Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Do they make cameras to last?

jwolf6589

jwolf6589

macrumors 601
Original poster
My apple Watch just took a dump today and so Apple is sending out a replacement. Good thing I pay monthly for AppleCare or I would be out $400. Regarding Cameras are they being made to last these days or to be replaced every 2-3 years? My Powershot and Canon Camcorder have warranties that have expired so if they broke I would need to buy a new model or get mine repaired. I don't ever plan to default 100% to a phone for my photography since I prefer Canon Cameras and have already captured video of 2 moose up in Alaska on my vacation.
 
jwolf6589 said:
My apple Watch just took a dump today and so Apple is sending out a replacement. Good thing I pay monthly for AppleCare or I would be out $400. Regarding Cameras are they being made to last these days or to be replaced every 2-3 years? My Powershot and Canon Camcorder have warranties that have expired so if they broke I would need to buy a new model or get mine repaired. I don't ever plan to default 100% to a phone for my photography since I prefer Canon Cameras and have already captured video of 2 moose up in Alaska on my vacation.
Click to expand...
Obsolescence by design is a well documented approach to product manufacturing. White good manufacturers have been at it for years. Could they engineer a washing machine that will last a lifetime? yes they could but by fitting cheaper parts, it will keep costs down but also wear out and bring repeat business.

So are they made to last forever? no, are they built to last adequately as good as the components can be but unfortunately as per conversations previously on SD cards for example, not even electronics are immune to failure although less likely.

Apple bit themselves in the butt with the first generation of iPad. They made it too well and so it made it difficult for them to tempt customers to upgrade as the one they had still worked fine - this led to tactics like software being made to identify the hardware and artificially run slower on older devices etc - all well documented so not being cynical. This then made people think they had to upgrade to maintain their user experience.

So physically have cameras got a finite life span? yes but that could be 5 years, 10 years, 20 years for example, again like hard drives and SD cards as discussed ad nauseam elsewhere. The point is, they will likely fail at some point but at an as yet undetermined point in the future.

Manufacturers need to keep people spending money and so they keep pushing the envelope in technology adding ever more sophisticated capabilities making people want to upgrade. The challenges then become things like batteries and memory cards becoming hard to get camera batteries previously (film era) were prime examples of using uncommon battery types for their power which became uneconomical to manufacture and so became hard to get rendering the cameras un usable. For digital we see older cameras unable to handle the later standards of memory card capacity and require smaller cards like 4GB and 1GB cards. Again, they will at some point become uneconomical to manufacture and will become more scarce. We see this in IT when we talk about data retention. Some organisations are required to retain data for up to 21 years. The way they do this is by keeping their backups. The way we made backups 20 years ago is different to how we do it now and so while the tapes are likely fine, we may no longer have access to read them. Think VHS tapes. I have the original Star Wars movies on VHS cassettes, but I dont have a VHS player to watch them anymore.

In short, yes, within reason but no, not for the long haul as the manufacturers want you to buy a new one ideally no more than every 3-5 years.
 
  • Like
  • Sad
Reactions: macsound1 and Clix Pix
My most recently built camera bodies are between 5 and 7 years old and my oldest is ~30. None are currently showing signs of falling over, which is awesome. They're "behind" in additional tech capabilities but all of them let me set shutter speed, ISO and aperture. All have a way to engage the shutter mechanism. I can focus the lenses manually at the very least and all have lovely sensors (film is a light sensor too). I can engage flash or strobes efficiently. Two bodies can work entirely without batteries. One of those can rock digital or film. They're at the very least reasonably well built from a manufacturing standpoint and a couple will certainly out live me.

All of the above drivel I've written is to suggest that sometimes obsolescence is in the mind. Yes, cameras can stop working from electronics failure or a port connector breaks or a whole host of other things. Cheaper builds will perhaps fall apart more quickly (or not). Sometimes "obsolete" is what we're made to feel when the object we possess doesn't do the latest exciting thing. In a way it's worth pondering that "obsolete" is also a marketing thing (closely related to the tech).

