rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
From: Dot rkm@kennedym.demon.co.uk
[1] Re: Design Defects--Which ones do you know of?
Date: Fri May 01 19:42:43 CDT 1998

meyer_b@rocketmail.com writes

>I'm not sure this qualifies as a design defect.  These cameras were never
>intended to work for 20, 30 or more years without maintenance.  Mechanical
>devices wear out  (ever kept a car for 20 years without replacing a bunch of
>parts? and need to be maintained.  The old moving needle light meters are
>notoriously fragle.  Its more amazing that the worked for as long as they did
>than it is they don't work after 20 years of who know what kind of abuse.
>
>If a part fails in the first couple of years, that's a design defect;  after
>20 years its just wear.
>

Duh??

After 20years of operation how much time has the moving parts of your average car been working? Many thousands of hours? Now compare that to the time the average moving parts of a camera have been working.

Even assuming it takes 10 pictures every day over that 20 year period, it still adds up to less than half an hour of actual work! If cameras were built decently they would last forever - or at least until the parts rot! It certainly shouldn't wear out!

Ok - so a car is a big bit of mechanics and a camera is a delicate instrument, but even the cheapest mechanical watches run for longer than 30 minutes before they need parts replaced.

Viewed in that context its hardly surprising that many pre-war Leica's (among other examples of 'built to last' models) are still working perfectly.

--
Kennedy

From: danksta@ns.sympatico.ca (Terry Danks)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: LCD problems anyone?
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998

On Tue, 29 Dec 1998 10:17:24 GMT, "RainMeister" suzukiNOT@tcwix.com wrote:

>I'm beginning to notice some shading in the liquid crystal display on my EOS
>10s. I'd previously heard the displays have a short life. Does anyone know
>or have experienced similar problems?

While I have unfortunately lost it, the manual for my Nikon F3 stated that the LCD had a limited life expectancy and would be readily replaced by a Nikon Service Centre when required. I believe the time period mentioned was 10 years??

Anyhow, my 1980 vintage F3 LCD seems as bright as ever.

Terry Danks

From: "RainMeister" suzuki@tcwix.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: LCD problems anyone?
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998

I'm beginning to notice some shading in the liquid crystal display on my EOS 10s. I'd previously heard the displays have a short life. Does anyone know or have experienced similar problems?

From: "John R" nsJRiegle@worldnet.att.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: LCD problems anyone?
Date: 30 Dec 1998

Canon claims that the LCD will last about 5 years (according to my A2 manual). I would hope to get 7-10 years out of it. I would get it fixed before the part becomes unavailable - if not already. Electronic cameras have built-in obsolescence.

JCR

From: "SATCHMO" satchmo@wfeca.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: LCD problems anyone?
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998

The same statement is made about the LCD in my T-90 manual. I have owned the camera since 1986, and both the LCD and internal battery are still fine. Go figure! Joe Arnold

From: jshdsh@ptialaska.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: LCD problems anyone?
Date: Fri, 01 Jan 1999

"RainMeister" suzuki@cwix.com wrote:

> I think Canon skimped on materials when they designed the EOS 10. There's no
> mention of battery replacement. Simply a recommendation to have the LCD
> replaced "at Owner cost". The question now is should I reward Canon for
> their planned obsolescence with the purchase of a new EOS3?!

You know it could also be that the LCD displays simply wear out. Strange as it may seem they do just that. The LCD display is an electro-physical display that works by re-aligning the crystals to either pass or block light and current technology for this type of display may only allow about 4-5 years use.

I don't own nor have I ever owned any Canon cameras, I'm from that "other" camp that uses Nikon :). Anyway what Nikon has to say about their LCD is this;

"The MF-28's LCD is of the highest quality. After five to six years of normal use, however, contrast my deteriorate and display information may begin to fade. Should this occur, contact an authorized NIkon dealer or service facility to have the display replaced at a nominal charge."

I presume the Canon manual says something similar. This does not sound like planned obsolescence to me, simply the limitations of current technology.

Jeff

From: wongmkw@aol.com (Wongmkw)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: LCD problems anyone?
Date: 2 Jan 1999

LCD displays usually only last 2 years on constant use. I don't remember where I saw this, but I have already gone through two pagers. Remember this is constant use.

From Nikon Mailing List:
Date: 15 Dec 1999
From: h.passman@erols.com
Subject: LCD on a FA

Hi Folks, I posted the following message on the NikonRepair onelist. If anyone here can help it would be appreciated. I hope I offending no one by referencing this other list.

