How many shots per year does a typical person use his/her digital camera?

Discussion in 'UK Photography' started by aniramca, May 13, 2007.

  1. aniramca

    aniramca Guest

    My small 3 MP Panasonic/Lumix digital camera is now 4 years old. I was
    surprised to know that I have clicked over 50,000 photos with it. My
    newer Samsung digimax i5 is only 5 months old, and I already used it
    over 3000 shots. I am not a commercial or professional, and not even
    an enthusiast photographer. Despite of a lot opinions about the
    Samsung camera as being a mediocre quality, I appear to grow to like
    it with time. It is nice and ultra compact, and I carry it with me in
    my pocket all the time. It is slow, but photo quality is not too bad.

    My questions are as follows:
    - How often are other people, who bought a digital camera at a
    supermarket or photo store uses his/her cameras?
    - How do camera manufacturers design their cameras to last? How many
    shots would the industry be considered to be acceptable, without
    loosing their quality?
    - If as an amateur, I shot that many pictures, what about professional
    photographers? How many shots did they typically take monthly or
    - What part of a digital camera which likely to go haywire first?
    autofocusing system, metering system, built-in flash, mechanical
    components (buttons, springs, etc)?

    Just curious and would like to hear feedback from other users.
    aniramca, May 13, 2007
    1. Advertisements

  2. aniramca

    The Reid Guest

    I buy my DSLR cameras from camera shops, landscape is my hobby after
    hill walking, I take under 500 shots a year, although there will be
    some instantly deleted ones that the exposure was all wrong.
    The Reid, May 13, 2007
    1. Advertisements

  3. aniramca

    ben brugman Guest

    I bought My camera in a photo store, make about 4000 pictures a year.
    Sometimes I make a lot of pictures to get a good one. At a sporting game
    of my daugther I made almost 300 pictures, but I captured 5 (sequence)
    when she was scoring, these pictures have value to me most of the
    other pictures are redundant.
    For DSLR, there is a maximum on how often the mirror can go up
    and down. (50000 to 100000 seems to be resonable). For point and
    shoots, it's often not the number of pictures which determine the lifetime,
    but the use of the camera, how is it kept, stored transported and used.

    I Head of a professional that het used to shoot conservatively when still
    using film. For a soccer match het shot 'only' about 10-12 roles of film
    (360-430 pictures). Now he said that he wasn't limited to shoot and
    kept on shooting. (No numbers given but several times 360 was
    was suggested).
    Depends a lot on the treatment.
    Dust and dirt can do a lot of harm to a camera. (Slowly but certainly).
    Moisture can do a lot of harm to a camera. (Often not noticed till the
    camera stops working).
    Batteries do weare out after several years, sometimes that's time to
    upgrade to a new camera as wel.

    Although some wear and tear does happen when taking a picture,
    this probably is less than the wear and tear of carrying the camera
    Also connections do not last forever, the usb-connection of the
    camera, the card connection of the camera.

    Buttons and dials can become disfunctional.

    The displayscreen can become broke or difficult to see.
    ben brugman, May 13, 2007
  4. aniramca

    Mike Russell Guest

    I bought mine online, but I'd guess there are a mixture of people. Some
    people, like my mom, have changed their habits only slightly in this new era
    of free film. I'm guessing a typical number is a dozen or so per month for
    these folks. Again guessing, for most computer savvy users, who can get
    their images from the camera to disk unassisted, a few hundred per month.
    In the 10's of thousands.
    I'n not a professional. Personally I do about 500 to a 1000 per month,
    slightly more when I'm travelling.
    Rechargeable batteries and hot pixels aside, any moving parts are more
    likely to fail than electronic components. This includes lens parts,
    followed by non-membrane buttons, for example rotating controls. On DSLR's
    the shutter is the achilles heel, with 50,000 being a typical number. It's
    not unusual for a pro to have the shutter replaced several times on a
    workhorse camera.
    Mike Russell, May 13, 2007
  5. I seem to average about 1000 shots per month, and use the camera mainly at
    weekends so about 200 shots per trip i guess.
    I have heard about 50k shots for a consumer camera and 150k shots for a pro
    A pro shooting action shots will likely use multiple shots at up to 8 shots
    per second so this can stack up quickly!
    The shutter is what takes the strain!

    cheers adrian
    Adrian Boliston, May 13, 2007
  6. aniramca

    Garry Knight Guest

    I think I half qualify to answer this: though I bought my Canon S3is from an
    eBay stores trader (at a great price, £200), I blagged my previous camera,
    a Casio EX-Z700 compact, for £150 from a shop in Tottenham Court Road when
    Jessop's stock ran out. Then I went back with a friend, and blagged another
    one for the same price for her. :)

    I got the Canon 14 days ago and I've taken 647 shots, which would add up to
    nearly 17,000 per year if I kept it up at this rate. I expect I'll slow
    down a bit when the novelty of the S3 wears off. (Other S3 owners will be
    smirking at this...)

