Imagemine Loc: St. Louis USA

Seems like everyone talks about everything on a camera except durability. I'm not saying talking about other features are bad things but people seem to leave out the build quality of a camera, that is the reason pros that shoot sports, wildlife & documentary seem to stick with Canon & Nikon by a large margin

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

I think if that would be the reason, they would stick to Pentax! They stick to Canon and Nikon not for durability, but for a whole lot of other reasons!!

Imagemine Loc: St. Louis USA

Do you think the crop of cameras now live up to the Pentax reputation like the Nikon d4 & d4s?

ORpilot Loc: Prineville, Or

Cameras today get out dated on their electronics long before they actually physicaly wear out. A professional generally replaces his camera body whenever the newer better one comes on line. Or they replace them at "X" amount of shutter clicks. The professional cannot afford to run a camera into the ground. Their equipment has to work each and every time. They do that just to stay competitive. Besides that...it's tax decidable.
Why did I replace my 14 yr old Minolta 5D (still working very well) and several subsequent cameras? Because they were superceeded by newer and better models.

Also of note: I still have my fathers Argus 35mm camera from WWll and it still works. I also have a plastic "Diana" camera that we were required to use in Photo 101 in college. It still works.

Imagemine Loc: St. Louis USA

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

A man's character is not measured by how he handles his wins, but how he handles his equipment.

MoT Loc: Barrington, IL

As with Canon and Nikon there are ranges of cameras that every manufacturer designs and produces. Some last a long time and some don't. However, a lot depends on how an owner uses and treats his or hers equipment. I think you may have made a gross generalization.

BB4A

I have only ever used Canon DSLR's professionally, and I chose that brand because their toughness was legendary among the professionals I respected and learnt from. I currently use the latest generations from the 1D and 5D series; and my sporting commissions are often executed in pouring rain and mud that sucks my boots off. My recent experience with the 7D Mk II is that this body is also one tough SOB... and IMHO one of the best all-round DSLR's available for the money.

Yes, I have a replacement plan for all my bodies, but it's not based on shutter clicks. It's based on the depreciation value of that asset; I run a business. Which means that friends get a well-looked after example, at a very reasonable price. I have friends who are still using my 7D Mk II and 5D Mk III bodies, with zero defects... these things are built like tanks.

Timmers Loc: San Antonio Texas.

I'm sorry, I just can't help myself when I read such clap trap.

During the Viet Nam Conflict (see I can be PC and call it a conflict and not a war!) there were ONLY two cameras that survived in the field, that was the Nikon camera with it's titanium shutter and Leica with it's rubberized cloth shutter. To add to that, during heavy wet conditions, the Nikons failed, while the M series Leicas worked pretty well, to pretty well, the Non M series Leicas were good to go.

I myself have had non-M Leicas go under sea water while tide pooling and these cameras are not considered water proof one went three plus feet in sea water with out taking on water (it was down there for 10 minutes).

As to Nikons, they do not fare well in dust and sand. You could have all the Nikons you wanted during Desert Storm, piles of them, the photojournalists switched to Canon DSLRs because the handled the desert conditions a lot better. This I got from Mrs. Marianna Smothers Bruni, who was there reporting on the war (oppsie, I mean conflict!), of course she sent her Nikon D's home and used her Leica M cameras, with no problems.

One other note, I used a Canon camera, but finally gave up on it because it was such a piece of junk. I had one of their 'L' zooms and the rear lens mount was such a poor excuse for engineering that the cheap metal flange bent while in it's Canon carry lens bag that it went on to the body but would not come loose, off to Canon to discover it was bent, ever so slightly. A plus thousand dollar lens so badly made that I decided I would leave the disposable digital camera body behind and use old Leica and Zeiss optics thus getting rid of half the photography problems in this digital age.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

Seems to me that durability is discused fairly often in threads when sports/wildlife and other outdoor activities require rugged bodies with long shutter life and weather sealing. Since most threads seem to revolve around less expensive, lower end cameras, the discussion of more robust bodies is not usually relevant.

BebuLamar

Build quality and durability to me are two different things. Durability is how tough the camera is. Build quality to me is how precise the camera is. Do the parts fit together perfectly. How tight is the tolerance.
With that said, I don't need durability that much as I take good care of my camera and don't abuse it. I do want my camera to have good build quality. To the least it just looks better.

Bill_de Loc: US

Was there any widespread discussion about this that you can point to, or just what you heard from one person?

---

Imagemine Loc: St. Louis USA

Thought that was one of the main reason for getting a high end camera among other things!

Imagemine Loc: St. Louis USA

In my book that is something to chew on 🤔

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

You'll find the excitable seniors get bent out of shape when you seem to be responding to someone, but don't use <quote reply>.