Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Sturdiest damn digital camera with compact flash and ni-mh..

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 1:58:38 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.chem.electrochem.battery,misc.consumers.frugal-living,rec.photo.marketplace.digital (More info?)

What is the most rugged consumer digital camera with cf and ni-mh
batteries?

I've broken the battery door on my Nikon, the slider door on my
Olympus, the over the lens shutter of the Canon, even the pop-up flash
of my 35mm EOS and electrical switches on my Minolta 7000 SLR. (I've
got a box filled with broken cameras and camera bodies and lenses, all
purchased new - is there any value to this on the open market?). ;) 

Point is, I'm rough on cameras (they get wet, they get mudbrody, they
get dusty, dew condenses on them, they get backpacked, they get warmed
in the trunk, they get dropped, ... in short ... I use my cameras.

Having said that, I have not found a single camera that can withstand
the abuse. The two Nikons were especially dissapointing as I paid mondo
dollars because I "thought" professional models held up better than
consumer models. I've been found wrong.

When I go to the dpreview or other web sites, I don't see anywhere
where they test the "ruggedness" of the camera. Of course, they say
they "feel" sturdy (that's what they said about my Minolta 7000 which
weights a ton and broke down within the first year).

I even tried an underwater camera. Guess what broke it? The pumice
cliffs in Santorini Greece. Sheesh. Can't a camera hold up to normal
wear and tear?

I'd be happy with a camera that lasts more than a year (that's about my
average). Yes, of course, most people I know are downright dainty with
their cameras so they can't even understand what I'm asking for. I
understand that. For example, I've never hit my kids in their lives but
when I try to explain to another parent not to bash their kid around,
they look at me like my use model is outmoded or something.

Same with cameras. So, I do know that very very very very few of you
are rough on your camera equipment ... but ... if there is ANYONE out
there like I am (who uses a camera and doesn't baby the thing) ... I'd
pay a premium for a camera built like a humvee ... hopefully one with
AA batteries like my ancient Minolta and AE1 of days of lore ... and
hopefully with type I compact flash media which is decidedly more
sturdy than anything else out there in the digital marketplace.

Does a sturdy digital camera actually exist that I won't break in a
year?
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 2:59:46 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.chem.electrochem.battery,misc.consumers.frugal-living,rec.photo.marketplace.digital (More info?)

Whacky Blacky wrote:
> What is the most rugged consumer digital camera with cf and ni-mh
> batteries?
>
> I've broken the battery door on my Nikon, the slider door on my
> Olympus, the over the lens shutter of the Canon, even the pop-up flash
> of my 35mm EOS and electrical switches on my Minolta 7000 SLR. (I've
> got a box filled with broken cameras and camera bodies and lenses, all
> purchased new - is there any value to this on the open market?). ;) 
>
> Point is, I'm rough on cameras (they get wet, they get mudbrody, they
> get dusty, dew condenses on them, they get backpacked, they get warmed
> in the trunk, they get dropped, ... in short ... I use my cameras.
>
> Having said that, I have not found a single camera that can withstand
> the abuse. The two Nikons were especially dissapointing as I paid mondo
> dollars because I "thought" professional models held up better than
> consumer models. I've been found wrong.
>
> When I go to the dpreview or other web sites, I don't see anywhere
> where they test the "ruggedness" of the camera. Of course, they say
> they "feel" sturdy (that's what they said about my Minolta 7000 which
> weights a ton and broke down within the first year).
>
> I even tried an underwater camera. Guess what broke it? The pumice
> cliffs in Santorini Greece. Sheesh. Can't a camera hold up to normal
> wear and tear?
>
> I'd be happy with a camera that lasts more than a year (that's about my
> average). Yes, of course, most people I know are downright dainty with
> their cameras so they can't even understand what I'm asking for. I
> understand that. For example, I've never hit my kids in their lives but
> when I try to explain to another parent not to bash their kid around,
> they look at me like my use model is outmoded or something.
>
> Same with cameras. So, I do know that very very very very few of you
> are rough on your camera equipment ... but ... if there is ANYONE out
> there like I am (who uses a camera and doesn't baby the thing) ... I'd
> pay a premium for a camera built like a humvee ... hopefully one with
> AA batteries like my ancient Minolta and AE1 of days of lore ... and
> hopefully with type I compact flash media which is decidedly more
> sturdy than anything else out there in the digital marketplace.
>
> Does a sturdy digital camera actually exist that I won't break in a
> year?

What events usually break the cameras? Do they break in your hands
while using them, or in other instances? If the latter, then perhaps
what you need is simply some generous padding like that offered by the
lowepro bags, and if need be, have a bag-in-bag, like the russian
nesting dolls. This reminds me of the eggs anecdote from The Fog of
War.

I personally don't think much about my devices, and that's because from
the very first day I purchase a suitable padding and encase them in it.
My camera has its lowepro bag, my PDA has it Krussel case and LCD
protectors, and so on. And all look as unblemished as a new item
despite my usage. There are even casing products that protect the
device while it is being used and don't require their removal.

Another thing to consider is a neck strap; that'll drastically reduce
the chances of cameras being accidentally dropped.

If they break in your fingers, which I must say sounds odd, then
perhaps the safest and ultimately easiest solution is to learn to
handle them more gently. It's not impossible, it's probably just a
habit.
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 3:11:41 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,misc.consumers.frugal-living,rec.photo.marketplace.digital (More info?)

"Whacky Blacky" <blackywhat@yahoo.com> writes:
> What is the most rugged consumer digital camera with cf and ni-mh
> batteries?

If you want a consumer digicam, these days I think you have to give up
on CF. They are all going to SD now.

