Anyone besides me notice the advisories on digitals?

[zuikologist]

Peter

I would have to agree that the Bronica does not sound too good. 100 rolls is not excessive at all (a pro would get through 100 rolls in a few weeks!).

 

[GeneW]

I know I am treading old ground and not wishing to start a digi/film flame war, but I am old school when it comes to cameras, and any other high quality consumer durables such as watches, hi-fi, tv.

I hear ya! That's why I have a Rollei, Hassy and Leica. But I like the new stuff too -- and I picked up a used Canon Digital Rebel with kit lens for $600 Cdn. How can you go wrong?? I like using it with my older Zuiko lenses.

Gene

 

[Honu-Hugger]

There may be a bell curve to this reliability, as well. My impression is that some of the most reliable film cameras were made in the '60's to early '80's...Canon F1, Nikon F2, Leicaflex, Rollei, along with seemingly reliant lesser variations like the Nikkormat cameras come to mind (I am intentionally not promoting my personal biases 🙂).

 

[zuikologist]

Now, if only I could find a used Canon Rebel for $600Cdn..........

(seriously, the 350D looks like good bang for the buck and probably worth the extra $. I have been adding some Super Takumar glass and an EOS adaptor to the growing camera pile over the last few months, in preparation for a DSLR ;-).

 

[MacDaddy]

Robert

It is unfair to compare matured film camera technology with yet maturing digital camera technology.

Bob

I somewhat agree about the comparison, but remember, as has been pointed out, that most times with a film camera you can either keep shooting or shoot with some workarounds, whereas with digital it's pretty much an "all or nothing" affair. The "point", if any, is that this maturing technology is having some teething problems and they are quite expensive. A friend has the Canon 1DS mkII, for which he spent $8,000 just for the body and it's spent more time at the repair facility (and been replaced twice with a new body!) than it has in his hands being used. Not a pretty situation for ANY photographer!
I guess what I'm trying to imply is that we don't need to feel inferior in ANY way to the digital guys with our film cameras. Having been in IT for 27 years, I know how much it bites sometimes to be on the "bleeding edge", as a lot of these guys are. Having said that, however, to the guys thinking about going digital, In the 5 years I was in it, I only had one partial failure and I was able to keep shooting with the camera, so go buy one and have fun if you want! As for film, I had a Nikon FM3a slr that should have been painted lemon yellow. But that's another story for another day...8o)

 

[zuikologist]

Honu

I think you are right. The Nikon SLR lineage goes all the way back to their rangefinders of the 50's/60's - you would hope Nikon would get the basic engineering right after 20 or 30 years. Similarly, Pentax dates back to at least the Spotmatic etc etc.

The bell curve probably started its downturn perhaps in the mid-80's, when the generic Cosina cameras appeared badged for other manufacturers (Nikon, Olympus, Canon T series and all of the others). We have possibly reached that point with digicams (Samsung produces for Sony). The same fate is probably not far for DSLR's.

 

[zuikologist]

MacDaddy

I have heard the same for the 350D which is where the reliability concern comes in.

The basic camera shell should be ok (it is after all basically a gutted film AF body). The electronics are the issue. If you speak to some of the older repairers, they are surprisingly not anti-digital and say that most things can be repaired. Unfortunately, digicams and DSLR's are not DESIGNED to be repaired and that is where much of the cost comes in. There is an assumed reliability which is perhaps not there yet.

As has been mentioned, modular design or a totally different form factor (to aid cooling of the CCD or protect the electronics) might be the answer.

 

[Honu-Hugger]

Whatever failures may be occurring aside, I must admit to being favorably impressed by the mecahnical aspects of my friend's Canon 1DS mkII (never would have remembered the name until you mentioned it, thank you Rob); all buttons and knobs are o-ring sealed, body seems very robust (although beastly as well compared to say... a Contax IIa 😉).

I've only owned two digital cameras: a very early Agfa P&S which did not fail and my present Sony DSC-V1 which is also still going strong. As for the Sony it could fail tomorrow and I can't imagine even investigating having it repaired -- I'd probably just replace it. That's how I feel about digital: I don't have any strong attachment to the gear -- it's just plastic and IC's. Of course if I had $8K in a Canon repair would be another story 😀!!!

 

[Kin Lau]

Now, if only I could find a used Canon Rebel for $600Cdn..........

(seriously, the 350D looks like good bang for the buck and probably worth the extra $. I have been adding some Super Takumar glass and an EOS adaptor to the growing camera pile over the last few months, in preparation for a DSLR ;-).

The 350D/XT body is currently $999- CDN. The 300D was down to about $750- shortly after the 350D introduction.

The *istDL is going for $819- CDN body only, $929 w/ the DA18-55.

The Nikon D50 is going for $799- CDN.

Prices are all quoted from SimonsCameras.com, which is where I got my 350D.

Henrys.com actually has 2 used DReb's for $599-CDN and $649-CDN.

 

[Rob]

Sounds like the Canon problems were simply bad solder joints that they will fix for free.
I have to look at how these DSLRs are used..where we might shoot 1 roll of film on something with a digital you may shoot 200 shots or more since its basically free shooting.
Often these DSLRS keep going until the shutters fail in the many 10s of thousand of shots.
Install a new shutter for $300 or so and keep shooting.
Meanwhile you already paid for that camera several times over in film costs savings.
Case in point a friend of mine that does some commercial shooting switched to digital a few years ago. First year he saved over $6,000 worth of film costs and processing.
So first year he paid $2000 for the camera and kept $4000 in his pocket, next year he kept $6000 in his pocket, 3rd year another $6000...

