Camera toughness (Page 5): But doesn't build quality lead to durability? Dennis...

dennis2146 Loc: Eastern Idaho

BebuLamar wrote:

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.

But doesn't build quality lead to durability?

Dennis

Bill P

dennis2146 wrote:

But doesn't build quality lead to durability?

Dennis

Two different things.

Bill P

Does anyone else remember when the Nikon (EPOI) rep would visit local camera shops and demonstrate hammering nails with a Nikon F?

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Who can have a positive attitude about inferior equipment?

DesRose Loc: Phoenix, Arizona

CHG_CANON wrote:

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

Lol.

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

I’m afraid saying Craftsman doesn’t impress me because we don’t know what that means. A wrench or socket is one thing. But when it comes to torque wrenches or air impact tools I would have go see them using off the shelf Craftsman tools to be convinced. Top Fuel teams like Kalitta are also doing a lot of tear down and replace at the track. Tear down doesn’t take a lot of precision. Wonder what they use back at the shop too.

lamiaceae wrote:

I like NHRA Drag Racing a lot. Lets see: Don Sch... (show quote)

PierreD

Imagemine wrote:

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

This is certainly not the case. For example, new Olympus cameras such as the TG6 are designed for outdoor photography and are as rugged (water-, shock-, and dust-proof) as they come. And other more expensive models (incl. lenses) are completely water-sealed and are now the models of choice by many wildlife photographers. These are just examples, but overall, to say that Canikon cameras are tops with regard to durability is more than a bit of a stretch.... Might have been the case at one point in the past, but times have changed!

Haenzel Loc: South Holland, The Netherlands

CHG_CANON wrote:

Who can have a positive attitude about inferior equipment?

Replace 'equipment' by 'comments' and I'll answer the question...

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Imagemine wrote:

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

Add Panasonic to that list, especially for documentary and independent filmic video, portraits, weddings, landscapes, and architectural work. (They're not particularly loved by sports and wildlife photographers, but documentary work is a main strength.)

Also add the availability of professional repair and loaner gear and other services to the reasons you cited. Canon and Nikon have had professional services organizations for many years. You do have to own their "pro" equipment, and pay an annual fee, but if you rely on hard, daily use of your gear, the pro services are worth it.

Panasonic recently introduced a very similar paid service — Lumix PRO Services — similar to CPS and NPS.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Bill P wrote:

Does anyone else remember when the Nikon (EPOI) rep would visit local camera shops and demonstrate hammering nails with a Nikon F?

Oh, yeah. I dropped one down the side of a mountain in Montana once. It rolled about 100' before coming to a stop against a rock. The lens hood had a ding in it, but it worked fine, otherwise. STILL works... but it needs new rear seals and mirror dampener foam.

BillBingham2

burkphoto wrote:

Oh, yeah. I dropped one down the side of a mountain in Montana once. It rolled about 100' before coming to a stop against a rock. The lens hood had a ding in it, but it worked fine, otherwise. STILL works... but it needs new rear seals and mirror dampener foam.

Hockey Pucks and Gorillas man, that’s a story! I think the days of a camera stoping an incoming round are mostly over.

My read on durability is that it should include access to new parts and independent folks who know how to replace them. While I used to trash talk Series-E Nikon glass a lot of it is still working. Not sure how much of the current fancy plastic zoom will say the same 30 years from now.

What is the length of time you are judging durability over? 5 years, 10 years, 30 years?

B2

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

BillBingham2 wrote:

Hockey Pucks and Gorillas man, that’s a story! I ... (show quote)

In 2019, if a camera body lasts five years, I'm happy, because it's probably time to upgrade and take advantage of improvements in nearly every system in it. So far, our GH4 bodies are over five years past the introduction date, both working fine, with no issues ever. But when one of them goes, a new GH(x) body will be in my sights. I am trying to hold out for a GH6. The GH5 is great, but long in the tooth.

Bill_de Loc: US

Timmers wrote:

Sure, and not to be a smart ass. Buy a pre M model Leica, get a pail of water. Take the 50mm Elmar lens out from it's collapsed position and use a turn of your wrist to lock that lens so it is ready for use. Now stick it in that pail of water! Wait a few minutes and take the camer/lens out of the pail of water and dry off the outside. Drop the base plate and look inside, unscrew the lens and look inside the camera front hole and look at the lens. It will all be bone dry.

Now due that to buck dump with your DSLR. You get the idea.

When in 1969 I had the good fortune to visit the Leitz factory in Wetzlar I asked a question to our guide, "Are Leica's really that much sharper than say a Nikon, or say a Pentax." I got a big smile and the answer was that Nikon and Asahi optics have several superior optics, often superior to lenses made by E. Leitz. Then he said something that stuck with me for the rest of my life. It is NOT just optics, it is the totality of the whole camera. It seems that most of the problem of sharpness in the hand camera is vibration caused by the sudden halting of the first curtain during exposure. By early 1932 this problem had been so reduced in Leicas by the use of a ball bearing shutter arrestor for the first curtain. This feature is part of EVERY mechanical shutter curtained Leica. No other camera maker bothers with this mechanical development.

So to get the quality possible in the Nikon, Pentax or other cameras optics you would need to fit them to a Leica camera body, then you could achieve that lenses potential.

Now ask yourself, why is it that E Leitz has the amazing Aspheric optics, matched only in the most advanced Zeiss T* optics?

Finally, there is a mystical standard in photography, what you might call the 'unicorn of optics' that most of the photographers in the world grade the final big test for a photographic optics sited by most using the Japanese word bokeh. The universally agreed lens that is considered the 'litmus test' of this controvertibly optic effect is the Leica 50mm Summitar f2 lens (built/manufactured in the 50's).

Sure, and not to be a smart ass. Buy a pre M model... (show quote)

When I asked, "Was there any widespread discussion about this that you can point to, or just what you heard from one person?" I meant some documentation I could read, not something you were told or shown. The reason I even responded was your comment about some cameras not holding up in Vietnam.

I spent about 70% of my time in the jungle through monsoon and dry seasons. A small percentage was on the beach and a couple of hospital stays. We all carried cameras of all different brands, mine was a Mamiya Sekor DTL. There were Pentaxes, Nikons. etc. The only complaints we ever had was when we were in a rear area, drunk, and stuff got stolen. We weren't photographers, we were grunts. My guess is we were a little tougher on the cameras than the pros were. We cleaned out M16's and M60's constantly, the cameras not so much.

---

RodeoMan Loc: St Joseph, Missouri

CHG_CANON wrote:

It's the poor craftsman who uses inferior tools.

I heard it as "It's a poor carpenter who blames his hammer."

RickTaylor

chrissybabe wrote:

You might not ask an auto mechanic what tools he uses but you will find am's with a whole box full of Snap-On tools and buy him a few drinks and he will tell you about the time he picked up an old Snap-On from 1988 that is still working great. I bet anything you like that he secretly thinks it makes him a better mechanic because he has the best tools.

There is a huge difference between Snapon quality and any other wrench or socket period