How many shutter actuations does/did your camera have?

NSXTypeR

There was an older thread in the old forum, but not really one in the new one, so I decided to start a new one.

An additional question is, how many shutter actuations did your camera have when it died? I wonder how much data we can collect from this forum.

My D40 had 28,077 actuations when it croaked on me.

jjdarling

My D3000 has around 45,000 and shows no signs of slowing down.

28k is very low even for a D40, no? Did the shutter just quit or was it something else?

PB_PM

It's always fun to see where people are at with their cameras. Oh this is for dead cameras... should have read closer, as both of mine are still alive.

My D300 has 103,000, and the D700 has 18,000

@jjdarling The D40 was rated for 30,000 clicks IIRC. Nikon has been putting much better shutters into recent entry level bodies.

Sato

My D5100 has less then 2500 shutter actuations, And is only 1,5 years old.

Tomorrow a package will arrive containing the D600.
It's not that the D5100 isn't a great camera, Because it is, It probably can achieve more then I ever managed to get out of it.
But there are these minor little things it can't do that annoyed me. Which both the D7000 and D600 offer, But the D600 won the argument.

NSXTypeR

My D3000 has around 45,000 and shows no signs of slowing down.

28k is very low even for a D40, no? Did the shutter just quit or was it something else?

Other members mentioned that the error I got was a dead shutter. I think it's a dead shutter too because I tried using mirror lock up just to take a look at the sensor and the camera keeps telling me that that option isn't available.

It's always fun to see where people are at with their cameras.

My D300 has 103,000, and the D700 has 18,000

@jjdarling The D40 was rated for 30,000 clicks IIRC. Nikon has been putting much better shutters into recent entry level bodies.

I thought I had done only about 20,000 shots, but when I looked, 28,000 is about reasonable in my opinion.

I'm more embarrassed about my keeper rate- at 28,000 shots, I don't think I'd break a 5% keeper rate. Most of my shots are mostly tests of this and that.

Msmoto

@ NSXTypeR

Keeper rate...? 5% is great. This simply means you have learned how to edit. I think the particular venue determines the keeper rate. Sports, action, tough lighting...always lowers the keepers. Landscapes, macros, studio shots....should be a high rate.

PB_PM

Indeed, 5% is a very good keeper rate.

Even with landscapes, there are many situations where what looked great in the field, just ends up being dull.

VictorMinchev

I had a D90 which i used for about 2 years and then sold. I had ~13k actuations on it.

I recently bought a D800 (used it for about 6 months now) and have ~6.5k actuations on it.

Regarding keepres: I tend to agree with Msmoto, the keeper rate deeply depends on what you're shooting and where you're shooting...

I don't have a keeper rate, but I do have a publishing rate. But since I publish myself only after acquiring the D800 I'l try to limit the statistics up to the last 6 months.

So from 6,5k shots I have published only 173.
My flickr account:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/79841745@N03/

Out of which 19 were published in a local newspaper.
The one article publishing my pictures:
http://www.dnevnik.bg/bigpicture/2012/11/01/1937896_helouin_v_sofiia/

NSXTypeR

@ NSXTypeR

Keeper rate...? 5% is great. This simply means you have learned how to edit. I think the particular venue determines the keeper rate. Sports, action, tough lighting...always lowers the keepers. Landscapes, macros, studio shots....should be a high rate.

The keeper rate was an estimate or ballpark, not really a "real" number. But I suspect most of my shots aren't that great.

Indeed, 5% is a very good keeper rate.

Even with landscapes, there are many situations where what looked great in the field, just ends up being dull.

It's true- I took many shots when I was in HK, but right now I don't think there were many "great" shots.

I had a D90 which i used for about 2 years and then sold. I had ~13k actuations on it.

I recently bought a D800 (used it for about 6 months now) and have ~6.5k actuations on it.

Regarding keepres: I tend to agree with Msmoto, the keeper rate deeply depends on what you're shooting and where you're shooting...

I don't have a keeper rate, but I do have a publishing rate. But since I publish myself only after acquiring the D800 I'l try to limit the statistics up to the last 6 months.

