It's an odd thing to contemplate, in a world where everything is an electronic device, that it wasn't that long ago when cameras were entirely mechanical and manual devices. The film was wound on by the photographer, the shutter speed and aperture was set by the photographer and the the shutter was cocked by the photographer, the lens was focused by the photographer before finally the camera made an exposure, when the shutter button was pressed by the photographer.
There is a limit to what can be achieved by mechanical means alone. Wouldn't it be great if the lens could focus automatically? What about if the camera had a light meter built in, even better if the light meter could cause the aperture and shutter speed to be automatically set? Hmm, I'd like to set my aperture myself and have the camera do the rest, no problem. On another day I'd like to set my shutter speed and have my camera sort the aperture out.
All of the features that we take for granted now, were once the domain of science fiction. As electronics developed and were miniaturized, they started to be included in the cameras of the day. Initially with built in light meters, then electronic shutters and auto focusing.
By the 1980s most cameras had some electronics in them but by the 1990s the cameras were fully automated electronic affairs. Marvels of the modern age. With a business model of constant improvement and expansion, the 1990s cameras were not expected to be used for years on end. A quick look at the Dixons catalogue shows really capable consumer compact cameras, packed with electronics for amazingly low prices.
The low prices revealing the intent that if the camera failed, it was not economic to repair and so the real solution was to replace. Even with a 12 month guarantee, the manufacturers would simply replace the camera if it developed a fault. If the consumer price was low the manufacturing price was even lower. If a camera sold for £80 then it probably cost £20 to make at scale. Not really sustainable for the planet but that was for the future to sort out.
The 1990s were the start of consumers having money to spend on "toys" rather than something the family needed. So the business model was to manufacture at scale for your market, keep manufacturing prices low, sell at low prices on the high street and replace rather than repair the units if they failed.
There was a deceit that happened with repairs. Camera manufacturers would either establish repairs departments at their factories or sub contract the repairs out to a separate specialist company. With the rise of Japanese consumer electronics, sending something back to Japan wasn't cost effective. These companies established repair departments in the UK by way of sub contracting. The cost of repairing any consumer device was costing industry a lot of money. The introduction of electronics was done, in part, to make the devices more reliable and less likely to develop a fault and need repair. This was a huge cost saving for the manufacturers.
The general public however were used to having things that they bought repaired and so Dixons would take a faulty camera, for example, and fill out the repair form in store. The customer would be assured the camera would be inspected and assessed. The reality was that the camera would be chucked in the bin and when the customer came back a new camera would be supplied with the reason that the camera couldn't be repaired.
The reality of this system is that by the 1990s the reliability of these devices meant that faults went from 1 in a 1000 units manufactured to a vanishing small 1 in 1 000 000 units manufactured.
By the time that digital cameras came along, faults were unheard of, almost.
So the current trend for people buying 1990s compact cameras, should ring alarm bells. While the cameras were super reliable in their day, after 35 odd years, those mass manufactured, surface mount electronics, that were never designed to be repaired, are a bit of a ticking timebomb.
It's not the preserve of the compact camera either. The Hassleblad XPan, a panoramic format 35mm camera, that has retained its secondhand value and was expensive when new has been known to work fine one day and be dead the next. That is an expensive ornament. The best bet is to find a donor body and rob circuit boards from it, but even that avenue would be expensive as it's specialist work.
Anything that is entirely mechanical can, with the right skillset, be repaired and serviced indefinitely. Early cameras that has electronics such as the Olympus Trip 35, only offered simple metering systems, run by a selenium cell, that if the electronics died, the rest of the camera could be used manually.
So don't pay lots of money for 1990s compact cameras. You can but it's a bit like Russian roulette, you may get lucky but not for ever.
As a postscript to this the reliability of these cameras initial design means that if they do die all is not lost. It's unlikely to be the main board or CPU that's at fault. Generally it's something simple that can be fixed. Broken wires, solder joints that have failed and contacts that require cleaning. The solder joint failure is more common than you'd think.
A camera that isn't operating even with new batteries, should be inspected carefully. If a battery has corroded in the battery compartment then cleaning the compartment with white vinegar may resurrect the camera. Broken wiring inside can make a camera appear to have died, when it needs replacement or simple resolder the connection. It's also surprising what a squirt of electronic contact cleaner can do. If a camera does "brick" itself, it may just be revivable.
