> Austin went just a bit over the edge with that 1000
> hour MTBF figure.
I don't know quite what you meant by that comment. It comes across that you
believe I am somehow making up the 1000 hour number I cited? Why on earth
would I do that?
Here is the product spec I got that information from:
The sheet says that 1000 Hrs. is what they GUARANTEE for "Operating Life"
given the test conditions they state. That's what any designer is going to
design it to unless they do their own MTBF tests.
There is no doubt that there are LEDs available that (according to the
manufacturers) have far longer MTBF, but since no one here knows what LEDs
Nikon used, we don't know what the MTBF for the LEDs Nikon used is. You can
cite all the specs you want, but unless you cite the spec for that LED Nikon
used you really don't know.
Do you know that the MTBF numbers you cited, were for a similar type of LED
that would be used by the Nikon?
> I suppose if you figure in hard mechanical
> shock (like in Austin's Land Rover) the
> numbers might go down a bit. Time to fix
> the potholes in your driveway, Austin,
> or get new shock absorbers for that beast.
It's a Range Rover, the shocks are fine (relatively new gas Bilsteins) and
my driveway doesn't have "pot holes" it does get washed out during heavy
rainstorms. Luckily, I have a tractor with a grader to take care of it when
someone complains enough.