[2010] Camera shutter will not open - what now?

[Ann-Marie]

I bought an inexpensive small digital camera about 4 years ago. Now the shutter won't open. Is it worth it to fix these camera? I paid about $200.00 for it.

 

[Mosca]

Nope. Short answer, but true.

 

[thheath]

Other than to replace/recharge the battery no it's not worth it. Have you went on the website for the camera maker and read any FAQ about troubleshooting the problem?

 

[pedro47]

I bought an inexpensive small digital camera about 4 years ago. Now the shutter won't open. Is it worth it to fix these camera? I paid about $200.00 for it.

Is this a Kodak digital camera with an error code of E45 (lens with not open)?

Do not waste your money to fix.

 

[Mel]

I bought an inexpensive small digital camera about 4 years ago. Now the shutter won't open. Is it worth it to fix these camera? I paid about $200.00 for it.

Does it otherwise power on? If it doesn't power on, it may be a moisture issue - this has become a problem with my first digital camera. It stopped working when we arrived in the Cayman Islands last summer. I did a bit of research, and was able to resolve the problem on my own, though I asked for a new camera for Christmas. If this is the problem, you need to dry out the camera by placing it in an airtight container with something that will absorbe the moisture. Best choice is silica packets (you may have some that have come with various electronics, mine were in DD's boxes of Magnetix meant to keep them from rusting). If you can't find any, and you've already given the camera up for lost, put it in a ziploc bag full of rice for several days. The rice should absorb the moisture, and the camera may start working again. I will now be packing my new camera in a ziploc with some silica packets whenever I travel.

 

[Kal]

An inexpensive 4-yr old digital camera probably has a worth of less than $25. Don't spend any money to troubleshoot or repair it. There could be a grain of sand keeping the shutter from opening. In any case the error code when translated means:

IT'S TOAST!

 

[ScoopKona]

It can't hurt to blow the shutter area with compressed air. But I agree it's time to replace it. Probably a bit of grit causing the mechanism to fail.

Do recycle the battery, if applicable.

 

[Ann-Marie]

Thanks everyone. Now, how do I decide what to replace it with??

 

[Passepartout]

Well, if you felt it gave good service and you liked it, I suppose the maker has an updated model. If not, try a competitor. I'd probably look at those that use the same memory media. Look at reviews in Consumer Reports, ask in a camera shop or just go to someplace that has a lot of them to fondle- like Costco or Wal-Mart and play with them. You'll be surprised at how much more camera features you can get for about what you spent for the one that broke. Or how much less similar features cost now. At the price point you are replacing, there aren't any crummy cameras, but probably not really outstanding professionally outfitted ones either, just good, dependable, point-and-shoot snapshooters.

Consumer Electronics Show was just a few weeks ago. Store buyers have orders in for the new cameras, so there will be some great deals on last year's greatest hits. It should be a good time for camera shopping. Have Fun!

Jim Ricks

 

[GadgetRick]

I'd do everything you mentioned--except checking Consumer Reports--they're notoriously horrible at reviewing anything like this which requires objectiveness.

There are plenty of threads here you can search on (best digital camera). Which one you buy depends entirely on what you plan to shoot, your shooting style, etc. There are many fine cameras available today. Not all of them are ridiculously expensive.

 

[Ann-Marie]

Thanks again. I just looked up Olympus, and there repair center is out on LI, so I was thinking of calling to see what they charge to look at it since I can hand deliver it.

 

[GadgetRick]

Thanks again. I just looked up Olympus, and there repair center is out on LI, so I was thinking of calling to see what they charge to look at it since I can hand deliver it.

Don't mean to sound crass but you'll be wasting your time...really. You can buy a nice point and shoot camera for around $100 now. If it costs you only $50 to fix this one (which I doubt), you'll be fixing an old camera. Why not spend a few bucks more and get something newer with better technology?

Also, many of the repair sites are notorious for taking forever to get things fixed. So you may be without your camera for a while.

I say throw this one away and get a new one. At today's prices, you can afford to.

Now, if you had an expensive DSLR, it would be a different story of course.

 

[Ann-Marie]

Really weird! I called Olympus just to see how much they would charge if I brought it out to them so they could look at it. While I was on the phone, just for the heck of it I turned on the camera. The shutter opened! It sounded weird and loud. I kept turning it on and off and blow hard on it a few times. Seems fine now.

 

[pedro47]

Really weird! I called Olympus just to see how much they would charge if I brought it out to them so they could look at it. While I was on the phone, just for the heck of it I turned on the camera. The shutter opened! It sounded weird and loud. I kept turning it on and off and blow hard on it a few times. Seems fine now.

My camera did the same and stopped working the next day.

 

[GadgetRick]

I wouldn't trust it. Chances are it'll stop working (again) just when you want/need it most.

 

[pjrose]

That happens occasionally with my Canon. If I touch the shutter lightly, it opens right up.

 

[pjrose]

I'd do everything you mentioned--except checking Consumer Reports--they're notoriously horrible at reviewing anything like this which requires objectiveness.

Can you elaborate on that?

 

[ScoopKona]

Can you elaborate on that?

I'll second that. Consumer Reports stinks.

Everything they review is rated mainly by price. The magazines will have catchy headlines like "what is the best camera," yet no mention of the high-end Nikons and Canons, Leica or Hasselblad because they're ridiculously expensive. They don't tell people what the "best" is. Only "what is the best value."

Value is probably the most important criteria for the majority of people. But for people who care about quality over price, it is not a good magazine.

