A DSLR is not a PC. The software doesn't have to change and the job doesn't change. Once you have a resolution you find acceptable (Some are waiting; I'm happy now) the camera will function until its breaks, you can't read the cards, or you just want a new toy. IMHO, the last factor is what limits the lifetime of the cameras. It is also equally true for film cameras, which is why I have five of them.
Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 01/13/04 05:02PM >>> Old Pentium (I) PCs may still work too, but that doesnt mean I would still want to use them..... JCO ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 2:57 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Used DSLR prices Why should build quality *not* be important? The "shelf life," as you call it, by which I presume you mean "useful life," is as long as the build quality allows it to be. Simply because there's something out there that is considered more modern technology doesn't mean that an existing camera has outlived its usefulness. The *ist-D will continue to produce images of like quality for as long as it continues to function. Better built cameras take more abuse and continue to function longer. Simple, really. Quoting "J. C. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > 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? > JCO ------------------------------------------------- This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/
