why is it specifically the all manual shit from the 70s that has the hipster tax? you can get pretty full feature cameras from the 80s and 90s that have the gay settings by wire shit like a pentax 645, canon sureshot or rebel 2000 for super cheap and all you have to deal with is the gay controls. even if they aren't serviceable/brick due to lol electronics, shit is still cheaper just to buy a new camera body. the only thing that is gay about them is they are ugly and you need to deal with shitty control by wire controls[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
>>4397783why do you want all manual shit from the 70s when, according to you, you can get pretty full feature cameras from the 80s and 90s?Unless you're a hipster, I don't get your point
>>4397783aside from the fact that you can get something fully mechanical and thus less likely to break than something with circuits from 1983 that have been questionably maintained, you don't have to pay the hipster tax if you don't want to
>>4397790>less likely to break than something with circuits from 1983Boomers have been repeating this line for decades. Meanwhile all my 80s/90s electronics have been fine while hipster faggots go on and on about shutter adjustments and CLA'ing their old trash.
>>4397783My manual shit from the 50s is pretty affordable desu
>>4397783I am very glad for that. I have 5 Minolta A7's now for backup, scored each for under $USD75. None has failed and they utterly mog any pre-70s body and have access to a lot of great glass. I hope my plastic SLR blobs remain completely unfashionable with the lame ass meme brigades on social media.
>>4397794
>>4397791sure, and i've had issues with a relatively well kept f55 while my dad's srt200 still works perfectly despite being in a dusty attic and having a battery corroding in the terminal for nearly 50 years. it doesn't change the fact that a simple mechanical design is less likely to break down irreparably over time than something reliant on electronics from a specific moment in history that, if they fail, are basically impossible to replace.
>>4397799>a simple mechanical design is less likely to break down irreparably over time than something reliant on electronicsthat's all good in theory but reality has proven otherwise
>>4397799Electronics have near zero wear except for generic parts like caps and resistors and anything without a unique or obscure ic or special sensor always be repaired. regardless the shutter will die before the rest of the camera. a mechanical camera is mostly just its shutter, so the statement might hold true with an fm3a compared to a lower end electronic SLR but a pro level eos or minolta alpha will outlast any olympus with their ~1000 shot rated shutters. speeds on mechanical shutters will always jam up before anything electronically timed so anything fully mechanical is going to need a CLA. most of the meme cameras are higher end models with longer lived, better made shutters and if you ever look at high end electronic SLRs most of them still cost hundreds of dollars.
>>4397786having physical dials to set the settings is cool and feels good. same as a manual advance lever. its why the pentax 17 is how it is. but it isn't worth the price difference between getting manual feathers I want and just getting a pentax 645>>4397790I have a pentax 645 and a canon sureshot. the pentax has AV mode and the canon has auto focus and manual ISO. if the pentax breaks a new body without the grip is like $70. I have a spare body with no grip sitting around. if the sureshot breaks I can buy a new one for under $40. I just bought a rebel 2000 for $50. I have some EF lenses from when I used a digital rebel. I'm deciding if I want to keep it or give it to my brother. (mostly because I'd rather use 120 if I'm going to carry a camera that doesn't fit in my pocket). it has auto focus and AE mode and if it breaks I can get another one for $50. I bought my brother that all manual meme pentax camera and it was $100. why would I pay more for something with way less features he needs a light meter for?
>>4397817>Physical dials cool and goodAnd thats what everybody else also thinks, making 70's cams a hot commodity.
>>4397783>>4397790Why do retards still believe this shit? Mechanical cameras rely on friction, which causes wear. Every time these parts interact, move against each other, they are wearing themselves down, and they eventually will break. They mainly use brass or plastic for the sprockets, both of which have no load floor and will wear down at least a little bit under any use at all. That's not even bringing up coil springs, lubrication etc... not to mention the necessity of replacement parts with 99% of the time just don't exist anymore. There's a reason why these are so often out of time or broken. If you have electronically controlled timing, you're not wearing it down with every use. The timing is always accurate. Sure, you're probably not gunna find replacement microcontrollers either, but it's really easy if you have a working electronically controlled camera to look after it. You can use it as much as you like, just don't get it wet or expose it to corrosive substances.
>>4397835>If you have electronically controlled timing, you're not wearing it down with every use. The timing is always accurateUp to this point you were 100% correct. Even with cameras that have shutter electronically controlled there's always the mechanical part as you written that gets used, dirty, grease solidifies etc. over time.The biggest problem with cameras any construction is springs that power movement or control return of elements. They are non-serviceable parts and very often making replacement is very hard or undoable because there is no technological data of their characteristics. Still you can experiment with their strength to match the timing. Cogs and sprockets can be easily made either with sóyboy 3D printing or with chad machining. You can even cut them manually from brass like watchmakers were doing for centuries. Even things like cams that there is no data regarding their original shape can be reverse-engineered from desired camera characteristic like for example cams in rangefinders - match the focus on infinity, 10, 5, 3, 1 meter and done. With electronics, either based on dedicated microcontroller, or long gone source code to progam those generic you're pretty much left with finding donor body. That's the case with my Olympus OM-2n that second year passes as I'm looking for donor body for the board.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution144 dpiVertical Resolution144 dpiCommentScreenshotImage Width1008Image Height714
>>4397842>Even with cameras that have shutter electronically controlled there's always the mechanical part as you written that gets used, dirty, grease solidifies etc. over time.of course, but every failure point you remove, the reliability increases. Sure you can't reduce it by 100% but that doesn't mean it's not worthwhile doing what you can. I think the difference in talent, time, cost etc. you need to be able to fix a mechanical camera, in comparison to an electronic one isn't so far apart, if existent at all. It's just a different skill set. Take the T90 for an example, that camera gets the EEE issue all the time and that's a simple fix. Obviously not all issues are that easy with electronic cameras, but it's pretty hard to compare all the possible issues you can have with an electronic camera against all the possible issues you can have with a mechanical one, and then on top of that try and compare how much time and effort you would need to learn how to repair two totally different systems. I think the important part is that electronic cameras have fewer wear parts, and wear parts that are less important if they do wear a bit, and they're easier to prevent damage.
>>4397983>of course, but every failure point you remove, the reliability increases.boxchads we can't stop winning
>>4397994>shutter>aperture >lensJust asking for camera failure[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKONCamera ModelE5000Camera SoftwareE5000v1.8Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Focal Length (35mm Equiv)28 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2004:12:12 06:46:06Exposure Time5/181 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating100Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, AutoFocal Length7.10 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width2560Image Height1920RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlNoneContrastNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknownColor ModeCOLORImage QualityFINEWhite BalanceAUTOImage SharpeningAUTOFocus ModeAF-CFlash SettingNORMALISO SelectionAUTOImage AdjustmentAUTOLens AdapterOFFAuto FocusCenterSaturationNormalNoise ReductionOFF
>>4397842Yes, modern bodies outlive their shutters. its pretty normal. any shutterless ilc will probably last forever.