When one is feeling that a device might be obsolete, it's worth remembering what a camera is: a light-proof box onto which you can put a lens to focus light and an image sensor to record the light. The controls you need are for ISO, shutter speed, aperture and to engage the shutter. Everything else is gravy. 🙂


EDIT: And lest I sound like a luddite, I should add that I do love tech and especially camera tech. 😎
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: phill85, macsound1, kenoh and 1 other person
kenoh said:
Obsolescence by design is a well documented approach to product manufacturing. White good manufacturers have been at it for years. Could they engineer a washing machine that will last a lifetime? yes they could but by fitting cheaper parts, it will keep costs down but also wear out and bring repeat business.

So are they made to last forever? no, are they built to last adequately as good as the components can be but unfortunately as per conversations previously on SD cards for example, not even electronics are immune to failure although less likely.

Apple bit themselves in the butt with the first generation of iPad. They made it too well and so it made it difficult for them to tempt customers to upgrade as the one they had still worked fine - this led to tactics like software being made to identify the hardware and artificially run slower on older devices etc - all well documented so not being cynical. This then made people think they had to upgrade to maintain their user experience.

So physically have cameras got a finite life span? yes but that could be 5 years, 10 years, 20 years for example, again like hard drives and SD cards as discussed ad nauseam elsewhere. The point is, they will likely fail at some point but at an as yet undetermined point in the future.

Manufacturers need to keep people spending money and so they keep pushing the envelope in technology adding ever more sophisticated capabilities making people want to upgrade. The challenges then become things like batteries and memory cards becoming hard to get camera batteries previously (film era) were prime examples of using uncommon battery types for their power which became uneconomical to manufacture and so became hard to get rendering the cameras un usable. For digital we see older cameras unable to handle the later standards of memory card capacity and require smaller cards like 4GB and 1GB cards. Again, they will at some point become uneconomical to manufacture and will become more scarce. We see this in IT when we talk about data retention. Some organisations are required to retain data for up to 21 years. The way they do this is by keeping their backups. The way we made backups 20 years ago is different to how we do it now and so while the tapes are likely fine, we may no longer have access to read them. Think VHS tapes. I have the original Star Wars movies on VHS cassettes, but I dont have a VHS player to watch them anymore.

In short, yes, within reason but no, not for the long haul as the manufacturers want you to buy a new one ideally no more than every 3-5 years.
Click to expand...
Well I sure hope my Canons last a long time because I don’t want to default to a phone camera because my type of Cameras are no longer being made. Well at this moment they are being produced and got plenty of positive reviews so some still use them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kenoh
r.harris1 said:
My most recently built camera bodies are between 5 and 7 years old and my oldest is ~30. None are currently showing signs of falling over, which is awesome. They're "behind" in additional tech capabilities but all of them let me set shutter speed, ISO and aperture. All have a way to engage the shutter mechanism. I can focus the lenses manually at the very least and all have lovely sensors (film is a light sensor too). I can engage flash or strobes efficiently. Two bodies can work entirely without batteries. One of those can rock digital or film. They're at the very least reasonably well built from a manufacturing standpoint and a couple will certainly out live me.

All of the above drivel I've written is to suggest that sometimes obsolescence is in the mind. Yes, cameras can stop working from electronics failure or a port connector breaks or a whole host of other things. Cheaper builds will perhaps fall apart more quickly (or not). Sometimes "obsolete" is what we're made to feel when the object we possess doesn't do the latest exciting thing. In a way it's worth pondering that "obsolete" is also a marketing thing (closely related to the tech).

When one is feeling that a device might be obsolete, it's worth remembering what a camera is: a light-proof box onto which you can put a lens to focus light and an image sensor to record the light. The controls you need are for ISO, shutter speed, aperture and to engage the shutter. Everything else is gravy. 🙂


EDIT: And lest I sound like a luddite, I should add that I do love tech and especially camera tech. 😎
Click to expand...
39 years old? That’s a film camera for sure and perhaps they were made better.
 
jwolf6589 said:
My apple Watch just took a dump today and so Apple is sending out a replacement. Good thing I pay monthly for AppleCare or I would be out $400. Regarding Cameras are they being made to last these days or to be replaced every 2-3 years? My Powershot and Canon Camcorder have warranties that have expired so if they broke I would need to buy a new model or get mine repaired. I don't ever plan to default 100% to a phone for my photography since I prefer Canon Cameras and have already captured video of 2 moose up in Alaska on my vacation.
Click to expand...

