Do DSLRs ever give warning before they expire?

[BeBu Lamar]

...And so we thought that 12Mpx was the max and more than enough .. and the D300 would be the last of the semi-pro DX's .. ;)

I didn't say anything about 12MP nor D300. I am talking about the Df. Nikon won't make it because it's simply not possible to make.

[bgelfand]

One good thing (if you can call it that) is that electronic gear doesn't really "wear" out; and like rodeo-joe's camera, failures often occur early on.

 

Of course lots of electronic cameras still have mechanical parts like the mirror.

 

 

I beg to differ with you; electronics do wear out. Failures are more likely to occur at two points in a products life cycle - early in it use called "infant mortality" and at end of life called "old age". The "old age" failures are wearing out. They do occur. The physics of failure may be different for different devices and for mechanical and electronic devices, but the failures do occur; the devices wear out albeit it in different modes.

 

An example would be light bulbs. Incandescent bulbs wore out by literally burning through the filament. LED light bulbs also fail at end of life - according to the package of the last LED bulbs I installed it will fail in about 22 years. The bulb should last longer than I do (that is a sobering thought). But it will fail; it will wear out.

 

Printed circuit board traces fail; solder joints fail; transistors fail. When these items fail after long use, it is called wearing out.

 

The same may be said for cameras.

[JDMvW]

it is called wearing out.

 

Not really, it's called failure.

HAL: I've just picked up a fault in the AE35 unit. It's going to go 100% failure in 72 hours.

[Mary Doo]

HAL: I've just picked up a fault in the AE35 unit. It's going to go 100% failure in 72 hours.

 

Hal attributed it to human error (i.e., unplanned). On the contrary, much of the consumer products, e.g., cameras and especially automobiles, are planned to fail sometime in the future ("planned obsolescence" in marketing terminology). Hence high shutter count, and advanced mileage in cars, are credible indicators of upcoming failure (i.e., don't be so shocked when it happens).

Edited July 26, 2019 by Mary Doo

[JDMvW]

Hal attributed it to human error

 

NTIM but HAL referred to the difference between 'him'self and the terrestrial counterpart.

[Mary Doo]

NTIM but HAL referred to the difference between 'him'self and the terrestrial counterpart.

NTIM, here is a recap of the conversation between Hal and his human counterpart and the story (click). Maybe you were referring to another aspect (?). I was thinking about the relevance of the Hal problem to our discussion. ;)

Edited July 26, 2019 by Mary Doo

[JDMvW]

yes, and here is the relevant discussion.

Dave: How would you account for this discrepancy between you and the twin 9000?

HAL: Well, I don’t think there is any question about it. It can only be attributable to human error. This sort of thing has cropped up before, and it has always been due to human error.

My point, directly relevant to our discussion, was that the AE35, in any case, was not "wearing out' but was "failing"!

[Mary Doo]

My point, directly relevant to our discussion, was that the AE35, in any case, was not "wearing out' but was "failing"!

Hmm..., perhaps "wearing out" and "failing" do intersect somewhere in the duration of an item's usefulness. e.g., "My refrigerator stopped working after ten years of continuous run". Refrigerators are not designed to run forever. It "wore out" its usefulness - and also "failed" - after so many years. AE35 did not fail from Day 1. Perhaps it also "wore out" - in combination with design error? ;)

[JDMvW]

perhaps "wearing out" and "failing" do intersect somewhere in the duration of an item's usefulness

 

If you say so....... I can't see it.

[bgelfand]

Not really, it's called failure.

 

We may be arguing semantics. How do you define the term "wearing out"?

[JDMvW]

We may be arguing semantics

of course we're arguing semantics. :D

 

let's call the whole thing off:rolleyes:

[Andrew Garrard]

I wish LED lights wore out as slowly as predicted. Probably the LEDs are fine, but the wiring in the ones I've been using is awful: two different kinds of LED bulbs have failed multiple times in multiple sockets. I'd blame it on spectacularly iffy electrics (still possible), but some have half-failed, suggesting the wiring is to blame. Corrosion happens to many things with no moving parts, and current makes for crystal growth that causes failure.

 

I think it's cynical to assume modern stuff is designed to fail. It may fail more quickly because it's more precise, or it may be that stuff made in the last was just as likely to fail, but anything that's still about happened to be the exception. (There's a long list of old churches that have fallen apart and been patched up over the centuries. Sometimes "they don't build them like that any more" is for a reason.) What we do have with modern equipment is automated testing that lets you put a figure on how long something will last. That's a good thing, even if it's just an average: having no idea doesn't mean the product will last forever.

 

Sorry to stir with the Df comment - I just meant unexpected announcements pass me by. There are many other ways Nikon could surprise me. They could launch some DX primes!

[Mary Doo]

I think it's cynical to assume modern stuff is designed to fail. It may fail more quickly because it's more precise, or it may be that stuff made in the last was just as likely to fail, but anything that's still about happened to be the exception.

It's real for sure. The market and economy need it. More importantly, consumers love it - we get the Z6, we forget about the D800, etc. (not the best example, I'll let you fill in...) Here is some discussion about it (click).

[glen_h]

My D70s sometimes forgets that it has a memory card, so I remove and reinsert it.

 

That was one reason I bought a (used) D200 to replace it.

 

There are a lot of failure modes, some fast and some slow.

 

On backpacking trips, though, there are failure modes like dropping on a rock or in water, also

temperature and moisture variations that can cause problems, both sudden and slow.

 

Many of these are as likely for new as old.

[glen_h]

I wish LED lights wore out as slowly as predicted. Probably the LEDs are fine, but the wiring in the ones I've been using is awful: two different kinds of LED bulbs have failed multiple times in multiple sockets. I'd blame it on spectacularly iffy electrics (still possible), but some have half-failed, suggesting the wiring is to blame. Corrosion happens to many things with no moving parts, and current makes for crystal growth that causes failure.

 

(snip)

 

LEDs themselves do have a life, and usually wear out slowly.

 

LED replacements for incandescent lamps have a power converter to generate the appropriate voltage and current, and these tend to have a shorter life.

 

Overall, and for many different types of devices, I find that electrolytic capacitors seem to be a

popular failure mode of many devices.

[Ed_Ingold]

As in an ad currently on TV, "The first symptom of a stroke is a stroke." That applies to cameras too.