> Having said that, I have not found a single camera that can withstand
> the abuse. The two Nikons were especially dissapointing as I paid mondo
> dollars because I "thought" professional models held up better than
> consumer models. I've been found wrong.

The professional Nikon models are the D1/D1h/D1x, and the D2/D2H/D2Hs/D2X.
If your Nikon wasn't one of those, it wasn't a professional model.

> I even tried an underwater camera. Guess what broke it? The pumice
> cliffs in Santorini Greece. Sheesh. Can't a camera hold up to normal
> wear and tear?

You know, most other people don't have these problems, so I'd say the
amount of wear and tear you're inflicting on cameras is not normal.
Why don't you just take better care of them?

> Does a sturdy digital camera actually exist that I won't break in a
> year?

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0111/01112801konicadg2.asp
might use CF.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/1079033196.html
uses SD.

You could also try putting a normal camera into an underwater housing.

The Sony DSC-U60 is also nice, but uses those stupid memory sticks.
Related resources
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 3:41:58 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.chem.electrochem.battery,misc.consumers.frugal-living,rec.photo.marketplace.digital (More info?)

"Whacky Blacky" <blackywhat@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1119027518.271793.291810@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> What is the most rugged consumer digital camera with cf and ni-mh
> batteries?
>
> I've broken the battery door on my Nikon, the slider door on my
> Olympus, the over the lens shutter of the Canon, even the pop-up flash
> of my 35mm EOS and electrical switches on my Minolta 7000 SLR. (I've
> got a box filled with broken cameras and camera bodies and lenses, all
> purchased new - is there any value to this on the open market?). ;) 
>
> Point is, I'm rough on cameras (they get wet, they get mudbrody, they
> get dusty, dew condenses on them, they get backpacked, they get warmed
> in the trunk, they get dropped, ... in short ... I use my cameras.

That goes beyond use, add "ab" as a prefix, and you've about got it.
>
> Having said that, I have not found a single camera that can withstand
> the abuse. The two Nikons were especially dissapointing as I paid mondo
> dollars because I "thought" professional models held up better than
> consumer models. I've been found wrong.

"Pro" compacts aren't really, they just give better results than "consumer"
level compacts, which are different from DSLRs.
>
> When I go to the dpreview or other web sites, I don't see anywhere
> where they test the "ruggedness" of the camera. Of course, they say
> they "feel" sturdy (that's what they said about my Minolta 7000 which
> weights a ton and broke down within the first year).
>
> I even tried an underwater camera. Guess what broke it? The pumice
> cliffs in Santorini Greece. Sheesh. Can't a camera hold up to normal
> wear and tear?

If cliffs had anything to do with your cameras' demise, then you need to
rethink how you're carrying them, using them and protecting them.
>
> I'd be happy with a camera that lasts more than a year (that's about my
> average). Yes, of course, most people I know are downright dainty with
> their cameras so they can't even understand what I'm asking for. I
> understand that. For example, I've never hit my kids in their lives but
> when I try to explain to another parent not to bash their kid around,
> they look at me like my use model is outmoded or something.
>
> Same with cameras. So, I do know that very very very very few of you
> are rough on your camera equipment ... but ... if there is ANYONE out
> there like I am (who uses a camera and doesn't baby the thing) ... I'd
> pay a premium for a camera built like a humvee ... hopefully one with
> AA batteries like my ancient Minolta and AE1 of days of lore ... and
> hopefully with type I compact flash media which is decidedly more
> sturdy than anything else out there in the digital marketplace.

Most of the DSLR bodies are as rugged as the AE-1, even the lowly Rebel, but
the electronics inside are much more sensitive. BTW, the AE-1 didn't use
AAs for body power, but I've forgotten what the little critter behind the
door was...
>
> Does a sturdy digital camera actually exist that I won't break in a
> year?
>
The Canon 1D mkII and Nikon D2x should be rugged enough for your usage, but
watch for impacts on lenses and, again, the electronics are the main
Achilles heel on impacts with those high level bodies. And you will
definitely pay a premium, $4000 for the body, from $400 to $1500 for lenses.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 5:02:50 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.chem.electrochem.battery,misc.consumers.frugal-living,rec.photo.marketplace.digital (More info?)

A camera is like a woman: if you take care of it, it goes a long way ;-)))
Marcel


"Whacky Blacky" <blackywhat@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1119027518.271793.291810@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> What is the most rugged consumer digital camera with cf and ni-mh
> batteries?
>
> I've broken the battery door on my Nikon, the slider door on my
> Olympus, the over the lens shutter of the Canon, even the pop-up flash
> of my 35mm EOS and electrical switches on my Minolta 7000 SLR. (I've
> got a box filled with broken cameras and camera bodies and lenses, all
> purchased new - is there any value to this on the open market?). ;) 
>
> Point is, I'm rough on cameras (they get wet, they get mudbrody, they
> get dusty, dew condenses on them, they get backpacked, they get warmed
> in the trunk, they get dropped, ... in short ... I use my cameras.
>
> Having said that, I have not found a single camera that can withstand
> the abuse. The two Nikons were especially dissapointing as I paid mondo
> dollars because I "thought" professional models held up better than
> consumer models. I've been found wrong.
>
> When I go to the dpreview or other web sites, I don't see anywhere
> where they test the "ruggedness" of the camera. Of course, they say
> they "feel" sturdy (that's what they said about my Minolta 7000 which
> weights a ton and broke down within the first year).
>
> I even tried an underwater camera. Guess what broke it? The pumice
> cliffs in Santorini Greece. Sheesh. Can't a camera hold up to normal
> wear and tear?
>
> I'd be happy with a camera that lasts more than a year (that's about my
> average). Yes, of course, most people I know are downright dainty with
> their cameras so they can't even understand what I'm asking for. I
> understand that. For example, I've never hit my kids in their lives but
> when I try to explain to another parent not to bash their kid around,
> they look at me like my use model is outmoded or something.
>
> Same with cameras. So, I do know that very very very very few of you
> are rough on your camera equipment ... but ... if there is ANYONE out
> there like I am (who uses a camera and doesn't baby the thing) ... I'd
> pay a premium for a camera built like a humvee ... hopefully one with
> AA batteries like my ancient Minolta and AE1 of days of lore ... and
> hopefully with type I compact flash media which is decidedly more
> sturdy than anything else out there in the digital marketplace.
>
> Does a sturdy digital camera actually exist that I won't break in a
> year?
>
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 8:12:16 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.chem.electrochem.battery,misc.consumers.frugal-living,rec.photo.marketplace.digital (More info?)