So from 6,5k shots I have published only 173.
My flickr account:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/79841745@N03/

Out of which 19 were published in a local newspaper.
The one article publishing my pictures:
http://www.dnevnik.bg/bigpicture/2012/11/01/1937896_helouin_v_sofiia/

Very cool! I've never been published before as I shoot for myself.

Symphotic

This is such a digital camera question...

Msmoto

@ Symphotic

Maybe I do not understand why this is digital....other than the early film cameras had no shutter count possibility. As to keeper rates, for each photo in National Geographic...several thousand may have been taken depending on the venue. This was true when Kodachrome was used as well to my knowledge.

Symphotic

@msmoto: I reckoned more in the number of rolls in the old days, rather than how many times I actuated the shutter. In fact, the very expression "actuate the shutter" sounds digital to me. I always said "release the shutter". I've got no call to be such a cranky old guy though: my keeper rate was less than 1 every other roll back then, or around 2% of my "actuations" nowadays.

PB_PM

Meh, I still say release the shutter.

Msmoto

@ Symphotic

We are possibly from the same era...if you look at this thread, you will see I was shooting F bodies in the 1960's.

http://forum.nikonrumors.com/discussion/366/what-was-your-first-camera#Item_14

And, you are absolutely correct. it was how many rolls, not shots. But you understand how old people are slow to understand sometimes )

I used to figure in how many 100 foot rolls of Plus-X I needed to have on hand. I think we could load about 19 or 20 rolls of 36 exposure back then.

So, I now understand "This is such a digital camera question..."

NSXTypeR

Meh, I still say release the shutter.

I don't say actuate either, but if it's a total count that's when I use that word.

On a side note, no one's used a DSLR long enough to have it die on them yet?

Of those who have, how many chose to have them repaired? My parents don't understand that it's not really worth repairing a D40, except perhaps for that flash sync speed.

PB_PM

A shutter repair on a camera like the D40 would cost more than the camera is worth. Bet you could find a lightly used one on eBay for less.

donaldejose

I once asked a camera repair technician if he has replaced many shutters on the D3s. He said lots of them, they usually fail around 200,000 actuations and cost about $400 to replace the shutter module. Interestingly, he seemed to think the other parts of the camera would last much longer so it would be worth it to spend $400 to replace the shutter at 200,000 actuations and keep using the camera (for another 200,000?).

spraynpray

Hey that is interesting Donald. :-?

Symphotic

... studio shots....should be a high rate.

I just did the math on a recent on-site product shoot. My keeper rate was about 10% but my "seller rate" was 0.5%. I took about 800 exposures, but many were almost identical shots, so I showed the marketing team about 80 and they went with the 4 best to go to print. (I did use some of the others for pdf only documents, though.)

Thankfully "shutter activations" are not costly. I could not imagine so many exposures on a job with film. I would have forced myself to have a higher "keeper rate" with film. Perhaps my photographic skills have degraded, or maybe I am more demanding, but I think it is more that it costs very little to try out many different product perspectives, backgrounds, product groupings and lighting moods with digital.

So the number of actuations doesn't fuss me at all. I take as many as I can now. That was not true with Kodachromes.

NSXTypeR

I once asked a camera repair technician if he has replaced many shutters on the D3s. He said lots of them, they usually fail around 200,000 actuations and cost about $400 to replace the shutter module. Interestingly, he seemed to think the other parts of the camera would last much longer so it would be worth it to spend $400 to replace the shutter at 200,000 actuations and keep using the camera (for another 200,000?).

Seems like a pretty good deal for a $5,000 camera. For a D40... not so much. I may as well just buy a refurbished camera.

Golf007sd

Current D4 shutter count: 6735

donaldejose

Two things surprised me about what the technician said;
1. The cost was not high to replace a shutter on a D3s
2. The technician had replaced many and felt the camera life was not limited by the shutter life. He would not be afraid to buy and use a D3s with 200,000 actuations. He just said to discount the price you offer for one by about $400 because that is what it will cost you when the shutter fails which should be soon.

