FRENCHY Loc: Stone Mountain , Ga

My D90 still clicking away , when I use it

SusanFromVermont Loc: Southwest corner of Vermont

The repair place you went was obviously not a Nikon Authorized Repair Facility. Be careful what you let them do, if your camera is under warranty.

I have two Nikon Cameras, one purchased in 2012 and still in great shape, the other purchased in 2016. Apparently that planned obsolescence is a theory that doesn't compute. Don't let someone with a negative attitude undermine your confidence.

Rather than building in obsolescence, it appears to me that they are trying to come up with better cameras with new tricks to stimulate sales! Have you noticed all the photographers that seem to "collect" cameras? They buy and buy again.

richimage

plus one on the Metz flashes - I was stationed in Germany in the 70's, and acquired several, including three CT60's. I didn't get the large batteries until I was back in the States, and have had to replace only one of the "dryfit" internal batteries to date. These three units, on tall stands, would illuminate a large room easily. I used them as ultra-portable studio flashes.

pesfls Loc: Oregon, USA

Oh no it must all be true!!! I had a Metz 402 many years ago that died a slow death.

sanhuberto Loc: Miami

Any company today that wants to be around for a while cannot afford to make bad products. I, like most of the persons who have posted comments to your post, have owned Nikon's, bought them new or used, and never had one break down on me. I do miss the simplicity of the mechanical cameras and everything related to film, developing and printing; but today we shoot hundreds of pictures, edit them, delete them, and can do all that on a $15 memory card. And it's true that the GAS feeling comes around mofe often than in the past, just factor in the savings that a $15 memory card gives you and it's like you are putting a few $ away every week for that new toy that just caught your eye. I am good till the 80+ MP hit the market.
BTW it's Nikon 100th B-day, that is based on quality and a loyal customer base.

jouster Loc: Witlesss Protection Program

My first DSLR was a Nikon D40 in 2007. After six years and over 35,000 clicks, I gave it to my younger brother. He uses it regularly, although not as much as I did. It still works as well as new. My Grandson is using my (new in 2011) D5100 and it still works as well as new.

If not for GAS (and newer features) I could still be using them.

For over fifty years I've heard the claim "they make them to wear out in a couple of years so you have to buy a new one" about almost every product. "They don't make them like they used too" is mostly bunk from those of us looking back through rose colored glasses with selective memory.

jaycoffman Loc: San Diego

Actually I'm surprised they don't give away the printers. The cost of new cartridges is basically what I paid for the printer in the first place. I'm just to lazy to go buy a new printer ever time I run out of ink.

jaycoffman Loc: San Diego

jj

I hate to break this to you but there is no such thing as "unregulated capitalism" anywhere and there probably never has been. And the thing capitalist theorists always miss is human nature--the minute someone gets and advantage s/he then uses whatever leverage s/he has to change the rules in his/her favor. I wasn't going to comment but you just kept saying it over and over.

pesfls Loc: Oregon, USA

My brother in laws dad was very high up in HP. He once told me they make nothing of consequence on the printer as they are so fiercely competitive. He said the profit for the printer division lies in the ink, “Period.”

Robert Bailey Loc: Canada

Some posters have missed the point that older, mechanical film cameras were indeed built
to last for decades. It is digital cameras that are under discussion, and their weak point
(whether "planned" or not) is the shutter box which will eventually wear out.

Fotoartist Loc: Detroit, Michigan

No, that's fine, let's discuss. What "rules" are you talking about breaking to someones advantage? The economic rules of supply and demand? The only one who can "break" the rules of supply and demand are governments with their forced instituting of wage/price controls, etc.

In the little bit of capitalism we enjoy, Nikon and Canon know that they will gain market share and maximize profits if they deliver the better product at the better price and not a flawed product at an exorbitant price. That's the only free market I'm talking about, It's self regulating. It involves selfish capitalists and self serving consumers, but it works and it's the freest market we have.

Bugfan Loc: Toronto, Canada

Designing obsolescence through mechanical means is dangerous. If one of my cameras fails prematurely, like in less than ten or fifteen years or perhaps 100K shutter clicks, my tendency would be to avoid that brand in the future and not recommend it either. I have a D70 that still works perfectly in addition to a D3 a D200 and a D800. Each continue to work reliably and flawlessly.

But the obsolescance question is none the less real. It's done through features. Manufacturers have a list of new features and refinements that are intended for future models. To get you to upgrade they try to come out with a new body every year that has one or two features that you would just die for. It's an effective way to get us to buy new gear without compromising quality. What also happens sometimes is that they remove a feature and bring it back again later. I remember the Canon g7 for instance. The predecessor had raw capability, the g 7 didn't. The next one brought it back.

The way I deal with his is to wait for two or three new models of the body before considering an upgrade and then I'll consider it only if the new features solve some of the issues I may still have.

Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina

Perhaps nice in theory, but I am not convinced that the best Nikon or Canon film camera shutter of 30 or 40 years ago would be rated for 400,000 actuations. Let alone would they fire off 14 frames per second. Certainly I my experience a whole lot more shots get taken in one or two drag racing events than probably would have ever gone through my OM-1 or OM-10. Film and developing were costly and shots were precious relatively speaking. So, I ask are there people that have a film SLR that they have put 400,000 shutter actuations through, or perhaps the good old days were not as good as we would like to think. I still have my film SLRs but I will shoot with my DSLR.

Best,
Todd Ferguson

Bugfan Loc: Toronto, Canada

My film cameras go back forty years and all still work. But they also didn't get the abuse my DSLRs have to endure. The best I could do was 3.5 frames per second. I don't think the shutter would have survived 400K shots but perhaps it could come close. The top speed was less than today in addition to the frame rate.

Still, it doesn't matter. I shoot exclusively DSLR these days. I get better performance than in the past. The only thing that has changed is that the cameras are a lot more complex. A lens used to be an empty tube with some glass and an aperture. Now we add a focus motor and a stabilizer too. The more of such things we add the sooner something will go wrong. That said though, to date all my digitals still work flawlessly.

As to the good old days, when the battery failed in my film SLR it didn't matter, I could estimate exposure and continue to take pictures. Today when the battery fails in my DSLRs I just have a lump of very expensive trash. The camera does nothing without a battery. That was a good old day, a camera I could always count on even when the battery was dead. What's different too was that those old mechanical wonders were not as sensitive. I've used mine all the way down to minus thirty five in the winter and up to forty five in the summer in the tropics. It's not likely our DSLRs will work over such a range.

Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina

Well, 400,000 is well over 16,500 24 exposure rolls of film. A sizable number... At lets say $10 a roll for film and developing back 30-40 years ago that is over $165,000. I have a friend that used to shoot slides and trade them with a dozen or more people around the country. He used to fire off ten or more shots to my one or two of the same subject. He probably shot 100,000 slides over a 20 year or more timeframe. Sometimes I think he spent most of his income on Kodachrome 64 and developing. He should have had stock in Kodak. So, I guess if I can get 400,000 shots out of $6,000 body I have quite a bargain compared to trying to do the same with film.

I have to say I have never missed a shot with a DSLR due to a battery issue...card being full, now that has happened a few times years ago...

Best,
Todd Ferguson