Worldwide shipments of Digital Still Cameras are nearing year 1999 levels.

If i were you I'd just rent them upon your shooting days. At least you'll have the latest hardware at your disposal at a fraction of the price of buying one outright.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SalisburySam
Adarna said:
Worldwide shipments of Digital Still Cameras are nearing year 1999 levels.

If i were you I'd just rent them upon your shooting days. At least you'll have the latest hardware at your disposal at a fraction of the price of buying one outright.
Click to expand...
I do not understand what you are saying.
 
jwolf6589 said:
I do not understand what you are saying.
Click to expand...
You're talking about buying a new camera to shoot moose with.

As it is written it appears not to be a daily, weekly or even monthly occurrence so why not just rent out the latest and greatest for the days you will be videoing or taking photos of wildlife?

I reference the sales of 2021 and comparing it to 1999 as to give you an idea on how unpopular dedicated cameras are today.
 
All of my film cameras are at least 50 years old. Two of them are approaching 70. All would still work flawlessly if I had a local outlet to purchase and process film.

That said many P&S cameras like my old Canon Powershot, the later Kodak z915, and even my current Lumix ZS200 are not particularly robust mechanically, though the Lumix seems a lot stronger than the first 2. The Canon proved incapable of surviving a minor 4 foot drop. The Kodak expired at the ripe old age of 12 years suffering from a lens extension that would not retract even after waiting 4 hours. Hopefully the Lumix will outlive me.

P&S waterproof cameras like my little Fuji XP90 are extremely rugged, but with a minor sacrifice in image quality (for the sensor size) and a bigger limitation of lens range.

Sadly Olympus has dropped their P&S lines entirely other than their excellent waterproof entry. The Olympus cameras I have owned required less post image manipulation than any of the other four and both were well designed as to quickly altering base settings.
 
Adarna said:
You're talking about buying a new camera to shoot moose with.

As it is written it appears not to be a daily, weekly or even monthly occurrence so why not just rent out the latest and greatest for the days you will be videoing or taking photos of wildlife?

I reference the sales of 2021 and comparing it to 1999 as to give you an idea on how unpopular dedicated cameras are today.
Click to expand...
Well my Canon Camcorder is still working and yes I did capture 2 moose with it.
 
OldMacs4Me said:
All of my film cameras are at least 50 years old. Two of them are approaching 70. All would still work flawlessly if I had a local outlet to purchase and process film.

That said many P&S cameras like my old Canon Powershot, the later Kodak z915, and even my current Lumix ZS200 are not particularly robust mechanically, though the Lumix seems a lot stronger than the first 2. The Canon proved incapable of surviving a minor 4 foot drop. The Kodak expired at the ripe old age of 12 years suffering from a lens extension that would not retract even after waiting 4 hours. Hopefully the Lumix will outlive me.

P&S waterproof cameras like my little Fuji XP90 are extremely rugged, but with a minor sacrifice in image quality (for the sensor size) and a bigger limitation of lens range.

Sadly Olympus has dropped their P&S lines entirely other than their excellent waterproof entry. The Olympus cameras I have owned required less post image manipulation than any of the other four and both were well designed as to quickly altering base settings.
Click to expand...
Olympus dropped their Point and Shoot Line? What a shame. Well I use Canon for a reason.
 
If the camera is only a component of a larger multi-purpose device such as a smartphone, it would likely not fail more quickly than other parts of that device assuming you didn’t take an ice pick to the lens. Smartphones are obsoleted by being unable to provide new and wanted services (FaceID?), non-support of operating system software, or other reasons not related to camera use. They can also be quickly obsoleted by every marketers wet dream: the “I wanna new thingie” appetite buyers have.

As others in the post, I have some old fully functional cameras: a Minolta and Nikon F both purchased in 1967, both delivering decades of excellent service. One could argue they are NOT obsolete by any mechanical standard, quite the opposite. Yet they are both obsoleted by film products evaporating in the market, and the desire to have instant results without the albeit short delay of Polaroids. Digital photography delivers that, and over time with improved resolution, the quality approaches that of silver nitrate film.