PB_PM

Of course not, the shutter is just a small part, but think of it this way, it is a percentage of the cost of the unit. On a D3s $400 is less than 10% of the cost of a new unit, it would be silly not to replace the shutter. Lets try a different scenario though. Say you had a D3200 shutter fail. If the cost of the shutter replacement was $400 (which I doubt it is) then that would be more than 75% of the cost of the unit.

If you are using a current generation, or higher end camera, a shutter replacement is almost a no brainer.

Msmoto

I do believe one of the big differences is that for many shooting projects, digital does allow more potential images than film. SO, more clicks on the shutter. However, for many situations, at least when shooting a D4, I may only click three or four shots, i.e, in shooting people. And, I am talking to them exactly like when I shot with film. Now, the real difference is in shooting action shots, sports, vehicles, where one must be ready to go lots of FPS when all heck breaks loose, and one can do this for several seconds if needed. This will crank the shutter count up very quickly. And of course the editing is for me at least an equal time if not twice the time as for the shoot.
The big difference is maybe in the cost. Shooting color film was very expensive, maybe $0.30-0.40 per shot when all was said and done. Digital..computer, etc. I do not know, but I hope it is less.

donaldejose

I guess my comment wasn't clear. It is not $400 vs $6,000 that interest me. it is not the percentage of the cost of the body. What interested me is his opinion that if a D3s has undergone 200,000 "clicks" you replace the shutter like you would tires on your car without thinking the car is "worn out" or near the end of its life span. How many times can the shutter button be pressed before it fails? How many times can all the buttons on the back be pressed before they fail? How many clicks can the dials withstand before they fail? How long does the weather sealing seals last before they crack or shrink and fail to seal? How long can the LCD panels work before they fail? There are a lot of parts and they cannot all have an indefinite life span. To use the car analogy, we all think at some mileage (100,000 or 150,000?) we don't want to keep putting money into more repairs because we expect so many other parts will soon fail also and it becomes more costly to pay for constant repairs than to buy a new car. I had thought 200,000 clicks would be about that point on a D3s but the technician said no, just replace the shutter and it will keep working for a long time yet. Seriously, have all those other parts been designed with a longer life expectancy? I thought a good test of longevity would be the practical experience of very heavy professional users who are using the D3s for pro sports shooting or photojournalism. The technician says they just replace the shutter and keep using the same body. In fact, he said he has seen some D3s bodies on which he has replaced the shutter a second time. I had not thought the camera was that durable. Then again maybe the technician's opinions were influenced by his own desire to see repair work coming into his shop.

If you look at this graph apparently some D3 shutters have gone millions of clicks. I presume all the other parts of the camera are good for over a million clicks? But that seems high. Of course, the metal frame doesn't wear out but there must be some life expectancy on all moving or working parts. Even SD cards have a read write life expectancy.

http://www.olegkikin.com/shutterlife/nikon_d3.htm

The pro D3, D3x, D3s, and D4 may be far more robust than I had thought. I have read some claims of people getting over a million clicks. Of course, not proven in any way, just internet postings.

Symphotic

... . Shooting color film was very expensive, maybe $0.30-0.40 per shot when all was said and done. Digital..computer, etc. I do not know, but I hope it is less.

This is the real beauty of digital. Lenses and bodies are about the same cost for digital and film. But the first time I took my rolls of film to be developed and printed, the bill was $30.00 for all the film I took in that day. There were probably only about 5 or 6 rolls, but this was the equivalent of $120 today, accounting for inflation. Computers are cheap, software is cheap, and "actuations" are cheap. Also, since I had to wind the film after each shot, I couldn't get the rapid fire multiple exposures I get now, which I find very useful, and very cheap.

I don't count my actuations because they are in no way a significant cost item in either my business photography or in snapshots of friends and family.

I've got a job tomorrow requiring both video and stills. I expect to make several hundred actuations. Maybe I'll use 3 or 4 images in my final product, unless we find something really interesting. (We are documenting a crime scene investigation.)