Reading mode: Light Dark

How Long To Keep (Your) DSLR Body

  • Thread starter Thread starter ecube
  • Start date Start date
Go to last post
I got my Olympus E300 in August of 2005, and fully expected to have it for two years or more.....now, I'll be selling it and my Oly lenses on Ebay in a couple of weeks after just 16 months. I expect/hope to FINALLY have the D200 under my Christmas tree, and I can't imagine having that for less than a few years (once I go with Nikon, I shall be staying with Nikon.)
--
Just Shoot It.
 
I keep hearing about how batteries fail.... My original camcorder battery lasted 5 years of fairly heavy use. I have 3 years on my laptop battery, when I was told it may last a year - year and a half. My DS uses AA rechargeables and I doubt if I could ever not find new ones. WHat I see as a potential "need" for replacement is a new feature that really makes you want to upgrade. Right now, that is Anti Shake. I tried it and it works great. I may end up replacing my young DS after it is about 3 year old with a paltry 40 - 50K exposures.
 
Bill Force said:
First off, I still have most of the digital camera's I have
purchased, still find a 2 MP useful at times.
IMO there is no legitimate reason digital cameras could not be made
modular except the manufactures couldn't sell as many new ones to
fools like me. Have a replaceable sensor and engine combo, after
all the camera is just a light box. All the bells and whisles
could remain pretty much as is. The mount doesn't change, the
viewfinders etc. would be the same. The engine/cpu directs
EVERYTHING in the camera anyway, so why not. The modern digital
camera is nothing but a computer with a lens attached.
Click to expand...
I also think this could be a possibility in the future, and one I would like to see happen. Although I'm sure a camera body couldn't keep up with the rest of the system forever, as formats such as faster storage media, body size restrictions, etc. may not allow a 5 year old body to take new electronics. But even if they offered modular guts for a camera that woud allow you to insert a good low-light 6mp sensor when you need it then swap out for a high res full frame sensor for maximum detail when desired. Make the back of the camera swing open like film bodies and you pull out the sensor / electronics processor in one piece. The first company to invent this system and sell it reasonably will be billionaires overnight!

--
Just another rookie with a camera
 
I'm pretty happy to bang around with my cheap 300D until then, unless it breaks and I'd happily replace with an XTi.

Actually I've seen the 5D as low as $1,800 with rebates, etc., but I guess my real pull-the-trigger level is $1,200. Maybe 2008.
 
CharlesGordon said:
I'm pretty happy to bang around with my cheap 300D until then,
unless it breaks and I'd happily replace with an XTi.

Actually I've seen the 5D as low as $1,800 with rebates, etc., but
I guess my real pull-the-trigger level is $1,200. Maybe 2008.
Click to expand...
2007
 
I also have a 3 month old.
Neither is going anywhere until it dies.
I expect to get 10 years out of them.
Why change, I'm happy with them?

I don't change ANYTHING unless it dies, so long as it supplies my needs. I really do not understand folk who have to change house, car, wife, pets, camera etc to a schedule???

I had a fridge for 15 years, a washing machine for 20, my current TV is over 8 years old... They ain;t broke, why change 'em?

--
  1. ######
  2. ####_O Tim Yorath
  3. #### />
  4. #### @ UK.
  5. ### # \
http://catmangler.smugmug.com/
 
(1) In DTP world 300 dpi printing is considered sufficient for high quality prints.

Btw, most current quality home photo printers do 300 dpi at the max too. Don't be fooled by the 1440 etc. dpi figures some brands use, thats about the amount of droplets p.i. that hit the paper and not the printing resolution, IOW bogus.

(2) The maximum print size which is viewed from normal reading distance is roughly 10x8". Anything beyond that is likely to be viewed from larger distances (poster framed to a wall etc) where detail/resolution is less critical. This is because the human eye picks up most rez from around normal reading distance of say 1-2 feet. Beyond that it quickly loses sense for fine detail.

So in short, I need the ability to print 10x8" at 300dpi

(300*10) * (300*8) = 3000x2400 = 7.2 MP

Add some room for cropping, and I'd say for most people, even advanced amateurs, 10 MP quality pixels will be sufficient for 99% of their pixies.

Coincidentally 10MP dlsrs are very fashionable at the moment, and relatively cheap too. So one of these days I might upgrade my current dslr to one of these. But after that for me the megapixel race is over. Future releases of 20 or even 30MP dlsrs would mean little to me, and I will likely only change boxes if other, really important upgrade technology instead of just stuffing more pixels on the sensor become available, such as good quality super high ISO, large ultrabright VFs etc.

The days in which digital cams within 1-2 years after purchase were degraded to obsolete technology are over imo.
 
Tim the Grey said:
Tim the Grey wrote:
I don't change ANYTHING unless it dies, so long as it supplies my
needs. I really do not understand folk who have to change house,
car, wife, pets, camera etc to a schedule???
Click to expand...
For a car I think it's a good idea to trade in every 4-5 years to a new one...

At least for me as I commute a 1/2 hour to work every day and don't need to wait for my car to die on me on the way to work (or anywhere)...

Bob
--
'Photography is more about depth of feeling than depth of field'
http://www.pbase.com/mofongo
 
I'll change when something with a significantly better image quality is introduced or if it have 1080i (or p) HDTV-video/'cine' recording.

I have a 'wait and see camera' now, 350D.

Sure the 5D have better image quality, but not good enough for the money for me.

The 30D- or 5D-replacement might be my next camera or Pentax K10D replacement (Body IS) or Olympus if they will be the only with HDTV recording.

Or Nikon or Sony ... ? we'll see.
ecube said:
In general, new and better flagship DSLR models or upgrade seem to
be introduced by the major camera manufacturers on 12 month cycle.
Click to expand...
I think it's little longer then 12 month, unfortunate.

--
Henrik
 
..because the current behemoths are a step back to the 50s or even before that.
 
it works, it works. I do not go replace my old film SLR just because there are better ones today ... similar logic for DSLR / DC

--
  • Franka -
 
edwardneal said:
computers have to be constantly upgraded to keep up with software
and operating system developments.
Click to expand...
Not really, at least not if you turn off the visual gizmos of modern interfaces or use something without artificial inflation of demand of processing power, for example GNU/Linux plus KDE or GNOME. Will run just fine on a 5 years old machine, and that is latest software.
PCs these days have much more longevity than digital cameras.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
p
Previous
n
Next
w
Next unread
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top