Thats a backup camera now and still working...Even my digital point and shoot cost broke even after 450 pictures. So even if it breaks today I am way ahead since I am over 600 pictures now. I dont think we will ever put these on display in our collection 20 years from now as collectors items but they have their place. These arent the chrome and brass cameras from yesteryear but basically plastic disposable cameras.

 

[Honu-Hugger]

Sounds like the Canon problems were simply bad solder joints that they will fix for free.
I have to look at how these DSLRs are used..where we might shoot 1 roll of film on something with a digital you may shoot 200 shots or more since its basically free shooting.
Often these DSLRS keep going until the shutters fail in the many 10s of thousand of shots.
Install a new shutter for $300 or so and keep shooting.
Meanwhile you already paid for that camera several times over in film costs savings.
Case in point a friend of mine that does some commercial shooting switched to digital a few years ago. First year he saved over $6,000 worth of film costs and processing.
So first year he paid $2000 for the camera and kept $4000 in his pocket, next year he kept $6000 in his pocket, 3rd year another $6000...

Thats a backup camera now and still working...Even my digital point and shoot cost broke even after 450 pictures. So even if it breaks today I am way ahead since I am over 600 pictures now. I dont think we will ever put these on display in our collection 20 years from now as collectors items but they have their place. These arent the chrome and brass cameras from yesteryear but basically plastic disposable cameras.

True...my friend with the two Canon's is a working pro. It was pure economics for him and he admittedly just blasts away more so than he ever did with film, although I doubt film costs deterred him too much from shooting what he wanted before.

 

[zuikologist]

Kin

Thank you for those prices. The 350D is about £550 UK with a kit lens ($1400 Cdn?). The 300D s hard to find now. I will have to start deGASing or save some pennies. I suspect the next wave of model upgrades might be a good time to buy the 350D - Christmas or early next year? this also allows time for production/reliability glitches to be worked out.

 

[Bertram2]

Seems the big boys of digital have all issued advisories about their camera sensors within the last two weeks—Canon, Nikon, Fuji and Sony have all put out warnings about their camera's sensors going "tango uniform" and really messing up the pictures they take
Sure glad I use FILM cameras, and especially RF film cameras, aren't you? ;o)

There is a bunch of good reasons why I still keep my fingers off digital but I admit I had not thought that much about the reliabillity or lifecycle prob .
Now reading it am not surprised tho, isn't that the same crap as we suffer from since we have to live with embedded systems in each and every thing, no matter if a waltz-dancing-and-singing super-dildo or a BMW 530i for $ 75.000 ?

We are living in an age where all mechanical probs finally are under control, a normal car runs 250.000 mls nowadays without any serious mechanical probs if you treat it decently. But now electronic systems are driving us mad and empty our wallets and make sure that there be will no BMW 530i still running in 2055 while a 1938 BMW 328 will still run then.

As long as possible I'll keep my photo hobby out of this trouble, there is enuff other trouble keeping me busy. A year ago my 5yo dishwasher died, mechanically in top condition as they confirmed but the processing unit was dead and the repair would have been the half of a new one.

Thought already about buying a japanese car (!!! AAARRGHHH!!!) because the Europeans don't get their electronic probs under control, don't feel like acting as a beta tester for BMW , Mercedes or Volkswagen.

I have to use a PC and a scanner, maybe a printer too one day ( NOT sure !) and that is enuff digital photography for me, at least my cameras will use an analog medium as long as possible. Not only because of the picture quality but also because of my blood pressure which does not stand any more embedded systems !
Not to speak of my wallet. 😀

Bertram

 

[ywenz]

That's why we semi-pros don't use the stupid P&S cameras. You shouldn't be comparing anything film+good lens to a $400 P&S.. The DSLR sensors were not mentioned in their advisories..

 

[RObert Budding]

I'll probably buy a DSLR at some point (lower prices would help). But I'll probably always shoot film because I love darkroom work. And the results are outstanding.

Robert

 

[Bertram2]

That's why we semi-pros don't use the stupid P&S cameras. You shouldn't be comparing anything film+good lens to a $400 P&S.. The DSLR sensors were not mentioned in their advisories..

I was talking more about the general prob caused by complex electronic designs than about the mentioned advisories.
The digital P&S are surely the worst way to waste your money but i know enuff folks with probs concerning amateur and prosumer DSLRS too. That's not a matter of sensor type, rather of QM which is in principle always the more expensive the more complex a system is. Old story.
.

 

[Kin Lau]

That's why we semi-pros don't use the stupid P&S cameras. You shouldn't be comparing anything film+good lens to a $400 P&S.. The DSLR sensors were not mentioned in their advisories..

The Fuji S2 Pro was mentioned, and it's a DSLR.

 

[ywenz]

The Fuji S2 Pro was mentioned, and it's a DSLR.

that's why you stick with the 1st tier manufactures like Canon and Nikon for your DSLR needs.. other filler-brands need not apply..

How many generations of Nikon and Canon DSLRs have we seen already? They're all field-tested and approved. Fuji... pfftt

 

[RJBender]

There may be a bell curve to this reliability, as well. My impression is that some of the most reliable film cameras were made in the '60's to early '80's...Canon F1, Nikon F2, Leicaflex, Rollei, along with seemingly reliant lesser variations like the Nikkormat cameras come to mind (I am intentionally not promoting my personal biases 🙂).

Several years ago I dropped a Nikkormat FT3 on to a hardwood floor. It hit flat on the baseplate. The meter and everything else was fine. I mentioned it to a technician who used to work for a major camera manufacturer (not Nikon) and Mark said the Nikkormat FT3 was one of the best cameras ever made in his opinion. But that was 15 years ago...

R.J.