On 17 Jun 2005 09:58:38 -0700, "Whacky Blacky" <blackywhat@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>What is the most rugged consumer digital camera with cf and ni-mh
>batteries?

Look at ruggedized digital cameras:

http://digitalcameras.engadget.com/entry/13762744162269...

Or these people can make you one...

http://www.retrievertech.com/index.htm

******************************************************

"I have been a witness, and these pictures are
my testimony. The events I have recorded should
not be forgotten and must not be repeated."

-James Nachtwey-
http://www.jamesnachtwey.com/
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 8:54:46 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.chem.electrochem.battery,misc.consumers.frugal-living,rec.photo.marketplace.digital (More info?)

Hi there!
I have been using Olympus for some time. My current Olympus is c-7oo
ultra Zoom.(10X)(n-m hy batteries) I love Olympus. Best thing I could
advise is you don't pay full price for a new camera but get a rebuilt.
The Olympus rebuilts are done by the factory and mine is one
(rebuilt)and holding up well (for about 2 years now). But I do keep it
strapped to me when in use and try to take care of it, but I won't lose
as much monetarily should I goof up and drop it in the ocean or some
such.
For some shots taken with my camera, go to
http://www.pollytravels.com/Pollytravels.html The most recent taken
with this newest camera are the Willie Nillie pages (Pics of my yorkie
and his sister Sophie)
Hope that helps
Vixen

Whacky Blacky wrote:
> What is the most rugged consumer digital camera with cf and ni-mh
> batteries?
>
> I've broken the battery door on my Nikon, the slider door on my
> Olympus, the over the lens shutter of the Canon, even the pop-up flash
> of my 35mm EOS and electrical switches on my Minolta 7000 SLR. (I've
> got a box filled with broken cameras and camera bodies and lenses, all
> purchased new - is there any value to this on the open market?). ;) 
>
> Point is, I'm rough on cameras (they get wet, they get mudbrody, they
> get dusty, dew condenses on them, they get backpacked, they get warmed
> in the trunk, they get dropped, ... in short ... I use my cameras.
>
> Having said that, I have not found a single camera that can withstand
> the abuse. The two Nikons were especially dissapointing as I paid mondo
> dollars because I "thought" professional models held up better than
> consumer models. I've been found wrong.
>
> When I go to the dpreview or other web sites, I don't see anywhere
> where they test the "ruggedness" of the camera. Of course, they say
> they "feel" sturdy (that's what they said about my Minolta 7000 which
> weights a ton and broke down within the first year).
>
> I even tried an underwater camera. Guess what broke it? The pumice
> cliffs in Santorini Greece. Sheesh. Can't a camera hold up to normal
> wear and tear?
>
> I'd be happy with a camera that lasts more than a year (that's about my
> average). Yes, of course, most people I know are downright dainty with
> their cameras so they can't even understand what I'm asking for. I
> understand that. For example, I've never hit my kids in their lives but
> when I try to explain to another parent not to bash their kid around,
> they look at me like my use model is outmoded or something.
>
> Same with cameras. So, I do know that very very very very few of you
> are rough on your camera equipment ... but ... if there is ANYONE out
> there like I am (who uses a camera and doesn't baby the thing) ... I'd
> pay a premium for a camera built like a humvee ... hopefully one with
> AA batteries like my ancient Minolta and AE1 of days of lore ... and
> hopefully with type I compact flash media which is decidedly more
> sturdy than anything else out there in the digital marketplace.
>
> Does a sturdy digital camera actually exist that I won't break in a
> year?
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 9:16:20 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.chem.electrochem.battery,misc.consumers.frugal-living,rec.photo.marketplace.digital (More info?)

William Graham wrote:
> > By the way ... what the heck is mudbrody mean
> > I've never heard that word before.
> >
> Yes. A Google search of, "mudbrody" turned up nothing...

Not any more! :) 
June 17, 2005 9:52:52 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm (More info?)

"Whacky Blacky" <blackywhat@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1119027518.271793.291810@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> What is the most rugged consumer digital camera with cf and ni-mh
> batteries?
>
> I've broken the battery door on my Nikon, the slider door on my
> Olympus, the over the lens shutter of the Canon, even the pop-up flash
> of my 35mm EOS and electrical switches on my Minolta 7000 SLR. (I've
> got a box filled with broken cameras and camera bodies and lenses, all
> purchased new - is there any value to this on the open market?). ;) 
>
> Point is, I'm rough on cameras (they get wet, they get mudbrody, they
> get dusty, dew condenses on them, they get backpacked, they get warmed
> in the trunk, they get dropped, ... in short ... I use my cameras.

That's not use.

Buy disposable.
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 9:58:19 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.chem.electrochem.battery,misc.consumers.frugal-living,rec.photo.marketplace.digital (More info?)

Whacky Blacky wrote:
> What is the most rugged consumer digital camera with cf and ni-mh
> batteries?

