Disadvantages of Silent shooting, and shutter lifespan in A6300?

[sonee]

1. Are there any disadvantages to silent shooting in the a6300, other than lower FPS? (I'm shooting RAW)

2. Does silent shooting increase the shutter count?

3. What is the shutter lifespan for a6300, and where is the most reliable place to check it?

4. Is it possible to shoot video using the Playmemories app connected to a6300? When I used the app, it seems to only have shooting functions.

 

[yali]

1. Yes: increased rolling shutter, which might get visible in pictures with motion. Also with some LED lighting you will have bright/dark stripes in the image. (at least that's how it is on my A7RII)

2. Yes, to infinity. Silent shooting doesn't use ANY mechanical parts so nothing can wear out...

3 / 4 i dont know...

[sonee]

2. Yes to infinity >>> means that the shutter count will still be recorded as +1? 

 

I'm concerned because I'm a heavy user and might sell the body in the future. Will try to minimize wear and tear as much as possible and prevent anal buyers from complaining about SC.

[VTC]

I'm concerned because I'm a heavy user and might sell the body in the future. Will try to minimize wear and tear as much as possible and prevent anal buyers from complaining about SC.

 

You a photographer or a 2nd hand resale shop? I've never understood this thinking. What a goofy idea to cramp your photographic style to appease some theoretical buyer who knows how many years in the future. By your logic I'd take no pics at all or forgo wearing a seatbelt and risk death just so some future clown could have a pristine camera or driving experience. You bought it. Damn it, USE IT. I never buy anything worrying about the 2nd hand market. I use things to their potential because it will eventually get lost, stolen, break, or get supplanted by better technology.

[Al Pha]

You a photographer or a 2nd hand resale shop? I've never understood this thinking. What a goofy idea to cramp your photographic style to appease some theoretical buyer who knows how many years in the future. By your logic I'd take no pics at all or forgo wearing a seatbelt and risk death just so some future clown could have a pristine camera or driving experience. You bought it. Damn it, USE IT. I never buy anything worrying about the 2nd hand market. I use things to their potential because it will eventually get lost, stolen, break, or get supplanted by better technology.

 

Hear, hear! My 1.5-year-old A6000 has 40,000+ shutter actuations! When I eventually get the A6300 (as backup to my A7ii) I will probably just give the A6000 away to a student!

[sonee]

Would appreciate if you could answer those questions directly and constructively, else there is no need for sarcasm.

[Austerror]

How does one read the shutter count?

 

On my Nex-7 and A99 its not a simple task.  A quick search resulted in having to use a 3rd party tool, which may or may not be accurate.

 

The thing that will have a larger effect on your resale price is the outward condition of your camera and lenses.  If you are a 'heavy' user and your equipment takes a beating, then your resale price will be less, regardless of shutter condition.

 

Sony have never really told people exactly how many actuations their shutter are good for. I have read the A6000 is rated at 'a lot'.  So my Nex-7 manual says that using electronic front curtain reduces the number of actuations by 1. Therefore if both shutter jobs are being handed over to the sensor, then it would be logical to assume that the counter would not be increased, since it does not moved under silent shooting modes.

 

It is, however, a new technology and has its advantages and problems.  In a few years we may not need shutters at all, but we are not there yet.

 

Also those posts above were not sarcasm.

[sonee]

the truth is I've used my old Canon FF for a couple of years, clicked over 90k shots but outward looks like brand new. buyers still whine about the fact that it has "gotten a lot of mileage" despite being taken good care of. eventually, i lost around $300 in resale value because of shutter count, and not because of the appearance of the body.

[carusoswi]

Would appreciate if you could answer those questions directly and constructively, else there is no need for sarcasm.

 

Al Pha has a point even if he did express it somewhat forcefully.  It's your camera, and, totally, your call as to whether you use it to its full potential as a photographic tool, or sacrifice some of its photo potential to minimize wear and tear.  But, in my experience, saving electronics can backfire, and you may forgo enjoyment of the units potential only to have something else fail while you care for the shutter.  Over the years, I've had some of Sony's best camcorders, paid a lot of money for a couple.  They were great units, and I took great care of them.  Eventually, they failed, certainly not due to over use.  Electronic components simply failed as these units sat in their case.  If they worked like new today, they still would be worth little, as technological development has past them by.

 

Just something to consider.  I love my film cameras (two Minolta 9's and a 9000), and all work as new.  I suppose shutters on those will fail someday, but, given that (I hate to admit it) most of my shooting is digital these days, I doubt I'll ever wear them out.  Still, they are not worth much these days.  Technology has moved on.

 

Still, it's your equipment and your call as to how you want to use/not use it.

 

Happy shooting, happy owning, perhaps happy selling as well.

 

Caruso 

[tinplater]

One has to accept the fact that buyers of used gear are looking for a bargain but willing to pay more for exceptional condition equipment.  If you are honest in your description, have good images to show condition, you can expect to achieve a fair value for your camera on Ebay for example.  In any event the range of realized price is only going to be a matter, I would guess, of a hundred dollars or so...I wouldn't worry about it at all, just take the best care you can of all your stuff.

[michelb]

the truth is I've used my old Canon FF for a couple of years, clicked over 90k shots but outward looks like brand new. buyers still whine about the fact that it has "gotten a lot of mileage" despite being taken good care of. eventually, i lost around $300 in resale value because of shutter count, and not because of the appearance of the body.

 

 

If you had taken only 30K with your Canon and got the extra 300$, that means the extra 60K pictures you took cost you 1/2 cent each. If you are a Pro, this is a minimal cost considering what the camera did for you and the revenue it generated. If you are an amateur, what's the purpose of taking so many and worry about resale value?

 

Let's go back 20 years, it would have cost you the increased shutter count of 300$ plus film and processing

60K pictures using 36 exposure film means 1667 canisters of film at 5$ plus 10$ for film processing = 25000$

 

And you are complaining about 300$ ?

 

I am more afraid of electronic component oxydation/corrosion that i can't see rather than actual shutter count. A camera that has taken so many pictures is more likely to have been used in all sorts of environment that may cause other invisible wear and tear. That is probably why some use shutter count as an indication of overall wear.

 

In today's market environment, everything is phased out/ out of fashion / discontinued and loses value more on age (read 2-3 years) than just on shutter count.

 

Use you car for an extra 60000 miles and compare what it will cost you in depreciation