>Hi Folks,
>The subject has come up about replacement of the LCD in a FA.  I found the
>part is $36.95 from Nikon and still available.  My repair shop estimated
>165.00 in labor which is probably 2 to 2.5 hours labor.  Has anyone out  there
>done this repair before?  Is it tough? I can open a tuna can so I figure how
>hard could an FA be?  Just kidding.  Thanks in advance for your help.  Howard

Let us assume for now that this is what's really wrong with the camera. Any help out there?? If you would be so kind as to respond in duplicate to the Nikonrepair list also. Thanks Howard

I just bought a used F3HP after going through two other used ones via mailorder. A fading or not-quite-right LCD was common to the first two I rejected. However, on the one I kept, the LCD is very strong and clean. I suspect it depends somewhat on age and use. If you get an F3HP with S/N 18xxxx I think you're assured of at least a mid '80's to 90's model.

As for other cameras, I believe the only ones with HP finders are the F3, F4, F5, F100 and N90s.

ben

From Nikon MF Mailing List:
Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000
From: beauhooligan@juno.com
Subject: Re: Re: Longevity of F3 viewfinder LCD

Hi All,

Has anyone had to have an F3 LCD replaced? How many years of use was on the F3 before the LCD died?

I bought the oldest of my F3s in 1982, and it's LED died about 4 years ago. I don't have any idea of how many exposures or rolls I shot, but it was my main workhorse shooting for the paper. I also used it for weddings for folks that didn't want prints larger than 8" x 10", and shooting for my own amusement. I sent it to Torrance and got it back a month later. Repairs came to $147 USD, but most of that was for replacing the shutter, which was also toast. I think the F3 gave me a good run before failing.

Adios,

Bill Hilburn Jr.

From Nikon Mailing List:
Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000
From: Gordon Pritchard gordonp@infoserve.net
Subject: Re: Re: Longevity of F3 viewfinder LCD

 "Paul" == paul easton eastonpa@cadvision.com writes:

    Paul> When Nikon first released the F3, they estimated that
    Paul> the viewfinder LCD would last only 6-7 years. In
    Paul> retrospect, that seems incredibly conservative!

    Paul> Has anyone had to have an F3 LCD replaced? How many
    Paul> years of use was on the F3 before the LCD died?

Sort-of off-topic, but related:
I'm with Bob Monaghan's assessment: I don't trust the longevity of LCD's. At home, I've got a thermostat with a dying display after 5 years; security-system displays were both losing segments after only 3 years, and are worsening steadily.

By day, I design electronics. Over the years, I've had occasion to sit down with returned units, and look at screwed displays. The numbers aren't large, maybe a couple of percent within the first 5 years, but that's enough to make me nervous.

When I buy stuff, I like to consider the durabilty, longevity, and possible "heirloom" factors. Like an FM2n. Or, buying a Browning O/U rather than a Remington autoloader. Solid-wood desk with nice inlays rather than melamine over MDF. And, LCD's don't generally "fit" for me.

My $0.02,
-Gord

--
Gordon Pritchard, P.Eng. VA7GP
White Rock, B.C. Canada
gordonp@infoserve.net

Date: 27 Oct 1999
From: dsjkallen@aol.com (DSJKALLEN)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: Reliability of Camera Electronics

All in all, camera electronics are very reliable. That said, however, when something fails once the supply channel for a certain proprietary IC is no longer available, you are out of luck. Therefore, some of the fully mechanical types may be the best bet in the long, long haul.

For example, I have five Minolta SRT-series cameras that keep working, including their light meters. When they fail, and two of them have since 1967, they are easy to repair. And, the same is true for the mechanical Nikons I also own.

But, some of the Nikon, Canon, and Minolta electronic cameras I own have not been so lucky. My Minolta XD-1, for example, works fine in the manual and aperature priority modes, but is dead in the shutter priority mode -- the chip that controls this is no longer available.

Don Allen

From Minolta Mailing List:
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2000
From: Don Tuleja durocshark@hotmail.com
Subject: Minolta Repair Service

I was disappointed in the service for my 7xi... Yeah, it's older so I must give Minolta some leeway, but still bummed.

After 2 months, they finally returned my camera to the store who called me immediately (got tired of my bugging them. heh). It was sent in because one of the shutter gears stripped or fell out... never did find exactly what the problem was. But the camera had a bleeding viewfinder LCD for a while. It wasn't listed in the repair order.

They replaced my LCD with one from a different camera... Instead of having the outlines of the focus zones, it has a general rounded rectangle (like a P&S; viewfinder)... The AF is slower and less certain then it was. All in all I miss my old camera.