Buy a set of AA batteries and several cheap cameras that use them.
Forget rugged, think replaceable.

--
Joseph Meehan

Dia duit
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 10:10:38 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.chem.electrochem.battery,misc.consumers.frugal-living,rec.photo.marketplace.digital (More info?)

<karoniconia@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1119053780.005905.17270@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> William Graham wrote:
>> > By the way ... what the heck is mudbrody mean
>> > I've never heard that word before.
>> >
>> Yes. A Google search of, "mudbrody" turned up nothing...
>
> Not any more! :) 
>
Yeah....It still does:

Did you mean: midbody




No standard web pages containing all your search terms were found.

Your search - mudbrody - did not match any documents.

Suggestions:

- Make sure all words are spelled correctly.
- Try different keywords.
- Try more general keywords.
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 11:51:33 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.chem.electrochem.battery,misc.consumers.frugal-living,rec.photo.marketplace.digital (More info?)

If you had not said "digital" I would have suggested a Speed Graphic with
4"x5" film holders and flash bulbs. You are using electronic gear now and
not film cameras that had no batteries or circuitry. Every one of my fellow
profesionals handle their digital cameras as if made of fragile glass. By
the way ... what the heck is mudbrody mean ??? In my 57 years on this earth
I've never heard that word before.

Craig Flory
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 11:51:34 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.chem.electrochem.battery,misc.consumers.frugal-living,rec.photo.marketplace.digital (More info?)

"Craig Flory" <floryphotog@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:9RFse.5373$hK3.4590@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> If you had not said "digital" I would have suggested a Speed Graphic with
> 4"x5" film holders and flash bulbs. You are using electronic gear now and
> not film cameras that had no batteries or circuitry. Every one of my
> fellow
> profesionals handle their digital cameras as if made of fragile glass. By
> the way ... what the heck is mudbrody mean ??? In my 57 years on this
> earth
> I've never heard that word before.
>
> Craig Flory
>
>
Yes. A Google search of, "mudbrody" turned up nothing...
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 11:51:34 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.chem.electrochem.battery,misc.consumers.frugal-living,rec.photo.marketplace.digital (More info?)

Craig Flory wrote:
>
> If you had not said "digital" I would have suggested a Speed Graphic with
> 4"x5" film holders and flash bulbs.

Roll back and electronic flash. Maybe a baby SG. More efficient in terms of
speed and weight. They also make nice defensive weapons. The bad part is
that they aren't particularly neckstrappable, although I guess it could be
done. Whoever thought that a wrist strap (like current digicams, not like the
SG strap) for a camera was a good idea should be horsewhipped.

> You are using electronic gear now and
> not film cameras that had no batteries or circuitry. Every one of my fellow
> profesionals handle their digital cameras as if made of fragile glass.

It's clear that he CAN'T baby his camera. Some of us are like that. We start
out with the best of intentions and end up losing our balance and smashing
something expensive or painful.

> By
> the way ... what the heck is mudbrody mean ??? In my 57 years on this earth
> I've never heard that word before.

Maybe a variant of "grody" involving mud?

--
Cheers, Bev
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Usenet is like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhea -- massive,
difficult to redirect, awe-inspiring, entertaining, and a source of
mind-boggling amounts of excrement when you least expect it."
--Gene Spafford (1992)
Anonymous
June 18, 2005 12:50:28 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.chem.electrochem.battery,misc.consumers.frugal-living,rec.photo.marketplace.digital (More info?)

Look, you're just too hard on the damned cameras.

Scare up a Kodak DC5000, a ruggedized 2 MP camera that's
water-resistant and uses 4 AA batteries and CF cards. Not state of the
art, but it's got the best chance of withstanding the punishment you're
dishing out.

-Cardamon Dave
Anonymous
June 18, 2005 12:53:34 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.chem.electrochem.battery,misc.consumers.frugal-living,rec.photo.marketplace.digital (More info?)

On 17 Jun 2005 09:58:38 -0700, "Whacky Blacky" <blackywhat@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>Point is, I'm rough on cameras (they get wet, they get mudbrody, they
>get dusty, dew condenses on them, they get backpacked, they get warmed
>in the trunk, they get dropped, ... in short ... I use my cameras.
>
>Having said that, I have not found a single camera that can withstand
>the abuse. The two Nikons were especially dissapointing as I paid mondo
>dollars because I "thought" professional models held up better than
>consumer models. I've been found wrong.

Ever though of buying one of those scuba housings for your NIKONs?
That should take care of the abuse. Or else build your own armor
camera housing.
Anonymous
June 18, 2005 1:22:46 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.chem.electrochem.battery,misc.consumers.frugal-living,rec.photo.marketplace.digital (More info?)

