8100 clicks. $579 US bucks. I am having a ball playing with this. 12 Mpix, is plenty. I also have a D800. The D3 feels like a Porsche. Very sexy camera. In 10 years maybe I can find a D5 for 600 bucks. I bought a D200 new for something like 1400 dollars, never used it. I still prefer medium format film. I ended up selling the D200 for 200 bucks. For me buying a nice pro level DSLR that's several years old makes sense. It's still miraculous that I can shoot 9 frames a second, the buffer fills after 40 or 50 shots, and I have to pause for a few seconds.
For me the weak link is how to edit, print and store all the images.
Mike