As I said, I can't totally blame Minolta for not having 7xi parts laying around, but I'd think they would UPGRADE it, not downgrade it.

Don

...

From: rdong@my-deja.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000
Subject: Nikon F3 LCD

I have a F3 with a bad LCD panel, the "M" does not appear in manual mode and the 1/1000 & 1/2000 are missing the last digit. In practice this doesn't impair the function of the camera as I know that the camera is in manual mode when the plus/minus symbols appear and when I see 100 or 200 I know that it's 1/1000 or 1/2000.

Is this a common occurrence? Also, what is the approximate cost of replacing the LCD?

--
http://members.home.com/rdong

From Rollei Mailing List;
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000
From: Bob Shell bob@bobshell.com
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Rollei Users list digest V8 #239

Max,

Watch out for one thing on used T90 cameras. Most of the ones I see have LCDs which have gone dark with age and you can't see the viewfinder indicators to know what the camera is doing. The LCDs can be replaced by Canon, but it is not cheap, and the replacement LCDs they have in stock are old and they are going to run out of them sometime soon.

Bob

...

From Rollei Mailing List:
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000
From: Bob Shell bob@bobshell.com
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Rollei Users list digest V8 #239

> From: John Hicks jbh@magicnet.net
> Reply-To: rollei@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 21:56:46 -0500
> To: rollei@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Subject: Re: [Rollei] Rollei Users list digest V8 #239
>
> A Canon T-90 owner told me a year ago that he'd learned from Canon that
> they're no longer willing to service them. I have no idea if that's
> correct, but it'd be worth checking before buying a T-90.
>
> John Hicks

As of the last time I visited Canon, which was early this year, they were still willing to service them on a "parts available" basis. Some parts are running out. They had about a five or six year supply of the LCD replacements at the time, but emphasized that these were all old stock since no new ones have been made. I sold my one and only T90 (bought because I was writing a user's guide to classic Canon SLRs) on e-Bay around three years ago and the LCDs were starting to darken at the time.

Bob

From Contax Mailing List:
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001
From: "Kaisern Chen" kconeverest@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: [CONTAX] RTS III - new vs old version ??

I guess the LCD or LED has its life span, my RTSIII has the problem 2 years ago and I have the Contax dealer replace a new one for me and it solve the problem. The cost as I remembered is approx. US$ 46 but it takes about 2 weeks - may be waiting for parts from Japan. The LCD pannel especially for earlier camera make use of this has the similar problem, for example my old Minolta Alpha 9000, bought 1988, has corner of the panel turned dark and one of my G2 has the similar problem on the panel close to the shutter speed dial. That is a part can be easily replaced at reasonable cost.

Regards, Kaisern

[Ed. note: warning about changing battery types causing LCD backlites to fail on Nikon F3 etc....]
Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001
From: "Mitch Winkle" mwinkle@jonatas.com
Subject: Re: nikon troubles

I just heard over on the Camera-Repair list that some users had switched to the 3v Lithium battery and the light mysteriously stopped working. When they switched back to a pair ot LR44's (if I remember correctly), it came back to life. Also, brand seemed to have something to do with it; like Energizer worked and Duracell didn't or something like that.

Mitch Winkle [o]
mwinkle@jonatas.com

Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2001
From: John Halliwell john@photopia.demon.co.uk
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: SLR brand market share

Josh Osborne STRyTw.stripes.5@antichef.com writes

>Rebels?  No.  LCD displays age and die.  Even if carefly kept the
>LCD will die before 30 years are up, and the value of that camera
>is too low to be worth the replacment, even if Canon (or someone)
>still makes that part, and sells it fairly cheaply.

Ten years ago, reports suggested LCDs would only last 5 years or so. My Super-A (at least 15 years, maybe even 20 is fine) shows no problems and has not been carefully kept. It would be interesting to see just how long it does last.

>More valuable cameras will still have LCDs die, but if the camera
>is still worth parts and labor costs the LCD can be replaced
>(assuming someone still makes it -- the orignal maker may not, but
>they are not hard to imitate).

It's very unlikely anybody would still make LCDs for very old cameras. The technology is continually changing and the electronic characteristics are changing all the time. It would be very difficult to interface a new LCD into an old camera (they are all custom laid out with icons).

Most cameras will fail before the LCD does anyway, there are many more weak points along the way, including battery availability and electronic component failure (both being fatal to an electronic camera). Mechanical parts are relatively easy to repair, replace even make from scratch, but microprocessors and other electronic components are extremely difficult and require very dedicated facilities. Most electronic components have production life spans little more than a couple of years, the odd resistor won't be a problem, but more advanced components certainly will be.