Whacky Blacky wrote:
> What is the most rugged consumer digital camera with cf and ni-mh
> batteries?
>
> I've broken the battery door on my Nikon, the slider door on my
> Olympus, the over the lens shutter of the Canon, even the pop-up flash
> of my 35mm EOS and electrical switches on my Minolta 7000 SLR. (I've
> got a box filled with broken cameras and camera bodies and lenses, all
> purchased new - is there any value to this on the open market?). ;) 
>
> Point is, I'm rough on cameras (they get wet, they get mudbrody, they
> get dusty, dew condenses on them, they get backpacked, they get warmed
> in the trunk, they get dropped, ... in short ... I use my cameras.
>
> Having said that, I have not found a single camera that can withstand
> the abuse. The two Nikons were especially dissapointing as I paid mondo
> dollars because I "thought" professional models held up better than
> consumer models. I've been found wrong.
>
> When I go to the dpreview or other web sites, I don't see anywhere
> where they test the "ruggedness" of the camera. Of course, they say
> they "feel" sturdy (that's what they said about my Minolta 7000 which
> weights a ton and broke down within the first year).
>
> I even tried an underwater camera. Guess what broke it? The pumice
> cliffs in Santorini Greece. Sheesh. Can't a camera hold up to normal
> wear and tear?
>
> I'd be happy with a camera that lasts more than a year (that's about my
> average). Yes, of course, most people I know are downright dainty with
> their cameras so they can't even understand what I'm asking for. I
> understand that. For example, I've never hit my kids in their lives but
> when I try to explain to another parent not to bash their kid around,
> they look at me like my use model is outmoded or something.
>
> Same with cameras. So, I do know that very very very very few of you
> are rough on your camera equipment ... but ... if there is ANYONE out
> there like I am (who uses a camera and doesn't baby the thing) ... I'd
> pay a premium for a camera built like a humvee ... hopefully one with
> AA batteries like my ancient Minolta and AE1 of days of lore ... and
> hopefully with type I compact flash media which is decidedly more
> sturdy than anything else out there in the digital marketplace.
>
> Does a sturdy digital camera actually exist that I won't break in a
> year?
>

Not digital, but you'll have a hard time destroying a Nikon F/F2/FM/FE2,
ect... But if you MUST be digital, well tough luck!
Anonymous
June 18, 2005 1:22:47 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.chem.electrochem.battery,misc.consumers.frugal-living,rec.photo.marketplace.digital (More info?)

On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 21:22:46 +0200, Chris Loffredo <me@privacy.net>
wrote:

>
>Not digital, but you'll have a hard time destroying a Nikon F/F2/FM/FE2,
>ect... But if you MUST be digital, well tough luck!

Even more sturdy: Argus C3 - think of a brick with a lens.
Anonymous
June 18, 2005 1:34:49 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.chem.electrochem.battery,misc.consumers.frugal-living,rec.photo.marketplace.digital (More info?)

what about the lenses?
do you break those too?



"Whacky Blacky" <blackywhat@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1119027518.271793.291810@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> What is the most rugged consumer digital camera with cf and ni-mh
> batteries?
>
> I've broken the battery door on my Nikon, the slider door on my
> Olympus, the over the lens shutter of the Canon, even the pop-up flash
> of my 35mm EOS and electrical switches on my Minolta 7000 SLR. (I've
> got a box filled with broken cameras and camera bodies and lenses, all
> purchased new - is there any value to this on the open market?). ;) 
>
> Point is, I'm rough on cameras (they get wet, they get mudbrody, they
> get dusty, dew condenses on them, they get backpacked, they get warmed
> in the trunk, they get dropped, ... in short ... I use my cameras.
>
> Having said that, I have not found a single camera that can withstand
> the abuse. The two Nikons were especially dissapointing as I paid mondo
> dollars because I "thought" professional models held up better than
> consumer models. I've been found wrong.
>
> When I go to the dpreview or other web sites, I don't see anywhere
> where they test the "ruggedness" of the camera. Of course, they say
> they "feel" sturdy (that's what they said about my Minolta 7000 which
> weights a ton and broke down within the first year).
>
> I even tried an underwater camera. Guess what broke it? The pumice
> cliffs in Santorini Greece. Sheesh. Can't a camera hold up to normal
> wear and tear?
>
> I'd be happy with a camera that lasts more than a year (that's about my
> average). Yes, of course, most people I know are downright dainty with
> their cameras so they can't even understand what I'm asking for. I
> understand that. For example, I've never hit my kids in their lives but
> when I try to explain to another parent not to bash their kid around,
> they look at me like my use model is outmoded or something.
>
> Same with cameras. So, I do know that very very very very few of you
> are rough on your camera equipment ... but ... if there is ANYONE out
> there like I am (who uses a camera and doesn't baby the thing) ... I'd
> pay a premium for a camera built like a humvee ... hopefully one with
> AA batteries like my ancient Minolta and AE1 of days of lore ... and
> hopefully with type I compact flash media which is decidedly more
> sturdy than anything else out there in the digital marketplace.
>
> Does a sturdy digital camera actually exist that I won't break in a
> year?
>
June 18, 2005 4:32:48 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Whacky Blacky" <blackywhat@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1119027518.271793.291810@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> What is the most rugged consumer digital camera with cf and ni-mh
> batteries?
>
> I've broken the battery door on my Nikon, the slider door on my
> Olympus, the over the lens shutter of the Canon, even the pop-up flash
> of my 35mm EOS and electrical switches on my Minolta 7000 SLR. (I've
> got a box filled with broken cameras and camera bodies and lenses, all
> purchased new - is there any value to this on the open market?). ;) 
>
> Point is, I'm rough on cameras (they get wet, they get mudbrody, they
> get dusty, dew condenses on them, they get backpacked, they get warmed
> in the trunk, they get dropped, ... in short ... I use my cameras.
>
> Having said that, I have not found a single camera that can withstand
> the abuse. The two Nikons were especially dissapointing as I paid mondo
> dollars because I "thought" professional models held up better than
> consumer models. I've been found wrong.
>
> When I go to the dpreview or other web sites, I don't see anywhere
> where they test the "ruggedness" of the camera. Of course, they say
> they "feel" sturdy (that's what they said about my Minolta 7000 which
> weights a ton and broke down within the first year).
>
> I even tried an underwater camera. Guess what broke it? The pumice
> cliffs in Santorini Greece. Sheesh. Can't a camera hold up to normal
> wear and tear?
>
> I'd be happy with a camera that lasts more than a year (that's about my
> average). Yes, of course, most people I know are downright dainty with
> their cameras so they can't even understand what I'm asking for. I
> understand that. For example, I've never hit my kids in their lives but
> when I try to explain to another parent not to bash their kid around,
> they look at me like my use model is outmoded or something.
>
> Same with cameras. So, I do know that very very very very few of you
> are rough on your camera equipment ... but ... if there is ANYONE out
> there like I am (who uses a camera and doesn't baby the thing) ... I'd
> pay a premium for a camera built like a humvee ... hopefully one with
> AA batteries like my ancient Minolta and AE1 of days of lore ... and
> hopefully with type I compact flash media which is decidedly more
> sturdy than anything else out there in the digital marketplace.
>
> Does a sturdy digital camera actually exist that I won't break in a
> year?
>

You have a choice. Either take some moderate care of your equipment, or be
prepared to keep buying new cameras.

