Lifetime of 35mms

[snappingturtle]

Hi,

I read this discussion in the digital forum about how ling will Digital SLRs last.

http://forum.pbase.com/viewtopic.php?t=7885

I am just wondering if the same applies to standard 35mm SLRs, and if they do how does it differ?

I currently have the Canon EOS Rebel Ti. Since I barely use film, I chose to get a Rebel Ti over the Elan since the Elan's capabilities seem like something I would not need. I do use a Canon AE-1 once in while from my cousin's stepfather, and it is still operating well since 1976! But I guess much of the stuff in the AE-1 is mechanical.


Hugh

[arachnophilia]

my film cameras are both about as old as i am. haven't broken 'em yet.

[bobtrips]

I shot film SLRs for 35 years. I didn't have many problems but those I did have were largely with shutter failure. Usually cleaning/servicing by a tech solved the problem.

One would expect mirror/shutter failure to be the most common problem. Those puppies really get slammed around a lot.

The other problems that I had were a leaky light box, a zoom that fell apart, and a couple of lenses ruined by fungus.

I doubt that people will experience problems as often with a film camera as they are very unlikely to receive the same amount of shooting. Over my film years I shot no more than 15,000 frames of transparencies and a couple thousand frames of B&W negatives and this was spread over nine different bodies. I took close to 20,000 shots with my second digital.

[jim_panzee]

My Leica 111f, was built in 1952, and apart from the odd CLR (last one three months ago) is still taking top class photographs with the original 50mm lens.

But then there are cameras and cameras.

JimP.

[containsmildperil]

Most manual cameras last pretty well, but anything with complicated electronics is more likely to be prone to problems. This applies to most modern film SLRs, as well as digital. Digital SLRs haven't yet been around in significant numbers for long enough to draw any meaningful conclusions about their durability.

[narsuitus]

I am not sure what you mean by "standard 35mm SLR" but I had a brand new 35mm film camera break twice within its first year. On the other hand, I have a 35mm film camera that has been working consistently since 1971.

By the way, I also have 4 rangefinders that have been trouble free since the 1940s and 1950s. On the other hand, I have a 2-year old digital that broke and is not worth repairing.

[jim_panzee]

One of the biggest problems with most modern (post 1980s) cameras, is in the construction materials. Since this date (approx), most cameras have been built using plastic's and more and more micro electronic parts, these are the things that break more easily than in older mechanicly operated cameras, these plastic and electronic parts are mostly throw away items and therefore , not meant to be either repaired or replaced by the manufacture.

JimP.

[narsuitus]

I also do not like plastic parts--especially parts that are subjected to motion and friction stress. However, I am impressed by the way plastic bodies withstand everyday wear and tear. They do not suffer from brassing and rusting like metal bodies. For example, look at how well the 1940s and 1950s plastic bodies of the Argus C3 have stood the test of time.

[kodan_txips]

I am not so sure about brassing. When black finish cameras started to be all the rage, we saw brassing as a badge of pride - it meant that we were serious photographers who took a LOT of pictures.

And maybe the problem is now "blacking" - my brushed aluminium effect camera is already showing signs that the cheap paint is wearing off to reveal the black plastic underneath. I bought it new less than 6 weeks ago.

I expect my 2 brand new digicams to be dead within 3 years. Yet the two 20 year old Minolta X300 slrs that I bought off ebay will probably last another 20 years/