I've had similar lifespans with film cameras. And I had one camera last for years with a busted LCD but it still took great shots so I didn't fix it.
If I think back to film cameras, that 2000 to 2300 shots would be nearly impossible to afford and certainly for most cameras had the camera in for some cleaning or repair.
Here's my parting thought. The per shot price was likely cheaper with the digital camera even if we replace the camera every 2000 shots?
Can anybody comment with experience on this subject? Our family had two Kodak LS443 camera both fail within months of each other early this year and late last year, both having taken only about
2000-2300 shots. They just recorded a blank (black) image. This was well covered previously in several posts in the Kodak forum on this site.
I'm not complaining about the particular camera, or Kodak. (Although I've switched manufacturers) My question is more fundamental. Does anyone really know the useful life of these cameras and the
technology behind them? Particularly the imaging sensors. Recently, there has been a rash of reports on this site about failures of all brands of cameras using a particular sensor, apparently made
by one manufacturer.
I was thinking of going with this canon camera now:
it is ranked 1th in its category after analyazing more then 5000 editorial reviews...