A camera is a tool to be used, 99.9% of all people shooting sports, moving wildlife etc are going to shoot at well over 3fps. If you're an amateur you're not going to be wracking up 500-1000 images/day. If you're a pro you factor in wear and tear into your business costs.
To not use your camera through fear of wear and tear is crazy imo, it's like buying a car and not driving it because you don't want to wear your tyres.
I hope you are not advocating for preferentially using low end models that lack usable electronic shutter for action photography. The train has definitely left the station here, and people in the game are willing to pay over £6k for a body to get the best newest technology.
IMHO even if you are an amateur who likes to go out every day, it is absolutely not unreasonably to come back with at least 500 on the card. 20fps gets it done in just 25s of combined shooting so go figure. And 20 is now considered low rate, we see 30, 40 and more. I shot over a 1000 shots in e-shutter with macro lens every time I went out in the garden during the summer. I only looked at maybe 50 of them randomly and kept around 10. So there you have it - a perfectly average real life high fps shooting scenario. My shutter count was = 0 here. The settings were quite marginal in wind high, so single shot was really not a great option, and no I don't shoot at ISO-ridiculous to limit my print options and require extra processing. My camera would be well on the way to the bin if I used mechanical shutter like this every day and for what exactly? I will never raise any £ from the said images.
If you are pro then you are not a charity for some chinese factories and resellers. You work to maximise profit, reduce expense as far as it is reasonable while delivering up to and exceeding client expectations. This is business, simple as that.
Re cars, strangely enough you will find just that in many cases. People are buying brand new £70k car, driving as little as possible at 19mph to a shop and back because something will wear out, their insurance will be happier, tyres can actually go on them in just 5k miles as the client with X7 told me (at £500 per corner), and yeah those emissions. Crazy, I know...
I'd rather experience blackout than miss a shot. I never found it that distracting, the blackout shooting a low shutter speed was a bit more of a nuisance.
Well I found it extremely distracting causing me to miss a shot after shot. I'd rather deal with rolling shutter to be absolutely crystal clear, and only because I haven't moved on to stacked sensor yet.
If you have to use it one-off for subject going across the frame in the worst case scenario for maximum rolling shutter, fine use the mechanic. I get that. I never saw an issue where subject is going mostly straight ahead or at lower speeds. And that's all near enough gone with stacked sensors.
Besides no shutter = less camera shake.
Plenty of people using DSLRs still without an issue, plenty of people using mirrorless without blackout free shooting having no issues either. Blackout free shooting with mimimal lag makes life easier, but it's not as though it's impossible without these things.
I never had the pleasure (nor need) of shooting 1DX at high fps in any real life scenario so can't really comment on that. My Dslrs are set to precisely 3fps, I never need more for what they are used, typically locked on tripod. It obviously has a blackout, but absolutely no lag, so it has to be clearly better than any old style non-stacked mirrorless. Tracking is not as great on these dslrs in comparison, but yeah it still gets you there most of the time. I am not sure what exactly is the point of this nostalgia. Why did you all move away from perfectly fine Canon / Nikon setup then at a very painful expense?!
Next we will discuss how pre-focusing and film motor drive was just fine to get you published in a high end magazine.
)
www.google.com
