alex wetmore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On Tue, 13 Jan 2004, J. C. O'Connell wrote: >> Since all DSLRs so far have had a short shelf life >> due to technical innovations, could someone please >> explain to me why build quality is important? > >Just because a camera is only sold for a short period of time doesn't >mean that it has a short functional life. I'm still using a Sony >DSC-S75 as my P&S camera. This is a 3.3mp camera that came out around >the same time as the Canon G1 (3 or 4 years ago?). Tons of stuff has >been released since then that is better, but that old camera still >does what I bought it for and does it well. > >The *ist D isn't going to take worse pictures in 5 years just because >there are better D-SLRs available in 5 years.
The Nikon D100 has been on the market for a year and a half so far. They may introduce a successor at PMA next month but it probably won't be available until summer (which would give the D100 a lifespan of 2 years) and I'd be very surprised if it turned out to be enough of an improvement to make D100 owners even consider trading up. It took two years for the D2h to be replaced. Heck, the D1x was introduced in the summer of 2001 and hasn't been superseded yet! Another PMA announcement? Could be, but it still seems like a healthy lifespan to me. I would expect D1x/D1h-class cameras to be kept and used by their owners just as long as film cameras. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
