Digital Camera Obsolescense

So Bob,
There is no camera out there that stands for quality and reliability you say.
Yes... I know... I saved on the cost of developing but really... should we expect it to last at least a dozen years without spending a ton of money to keep it running... ???

I did take the camera completely apart and admire the engineering...

Give me something that is made in Germany... now they know how to engineer quality and reliability into anything.

How about Nikon... you pay a lot more but will it last... or will you need to keep dumping money into it to keep it afloat? I could always buy a sailboat instead.
Bryan

I'm just an electronics designer and there are too many parts that are used with about 5 year life spans. Some go longer, some shorter but nothing is as solid as the mechanical things of old. That is we have chemicals and foils that don't stand up to time.

Need proof? Look at the maker's warranty period. If they won't give us over a year, the message is clear.

If you have an electronics engineer around, ask them to show you a data sheet on a very common part, the electrolytic capacitor and hopefully they'll show you the expected life spans of just this one part.

Now back to the rest of the design and each part has some life span. Add a little humidity and heat to speed up the process.
Bob

Cameras of yesterday were largely mechanical. There were very few controls. Like a slide rule calculator, it could last virtually forever.

Cameras of today are extremely sophisticated electronic devices, and digital technology is still advancing rapidly. From both a manufacturing and consumer standpoint, it doesn't make sense to make or buy a camera that will last forever, when newer technology keeps bringing improvements to cameras.

And the manual for it. Still works but it's now only for show. Guess it's time to pull it out and in a meeting pull it out, slide it around and shout "you're off by 2 Volts."
Bob

<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="590">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="forumsmessagemiddle" height="16" colspan="2"></td></tr>
<tr>
<td class="forumsmessagecontainer" colspan="2">
<div class="message-container">
<div id="message25489145" class="message">
PC Mag has just published its last reliability survey for digital cameras.

The overall ranking is as follow:

#1 Nikon 2: Canon 3: Panasonic 4: Casio 5: Konica Minolta (ranked separately from Sony) 6: Sony 7: Olympus 8: Pentax 9: Fujifilm 10: Kodak 11 Samsung 12: HP and 13: Vivitar.

The ranking for the dSLR category is as follow:

#1 Nikon & Canon (tie) 3: Pentax 4: Olympus 5: Sony 6: Konica-Minolta 7: Fujifilm 8: Kodak.

Readers are asked to fill up a questionnaire and give a mark for their own cameras in various categories. You're your own judge about the value and the ... reliability of such a reliability surveys. For one thing, criteria like "image quality" are considered, which not what I'd call reliability, not to mention that the mark is entirely subjective; for another thing some of the differences between manufacturers are very small. Nikon gets an overall mark of 7.5 and Canon 7.4. Is this different significant, or should Nikon and Canon considered as tie for 1st place? Probably the latter.
</div></div></td></tr></tbody></table>

Are you certain that is an up-to-date ranking? I ask because Konika-Minolta's camera assets were transferred to Sony a number of years ago; there are no Konica-Minolta cameras in the market.

Probably a more reliable report is from Squaretrade, the extended warranty company:

http://blog.squaretrade.com/2010/03/digital-camera-failure-rates-study-finds-panasonic-most-reliable-manufacturer.html

Having Polaroid in the survey seems out of place.
Polaroid does not manufacture any digital cameras.
They re-brand no-name cameras from China.

Polaroid is no longer the company we once knew.
It is only a marketing arm of a company that finds overseas partners for American companies.

..

Maybe I am missing something....

Thanks Piston... for the other link will have a look.

I think the fact that Walmart and Target sell Polaroid cameras probably means there are a large number of them sold, a quantity great enough to generate the numbers that would put the company on the list, regardless of the company's re-branding approach.

On my budget rather than a Nikon (which is my choice), I would be as well off buying a Canon.
I am glad to see the data supports my claim that SONY lack quality and reliability.

Now which Rebel? Any info that would help in the selection?

Where do you see the data saying Sony is less reliable? In the Squaretrade findings, it says they are more reliable than Canon or Nikon, at least for cameras under $300. There is no mention of Sony's DSLR's at all, but Sony DSLR market share is teeny tiny compared to Canon and Nikon.

That aside, choosing a DSLR is mostly about what features you deem necessary. More expensive models are theoretically more durable because they have magnesium bodies instead of plastic, pentaprism viewfinders instead of pentamirror, etc. More expensive cameras give you more controls as well. Nikon makes cameras in the same price ranges as Canon; they are not more expensive (although their lenses can be).

I agree with all that has been said except for the matter of SONY having quality and reliability in their cameras or at least in the DSCH5.
Somewhere in all of this it was stated that a camera over $300 should last for sometime. I paid well over $800 for the SONY DSCH5... along with the $125 to fix a shutter button that appears to be a manufacture default as there are so many cameras with that problem... So... that $300 mark for SONY at least is a not legitimate.

I am looking at either a Canon or Nikon for my next camera. Canon PowerShot SX230 HS Canon PowerShot SX210 IS $199 - 299 Nikon Coolpix S9100 Nikon Coolpix S8200

Any comments before I proceed?

You are basing your opinion on the experience of one camera. Just because your Sony camera had problems does not mean every example has has them, or that its repair record is worse than others. This is born out by the Squaretrade report, which is not based on an opinion or a survey, but on warranty claims. It is in Squaretrade's interest to publish an accurate report, because it is more profitable for them to sell extended warranties that never require any claims.

But that's okay. It is perfectly understandable that you would not want to buy another Sony; if I were in your shoes I probably would not either. I'm curious though...how did you manage to pay $850 for it? When the H5 was released, it carried an MSRP of $500.

Canon and Nikon both make good cameras. Whether or not they will fail in a few years is another matter...you might be one of the unlucky 15.6%. Note that according to Squaretrade, Canon is slightly more reliable than Nikon. Regardless, they share honors for the top spot in a recent travel zoom camera comparison test:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/q311travelzoomgrouptest/

Yes... $850 at London Drugs that was back in 2006. I appreciate your input and that of TEDFIN.
That would be Canadian$$... maybe that's the rub... our Dollar is a little better now.
OK... from what you say... any camera that feels good and delivers a good picture is OK... I just have to live with obsolescense... which is a rub for sure. If over the coarse of 5 to 10 years I purchase several cameras because of the poor reliability... it might be wise just to bit the bullet and purchase a professional camera and be done with it . In looking up problems with the Sony on forums... it appears the two main faults with the camera is exactly the same... shutter button popping off and the lens sticking and shutting down the camera. In some ways it reminds me of a vehicle... the deal between the manufacturer and the repair shops.

Nevertheless... I think I will go for one of the two Canon camera... and hope for the best. A compact high zoom camera is likely the best as I do a lot of hiking and skiing. On hikes I need the zoom to stay well away from some of our more interesting wildlife creatures... i.e. Grizzlies.

So... that about does it... I have appreciated everyone's input.

Personally, unless size is an issue, I want a bigger camera. Compacts are too small and slippery. Not literally slippery, but so small that there's little to hold onto. The Canon SX130 has the same zoom range as the SX230 and the same photo quality. You give up some features, but it has a larger body and a much cheaper price.

If you want a LOT of zoom range, the SX30 has a whopping 35x lens. It has the same form-factor as your old Sony, so plenty to hold on to (but less portable as well).

I don't believe extended warranties are worthwhile, but a Squaretrade extended warranty would be about $50 for three years, or $75 with accidental damage coverage.