What is "reliability" for you?

Brian Sweeney said:
Reliability in a computer is 5 year mean time between failure. I have a twelve-year computer that continues to work and I use it everyday. It has a 17 year old 1GByte hard drive in it.

Classic Mechanical cameras were built to last a lifetime. Of course, the ones I use are older than I am so they have met their design goals and can fail at anytime. That's what a repair is for.
Click to expand...

is this means that we should expect reliability from NEW product only (as the old one is waiting for it's time to die?)
is there anyhow, a data, realistic measurement of reliability, such MTBF(mean time between failure) for a new product, ever published?
Assume this way, i'm looking for a reliable RF, a lot say: it's leica. But how do i know if a new MP will more reliable than an old m3? Should i rely on user opinions, or just waste $ 2k just to test it? A camera at this cost, should give you a waranty of a lifetime !! A direct new replacement if it fail before 10 year, maybe. But yet, no one know until they buy it.

Look at dslr world, when they say it's weather proof, it is tested again heat and cold condition, mechanically and electronically tested agains a certain amount of benchmark point. Even they rent professional photographer to test it, to see how it endures and as well to gain more customer trust if it survive. But an RF? How do i know? Did leica, zeiss ikon, or even voigtlander(cosina) ever done it?

If my 50$ zorki last forever, i have very high expectation on camera priced 10x more than the zorki.
 
pb908 said:
iA camera at this cost, should give you a waranty of a lifetime !!
Click to expand...

Amen, brother.

And for the price of a Titanium M9 they should send someone around every damn week to polish the damn thing :rolleyes: My last car cost significantly less than a Titanium M9 and has been totally reliable the past 5 years. It will easily last another 5. But that M9 will be close to landfill by then. And for a MP you wouldn't be able toget film :D
 
JSU said:
I thought my M2 was reliable.

Now I have to find the source of deep scratches that have just reared their ugly head on the film base in the last week. Five rolls through the M2 are equally scratched, three from the M4 are fine. It's not the baseplate, or on the cassette side as the final frame of each roll isn't scratched. Lot's of Healing Brush needed today.

Back to the topic, I consider the Leica M2, M3 & M4 as the epitomy of reliable, just a bit better than a Nikon F2.

Still, I almost always carry two cameras, just because stuff happens.
Click to expand...

The only camera I would take above all others if given a once in a lifetime shot would be a serviced Nikon F2.
No rangefinder issues, no light leaks, no electrics.
IMHO the best 35mm camera ever.
Next up would be an M6.
Plenty of cameras are reliable, even cheap ones but for solid dependability the old Nikon's are hard to beat.
The F was great but the F2 improved on it.
This thread has made me think about what I believe is the best and most reliable set up I've used and it's got to be an F2 with a 35 R Summicron.
 
nobbylon said:
The only camera I would take above all others if given a once in a lifetime shot would be a serviced Nikon F2.
No rangefinder issues, no light leaks, no electrics.
IMHO the best 35mm camera ever.
Next up would be an M6.
Plenty of cameras are reliable, even cheap ones but for solid dependability the old Nikon's are hard to beat.
The F was great but the F2 improved on it.
This thread has made me think about what I believe is the best and most reliable set up I've used and it's got to be an F2 with a 35 R Summicron.
Click to expand...

'Serviced'? Only if I'd put several films through it since the service.

How did the F2 improve? We had both in the studio where I worked in the mid-70s, and we regarded the F as more reliable, on empirical evidence. Marty Forscher reckoned the same too (I knew him well enough that we were on first name terms, a great honour for me).

I'd as happily use any of my Ms, film or digital, as an F. But for the 'shot of a lifetime' I'd try to shoot on 2 cameras, no matter what system I was using.

Cheers,

R.
 
NOTHING is fail-proof.

Reliability is the probability (%) that something will function as intended over a defined period of time under certain conditions.

The variables are: intended functions, period of time, and conditions of operation

Once you have defined these three variables, choose your expected level of reliability (and, no, 100 % is not an option). Work out what is needed to achieve this (materials, design, number of backups, costs, etc).

Again, even if you expect 100%, you are not going to get it.
 
My D700 screams 'reliable' to me ... my M8 never quite made me feel that way! :p
 
Roger Hicks said:
'Serviced'? Only if I'd put several films through it since the service.

How did the F2 improve? We had both in the studio where I worked in the mid-70s, and we regarded the F as more reliable, on empirical evidence.
.
Click to expand...


+1 on testing things after servicing but before shooting anything serious!

The F2s reliability isn't improved over the F in my experience, it's usability though is. Just the higher top shutter speed, better self timer and much more convenient back design make me more likely to reach for it than my F.


