Camera abuse testing!!

[stingOM]

http://www.komverse.com/2010/08/21/nikon-d90-vs-canon-550d-destruction-test-carnage/

[Attila]

I found to disgusting , to not care any property that is not a fun to me, especially if it is a photographic equipment.

[cooltouch]

Well, I held a more dispassionate view. I was actually interested in the level of abuse each camera would take, and unfortunately, this requires abusing the equipment to find out the answer. It's like when Mercedes crashes a $100,000 car into a wall. It hurts to watch, but the information gained from the crash is valuable.

Now obviously this guy was injecting a fair amount of humor into his test, but nonetheless, he did subject both cameras to rather brutal treatment, much worse than yours or mine is ever likely to see. I actually finished watching the video feeling a bit better about my EOS DSLR, thinking, "Huh. Maybe it will last a few years after all."

[stingOM]

[cooltouch]

Actually that was his D70. He mentioned this several times in the video. And he also stated at the beginning something about his producers not being willing to spend the money on the new stuff. So he used his own D70 and a 400D they got from somewhere.

[stingOM]

[Scheimpflug]

I think this was good to see.

It is one thing to be careful with your equipment... but some people take it to such extremes that they miss a lot of great shots - either because they didn't bring their camera for fear of damage, or they brought inferior equipment to avoid risking their good gear.

cooltouch made a great point with the car crash testing analogy... and in fact, I would bet that Nikon and Canon have already dropped, drowned, frozen, and otherwise abused plenty of cameras in the normal development cycle.

Plus, it was absolutely hilarious to watch him "attack" the camera with the piece of lettuce.

[cooltouch]

[56 DIN]

i wouldn´t have expected that the cams still work, so even not trying to copy this test, i am getting less anxious using the cam outdoor

[torbod]

Very nice abuse test. Don't miss part two where image quality is examined

[a20010494]

I wonder how the SDXX would rank in there.

[dsmlogger]

WTF?

Total waste of bandwidth. Oh, and equipment too.

[mikenco]

This 'testing' didn't look too scientific. But that said, it does show just how tough modern equipment is and is indeed reassuring to people like myself who regularly uses my camera in rain and sea-air environments. I don't use skylight filters to 'protect' the front of the lens and always clean them by breathing on them and wiping with the bottom of my t-shirt. I quite often walk about all day with my camera swinging from my shoulder bumping into things and not in a bag.

Ultimately, my camera is comprehensively insured and what is the worst that could happen? I would be more upset if the camera got stolen than if I broke it through use or abuse. Because any photo that I had on the camera at the time would be lost. If however I broke the camera through everyday use at least the photos would be safe on the memory cards. I think you'd be hard-pushed to damage the memory cards themselves while they are inside the camera.

That said, I would love to own either of the two cameras that were wantonly destroyed making this video, but he has the means to facilitate such a waste of gear, then kudos to him.

I guess my view point would be different if my gear was high-end or not suitably insured. Also, if it was vintage gear that is irreplaceable.