How long do you keep your equipment

[rick_m.]

<p>I still have my Argus C-3, Nikormat EL and F2AS. I also have an N80 and F5. I have a Super Speed Graphic and Yashica D. Sold the RB-67 and all of its stuff. Glad to see it go. As for digitals, I have no special affinity for any of them. I have sold them when I replaced them. I have a D2Xs, D7100, D3 and D4 now. They are tools and will go when they are no longer needed. (I keep the D2Xs for rough service but almost never use it except for backup at rodeos.) I can't love digital cameras. Perhaps familiarity breeds contempt. That and I miss the drama that made me love my film cameras twice. Once when I took the shot and once when roll came out of the dryer.</p>

[pics]

<p>I've never sold a film camera body and the price they command on the used market today doesn't make it worth while. I still use my D300 (purchased in 2008) as my sole DSLR. It still works well and gets the job done for my needs. Nikon hasn't yet released a camera body that I desire at a price point I can justify and therefore the D300 lives on for me. When/if I do finally upgrade within the Nikon lineup I will most likely keep it.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>Until it breaks or isn't cost effective to repair.</p>

<p>My nine-year-old D2H is too glitchy and undependable for most stuff, but has found a second life doing infrared. So I'll keep using it until it dies. But I probably won't have it repaired. For the cost of repairs I could buy a better camera and have it converted to IR.</p>

<p>I've regretted selling only some gear I thought at the time was superfluous, especially a Rolleiflex 2.8C TLR that would be difficult to replace now for anywhere close to what I originally paid. But I don't really miss most of the stuff I've sold, swapped or given away. I like good tools, but it's mostly just stuff. I'm mainly interested in the photos.</p>

[Jochen_S]

<p>I seem to keep my equipment even "too long". I am proud of a few resales. The Kodak Disk 2000 which was my first own camera, A Seagull TLR which generated too soft images when shot at my Mamiya's side. Grandpa's Agfa box A broken electronic shuttered k-mount body with winder a Pentax film body still shooting & exposing but AF motor broken. An Optio 6MP P&S which was like the Disk just too unresponsive for my taste.<br>

I'd have little issues handing certain stuff down, but I am sticking to a lot of what I acquired. My first SLR, a Super A will stay as a paperweight in case it should break.<br>

I see no sense in reselling my surely outdated *istD. Monetary value dropped to less than 10% but it is still going pretty strong I hadn't replaced it ("I'm a poor shutterbug and thats the only 3rd DSLR I have to cover this event for the Internet") until a year ago, when I spotted the Samsung version of my top body K20D for little money in the local store's used stuff window.<br>

By now I am realizing I made a few bad purchasing decissions. - I am stocked with a pair of "I don't care about them, if they vanish out of my saddlebags" film SLRs & matching lenses and bought also a pair of surely awesome MX at the dawn of digital, so like others above I own probably too many 35mm film beaters.<br>

Not sure what to say about digital. - I feel seasoned enough to claim: "I know what this is and I believe its doing its job well enough for me." about my old bodies in most cases. - Yes, Pentax shelled out next models. But there was nothing that made me drool over my keyboard when I read about them on dpreview, like back in the days when Minolta brought out their 7D which offered in camera anti shake and seemed the just right tool for concert photography paired with some 50 & 24mm primes, but arrgh, my $$ were spend on an M3... - A few paychecks later I got hold of a K100D for that job and was glad to not have ended switching or mixing systems.<br>

The biggest issue I see: Remaining gear dreams tend to become fairly expensive. - I would like to be able to gun down sports with decent zooms on pro bodies once in a while but these seem 25k which would maybe make me happier spent on a pair of simple Leica monochroms for general photography.<br>

Budged DMF appears tempting too but will probably repeat all issues with smaller DSLRs just with multiplied price tags.<br>

While safing up and wondering what to do when the thought of carrying money for a camera less than 2 football fields from bank to store feels uncomfartable the old stuff has to do. And upgrades of that should be quite stunning specs, or tempting price wise to shake me out of my shopping hiatus.<br>

The big question is always: do I with my lensline as is (in reach) need that at all? And tech progress isn't made very transparent.</p>