Both are top on my list for reliability... I haven't had any problems with an M or Nikon RF, although I have had cameras of both brand that had slight RF misalignments that were only visible in pictures when shot wide open; leading to some major disappointments. It's hard to beat an F or F2.
 
Last edited:
well, it's been said above, but trusty old friends sure deserve a little push each time a chance will present itself... "reliable" means it has nikon written on it (in my case, yes, it usually has a little "F2" in front of the serial number)

:cool:
 
hmmm... so it goes something like this... somebody cares about reliability so he googles "reliable camera" and finds this thread... sees F2 all over the place so he gets one... since he was a reliability freak to begin with, he soon finds himself posting in a similar thread... and then somebody who cares about...

when did it start?

:)
 
Roger Hicks said:
'Serviced'? Only if I'd put several films through it since the service.

How did the F2 improve? We had both in the studio where I worked in the mid-70s, and we regarded the F as more reliable, on empirical evidence. Marty Forscher reckoned the same too (I knew him well enough that we were on first name terms, a great honour for me).

I'd as happily use any of my Ms, film or digital, as an F. But for the 'shot of a lifetime' I'd try to shoot on 2 cameras, no matter what system I was using.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

MCJC86 said it for me!
I agree it has nothing to do with reliability. F2 is just more user friendly, more so with meter heads. I find the Ftn finders on/off switch annoying.
The F2 just sorted the niggles in the F. I like using my F but it's my F2's I'd take over anything.
 
stop the F2 campaign :D

let's talk about RF !!!

anybody have another opinion other then NIKON F2 ? :)
how is your zorki, fed, zeiss ikon, canon Rf, etc ??
 
Reliable means I don't have to think about it.

My Zeiss Ikon comes close, but it did fail me in cold weather once, and I haven't had the chance to re-assert whether it was a camera or battery problem...
 
JSU said:
My greatest issue with the M8.2 is battery life and condition. Too many times I have literally had the bottom fall out of a battery in either of my M8.2's. In one moment I have one bar and the next no battery display and no camera function. The last firmware update addressed the shutter fault issues that plagued the camera early on.

This is one attribute of of the Nikon D3 / D700 that I really appreciate. Not only do they provide the most usable and accurate battery level meter I've seen, they also are very good at evaluating the remaining battery life. Also, the Nikon battery charger has a built-in conditioning circuit, lacking in the charger for the digital Leica M cameras.

The D3 is as good as it gets for more than just its sensor. The entire camera system works well. IMHO, it the most reliable digital camera available.

I never had a mechanical failure with a Nikon F2 used daily as a PJ's tool. I can't say the same for the Nikon F's I used. Regardless of the camera, when photography was my livelihood, redundancy was a fact of life. As for lasting a lifetime, any tool must be cared-for and receive periodic maintenance, be it a battery change or a full-blown CLA.
Click to expand...


I had an interesting battery situation a week ago that made me realise what battery hogs M8's are. The morning before having to shoot a gallery opening I went to put my D700's battery on charge and got no response from the charger at all ... it was dead. We'd had a huge electrical storm earlier in the week with a ground stike very near by that caused an electrical surge through the house that blew a few bulbs and killed my darkroom radio! It seems it also did my charger in!

A little nervously I headed off to the galley opening with a half charged battery only to be amazed that after 200+ shots that night the charge level didn't drop very much at all and that included a lot of chimping and deleting trying to get decent exposures! The same situation with the M8 would have been a disaster! Why does the Leica suck so much power ... there's no refelx mirror after all?

What amazed me even more was, I got a new non genuine charger from eBay for fourteen dollars from an Australian seller that works perfectly ... in fact it's a better design than the original IMO. Sometimes it's just good to have what everyone else has. :)
 
What does reliable mean to me?

Triple or quadruple redundancy, NASA style. Three or four APU's, etc.

The space shuttle Discovery.

The Leica that fell out of a fighter jet over the desert; was recovered; was still working.

My M2. It has never broken or done anything wrong since I bought it in 1961.

My Marantz 7C preamp.

Timex watches: takes a lickin' and keeps on tickin.'

1958 VW beetle.

Porter's acrylic latex bonding primer.

My film Nikons: FE2, FA. Too soon to tell about the D300, but so far so good.

Stanley 60 1/2P block plane.

Sony 13" TV I bought in 1967.

Ektagraphic projectors. They get noisy, but they keep on running.
 
N I K O N !
Tested time and time again. I remember when my D2H was hit by a bucket of water at a parade I was covering, I was standing beside a police officer when someone from an apartment balcony threw a bucket of water at the officer and hit me instead, didn't see it coming, it came from three floors above. I thought that was it, i fired a shot and to my surprise it was working, I finished my assignment with that D2H. Brought it in to Nikon the next day. They gave it a CLA and said everything was Ok. It's still working after about 134,000 exposures.
:eek:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom