Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > General Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 6, 2002, 11:39 PM   #11
steve's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,535
Default Re: How long will a digital camera last!!!

Originally Posted by jmcdev1
I remember reading a few months ago that the lenses in most digital cameras, excluding the dSLR's, only have so many cycles built into them. I can't remember exact numbers, but 2000 or 3000 sticks in my mind. I remember thinking that I might go through my camera alarmingly soon at the rate I shoot! These are the point and shoot cameras, and they aren't designed to last more than a few years unfortunately. It will be interesting to see how long it lasts, since my daughter is salivating on the back of my neck to get a new one and give it to her. So it will be in the family for a long while.
I've put thousands and thousands of exposures on the Nikon 950, 990 and 995 that I use for our product photos for the reviews. I have yet to have worn one out, I have given them away and they're still being used to this day.

steve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 2002, 3:13 AM   #12
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 135

I am still using my Sanyo VPC-X350 that I bought in 1999, I must have taken thousands of photos and it still is going strong, cost me $400 back than and it is made of metal not plastic.
I just needed to upgrade to a 2mp camera for better detail, other than that, I don't think there is a time limit on a digital camera other than going obsolete.
Just like it was mentioned, the technology will change and you will want to buy better.
I buy a 2mp today, than I will want a 4mp tomorrow, but my buget will only allow me a 2mp this time around.
Bill Benson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 2002, 6:31 AM   #13
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 58

If a digital camera only lasts for two or three thousand shots, then I'm in big trouble. I just bought my Fuji S602Z a couple of months ago, and I've already run a couple of thousand frames through it.

I will say this, though--if you've had the Canon for 20 years and you've only run 4000 frames through it, I'd say you have very little to worry about unless you plan on increasing your rate of shooting to something closer to mine.

sever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 2002, 6:51 AM   #14
Senior Member
BillDrew's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Hay River Township, WI
Posts: 2,512

Folks.... Thnxs for the good information. I understand what you are saying but my point of view is this. My Canon A1 is 20 years old and has taken about 4,000 shots. It is working as good today as it did when new. It has not "broke" in all these years. Not once.
In the 2 years I've had my digicam, I have shot about 40,000 pictures - 100 times the rate you have shot at. Likley I am one of the folks here who doesn't use my digicam as much as many others.

As an example, if I am going to shoot pictures at a party - I will shoot three or four hundred and sift down to the best 40 or 50. Makes getting good shots much easier, and makes shooting hand-held at 1/10th sec a real possibility - even if most of them have motion blurr, there will be some good ones.
Don't get me wrong. I am going digital but the cost of Digital is higher that I was led to believe in the sense that I will be spending big bucks every 5 years to stay current.
You won't have to buy a new camera every 5 years, but you will want to. Chemical photography is mature - it doesn't really change that much in a few years. In 200 years, folks will be saying the same kind of things about digital photography compared to their new four dimensional holographic systems.
BillDrew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 2002, 7:44 AM   #15
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 3

Steve, Bill, and others..
I am very thankful to receive such good info from each of you. I have renewed confidence in the dicam format. I recently heard that the "ccd" could be the weak link in time, ( bleaching ) problem???, but like many of you have said there is no noticeable problems to date with image quality with your cameras. Good news for all!!!!
Wayne Foster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 8, 2002, 3:19 PM   #16
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 82

On the lighter side. Your digicam will last until you knock it off the table.
david is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2002, 2:28 AM   #17
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,162

All the technological change issues have been well said. If you like a cam, and it's reliable then think about keeping enough 'consumables' for your needs: i'e cam media - and batts if your cam uses proprietary sort.

Watch for any changes in the interface to pc or card formats and make sure you always have the hardware/software to read from the cam. I think AA's will be around for a while.

Eventually, like pc's, you'll see newer cams at lower prices, with better performance and might feel the need to upgrade.
voxmagna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2002, 6:55 AM   #18
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 37

The Apple QuickTake 100 digital camera that I bought in late 1994 still works to this day. Eight years and still ticking. The picture quality is absolutely horrible though, and the camera is essentially useless. Resolution is only 640x480 (0.3 Mpixel), contrast range is very limited, and most of the features that you find on digital cameras today had not even been thought up in 1994. The camera cost something like $700 when I bought it.

Fast forward to the Nikon 950 and 995's that I bought over the past few years for roughly the same price, and then to the Canon D60 that I bought just a few months ago. No comparison.

Like all the others have said already, it's not that the camera won't work after a few years - it's that you won't want it. The interesting thing to note is that the Apple was a "toy" when I bought it, and everyone knew the image quality was horrible. It was horrible the day I bought it, but it was the early days of digital imagery so it was "cool" and easy to overlook the poor quality. The Nikon 995 that I have produces acceptable images today, produced acceptable images the day I bought it, and will still produce acceptable images 8 years from now - even though much better quality cameras will be available. Now that we've reached a level where a Nikon 995 image printed on 4x6 compared to a film camera image printed on 4x6 are roughly (and loosely) equivalent, I'm not so sure people will be as apt to throw their cameras our over time.

Of course, I will continue to replace cameras every year or so, because I am a gadget freak.

norm911 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2002, 6:05 PM   #19
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 79

in this day and age it may last longer than most marriages, hehehe.
rikster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 11, 2002, 2:14 AM   #20
Senior Member
ajitkataria's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 315

seems like the thought came from the bottom of your heart,

just kidding
ajitkataria is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:30 AM.