[jose_angel]

<p>I try not to have too much digital stuff... in my experience it becomes obsolete before it breaks. So it is not worth to me to be upgrading after short periods (too much expense for small image quality improvements). I don`t even have a really usable backup camera (actually, my kids have a lot of old, abandoned digicams... not a good deal).<br /> Also, I`m afraid I`m not a big technology freak. I don`t feel so bad using my 12Mp DSLR; honestly, I`m aware that a better camera will not improve my photography that much, now limited to casual and family photos.</p>

<p>Against NAS, I use to shoot regularly (film or digital), it is the best antidote. Another great antidote is to keep the money waiting for the very latest model, just in case my D700 breaks... ;)</p>

<p>Not the same with lenses, I got rid of almost all AF/AFD ones (few exceptions), as well as AI/AiS zooms, replaced with current AFS zooms. I think I did it right. I`m pleased.</p>

<p>Film gear is another topic; I still use them regularly, specially larger formats, and given the current value, although I have way more cameras I can use (many of them are in good shape, -in <em>known</em> shape-), I`m not willing to sell them. Traditional photography still is my main motivation source.</p>

<p>If I were into business (I`m just an amateur), for sure I`d upgrade my gear after short periods, trying to offer the latest technology and services. This is what I try to do in my daily job.</p>

[Two23]

<p>I have a Voigtlander Petzval lens, 7 in. f3.5, made in 1847. I'm the original owner.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p><div></div>

[Lou_Meluso]

<p>My digital equipment gets flipped more regularly, every five years or so, bodies anyway. Like some others, I have film cameras from long ago, mid-1950's-90's, that still work great. Longevity was a feature of film cameras that is not so much touted on today's cameras that change considerably as imaging technology progresses. That said, many years ago I gave my wife the original 6MP Canon 300D that she still uses today for her eBay business. I've offered to upgrade it for her but she'll have none of it. She says it meets her needs which, I guess, is the bottom line for any camera.</p>

<p>Kent-too funny!</p>

[johne37179]

<p>I keep my equipment until it is no longer economic to maintain it -- repairs cost as much as replacement, or my imagination outruns the capability of the equipment and there is a camera in the market that is capable of filling the need. Back in the day when I was doing a lot of location work nearly every day, I would replace about 1/3 of my Nikon bodies each year -- mostly because I gave them very hard use and could not keep the shutters calibrated. I had a colleague who bought about a dozen Pentax bodies at a time an treated them almost as disposable cameras -- he put a Nikon lens mount on them. I wore out my D-1 and my D70. My D7000 is working just fine and will be around for a while longer.</p>

[fotolopithecus]

<p>I once thought every camera I bought should be of pro build quality, and last forever. With the advent of digital it slowly dawned on me that pro build quality was largely pointless because a dslr typically becomes a dinosaur long before it wears out. Hmmm I thought, these middle of the line DX cameras have IQ as good, or better than the pro models of only a very few years ago, and cost way less.<br>

Unless you're a truly prolific photographer you wont get near to wearing your camera out in the months it takes for the new model to appear. I say buy the middle of the line camera, and buy frequently. The D90, D7000, D7100 etc. It's not like these cameras are cheesy either, and should last quite a long time if you want, and take reasonable care of them. Nope, no more brick shoothouse camera builds for me, I'm not hammering nails with my D7100, only taking pictures. That new D7200 must be coming out soon....oh boy! ;)</p>

[johne37179]

<p>Kent, I recognize that lens -- you may be the second owner.</p>

[bgelfand]

 

<blockquote>

<p>I have a Voigtlander Petzval lens, 7 in. f3.5, made in 1847. I'm the original owner.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>The lens is 147 years old. Something tells me you are slightly younger, Kent. Original owner means the person who purchased or was given the lens new - the first owner. So how are you the original owner (this should be a good story - involving either time travel or creatures with fangs and a taste for human blood <GRIN>)? Unless the lens sat on the store shelf for about 100 years.</p>

[david_carroll4]

