If the mirror on an SLR stays up or the camera is not receiving any power at all, troubleshooting often begins more or less immediately.
A few thoughts about what the cause of the error might be, plus experience and intuition, a look at the web, a quick consultation of the available technical documentation and the diagnosis is made.
Risky dismantling, no direct success control possible
As is the case with photographic equipment, it is often necessary to dismantle it more or less deeply to get to the suspected location of the problem.
No viewfinder displays light up, the camera shows no signs of life. How can troubleshooting be carried out effectively?
This is always risky, as damage may occur or reassembly may no longer be possible.
Once you have arrived and repaired the suspected error, you often cannot check whether the repair was successful; this is only possible after (partial) assembly.
If you were right, the device will work again.
If not, hours of work may have been unsuccessful.
Is systematic troubleshooting therefore better?
Would it improve the chances if you systematically diagnose the error and invest more time in this?
To get answers to these questions I am currently reading
Darrel P. Kaiser: Basic Electrical Troubleshooting for Everyone
The author:
Among other things the book contains systematic questions on how to isolate errors and mistakes that can be made.
Your own approach to effective troubleshooting
Of course, this has to be broken down into the specific repair task and adapted to the specifics of photo equipment repair (see above). This is complemented by your own experiences and knowledge, which are then added in this way.
I'll try to use all of this to create a troubleshooting approach that I plan to use as a practical guideline.
More on that later.
How do you go about troubleshooting?
Do you have recipes for success?
A few thoughts about what the cause of the error might be, plus experience and intuition, a look at the web, a quick consultation of the available technical documentation and the diagnosis is made.
Risky dismantling, no direct success control possible
As is the case with photographic equipment, it is often necessary to dismantle it more or less deeply to get to the suspected location of the problem.
No viewfinder displays light up, the camera shows no signs of life. How can troubleshooting be carried out effectively?
This is always risky, as damage may occur or reassembly may no longer be possible.
Once you have arrived and repaired the suspected error, you often cannot check whether the repair was successful; this is only possible after (partial) assembly.
If you were right, the device will work again.
If not, hours of work may have been unsuccessful.
Is systematic troubleshooting therefore better?
Would it improve the chances if you systematically diagnose the error and invest more time in this?
To get answers to these questions I am currently reading
Darrel P. Kaiser: Basic Electrical Troubleshooting for Everyone
The author:
Among other things the book contains systematic questions on how to isolate errors and mistakes that can be made.
Your own approach to effective troubleshooting
Of course, this has to be broken down into the specific repair task and adapted to the specifics of photo equipment repair (see above). This is complemented by your own experiences and knowledge, which are then added in this way.
I'll try to use all of this to create a troubleshooting approach that I plan to use as a practical guideline.
More on that later.
How do you go about troubleshooting?
Do you have recipes for success?
Last edited:
