Disposable DLSR bodies?

[DonSchap]

You know, the one thing that seems to be approaching rapidly is the advent of the "disposable" camera body. Along with all the other things you can buy ... the sub-$300 DSLR camera body seems to be "marked" as truly disposable.

What this means is:

1) You can have your high-end camera and lenses ...
2) You can carry a sub-$300 camera body for backup, dangerous/hazardous to equipment environments, or to pitch off to another user (family member or whatnot) ...
3) Total interchangeability with all your lenses.

In other words ... yeah, a cheap, entry-level camera ... that people will try to justify as "just as good as anything else." You know the kind, where people post the shot and say, "See, not too bad, eh?" The fact is ... this would be a vacation camera ... one that you could lose with your luggage and not have a heart-attack about (as long as you kept the Memory card on you ;) ). You'd have access to your select low-end lenses ... or you could actually buy a set of the popular and disposable (anxiously so) kit lenses to use (18-55 & 55-200) ... again, not bedeviled by the airlines losing your gear. Figure the whole rig for less than $500 ... effectively throw-away ... as your $2000 real rig sits safely in the comfort of your home.

It's just a thought ... as your luggage goes on tour to destinations unknown ...

35452

[griptape]

Also known as shooting film.

[DonSchap]

Hey, now there's a thought ... converting your old SLR ... to a DSLR.

Wait a minute, Minolta did that already with the Maxxum 9000, back in the real early days of digital (circa 1987) ... before infancy, even.

35453


Might be a bit of a 'sticky wicket" with the rights to that one. Perhaps we need to muddle this over, a bit. Still, there are lots and lots of old SLRs out there, that's for sure. Just need them to cut memory, too ... with some kind of digital back idea.

[cdifoto]

Where are you seeing legitimate sellers of sub-$300 digital SLRs? If you're counting used ones (even finding one of those for under $300 is still difficult), you've already discredited your statements, because the very purpose of buying them second hand is to give them a 2nd life, ie they are not being disposed of but rather "recycled" in a sense.

I've never heard of anyone throwing a working dSLR in the trash.

[JTL]

Definitely a possibly plausible scenario given today's quality and prices.

But remember...one person's "disposable" rig is another person's primary rig. Not everyone is in a financial situation to consider any rig disposable. ;)

So, while the concept of a disposable rig is a good one, I wouldn't be going around telling (and possibly insulting) folks that can only afford a Canon Xtx, Nikon Dxx, Sony 2 or 3 series, Olympus x10 or x20, or Pentax Kxx (and their subsequent progenies), with the kit lenses, that they're using a disposable camera...:D

$400.00 is still a lot of money to most people.

[DonSchap]

JTL ... I couldn't have said it better ... thank you, as you did. Readin' my noggin'!

GMTA!

Have a great day! :D

[Screenclutter]

Would disposable dSLRs have a large enough market? I don't think the current disposable cameras deliver massive profits to their makers.

[Ken.]

My "disposable" is a Lumix FZ8. I use it set to RAW and Program, everyone gets simple mode. It's paid for and insured. Nobody touches the Olympus kit but me.

[FLiPMaRC]

I love your imagination Don :D

[Rhys]

I would not consider a $10 compact as "disposable".

I can see that digital SLRs will continue to fall in price. Remember the 300D? That came out at I believe a shade under $1000. Now we're routinely seeing digital SLRs for sale for a little over $400.

The cheapest on B&H is a used Olympus E300 8mp dSLR for $249.
The cheapest new dSLR on B&H is the Olympus E410 for $400

[DonSchap]

Well, I'm looking forward to the DSLR you can go "beachin" with ... where if sand gets inside ... it gets heaved. I have a feelin' it'll be here soon enough ... probably with a pellicle mirror (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pellicle_mirror), permanent LiveView or some such thing.

35491


That'll be at least sand-resistant.

Imagination ... who me? Hah!

