From a 1979 special number of Chasseur d'Images.
Total number of cameras surveyed: about 15,000
ModelAB C D
N*k*n f 9 78 0,7 0,37
pentax kx 10 32 0,7 1,30
N*k*n el26 24 1,8 0,63
leica all 20 129 2,4 1,10
C*n*n f113 42 2,6 0,47
pentax sp5/1000 24 111 2,9 0,53
N*k*n ft42 120 3,0 0,20
C*nt*x rts 17 16 4,2 0,20
N*k*n f213 32 4,4 1,27
K*n*c* tn3 20 50 4,5 0,17
Etc... Almost 100 models or groups of models.
A: Number of cameras returned per 100 cameras.
Note: Older cameras have more chance to have been returned more
frequently (than newer cameras). So this number does not tell us a
lot about toughness. But readers gave the number of months they have
had the camera (column B) and the number of photographs taken with
their camera. A somewhat meaningfull measure of toughness is then
possible (column C).
B: Average age of camera (months).
C: Number of returns (for service) per 100,000 clicks (rounded to .1)
Average for all cameras is 16,6 (not 11 as I reported earlier)
D: Share (%) of all cameras own by readers. If you multiply this %
by approx. 15,000, you get, for example, that 56 Nikon F and 195
Pentax KX have been considered in the survey. Models with less than
25 cameras surveyed are grouped (i.e. all leica, all topcon, all
mamiya etc.)
Global results (average number of returns per 100,000) for a few brands:
N*k*n 7
Pentax9,6
Ol*mp*s 15,8
K*n*c* 15,8
F*j*c* 15,8
AVERAGE 16,6
M*n*lt* 17,5
Pr*kt*c* 28,7
There are many comments in the text (for example, most common types
of repairs are mentionned for many models). Also average cost of
repair and average delay (not interesting as it relates to one
country and back then).
I seriously doubt the survey's methodology. If not
knowing numbers which they wouldn't know (number of total cameras in
use of that particular type compared to defect ones), it's
meaningless.
The methodology itself seems OK. If we believe that these 15000
cameras behaved in a typical way... but it's not a question of
believing... Is 15,000 enough? Is the margin of error too high?
Andre
Or did they use different methodology? Please dig out the
article, so we can be sure :)
Frantisek
P.S.: thanks!
Thursday, July 11, 2002, 5:43:55 AM, andre wrote:
a The KX was found to be as tough as N*k*n F in a huge survey made by
a Chasseur d'Image in... 1979 if I remember. I have the issue
a somewhere and will post the results if I can find it.
a N*k*n F had 0,69 breakdown every 100,000 shots
a Pentax KX had 0,70
a I just found a file with the first ones:
a N*k*n f,69
a pentax kx,70
a N*k*n el2 1,8
a L**c* all 2,4
a C*n*n f1 2,6
a pentax sp51000 2,9
a N*k*n ft 3,0
a C*nt*x rts 4,2
a N*k*n f2 4,4
a K*n*c* tn3 4,5
a Average of all cameras reported (by thousands of readers) is around 11.
a Andre
--
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