If the latter, could I suggest that you keep replacing with the same model,
so that when you break them, at least you will have a ready made supply of
replacement parts.

Press photographers are notoriously careless of their equipment, but even if
you were one of them, I rather suspect your Picture Editor would already
have done more than a little bit of shouting and swearing at you.

Roy G
June 18, 2005 5:02:31 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,rec.photo.marketplace.digital (More info?)

William Graham wrote:
> "Craig Flory" <floryphotog@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:9RFse.5373$hK3.4590@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
>>If you had not said "digital" I would have suggested a Speed Graphic with
>>4"x5" film holders and flash bulbs. You are using electronic gear now and
>>not film cameras that had no batteries or circuitry. Every one of my
>>fellow
>>profesionals handle their digital cameras as if made of fragile glass. By
>>the way ... what the heck is mudbrody mean ??? In my 57 years on this
>>earth
>>I've never heard that word before.
>>
>>Craig Flory
>>
>>
>
> Yes. A Google search of, "mudbrody" turned up nothing...
>
>

It would seem that Wacky Blacky is the sort of fellow who should get a
sketch pad and take some drawing lessons. In my fifty sum plus years of
photography I have only run into two other persons like this. When you
consider the places National Geo Photographers have taken Nikon F2,3,4's
over the years without getting them "mudbrody", and producing great
photos. Like the great photographer once said it isn't the equipment it
is the person behind the equipment that produces a great photo. Forty
years ago a friend in a large camera club in a major mid west city would
shoot rings around 98% of the others and all he used was an old
Rolliecord, while others were using the best of what was currently
available. This is simply a case of someone very much untalented in this
regard.

Ed
Anonymous
June 18, 2005 6:49:33 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 19:51:33 GMT, Craig Flory wrote:

> By the way ... what the heck is mudbrody mean ??? In my 57 years
> on this earth I've never heard that word before.

Maybe "broken" was buzzing through his brain and caused his
fingers to insert a few letters ("bro") while typing "they get wet,
they get muddy, they get dusty, dew condenses on them . . ."
Anonymous
June 18, 2005 9:30:42 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.chem.electrochem.battery,misc.consumers.frugal-living,rec.photo.marketplace.digital (More info?)

On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 09:58:38 -0700, Whacky Blacky wrote:

> What is the most rugged consumer digital camera with cf and ni-mh
> batteries?
Make yourself a pinhole camera.
--
neil
delete delete to reply
Anonymous
June 18, 2005 1:08:38 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.chem.electrochem.battery,misc.consumers.frugal-living,rec.photo.marketplace.digital (More info?)

On 17 Jun 2005 09:58:38 -0700, "Whacky Blacky" <blackywhat@yahoo.com> wrote:

>What is the most rugged consumer digital camera with cf and ni-mh
>batteries?
>
>I've broken the battery door on my Nikon, the slider door on my
>Olympus, the over the lens shutter of the Canon, even the pop-up flash
>of my 35mm EOS and electrical switches on my Minolta 7000 SLR. (I've
>got a box filled with broken cameras and camera bodies and lenses, all
>purchased new - is there any value to this on the open market?). ;) 

Don't take up rock climbing.
Anonymous
June 18, 2005 3:01:58 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.chem.electrochem.battery,misc.consumers.frugal-living,rec.photo.marketplace.digital (More info?)

"The Real Bev" <bashley@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:42B360DA.A4838A09@myrealbox.com...
> Craig Flory wrote:
>>
>> If you had not said "digital" I would have suggested a Speed Graphic with
>> 4"x5" film holders and flash bulbs.
>
> Roll back and electronic flash. Maybe a baby SG. More efficient in terms of
> speed and weight. They also make nice defensive weapons. The bad part is
> that they aren't particularly neckstrappable, although I guess it could be
> done. Whoever thought that a wrist strap (like current digicams, not like the
> SG strap) for a camera was a good idea should be horsewhipped.
>
>> You are using electronic gear now and
>> not film cameras that had no batteries or circuitry. Every one of my fellow
>> profesionals handle their digital cameras as if made of fragile glass.

> It's clear that he CAN'T baby his camera. Some of us are
> like that. We start out with the best of intentions and end up
> losing our balance and smashing something expensive or painful.

You shouldnt take photos when blotto, silly.

>> By the way ... what the heck is mudbrody mean ???
>> In my 57 years on this earth I've never heard that word before.

> Maybe a variant of "grody" involving mud?
Anonymous
June 19, 2005 1:36:25 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.chem.electrochem.battery,misc.consumers.frugal-living,rec.photo.marketplace.digital (More info?)

"Whacky Blacky" <blackywhat@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1119027518.271793.291810@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> What is the most rugged consumer digital camera with cf and ni-mh
> batteries?
>
[ . . . ]
>
> Does a sturdy digital camera actually exist that I won't break in a
> year?

I don't think they make 'em like that anymore.