    The Casio is up to 2,218 in about 3 months, so I was only using it at half
    the rate of the Canon. It's a great little camera and it gives bright,
    punchy shots, but it's not as versatile.

    Maybe "enthusiastic amateur" would best describe my photography. While I
    specifically go out on "shoots", I've still got lots to learn.

    Garry Knight
    (No relation to the well-known photographer of the same name :)
    Garry Knight, May 13, 2007
  7. aniramca

    Ron Hunter Guest

    It varies, but I take 600-700 shots/year. MUCH more than I took with
    film due to the cost factor.
    A lot more than I will ever need to worry about.
    It would depend on the professional's market segment. A busy wedding
    photographer might take thousands of shots a month, while a news
    photographer in a small town might take less than I do.
    The photographer. Grin.
    Seriously, the mechanical aspects, such as battery door, followed by the
    zoom mechanism, from reports in this newsgroup.
    Ron Hunter, May 14, 2007
  8. I seem to be shooting about 3500 a year (since 2000 when I went
    digital). It definitely varies; I tend to shoot big clumps, at events
    or on trips or whatever. This is definitely more than I was shooting on
    film in the years before that, and price is probably some of the reason
    for me as well -- though especially my two DSLRs have pushed the expense
    up; not as far as film for this many pictures would have been, though.
    The shutter activations spec is the lifespan design limit on most DSLRs.
    The pro models are up in the 100,000+ range. Consumer models are
    often around 50,000. These are design numbers, not all cameras achieve
    them, and they don't appear to be programmed to stop working when the
    count reaches those numbers.
    A wedding photo team, at the top end, apparently shoots over 10,000
    photos for one wedding (maybe 5 days of coverage). That's multiple
    people and multiple camera bodies, and most weddings don't go for that
    level of coverage (and aren't that big an event to begin with).
    Score one for you :). That piece of most cameras is crazy as a loon.
    David Dyer-Bennet, May 14, 2007
  9. aniramca

    BaumBadier Guest

    I average about 65,000 in the last 3 years. 90% of them keepers. A good thing I
    didn't throw money into owning a DSLR. My Sony F717 has been from blizzard
    condition mountain-top to deep in some remote swamps for weeks photographing the
    rarest orchids on earth. It's still in fine shape and going strong. Not once did
    I have a problem with it and it's been through hell and back with me.

    Short Shutter-Life-Span -- I'll chalk this up as another reason to never buy a
    DSLR (there's so many reasons now).
    BaumBadier, May 15, 2007
  10. aniramca

    ASAAR Guest

    How many of those do you think would be outdoor shots vs. indoor
    shots using flash?
    ASAAR, May 15, 2007
  11. aniramca

    Ron Hunter Guest

    About equal. I take mostly indoor shots at family gatherings, balanced
    by outdoor shots while on vacations. I plan to visit Palo Duro canyon
    at the end of this month, and will probably take a few hundred shots
    there, to balance the shots I will take this week at a family gathering
    for a nephew's graduation.
    You can check my 'homepage' to see how that works out.
    Search for rphunter42.
    Ron Hunter, May 15, 2007
  12. aniramca

    C Anon Guest

    6000 + so far this year. Getting paid to do it is a huge incentive.
    C Anon, May 15, 2007
  13. aniramca

    Grey Guest

    I have taken about 5,500 pictures in the two years I had my camera. It's an
    old Minolta F200, takes amazing pics, but i'm starting to look to upgrade to
    a Canon EOS 400D.
    I like taking picutres, tweaking them in Photoshop and putting together
    albums and slideshows.
    Big plus with Digi cameras is take as many pics as my mem
    card/battery/finger can stand and not cost a bean to develop (I tend not to
    print my pictures) and my 2GB card means I can take over 1,000 (not sure
    exact number) at a time and have yet to fill a card in one go.

    Worst thing is batteries - the thing chews them up and spits them out. I can
    never go anywhere without my charger being too far away - even though I have
    four sets.
    I also seem to need my tripod all the time, as it has a slow shutter speed
    but as always, I keep forgetting it and have to improvise.

    A minus with my camera is the inability to use filters and gradients. The
    microscopic screen doesn't help matters either.

    Grey, May 15, 2007
  14. Some of these frame counts are pretty astounding. So I looked up
    what I have been doing (stimates from images on disk, and rolls of film
    bought per year):

    1994 350-700, 10-20 rolls of film + 100-200 sheets of 4x5 film
    1995 350-700, 10-20 rolls of film + 100-200 sheets of 4x5 film
    1996 350-700, 10-20 rolls of film + 100-200 sheets of 4x5 film
    1997 ~1450, ~40 rolls of film + 100-200 sheets of 4x5 film
    1998 350-700, 10-20 rolls of film + 100-200 sheets of 4x5 film
    1999 1600 (film, digital transition) + 100-200 sheets of 4x5 film
    2000 6000 (film, digital transition) + 100-200 sheets of 4x5 film
    2001 16600 (mostly digital) + 100-200 sheets of 4x5, 8x10 film
    2002 10000 digital + 100-200 sheets of 4x5, 8x10 film
    2003 41000 digital + 100-200 sheets of 4x5, 8x10 film
    2004 44000 digital + 100-200 sheets of 4x5 film
    2005 18400 digital + ~50 sheets of 4x5 film
    2006 9500 digital + few sheets of 4x5 (transition to digital mosaics)
    2007 13000 digital (Jan-Apr)

