Originally Posted by GaryLH
I guess a better way to put it if u sum it all up..my idea of digital rot..is...though I may hang onto a specific digital camera for as long as I can, eventually it cannot be repaired for one reason or another.
On the other hand, I have some film cameras that date back to the early 1930s that I can still find people that know how to repair them (if u are willing to pay). I have other film cameras that are part of the electronic era, where the components are EOL and right now if I need a repair, it can only happen if the repair person can canibilize from another camera. That is an example of not really digital rot but electronic rot as it relates to anolog film cameras such as a Minolta cle.
Oh, eventually all these little machines die and need service. I agree with that. I was thinking more that you might mean the sensor gives up the ghost, or something like that, in a gradual and unhappy way.
My old film cameras have cost me more in service and repair than any of my digital cameras. The Oly E-1 (my benchmark cam) has never had a single problem. It was manufactured in Oct 2003, I got it used in 2003 with 3200 exposures on it. Nothing. I've put 12,000 more on since, still nothing as it was designed for 150,000 actuations MTBF. I suspect it will keep going until I just can't use it any more.
I feel the same will be true of the Leica M-P I acquired recently. Unlike the M9 which always felt fragile to me, the M-P feels like a solid, reliable tank that will last nearly forever.
But back to Q stuff... ;-)