My very first SLR was a screw-mount Petri. That was at least 40 years ago,
and I bought the Petri because it was the cheapest SLR in the store and
that's all I could afford. One sunny day I was on my way up to a sports car
race, and the Petri came off the back of my motorcycle at about 65 mph. I
think it bounced end over end along the concrete for about 50 yards. It
picked up several dings and scrapes in the process, but still worked
perfectly except for the frame counter (which was a quirky thing on that
model anyway). I used that camera for quite some time after that with no
further problems.

But I really doubt they make 'em like that anymore.

N.
June 19, 2005 4:12:34 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.chem.electrochem.battery,misc.consumers.frugal-living,rec.photo.marketplace.digital (More info?)

Whacky Blacky wrote:

>
> I've broken the battery door on my Nikon, the slider door on my
> Olympus, the over the lens shutter of the Canon, even the pop-up flash
> of my 35mm EOS and electrical switches on my Minolta 7000 SLR. (I've
> got a box filled with broken cameras and camera bodies and lenses, all
> purchased new - is there any value to this on the open market?). ;) 
>
> Point is, I'm rough on cameras (they get wet, they get mudbrody, they
> get dusty, dew condenses on them, they get backpacked, they get warmed
> in the trunk, they get dropped, ... in short ... I use my cameras.
>

That's not use, that's ABUSE!


>
> Does a sturdy digital camera actually exist that I won't break in a
> year?

Doubt it.
--

Stacey
Anonymous
June 19, 2005 4:26:32 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.chem.electrochem.battery,misc.consumers.frugal-living,rec.photo.marketplace.digital (More info?)

"Stacey" <fotocord@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3hk9ljFh5bsjU3@individual.net...
> Whacky Blacky wrote:
>
>>
>> I've broken the battery door on my Nikon, the slider door on my
>> Olympus, the over the lens shutter of the Canon, even the pop-up flash
>> of my 35mm EOS and electrical switches on my Minolta 7000 SLR. (I've
>> got a box filled with broken cameras and camera bodies and lenses, all
>> purchased new ......

I got so mad at a computer once that I put it on my garage floor and smashed
the hell out of it with a sledge hammer..........(Didn't buy another one for
about 10 years, either.)
Anonymous
June 19, 2005 3:36:25 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.chem.electrochem.battery,misc.consumers.frugal-living,rec.photo.marketplace.digital (More info?)

William Graham wrote:


> I got so mad at a computer once that I put it on my garage floor and smashed
> the hell out of it with a sledge hammer..........(Didn't buy another one for
> about 10 years, either.)

A course a local college might have been more productive.


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
June 19, 2005 4:11:48 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.chem.electrochem.battery,misc.consumers.frugal-living,rec.photo.marketplace.digital (More info?)

"Alan Browne" <alan.browne@FreeLunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
news:Whgte.3367$Jk6.104914@wagner.videotron.net...
> William Graham wrote:
>
>
>> I got so mad at a computer once that I put it on my garage floor and
>> smashed the hell out of it with a sledge hammer..........(Didn't buy
>> another one for about 10 years, either.)
>
> A course a local college might have been more productive.
>
Yes, but in those days they didn't teach Anger Management at the local
community college........
Anonymous
June 19, 2005 4:25:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.chem.electrochem.battery,misc.consumers.frugal-living,rec.photo.marketplace.digital (More info?)

"Whacky Blacky" <blackywhat@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1119027518.271793.291810@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> What is the most rugged consumer digital camera with cf and ni-mh
> batteries?
>
> I've broken the battery door on my Nikon, the slider door on my
> Olympus, the over the lens shutter of the Canon, even the pop-up flash
> of my 35mm EOS and electrical switches on my Minolta 7000 SLR. (I've
> got a box filled with broken cameras and camera bodies and lenses, all
> purchased new - is there any value to this on the open market?). ;) 
>
> Point is, I'm rough on cameras (they get wet, they get mudbrody, they
> get dusty, dew condenses on them, they get backpacked, they get warmed
> in the trunk, they get dropped, ... in short ... I use my cameras.

I hear Fischer-Price makes some nice camera's for similarly clumsy
4-year-olds...
:) 
Anonymous
June 19, 2005 5:14:01 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.chem.electrochem.battery,misc.consumers.frugal-living,rec.photo.marketplace.digital (More info?)

Mark² wrote:
> "Whacky Blacky" <blackywhat@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1119027518.271793.291810@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> What is the most rugged consumer digital camera with cf and ni-mh
>> batteries?
>>
>> I've broken the battery door on my Nikon, the slider door on my
>> Olympus, the over the lens shutter of the Canon, even the pop-up
>> flash of my 35mm EOS and electrical switches on my Minolta 7000
>> SLR.
>> (I've got a box filled with broken cameras and camera bodies and
>> lenses, all purchased new - is there any value to this on the open
>> market?). ;)  Point is, I'm rough on cameras (they get wet, they get
>> mudbrody, they
>> get dusty, dew condenses on them, they get backpacked, they get
>> warmed in the trunk, they get dropped, ... in short ... I use my
>> cameras.
>
> I hear Fischer-Price makes some nice camera's for similarly clumsy
> 4-year-olds...
> :( 

I bet that someone old enough to shop for a "rugged consumer digital
camera" has had enough experiences to both need a good camera, and be
resigned to equipment-breaking as a way of life. I'll also wager
cameras are not the only pieces of hardware he has boxes of broken of
(!).

My suggestion, should he decide to accept it, is: seek counseling. You
can break one last thing: your break-it habit. I bet the breakage
never happens until you've somehow decided the equipment is not worthy
of you in a basic way, and you'd move on up if you just didn't have
this faulty thing to use instead.


