How long do digital cameras?

On average how long do digital cameras last?
I don't think digital cameras last as long as film cameras do. My father's 35mm Pentax SLR is still working.

I agree, not as long as film cameras. I would say an average of 5yrs.

You're asking the wrong question for the wrong reasons...

Mechanically they'll last as long as any other camera built to a similar standard.
Of course they'll be obsolete way before that happens in a way that film cameras never will be - even an 'obsolete' film camera is capable of taking exactly the same quality image as a newer model.

My Nikon F3 takes the same quality photos as my Nikon F5 - if the film and lenses are the same.
Whereas before, film was the recording medium, sensors now perform that function. My Nikon D1 from 1999 still works perfectly, but the images it records are horrible compared to my D3 or D3x...

Film stock from the 1930's, 40's and 50's was nowhere near as good as film stock from the 1990s. Slower, grainier (if the same size and speed) and more expensive. And more combustible...

I will guarantee my cameras will last more than five years. I am still shooting a modded D70s, six years and still going strong. We have a longer track record with filmers, no comparison can be made yet....

As far as the mechanical parts are concerned, I would think the digital would take more of a beating simply because there are more shots available for less cost. This morning I took over 500 shots trying out the new camera. I cannot imagine shooting that many images on film in the same length of time.

chasrich wrote: As far as the mechanical parts are concerned, I would think the digital would take more of a beating simply because there are more shots available for less cost. This morning I took over 500 shots trying out the new camera. I cannot imagine shooting that many images on film in the same length of time.

Looking at the boxes of negs in my attic and trying to work out how much of that junk was shot on the F3 bodies...
Probably about two thirds, so call that about 4,000 rolls of film a year for ten years x 36 then divided roughly by four (two cameras with B&W, one with fast colour, one with slow colour).

I think if you shot a certain way with film, you still tend to shoot the same way.
A job I did yesterday saw me shoot 130 frames to get what I needed...
It depends on what you need.

A wedding shot 20 years ago by me would have used four or five rolls of 35mm and two rolls of 120. Now I'd shoot 2-4,000 frames easily.
Not because it's digital and 'cheaper' but because people's expectations have changed.

Whereas I'd have shot the arrival of the B&G, one or two shots of the service, signing the register then the groups (on medium-format), then the cake-cutting and some formal portraits of the B&G at or near the reception venue, I'm now expected to cover the entire day from start to finish and have to employ a second-shooter to cover everything.
I remember when I started shooting 'reportage' style on B&W film, I started going through twenty or thirty rolls of 135-36 on a big wedding and thought "this can't last"...
That I initially passed those costs on to the client seemingly made no difference. Gradually though, things changed - more people started getting 'into' the money-making side of things and our gravy-train slowly pulled out of the station, leaving us standing alone and poor on the platform.

20 years ago I was charging between £1,500 and £3,000 for a wedding, depending on the package chosen by the client.
Guess what?
I'm still charging £1,500 - £3,000 for a wedding, only now I have to work 12-15 hours on the day and do all my own post-production.

Depends on how often you use it and what kind of TLC you give it. I have a Fuji Finepix 2600 that's going on 10 years old and still works as well as it did the day it come out of the box. Of course, I don't use it every day. I take the batteries out when it's not in use, keep it in a case and take care about banging it around when it does get used.

arkady001 wrote: You're asking the wrong question for the wrong reasons...

Mechanically they'll last as long as any other camera built to a similar standard.
Of course they'll be obsolete way before that happens in a way that film cameras never will be - even an 'obsolete' film camera is capable of taking exactly the same quality image as a newer model.

My Nikon F3 takes the same quality photos as my Nikon F5 - if the film and lenses are the same.
Whereas before, film was the recording medium, sensors now perform that function. My Nikon D1 from 1999 still works perfectly, but the images it records are horrible compared to my D3 or D3x...

Film stock from the 1930's, 40's and 50's was nowhere near as good as film stock from the 1990s. Slower, grainier (if the same size and speed) and more expensive. And more combustible...

My nikon D200 was a nice camera when it was new but now even the much lower grade D3100 far out dose its I/Q but every time I look at geting a new one it seems something beter is just around the bend.

Cjarvis wrote:

arkady001 wrote: You're asking the wrong question for the wrong reasons...

Mechanically they'll last as long as any other camera built to a similar standard.
Of course they'll be obsolete way before that happens in a way that film cameras never will be - even an 'obsolete' film camera is capable of taking exactly the same quality image as a newer model.

My Nikon F3 takes the same quality photos as my Nikon F5 - if the film and lenses are the same.
Whereas before, film was the recording medium, sensors now perform that function. My Nikon D1 from 1999 still works perfectly, but the images it records are horrible compared to my D3 or D3x...

Film stock from the 1930's, 40's and 50's was nowhere near as good as film stock from the 1990s. Slower, grainier (if the same size and speed) and more expensive. And more combustible...

My nikon D200 was a nice camera when it was new but now even the much lower grade D3100 far out dose its I/Q but every time I look at geting a new one it seems something beter is just around the bend.

Like any technology today. Tomorrow will be better, faster and less expensive. Of course, there will always be better technology at a higher price, too.
Check out this thread and see what I mean.
www.photographytalk.com/index.php?option...2176&Itemid=54#32237