--
John

From Contax Mailing List;
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2001
From: Major A andras@users.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Contax] OT: Strange effect of polarizer

Darin, Tom, Irakly,

Just some minor corrections to those replies:

[Tom]

> The cover glass on an LCD has a build-in polarizer. Between the cover glass
> and the backplane is a liquid gel that can be polarized when an alternating
> voltage is applied. The backplane is either transparent (thus allowing for
> backlit displays as on your laptop) or reflective (like on most pocket 
> calculators).

The "LC" LCD means liquid crystal, a liquid with cigar-shaped
molecules that align in an ordered structure by themselves. It is not
the same as a gel.

Liquid crystals can ROTATE the polarization of light. In your laptop,
the liquid crystal is between two parallel (linear) polarizers. The
liquid crystal molecules are aligned (by the surface structure of the
two plastic sheets surrounding it) such that it rotates the
polarization of the light by 90 degrees (actually 270 in modern
displays, but that doesn't matter). So your display appears dark
unless an electric field is applied in the direction of the light path
(perpendicular to the display), which aligns molecules perpendicular
to the display, thus making the display transparent because the 
molecules no longer rotate the light's polarization plane.

The voltage is applied through transparent wires on both sides of the
display (the manufacturing steps of these contacts are what make LCDs
so expensive).


A reflective display needs only one polarizer and a mirror at the
back, but the physics is the same.

> from the backlight shines through the liquid gel and gets polarized in
> places where there is an alternating electric field. The light then hits

The liquid crystal does not polarize, it rotates. See above. Also, the
voltage is a DC voltage, not AC (alternating).

[Irakly]

> Piece of cake. Phot transistors on the TFT matrix or liquid crystals in the
> passive LCD emit coherent and polarized light. If you turn the polarizer on

There are no photo transistors in TFTs. A photo transistor is be a
regular transistor with a transparent case and used for DETECTING
light. A TFT is a regular LCD with the only difference that the pixels
are not programmed in a multiplexed mode (like DSTNs, in which the
voltage on each pixel is only applied for a very short time, less than
a microsecond every 20ms or so), but each has a backing transistor
that "stores" the voltage. The transistors in a TFT don't emit light
(they can't anyway, they are made on a silicon base, with is an
indirect semiconductor and cannot be (easily) used to emit light).

The light from an LCD is not coherent, BTW, but that doesn't matter
either.

> your lens, you will be able to see the screen. This is a real problem in my
> car. I have a GPS system with a TFT screen, and when I wear my polarized
> sunglasses, I can barely see the screen unless I tilt my head to the right.
> I think I should call BMW and let them know how I feel about this :-)


GRRRR. Some folks still don't understand that they have to build all
LCDs in cars and similar vehicles with a standardised polarization (I
can't remember which). This is because polarized sunglasses are made
to enable you to see through fog better, and light from fog has a
slight polarization, always in the same direction. Therefore all
Same thing happens with bike computers, though less often because
polarized glasses are very popular among cyclists.

[Darin]
> > Was playing around this evening with my new p50/1.4 and a polarizer.

Congratulations to your new lens, hope you will enjoy it (I have
enjoyed mine so much for the last 7 years).

> > When I looked at the LCD panel on my laptop the polarized had blocked
> > all light from it. Anyone know how those things work? Do the LCD
> > panels emit light on a single plane? Just curious about the phenomenon.

That's right (that's the bottom line...). 

Andras

Major Andras
e-mail: andras@users.sourceforge.net
www: http://andras.webhop.org/  

From: "Michael R" w0kie@home.com>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: Does CCD age?
Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2001 

CCD life expectancy is said to be 5 to 25 years.

"Karl Andrews" kandrews@ichips.intel.com> wrote 
chiry@csua.Berkeley.EDU wrote:
>
> Does a CCD age? ie, as time goes by, does its sensitivity decreases?
> much like CRT tubes?
>
> Assumes no mechanical wear and tear, does a digital camera take less
> good pictures as time goes by?
>
> In conventional 35mm photography, this issue does not exist because
> the lens hardly changes with time and the film is pretty much 'new'. A
> 35mm SLR can easily last 10 years.
>
> Can a digital camera lasts that long? (technological advances aside)
>
> Just curious.
>

Microprocessor chips are commonly designed for a minimum ten year life;
CCD chips should be very similar.  The normal failure modes are caused
by accumulated metal "drift" in the wires connecting circuits on the
chip itself, which can eventually cause a given circuit to open or short
to something else.  This effect occurs at a known rate, and is accounted
for in the chip design.  Unavoidable variations in manufacturing
processes account for different life spans, but the minimum is fairly
predictable.