--
Frank ess
"There _are_ no accidents, if you dig deep enough and have a fertile
imagination".
—Sigmund Daguerre
Anonymous
June 19, 2005 7:27:55 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.chem.electrochem.battery,misc.consumers.frugal-living,rec.photo.marketplace.digital (More info?)

William Graham wrote:
> "Alan Browne" <alan.browne@FreeLunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
>> A course a local college might have been more productive.
>>
>
> Yes, but in those days they didn't teach Anger Management at the
> local community college........

I meant a computer course, of course; but the other posters reply about
not using sledgehammers much is the best...
Anonymous
June 19, 2005 7:27:56 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.chem.electrochem.battery,misc.consumers.frugal-living,rec.photo.marketplace.digital (More info?)

"Alan Browne" <alan.browne@FreeLunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
news:WGjte.16978$Jk6.171622@wagner.videotron.net...
> William Graham wrote:
>> "Alan Browne" <alan.browne@FreeLunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
>>> A course a local college might have been more productive.
>>>
>>
>> Yes, but in those days they didn't teach Anger Management at the
>> local community college........
>
> I meant a computer course, of course; but the other posters reply about
> not using sledgehammers much is the best...

Yes. The really funny part is that I used to repair IBM machines, including
early computers, and one of the most useful tools I carried was a 5 lb.
sledge hammer. It was really useful when you need to "force" something and
you didn't have much room to swing a regular hammer....You could get a lot
of force out of only a few inches travel.....
Anonymous
June 19, 2005 7:31:03 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.chem.electrochem.battery,misc.consumers.frugal-living,rec.photo.marketplace.digital (More info?)

On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 00:26:32 -0700, William Graham wrote:

>
>
> I got so mad at a computer once that I put it on my garage floor and smashed
> the hell out of it with a sledge hammer..........(Didn't buy another one for
> about 10 years, either.)
I don't use sledgehammers much either.
--
neil
delete delete to reply
Anonymous
June 19, 2005 7:46:55 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.chem.electrochem.battery,misc.consumers.frugal-living,rec.photo.marketplace.digital (More info?)

In sci.chem.electrochem.battery Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
> William Graham wrote:
>
>
>> I got so mad at a computer once that I put it on my garage floor and smashed
>> the hell out of it with a sledge hammer..........(Didn't buy another one for
>> about 10 years, either.)
>
> A course a local college might have been more productive.

You'd need a bigger hammer though.
Anonymous
June 19, 2005 11:18:04 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.chem.electrochem.battery,misc.consumers.frugal-living,rec.photo.marketplace.digital (More info?)

On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 11:36:25 -0400, Alan Browne
<alan.browne@FreeLunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

>William Graham wrote:
>
>
>> I got so mad at a computer once that I put it on my garage floor and smashed
>> the hell out of it with a sledge hammer..........(Didn't buy another one for
>> about 10 years, either.)
>
>A course a local college might have been more productive.

The local colleges around here don't have classes on smashing
computers.
Do yours?

--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"
June 20, 2005 3:55:10 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Frank ess wrote:
> Mark² wrote:
>
>> "Whacky Blacky" <blackywhat@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1119027518.271793.291810@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>> What is the most rugged consumer digital camera with cf and ni-mh
>>> batteries?
>>>
>>> I've broken the battery door on my Nikon, the slider door on my
>>> Olympus, the over the lens shutter of the Canon, even the pop-up
>>> flash of my 35mm EOS and electrical switches on my Minolta 7000 SLR.
>>> (I've got a box filled with broken cameras and camera bodies and
>>> lenses, all purchased new - is there any value to this on the open
>>> market?). ;)  Point is, I'm rough on cameras (they get wet, they get
>>> mudbrody, they
>>> get dusty, dew condenses on them, they get backpacked, they get
>>> warmed in the trunk, they get dropped, ... in short ... I use my
>>> cameras.
>>
>>
>> I hear Fischer-Price makes some nice camera's for similarly clumsy
>> 4-year-olds...
>> :( 
>
>
> I bet that someone old enough to shop for a "rugged consumer digital
> camera" has had enough experiences to both need a good camera, and be
> resigned to equipment-breaking as a way of life. I'll also wager cameras
> are not the only pieces of hardware he has boxes of broken of (!).
>
> My suggestion, should he decide to accept it, is: seek counseling. You
> can break one last thing: your break-it habit. I bet the breakage never
> happens until you've somehow decided the equipment is not worthy of you
> in a basic way, and you'd move on up if you just didn't have this faulty
> thing to use instead.
>
>

This thread just shows you how dumb some people really are. Now smashing
a computer on the floor of a garage with a sledge hammer. I do not
really think the computer is stupid, as much as the user who did not
know what he was doing.
The same holds true with the fellow who started this whole thing. I
agree that a box of broken cameras is not the only box full of broken
things he has.
And to ramble on and on ad nauseaum just proves my point.
And then to cross post his garbage is another really dumb assed thing to do.

Ed
Anonymous
June 20, 2005 11:30:00 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,sci.chem.electrochem.battery,misc.consumers.frugal-living,rec.photo.marketplace.digital (More info?)

"Bill Funk" <BigBill@there.com> wrote in message
news:hp9cb1ps37pg1lp8vj6f7i3pkcjnou0ll3@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 11:36:25 -0400, Alan Browne
> <alan.browne@FreeLunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
>>William Graham wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I got so mad at a computer once that I put it on my garage floor and
>>> smashed
>>> the hell out of it with a sledge hammer..........(Didn't buy another one
>>> for
>>> about 10 years, either.)
>>
>>A course a local college might have been more productive.
>
> The local colleges around here don't have classes on smashing
> computers.
> Do yours?

not smashing computers but they do courses on mediocre machines.
!