Shel Belinkoff wrote: > As the time approaches for my purchasing a DSLR, the comments > about these cameras becoming obsolete keep running through my > mind. As a user of older film bodies, which don't become > obsolete and which continue to make good pictures and use a > wide variety of lenses, it's hard to consider that in six > months or a year a new DSLR will have become "history." > > It seems that, unless there's a camera malfunction, these new > techno-marvels should continue to make decent pics for years > to come, yet I keep hearing about how models just a few years > old (or less) are dated and need to be upgraded. Am I > missing something? Is it just the techno-buffs who are > saying this - those who must have the latest and greatest, or > are there hidden issues, like software compatibility, lack of > peripheral equipment (such as a memory card type being > discontinued), and things of that sort? Maybe I've answered > my own question. > > What's the reality of getting 10 years of use from now > current Pentax DSLR?
Pretty much the same worries crossed my mind about DSLRs before I jumped in and bought one. Yes, it's going to be history faster than the older cameras I own, which will cause trouble for parts if things go wrong. The fact is we are prepared for a planned life span in most products we buy, from the appliances in the kitchen to the car, but I suspect because the camera is more personal, it's a greater worry. You know that an expensive computer leaving the shop will be the latest and greatest for seconds, before it's replacement is announced, but years down the line of ownership it is still capable to do what you bought it for. Buy one and relax and maybe on the 23rd August 2015, you can come back to this post yourself with an answer! Malcolm