The symptoms are what you would expect with a short or open; sudden
failure of some part of the circuitry; you shouldn't see any gradual
degradation effects before then.  The failure may result in a hot,
stuck, or dead pixel, or it may kill the entire chip; it all depends
where it happens, which depends somewhat on the design of the chip and
the phase of the moon.


- Karl


To: camera-fix@yahoogroups.com>
From: "Kelvin" kelvinlee@pacific.net.sg>
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2001 
Subject: Re: [camera-fix] Re: Service manuals

It could be a simple cleaning of the contacts (I think Micro-tools has
something for illumination contacts which is supposed to help)...
or else, if the camera has been used daily for over 5 years, it could be
time for an LCD change. LCDs were built to last about 5-odd years
in daily use. Newer ones may be longer-lasting, but I can't be sure.


----- Original Message -----
From: rontimhot@hotmail.com>
To: camera-fix@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 1:10 AM
Subject: [camera-fix] Re: Service manuals


> > Are you sure you want to tackle a PZ-1p ?
> > It's really a job for the professional and perhaps for a seasoned
> > repair person.
> >
> > Any repair for such advanced electronic cameras is likely to require
> > some parts.
>
> Actually, I'm having some problems with the illumination of the
> display and the "PCV audible signal". I would like to see if it could
> be something simple, like a loose wire. The camera works just fine,
> aside from the problems I mentioned above.
>
> Thanks for your reply,
>
>
> Ron

To: camera-fix@yahoogroups.com>
From: "Kelvin Lee" kelvinlee@pacific.net.sg>
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 
Subject: [camera-fix] selenium cells

That's a simmilar story I hear about modern LCDs. All some techs
do is clean the connections to revive the LCD.

But rule of thumb is, LCDs generally go bad after 5 years of full time
use i.e. 24x7.

----- Original Message -----
From: ccm952@bellsouth.net>
To: camera-fix@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 
Subject: [camera-fix] Re: Digest Number 174


> ***Many times the cells are still good; but have a bad connection...
> My dads Retina IIIc went bad about 7 years ago and all the repair
> guys listed in shutterbug said there are no meter replacements....
> But this old guy in Florida asked me if the camera was bumped...I
> said no; it just went dead while the camera was sitting in the
> dresser drawer... He said he could take the cell out and use an
> eraser to buff up the contact surface...We sent the camera to him;
> and the old guy fixed it!!! Here is a praise to old time
> experience!... Philip
>
> --- In camera-fix@y..., Ron Schwarz rs@c...> wrote:
> > >Does anyone have knowledge of a source of replacement cells for
> selenium
> > >meters?  Can that material be bought and cut to the size needed?
> I have a
> > >favorite old Weston Master II I would like to bring back into
> service.  I
> > >also have an on-camera Leica M3 meter which reads very low.  It
> needs a new
> > >cell too.
> >
> > Do you have a wrench/bit for those reverse-spline screwheads they
> used?



From hasselblad mailing list:
Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 
From: Austin Franklin darkroom@ix.netcom.com
Subject: RE: [HUG] Re: hasselblad V1 #1589

>  My Rolex used to keep time to about 2 seconds a day which is
> regarded by
> Rolex as extremely accurate. 
>
> My $19.95 Casio calculator watch does better than your $2000
> Rolex in keeping
> accurate time.  If I could find a $19.95 camera that would outperform my
> $2000 Hasselblad, I would not have bought the Hasselblad!  Best regards,
> anyway!  Or did I miss the point?

Do you believe your Casio calculator watch will be working in 20 years?  100
years?  I'd say probably not.  I do have the same problem with the modern
electronic cameras...and especially the use of LCD panels, which have a very
limited life (compared to typical mechanical systems).  A $7k Hasselblad
(205FCC) can be rendered completely unusable in 20 years because of the
little LCD panel, they may not be available.  It certainly won't be
available in 100 years!  And...I don't believe you can shelf LCDs, they
degrade over time, not simply from use!

Austin


From nikon mailing list:
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 
From: Randy Holst mrvolvo@cableone.net
Subject: Re: Nikon F3 LCD panel

"C.J. Scheppers" wrote:
>
> What about the LCD panel on an F3? I read somewhere that the panel
> might have limited life expectancy. Now that the cameras have been
> around several more years than the prediction, how are they holding
> up? 

The limited LCD life expectancy is described in the F3/F3HP owner's
manual. I've got both an F3 and F3HP with fairly early serial numbers
and the LCD panels are still working fine.

Randy Holst
Boise, Idaho



End of Page