OP asked if cameras are being made to last only 2-3 years. Hardly, the cameras will last far longer than that, witness early iPhone models still in use. I’d bet the cameras on those antique iPhones work just as well as they did the day they were produced in the factory, perhaps with a few more lens scratches though. My iPhone7’s camera is not degraded in any way from the way it worked new, similarly to my wife’s iPhoneSE (1st gen). I have supposedly excellent cameras (plural) in my iPadPro (4th gen) and that’s great I suppose. I’ve had iPads since they came out and have yet to ever take a picture with the device and don’t see that ever changing, but I digress. Our iPhone7/SE cameras work well but have been obsoleted by (a) better ones (b) desire for newer phones for reasons other than the camera, and (c) we have few moose in our city limits.
 
SalisburySam said:
If the camera is only a component of a larger multi-purpose device such as a smartphone, it would likely not fail more quickly than other parts of that device assuming you didn’t take an ice pick to the lens. Smartphones are obsoleted by being unable to provide new and wanted services (FaceID?), non-support of operating system software, or other reasons not related to camera use. They can also be quickly obsoleted by every marketers wet dream: the “I wanna new thingie” appetite buyers have.

As others in the post, I have some old fully functional cameras: a Minolta and Nikon F both purchased in 1967, both delivering decades of excellent service. One could argue they are NOT obsolete by any mechanical standard, quite the opposite. Yet they are both obsoleted by film products evaporating in the market, and the desire to have instant results without the albeit short delay of Polaroids. Digital photography delivers that, and over time with improved resolution, the quality approaches that of silver nitrate film.

OP asked if cameras are being made to last only 2-3 years. Hardly, the cameras will last far longer than that, witness early iPhone models still in use. I’d bet the cameras on those antique iPhones work just as well as they did the day they were produced in the factory, perhaps with a few more lens scratches though. My iPhone7’s camera is not degraded in any way from the way it worked new, similarly to my wife’s iPhoneSE (1st gen). I have supposedly excellent cameras (plural) in my iPadPro (4th gen) and that’s great I suppose. I’ve had iPads since they came out and have yet to ever take a picture with the device and don’t see that ever changing, but I digress. Our iPhone7/SE cameras work well but have been obsoleted by (a) better ones (b) desire for newer phones for reasons other than the camera, and (c) we have few moose in our city limits.
Click to expand...
I think I know what killed my Apple Watch. The seal failed and water got in and destroyed it. Well I have a replacement coming when I get home from Alaska. Got some good photos of Alaska. How do I convert a still from a video I want to know as I shot 2 moose with video?
 
jwolf6589 said:
Well my Canon Camcorder is still working and yes I did capture 2 moose with it.
Click to expand...
When your Canon stops working just rent one for your next shoot. Its cheaper than buying brand new or even used.

Also.... why do you need to have warranty for gear that appears to be in working order? When it breaks just rent or buy used
 
Adarna said:
When your Canon stops working just rent one for your next shoot. Its cheaper than buying brand new or even used.

Also.... why do you need to have warranty for gear that appears to be in working order? When it breaks just rent or buy used
Click to expand...
Buy used may be the option.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Adarna
When I bought the Lumix I very seriously considered one of the Olympus micro 4/3rds cameras, but since it was mainly for my wife I went with the Lumix as she wanted a single unit camera rather than a three piece kit. Admittedly the software layout is a bit hair-brained compared to Olympus. While the Lumix 1" sensor is still small it is far superior to the remaining compact P&S cameras with their tiny sensors. The camera is a bit heavier but not much larger than most P&S cameras.

For about double the price I could have gone with a similar Sony, but at that price point my wife would have been afraid to actually use the camera.
 
As one moves up the "price ladder", cameras become more robust and weather-resistant.

I would expect a Canon EOS R3 to be more "enduring" over the long-term than my 77d.

Same for interchangeable lenses. I would expect Canon's "L" line to be more rugged than their EFs line...
 
  • Like
Reactions: kenoh
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back