    But while the numbers, like 41,000 and 44,000 seem like a lot, there are reasons
    for the spike: I was doing a science experiment where I was taking an exposure
    every minute for days at a time. Second, I do astrophotos, and many
    long exposures (1 to 5 minutes each) are added together to produce a single
    final image. Plus one needs to do a similar number of dark frames,
    so 80 to 200 frames may go into a single final image. Another explanation
    for the high frame counts in 2006 is digital mosaics: I take from several
    to ~80 images for a single final image mosaic.

    In the early 1990s, when I was shooting 10 to 20 rolls of film per year,
    I couldn't imagine shooting thousands in a day like you hear some pros do.
    Then I got some nice telephotos (e.g. 500 f/4 L IS) and started doing
    a lot of wildlife photography. Then I began to understand why one
    burns through so many frames when capturing action.

    So looking at my style, I don't think I produce any more or less landscape
    images now than I did a dozen years ago with film, I just take more digital
    frames to make those images. But digital sure saved a lot of money
    on film when I started doing more wildlife photography. With
    wildlife, I find I get about 6 to 8 percent very nice
    images (up from 1% when I first started). In my recent Africa trip,
    I had something like 90% percent in sharp focus and decent
    composition, up from much less than 50% in the early days of digital
    (D60 and 10D cameras were pretty slow to focus).

    So, I have to ask, for those who are shooting tens of thousands of frames
    per year, what do you do with all those images?

    Photos, digital info at:
    Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark), May 16, 2007
  15. aniramca

    BaumBadier Guest

    I agree about saving money. I switched to digital only because I was headed out
    on some lengthy year-long wilderness treks. Where keeping, hauling, and storing
    that much film would have been impossible. (Can you imagine hauling enough film
    for 30,000 shots?) Now I just charge up my camera with some compact folding
    solar-panels, takes about 2 hours per camera. Or I can just plug one in while
    I'm hiking and use the other camera.

    In just the first few months the digital camera paid for itself when I add up
    how much that film would have cost to purchase & process. My cameras have paid
    for themselves many times over since then.

    What do I do with them? I archive them to both CD and DVD. Catalog them with a
    good thumbnailer cataloging utility. Since I have no desire for fame nor fortune
    I just go back through them now and then if I want to print one up for a gift or
    to use for a web page for myself to show temporarily to someone (pages which are
    also private).

    Everyone that's seen my photography wonders why I don't sell coffee-table books
    or enter them in galleries or contact Nat. Geo. or something like that. Society
    as a whole would have to prove to me that they deserve to see them. I know now
    that that's never going to happen. I used to sell my photography long long ago.
    But when I saw what kinds of undeserving useless cretins were able to enjoy my
    photography just by handing me their ill-gotten money I decided the best thing
    to do was take all of it off the market and never reveal anything new to the
    general public ever again. Instructions in my will to destroy them all, if I
    don't do it myself first.
    BaumBadier, May 16, 2007
  16. aniramca

    ASAAR Guest

    Don't wait. It would be best to destroy them all right now.
    They're already in the hands of an undeserving, useless cretin! If
    you have any offspring, one wonders if you've taken similar steps to
    keep them from the undeserving society you so abhor.
    ASAAR, May 16, 2007
  17. aniramca

    BaumBadier Guest

    See? They provide ready proof of exactly why they will be destroyed and why I am
    100% correct in my values and reasoning. Humans never change their
    contemptibility, and they will never deserve something better in life, at least
    not from me!
    BaumBadier, May 16, 2007
  18. aniramca

    Ron Hunter Guest

    With an attitude like that, I suspect you have few people you show the
    pictures to. Sad. Hiding your light under a bushel will give you no
    pleasure in the end.
    Ron Hunter, May 22, 2007
  19. aniramca

    Ron Hunter Guest

    You are attributing to others your own attitudes, and values. Perhaps a
    long stay in front of a mirror would be beneficial. If you don't love
    yourself, you can't love others, and vice-versa.
    Ron Hunter, May 22, 2007
  20. aniramca

    Charlie Self Guest

    Holy Moses! You respond with un-asked for nasty comments about
    humanity and are surprised when you get that in return, taking it as
    an example of proving your statement?

    Sheest. I sell my photos. Some who buy them are probably undeserving,
    but for the most part, my customers, and other people I meet, do not
    fall into your rationale about the human race.

    Sure, there are plenty of people who give me a royal pain in the
    sitzspot, but there are many more who are enjoyable to be around, to
    talk to, who actually can teach even an old fart a bit about life and
    living it.

    You might try locating someone like that. They ARE out there.
    Charlie Self, May 22, 2007
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.