<p>I recently sold off all my OM stuff, which I had started accumulating in the 80s, to finance the purchase of an OM-D EM-1. Also sold my F4S, which I never really warmed to. I had always kept everything, but after packing to move house, I realized I had three large shipping boxes full of film stuff (and that doesn't even include the darkroom stuff) that was getting very little use. Once I sold off the OM SLRs on fleabay, getting rid of the Zuikos was pretty easy, and then I just kept selling until I was down to a core collection of the cool stuff - couple of Fs, couple of F2s (early and late versions of each), F3HP, 1st generation Canon F-1 and a Minolta XK, and a set of primes (24, 50, 85/100, 200) for each system - these will live in a display case except for the occasional roll put through them for a change of pace. It was actually pretty liberating moving all that stuff out.</p>

[Aoresteen]

I still have my film camers from the 70s. I still have every digital camera I

have bought. Still use them all - mostly Olympus stuff. No need to sell

them.

[kam_kozalak]

<p>There are two kinds of hanging on to a piece of equipment.<br /> First is for nostalgic reasons, after you have upgraded to newer equipment. One could just keep it, especially if it is not worth much, or occasionally use it. For example, I still keep my Yashica Mat124 TLR and Nikon FE2 cameras, although I never use them.<br /> Second is using it as your regular camera or lens without feeling a need (or be able to afford) to replace it. For example, I still use my Nikon D200 as my only body, because I don't shoot action and low light scenes and it serves me well for what I do (even though I get tempted occasionally to replace it). All of my lenses (Ais and AF-D) fall under this category, too. They still are in frequent use. Some are 30 years old.<br /> <br /><br /></p>

[pjdilip]

<p>As long as I had just one film body (FE2) and later one autofocus (F801s), I used them quite frequently... then came digital, and the easier it became the less serious my photography became! Then the old film bodies were available so cheap that I strated acquiring them (F100, F4s, luckily stopped there!), a couple of medium format bodies, but not really for actual use... Now I've finally started disposing off some of the stray bits and pieces, out-of-order old bodies, maybe even the old film bodies. I use a Nikon D7000 as my main digital body, and a Canon S95 for convenience.<br>

The old Nikon bodies like the F100 and F4 and FE2 are mainly to touch and feel and handle and listen to... like a pet :)</p>

[RaymondC]

<p>I mean my dad still has a fungus smelling 2nd hand camera Fujico or something rangefinder fixed lens auto only camera no shutter or aperture selection from at least the 1970s but hasn't been used or taken out in nearly a decade or two haha and we have a Canon film SLR that hasn't been used for a roll in about 10yrs it has been taken out and looked at thou.</p>

<p>Maybe the question is how long we we hold our "main camera" for or at least how long we we hold our regular used camera(s) for.</p>

<p>I got a D70 in 2004 and got a D600 in 2013. As for my film camera still used, both used bought at 2006 and other was later - F100 and FM2N. If I get a medium format and a large format - I'll only have one. My bro now still use the D70 nearly every 2 weeks. I don't have any point and shoots other than my phone. I still have film in freezer and shoot film and develop the b/w film myself. </p>

[john_narsuitus]

<blockquote>

<p>"How long do you keep your equipment?"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It depends! I keep my equipment until...</p>

<p > </p>

<p >1. It proves to be unreliable. for example, when my first SLR (a Miranda Sensorex) broke three times within the first two years of its 3-year warranty, I sold it and replaced it with a Nikon F.</p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p >2. It is replaced by a significantly improved model. For example, when the Nikon F2 was introduced in 1971, I replaced my Nikon F with the F2.</p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p >3. It does not fulfill its purpose. For example, when I discovered that my bad weather camera (the Nikon EM) stopped working in the rain, I replaced it with the Nikon Nikonos underwater camera.</p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p >4. It appreciates so much that I am afraid to use it. For example, when my two Nikon F2 Titanium cameras doubled in price, I sold them and purchased two lower priced Nikons that I was not afraid to use and abuse.</p>

<p > </p>

[sridip_nag1]

<p>Nice to see that a lot of people are still using their film cameras. I will continue to hold on to my film bodies (N70 and F5)... can hardly get anything for them, esp. the F5, considering that I bought it new at full price.</p>