Keeping digital cameras for a long time

Frida

Established
Local time
12:48 AM
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
57
This site is home to lots of folks who treasure "old" film cameras. However, who else out there enjoys keeping digital cameras for a long time or buying "obsolete" ones? There are plenty of reasons to do so, whether to save money, resist consumerism, avoid feature bloat, have gear you're not afraid of breaking/losing, or simply for the thrill of finding diamonds in the rough. Who else feels similarly, and why did you choose to keep/buy your old digital camera?

As an example...my oldest digicam that I still use frequently is a Panasonic Lumix FZ7. I bought it new in 2006, so it's almost 7 years old. It still works perfectly. I spent years shooting it on P mode, and switched to M mode a couple of years ago, and for the last couple of years, I've used it permanently at the 36mm equivalent setting. It's unusable above ISO 400, and the image quality even at ISO 100 is nothing like that of any of my DSLRs, but it's a good little camera.
 
While I don't own one anymore, I sometimes still look back through my 4MP 1D files and marvel at them. What was that, 2001? Nice to have more cropping latitude now but they still hold their own after 12 years.
 
Still shooting my first DSLR, an Olympus E-410 w/kit lens, bought new but discontinued March 2009 for $340.
So lets see, that is 4 years and counting. I have to tape the card door shut (one of the two plastic latch tabs broke) but will continue to use it until it suffers a fatal failure. Don't feel the need for anything better.
 
I will probably keep my D700 until it dies. It is just that good, even thought there are newer bodies with more/better specs.

If I ever get a digital M,I will keep,it until it dies too.
 
Had planned on selling my Canon G10 when I got my Olympus OMD, but I can't bear to get rid of it. After almost 5 years, it truly takes me no thought whatsoever to snap a quick photo, and I know beforehand whether it'll be good or not.
 
If you look at the used market, there are a ton of DSLRs from the early 2000s that still function perfectly. We are getting to the point now where cameras are giving us a lot more than we actually need. I see people keeping there digital cameras for a lot longer now.
 
I am still using a Pentax ist DL2 from the early 2000s. 6.1 megapixel does not sound like much anymore, but it still produces great images even today. The focus motor died, or the connections did, but it still works great with a KatzEye split image screen installed.
 
Still shooting My first digital Olympus C2500L (1999) 2.5 MP makes beautiful 8X10s

still shot my Canon D30, D60, 30D, Nikon D2H , D200 and D300S
 

Attachments

  • ZFRONT.JPG
    ZFRONT.JPG
    14 KB · Views: 0
  • PB1800061.jpg
    PB1800061.jpg
    51.4 KB · Views: 0
My only DSLR is a D200 that I bought used, and I'm not planning on upgrading any time soon. It does everything I need, and I've gotten some really nice shots with it.
 
M8 since 2006
D70 since 2004
Still using both
Why not?
Will not buy another DSLR until the D70 breaks, but I do have an M9 (since 2009). Again I expect to use it until it breaks.

Cheers,

R.
 
Last edited:
Early digital cameras were built to very high specs, to justify the high retail prices. My first digital camera was a Nikon Coolpix 990. I bought it new and used it quite heavily. It still works and it still provides images that are more than adequate for a lot of purposes.
 
I've been using a Canon 4Mp Ixus 400 for a couple of years. This is modified for IR work. It makes good images even at 4Mp.

8842835797_a5c5667640_o.jpg


Old miners track, Scottish Highlands.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom