To replace, or to repair?

[Morca007]

Despite my newfound love of film photography, I find myself entangled in a buying decision relating to digital SLRs.

Our main dSLR has been a FujiFilm S1 Pro, which was in the neighborhood of $3200 when it was bought back in 2000-2001. Today, if you were to replace the CCD (which technically records 3.1 MP images, but interpolates them into 6.2 MP images) and let it output RAW images, it would still be a pro level SLR.

It recently broke, and had to be sent back to Fuji for repairs.

The repairs, we are told, would cost us $450. Now, I'm surprised they are able to repair it at all (7 years is old for digital), but the price point is interesting, because for a mere $175 more, we could replace the camera as a whole with a Nikon D40.

There are a few glaring deficiencies that are stopping me from making an immediate reccomendation:
-It will not AutoFocus any of our lenses. The D40 has no internal AF motor, and is only able to AF on new AF-S and AF-I lenses. This isn't much of a problem for me, but for the rest of my family, such as my dad (who owns the Fuji), it may be.
-Build quality. The D40 is an entry level camera, and the quality is as such, whereas the S1 is a solid camera that's been used pretty heavily with no body damage.
-Will not meter AT ALL on lenses with no CPU coontacts, meaning none of my lenses except the 17-35, 75-300, and one 50mm.
-No anti-dust-on-the-CCD feature, not that the S1 has this, but it's becoming standard on newer dSLRs.

Now, it does have some advantages that are quite appealing:
-Fully half the weight of the S1, which is large, bulky, and heavy. Not something you want to carry.
-Image quality. You just can't argue with 6 years worth of technological improvement.
-Noise, apparantly it's pretty quiet.
-RAW capture, which Is pretty much de rigeur in digital now.
-Rechargable battery, the S1 required four Triple A's and two Lithium batteries.

But, beyond the comparison, there is some stuff I just can't shake.
-I feel wasteful by getting rid of a camera that, up until it broke, I was perfectly happy with. Well, not perfectly happy, but mostly satisfied.
-Then again, repairing an older camera for nearly the price of a new one that outperforms it is also wasteful.
-And lastly, snobbery. There's something about holding a pro level camera that is lost when holding an entry level.

Er, If you have any advice, or anything to add, please do

 

[JohnM]

Honestly, with a seven-year old digital, I would replace it as opposed to repairing it. I don't even think I would spend much time thinking about it either.

 

[BillBingham2]

How much does a used S1 Pro cost on EvilBay or such? How much would it cost to move up the camera chain in Nikon to enable all your glass? How long will Fuji stand behind thier repair? It sounds like you like the S1 and you need to add in the pain (time, time, time) of learning to use a different DSLR (way too many features).

Being a owner of a bit of Nikkor glass myself, I'd lean towards getting it fixed. But then I still use cameras that are older than I am.

Map out your different options and look at the total cost of ownership, positives and negatives. She sounds like a great solid camera, you might not really be able to replace for twice the cost of repair.

B2 (;->

 

[Morca007]

How much does a used S1 Pro cost on EvilBay or such? How much would it cost to move up the camera chain in Nikon to enable all your glass? How long will Fuji stand behind thier repair? It sounds like you like the S1 and you need to add in the pain (time, time, time) of learning to use a different DSLR (way too many features).

Being a owner of a bit of Nikkor glass myself, I'd lean towards getting it fixed. But then I still use cameras that are older than I am.

Map out your different options and look at the total cost of ownership, positives and negatives. She sounds like a great solid camera, you might not really be able to replace for twice the cost of repair.

Oh, this is too rich, I can buy a mint condition S1 on eBay for less than the cost of the repair.
It seems that all the newer non-pro level Nikons have the same AF "feature." To save weight and price.

Heh, I also use a few cameras far older than I am, and love my old Nikkor Glass.

 

[JohnM]

Old Nikkor glass ages well. Classic film cameras age well.

Digital ages poorly.

 

[pvdhaar]

The Fuji S1 is based on the Nikon F60 chassis. At the time, the F60 was the bottom of the line Nikon. I had an F60, and it was great indeed. But the D50 I have now (also bottom of the line Nikon) is equally great and has comparable build. As far as construction quality is concerned, I'm quite sure you won't be disappointed with anything Nikon at the time.

The main caveat with the D40 would be the lack of autofocus. You might try to scoop up a D70s instead. These are just discontinued, and lots of places are clearing inventory.

 

[Morca007]

The d70 looks like a nice camera indeed, if I can find one!
Seems to be gone from most all of the big camera stores online.

 

[pvdhaar]

The d70 looks like a nice camera indeed, if I can find one!
Seems to be gone from most all of the big camera stores online.

The D70 has been discontinued somewhat longer than the D70s, but both may be worth a try (as is the D50)..

 

[Steve Bellayr]

It is my personal belief that digital cameras are more akin to computer technology than optical/camera technology. It is certainly nice to have a professional level camera but with digital currently it appears that it is hard for an individual to maintain that level. Recently, I discovered after only 18 months it was cheaper to replace my hard drive. The newer one was more an "entry level" but had more memory etc. I have a "professional level" digital but almost any current entry level digital has more pixls. With digitals when dicussing professional you need to look at the capacity of the camera. Your old camera is no longer professional. Like mine it is just solid and heavy. If my digital were to go I'd replace it with very compact entry level camera.

 

[shadowfox]

It is my personal belief that digital cameras are more akin to computer technology than optical/camera technology.

I assure you it's not only your personal belief, it's a well-researched phenomenon that when we "marry" anything with computers, it gets more features, short life, bugs, and expensive.

One way to reduce the hit, is to periodically trade up when your camera is still "healthy".

For the original poster, definitely a replace.