"Obsolete" cameras: is it a serious concern?

Started 4 days ago | Discussions thread
Bob Janes
Bob Janes Veteran Member • Posts: 3,348
Re: "Obsolete" cameras: is it a serious concern? - No.

rapick wrote:

Many times in threads about the pros and cons of buying/using old camera models, the 'end of customer assistance'/'end of spare parts availability' argument is raised.

In my understanding, manufacturer shall (or should?) provide servicing of the camera (lens, etc.) and availability of spare parts for repairs for 10 years.

Is this correct?

Does this come from legal obligation, or 'industry standard', or voluntary manufacturer's policy?

when the 10-years period starts? The date of 'end of production' should logically apply. But what about if the manufacturer never declared it? And if they terminate their whole business?

Is it a good move by the owner of an old (but still perfectly working) camera to buy a same one (used) as a safe (and relatively cheap!) source of spare parts?

I think it is 5 years by law (possibly EU). Sony supported Minolta kit for 5 years after KM got out of the camera business.

I think the only thing that really makes camera equipment obsolete is availability of batteries and memory cards. Old stuff works pretty much as well as it used to - as far as spare parts ore concerned once you get to 5 ish years, the cost of any repair is probably more than a decent second hand example.

Recently treated myself to a Nikon CoolPix 995 - works just fine, but does remind you how far UI on cameras has come over the last 18 years.

-- hide signature --

Save a life, become a stem-cell donor.
Hello to Jason Isaacs!

 Bob Janes's gear list:Bob Janes's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony Alpha a99 Sony a7 II +3 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow