Shutter Actuations.

I have my Camera for over a Year now and have probably taken 1,000 Photographs ( Estimating ) to date which is very very low. It is amazing how many shots you take because of instant viewing, we point, shoot and exclaim, ah that's crap and delete. Old styleee photographers knew that bad shots cost Money because he/she didn't know what kind of Photo would result until post development.

Being bored the other Evening, I decided to search for a way to find the exact number of times the Shutter has actuated. There are ways of doing this via Phil's tool, Photoshop etc.

I have come to the conclusion that given that expensive Cameras, while Sexy and cool, are unnecessary unless you are a Pro or at least have a decent knowledge of Photography.

I am so amazed at how quickly it reduces in monetary value. I was googling various Websites last night and found that lots of questions were referring to Shutter actuation, in other Words, how many times the shutter has clicked.

With electronics we tend to forget that parts do wear out, my shutter, if it were to stop working, would cost in excess of 275 Euro to replace !!!! this, believe it or not is half the current value of the Camera body !! That's a lot of jingle that you could spend on the subject you want to Photograph (assuming this is the purpose of your purchase )

My advice to anyone looking at fancy DSLR Cameras is to think long and hard, compact Digital Cameras are getting better and better all the Time and will do justice to the subjects of the Photograph, it will also get you used to changing settings and adjusting Lighting etc.

Just my two Cents.

Kev.

Intresting read kev


seen nikon have a new compact digital camera nikon 1 think its called but it has inter changeable lenses


cool feature for a seemingly normal digital camera


dont know quality of pictures with it think ill have a root around and see what its like


craig

Hi Craig

I've noticed on some Compacts that there are Threads on the housing on the Lens and always wondered why they were there, I thought it might have been there in order to screw in the original Lens but these Companies would never leave exposed Threads if the original Lens was the only one intended, surely they would just make the housing flush with the Lens.

I think, at some stage, technology will catch up with the big Guns and you will have pro style Cameras in a compact form.

There is a degree of snobbery surrounding professions including Photography, Imagine the late David Bailey setting up his tiny Panasonic Lumix to photograph the Royal Family!!!! the looks he would have got from the World's Paparazzi...

I got a tip a while ago not to transfer your Photos via the Cable but via your Memory Card and a Card Reader, it cuts down on the wear of the Electronics within the Camera.

Kev.

Just checked the price of the Nikon 1 OMG ! the basic model is nearly 600 Euro !!!

Yeah kev you were saying you think, at some stage, technology will catch up with the big Guns. I think that's what the nikon one is I just seen a review where they put the entry level Nikon DSLR with the Nikon one and in a few cases it came on top..

That camera I was telling you about is the Lytro Light Field Camera






Looks good


Mark

Thanks Mark.



Kev.

With my old Nikons from the 70s and 80s, there was almost a warranty on how long that shutter would last (and it was more shots than you could reasonably take in a lifetime). The Canon F1, The Nikon F & F2 were built to not break down and be able to be bashed around quite well....in 30 odd years, not one ever failed on me.

But, I have no idea how long the shutter will last in my Nikon DSLR (it has a mechanical shutter as well as an electronic shutter). Maybe the manufacturers do see things as being 'disposable'.
I must admit that I have no problems with the DSLR since getting it 7 years ago, but for the money I'd expect it not to go wrong.
The digital cameras are more flimsy....the lower the targetted market, the flimsier.

I have recently got a Nikon compact (the P100) for an awful lot less than the DSLR....apart from the delay in shutter and lack of flash facilities, it is a great camera with great quality pictures.....and has a good quality zoom lens that would cost an arm and leg to equal on a DSLR.
Not to mention full 1080p HD movie recording for 30 minutes, time-lapse, 250 frames per second video, and lots more......the DSLR comes nowhere near those facilities.
Compared to the DSLR, it is lightweight and you don't look like a total knob being at a party with it.

Yep. Good quality is getting cheaper.

ian

@Ian.


Compared to the DSLR, it is lightweight and you don't look like a total knob being at a party with it.


I love it !

Kev.

Good thread!

One thing worth mentioning is that you actually can find really good bargains on DSLR cameras these days If you do not need the latest models etc.

I got my olympus E-45 for around 250 euro on a sale, and it's definently enough for what I'm up to. This being my first DSLR I have found that I have had to learn more about photography while with my old compact I just clicked and the camera did most of the job, which I see as a plus.

Melander

As for shots done so far, there are plenty of software (free) available with instructions on how to do it. If you decide to sell your camera, more than likely you will be asked, whats the count and if not you will look good with low count.

Your camera is counted to make from 80'000 to 150'000 shots before you need to change the mirror mechanism. This is something sport pro users reach. Don't be concerned about it too much. After all you will see heavy wear and tear on the body/lens with that kind of usage. More concerning factor probably would be signs of a drop, more than anything.
These are the statistics for Nikon D300 the one I have anyway.

Try this link: Upload your photo in order to check.

As for DSLR not needed for simple shots.. maybe not. To my opinion you will get a lot better shots inside or in lower light. bridge or point and shoot cameras are very weak in low light. When sun is bright, you can get away with crisp image even with your phone.. i would definetly see the difference anyway.
If value concerns you i would recommend purchasing used body (2-3 years), that means value will not depreciate as much, technology in DSLR's during that period was too busy adding all the in-camera processing features (seriously how can you do anything on 3" display), also live-view and fullHD video capture. All these really not needed if you buy photo camera right?
Second thing is lens... if you manage non-kit lens, value will surprise you. Lens I have Nikkor AF-S 24-70 2.8G is pretty much same for last 5 years. so is 50mm 1.4G. So make sure your money goes on good optics, rather than electronics, after all this is DSLR's big advantage, image quality which come with good optics.

Concerned about depreciation?
Don't buy new tank, get used one.
Don't buy new car, get used one.
Don't buy new camera, get used one. And check number of shots done

i was considering a dslr not so long ago but chose not to because of the prity good range of compacts available. i use the fujifilm finepix z10 and when i go to photo viewer it has a picture counter in the corner (2633 pics taken in 6 years) i assumed most camera's had this, especialy the ones that'll cost ye several hundreds, but obviously i was wrong