I gave up on Consumer Reports because they don't include Wusthof in their reviews of kitchen knives, they don't include Wolf in their reviews of cooktops, they don't include La Pavoni in their reviews of espresso makers, etc. The really good stuff simply doesn't make the cut.

EDIT -- PS, Ann-Marie, I would keep using the camera for as long as possible. Unless you're shooting a "mission critical" event like a wedding. That's the time to replace the camera (and do so early enough to get used to the new camera). I try to run gadgets into the ground before I dispose of them.

 

[T_R_Oglodyte]

I'll second that. Consumer Reports stinks.

Consumer Reports is what it is. It is quite obvious that your tastes and preferences are completely different from the audience targeted by CR.

Consumer Reports is perfectly fine for what they are. Saying they are worthless because they don't cover the elite items that are of interest to less than 0.01% of the population is a characterization that might be extreme even for Marie Antoinette..

 

[pjrose]

I'm with Troggie. The average consumer is in the market for standard consumer items, not the high priced elite ones. I do, however, agree that they should include the premium items - and I think they do sometimes - e.g. $400-500 headphones recently - but generally I'd like to know the pros and cons and repair history of appliances from home depot and Sears, and cameras that I'd find at Best Buy etc.

 

[GadgetRick]

Can you elaborate on that?

Sure, in all of the years I read Consumer's Reports, whenever they reviewed things like electronics, cameras, etc. They really did a bad job with them because they can't (tangibly) measure many things they're commenting on. Yet they still try to write their reviews like they were able to and it turned out they were totally off the mark on things.

With cars, it's the same way. Get away from their years of data on reliability and they have problems. Always found their reliability ratings to be spot on, their opinions, however, were (many times) way off.

 

[GadgetRick]

I'll second that. Consumer Reports stinks.

Everything they review is rated mainly by price. The magazines will have catchy headlines like "what is the best camera," yet no mention of the high-end Nikons and Canons, Leica or Hasselblad because they're ridiculously expensive. They don't tell people what the "best" is. Only "what is the best value."

Value is probably the most important criteria for the majority of people. But for people who care about quality over price, it is not a good magazine.

I gave up on Consumer Reports because they don't include Wusthof in their reviews of kitchen knives, they don't include Wolf in their reviews of cooktops, they don't include La Pavoni in their reviews of espresso makers, etc. The really good stuff simply doesn't make the cut.

EDIT -- PS, Ann-Marie, I would keep using the camera for as long as possible. Unless you're shooting a "mission critical" event like a wedding. That's the time to replace the camera (and do so early enough to get used to the new camera). I try to run gadgets into the ground before I dispose of them.

Exactly, this is another reason I don't like reading CR for things like this. Price is not my first criteria I look at for buying something.

 

[Kal]

If I'm spending more than a few bucks on toys, I do enough meaningful research so I'm comfortable with my decision. My goal is to maximize the quality vs price. For cameras, there are some very good product review websites (e.g. www.dpreview.com) which provide information to satisfy a wide range of user capabilities. Then if you compare that level of review, the Consumer Reports review is pretty much a waste of time.

In a recent CR review for cameras, it was very clear their review was totally inadequate and what appeared to be very biased. I talked to an owner of a small camera shop and he just laughed when I mentioned CR. He said the content all depends on how much the manufacturer is "contributing" to CR's business model. For me, his comment is very telling as he sells just about every camera line available. You tell him how much you want to pay, and he'll present a range of selections then focus on quality, value and cost geared to the user's need, budget and ability. Obviously, his profit margin varies from one camera and manufacturer to another, but it doesn't appear to impact the level of information he presents.

In CR reviews for other items, I always wonder why there were obvious gaps. Is it that their target reader only shops at fine French stores like JC Penney?

Finally, I very much want to see information on "high-end" product lines as that will tell me what I'm giving up in stepping down in quality consistent with my budget goals.

 

[Makai Guy]

We subscribed to Consumer Reports for several years, a long time ago now.

Whenever I'd read Consumer Reports reviews on items in areas that I was really familiar with (cameras, stereo gear, whatever) I never agreed with their assessment of what was important. They'd make a big deal of something I considered to be fairly inconsequential yet make no mention of things that I considered to be vital. So when they used these criteria for their ratings, it made them meaningless, at least to me.

So when reading reviews of things where I really did need help, I had no faith that they were doing any better job of reviewing what was important.

We haven't subscribed to Consumer Reports in many years.

 

[ScoopKona]

CSaying they are worthless because they don't cover the elite items that are of interest to less than 0.01% of the population is a characterization that might be extreme even for Marie Antoinette..

I do not think it is snobbery to purchase items and use them for a lifetime.

Even with "disposable" items like cameras, I have only owned three in my entire life. By purchasing quality items, I spend less money than the consumer who buys the "value" that only lasts a few years.

I'm of the mind that things like tools and cookware should be considered "lifetime purchases." Consumer Reports does not help me find such items. Therefore, I think it's worthless.

That being said, I find it hard to believe that Consumer Reports is accepting bribes from manufacturers to "further their business model" in exchange for positive reviews. Besides being fraudulent, it would irreparably damage their reputation. A quick google search only turns up speculation based on their ridiculous best-buy picks. I think their picks are ridiculous because of their criteria for a "best buy," not because they're on the take.

Either way, it's not a publication I care to read. And I would not recommend it to anyone. Everything under the sun has free reviews on the web. For instance, digital SLR shoppers need only google "Ken Rockwell." And there are similar websites for every product imaginable. All free. All written by people who obviously care about the items they review.