[Margus]

Funny idea. So funny that even an interesting idea to think about and think seriously. If you look at disposable film cameras then they are extremely cheap, producing somehow bearable (far from good!) quality pictures and you cannot use them after you have taken your pictures, even if you wish to. So, following the same logic, you could have reason to make a disposable digital camera if it is
- extremely cheap (which $200 is not ;) )
- bearable quality (comes with cheap anyway :) )
- impossible to use after the memory is full (built in write-once-read-many?)

Technically clearly possible to manufacture. But how about the demand on market? Can't think of...

[Rhys]

Funny idea. So funny that even an interesting idea to think about and think seriously. If you look at disposable film cameras then they are extremely cheap, producing somehow bearable (far from good!) quality pictures and you cannot use them after you have taken your pictures, even if you wish to. So, following the same logic, you could have reason to make a disposable digital camera if it is
- extremely cheap (which $200 is not ;) )
- bearable quality (comes with cheap anyway :) )
- impossible to use after the memory is full (built in write-once-read-many?)

Technically clearly possible to manufacture. But how about the demand on market? Can't think of...

With cheapo digital cameras coming in at under $10, it's possible that it might just happen one day.

[FLiPMaRC]

In other words ... yeah, a cheap, entry-level camera ... that people will try to justify as "just as good as anything else." You know the kind, where people post the shot and say, "See, not too bad, eh?" The fact is ... this would be a vacation camera ... one that you could lose with your luggage and not have a heart-attack about (as long as you kept the Memory card on you ;) ). You'd have access to your select low-end lenses ... or you could actually buy a set of the popular and disposable (anxiously so) kit lenses to use (18-55 & 55-200) ... again, not bedeviled by the airlines losing your gear. Figure the whole rig for less than $500 ... effectively throw-away ... as your $2000 real rig sits safely in the comfort of your home.

It's just a thought ... as your luggage goes on tour to destinations unknown ...

35452

Well, according to Don, $500 is "disposable" :D because he has disposable income :p

[Rhys]

Well, according to Don, $500 is "disposable" :D because he has disposable income :p

Even penniless drug addicts have enough disposeable income to be high 90% of the time.

[griptape]

Even penniless drug addicts have enough disposeable income to be high 90% of the time.

They generally don't obtain their income legally though. Are you implying Don is a burglar?

[DonSchap]

... Are you implying Don is a burglar?

Nah ... just gainfully employed ... and okay ... that's a dying breed in America, today. So go ahead and lower the cost and use a plastic mounting ring (manufacture's choice - you pick the lens) and a terminal sensor ... that dies after 300 exposures or so. Enough for a good vacation, eh? The purchase would guaranty one set of well-processed prints and a non-printable (by the customer) electronic copy ... for future processing (enlargements and such). Say $200 for 300-shots?

Rentable (you scratch it, you bought it) "kit"-style lenses, available here and there ... with the disposable bodies. You could even invigorate those stupid "flash cubes", to really make it cheap.

35497

How about a one-time, cypher encrypted Internet download capability in the camera ... say through a USB port?

Eastman Kodak electronic "film" makes a come back, 120 years later, with: "You press the button - we do the rest!"

Now, imagine that ...

[mugsisme]

Don't bite my head off for saying this, but what about the smaller cameras, that are supposed to be close to SLRs? I think that the Canon G9 falls into this, and didn't Sigma come out with one? (I do think that one is either $400 or $800, if I remember correctly.)

I would love a camera the size of a P&S with SLR capabilities to toss into my pocketbook at a price that won't break the bank. Of course, it will have to take excellent pictures as well. Bahaha, I want it ALL!

[griptape]

Eastman Kodak electronic "film" makes a come back, 120 years later, with: "You press the button - we do the rest!".

NO F.ING THANK YOU! Sony's smile detection is embarrassing enough (hey, jerks, maybe I want to take pictures of sad people) for photography. Pretty soon, it'll just be "well we have unlimited memory, so we just take a picture every 3 seconds, I'm sure something will turn out".

[DonSchap]

Hey Grip ... they used to just photograph still lifes, landscapes ... and the dead, remember, back in the 1800's? LONG EXPOSURES ... Zzzzzz. Where's your smile, now? Muahahahahaha

[Rhys]

There IS a disposable SLR though - the Sigma SD10!