How much longer does my 6D have?

ShadowHillsPhoto wrote in post #18481874
Those numbers are from April 2016, you might want to look at OP's update right above your post, they are closing in on 500k now!

Whodathought someone would revive this discussion 1.5 years after it started?!

500000 shots in 61 months, just under 8200 per month. 1895 per day, 189 per hour, three shots per minute with no bathroom breaks all day

It's turning into a challenge now to see how long she will last.

My shutter count is a little inflated in the sense that I shoot brackets of 3-7. I'm regularly working 80-90 hour weeks. , I shoot 6 days straight, sometimes Sundays too if they beg. This number also doesn't account for all the video work.....I put the first click on this body. I'll never forget the story of how I got it, and how the manager really screwed up on a price match and ended up selling it to me new for around $1000.....

Thanks for doing the math, 1900 seems higher than what I would have guessed. I feel like I hover around 1500, but I definitely can break 3000 on long summer days.

I don't know, if it officially makes it to 500,000 and if you could get in touch with the right PR person at Canon it's one of those things where you might get them to trade you a new camera (6D2 or maybe something even better?) in return for your story and the 6D with the half-million shutter. No guarantee but it might be worth exploring, there's advertising potential there they might want to take advantage of, seems like there's a similar story every few years when someone puts 500,000 or a million miles on a vehicle.

Wilt wrote in post #18481884
500000 shots in 61 months, just under 8200 per month. 1895 per day, 189 per hour, three shots per minute with no bathroom breaks all day

I don't understand the math here. . If someone shot 1895 images per day, at the end of one month they would have 56,850 shots, not 8200.

.

Persian-Rice wrote in post #17967779
If I'm in the position that this camera fails while being used, that means that I'll be on a job site with a dead backup after 2 other bodies has failed. Money is not an issue, but I'm not gonna dump it if it's got more to give as a third stringer.

If this is only a backup to a backup, then how do you end up using it so much? Do your #1 and #2 bodies fail time after time after time, so that you are constantly forced to use your third string camera?

I shoot a heck of a lot, but my backup body has only been used once since late 2013, and my 2nd backup hasn't been used at all since upgrading in the spring of 2013. If you've put a half million clicks on your third string camera, then you must have the worst luck ever in the history of mankind when it comes to failures of your main camera and your first backup.

.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18481963
If this is only a backup to a backup, then how do you end up using it so much? Do your #1 and #2 bodies fail time after time after time, so that you are constantly forced to use your third string camera?

I shoot a heck of a lot, but my backup body has only been used once since late 2013, and my 2nd backup hasn't been used at all since upgrading in the spring of 2013. If you've put a half million clicks on your third string camera, then you must have the worst luck ever in the history of mankind when it comes to failures of your main camera and your first backup.

.

It's a long story, but that became my main photo body not long after I posted this. I figured, why not?

The numbers are definitely off though, I shoot in the thousands today, but I wasn't shooting like that when I first got it.

Tom, I don't doubt that I blew simple conversion arithmetic, somewhere. Put simply, it is a h3ll of a lot of shots!

The exercise is left to the student, to find the error(s)!

Wilt wrote in post #18481988
Tom, I don't doubt that I blew simple conversion arithmetic, somewhere. Put simply, it is a h3ll of a lot of shots!

The exercise is left to the student, to find the error(s)!

Whatever the error is, it looks like you made the same miscalculation a few hours ago when you posted this:

Wilt wrote in post #18481859
6D was launched in Sept 2012, so 61 months since launch. Assuming you were an early adopter, that is 4032 per month, or about 930 per day, or 93 per hour assuming 10 shooting hours per day. And then you need to factor loss of shooting time due to bathroom breaks. IMHO that is a lot of shooting!

.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18481990
Whatever the error is, it looks like you made the same miscalculation a few hours ago when you posted this:

.

Photography entails getting CONSISTENT results!

I used a spreadsheet to recalculate the numbers, rather than a calculator. I computed number of months since product launch into years, then number of years * 52 weeks per year, then used 6 working days per week, and 10 hour days per year.

246000 shots in 55 months = 1032 shots/wk, 172 shots/day, 17 shots/hour, 0.28 shots/min

500000 shots in 61 months = 1891 shots/wk, 315 shots/day, 31 shots/hour, 0.52 shots/min

4032/month is actually only 139/day, 14/hour. When i shot for a rugby/football/cricket club i would run about 1500 clicks over a week/end with seniors, juniors, ladies and minis, so this is entirely likely.

It really depends on how one uses their camera, I suppose and perhaps the genre. Each Spring, we visit several bird rookeries. I usually come home with around 1500 photos, give or take. The reason? I shoot in AI Servo and when I'm trying to catch birds in flight, I resort to short bursts at 10 frames a second. It doesn't take long to rack up the numbers. We try to get to a bird rookery once a week when they are active. I can't imagine going through all those photographs if I were shooting 6 days a week.

I realize a 6D is a different animal (camera) than my 1D IV, but I take those 1500 photos in around 3 to 4 hours because we're pretty tired at that point.

Shooting 1500 shots in a SINGLE day is not all that hard to do. Doing so, day after day after day for over 5 years, is a different matter.
The time to post process 1500 shots every day is an onerous way to spend time, in addition to the time pressing the shutter button, especially if one shoots RAW in order to extract the most quality and detail out of each shot.

No one said it was fun, we just it was doable

bildeb0rg wrote in post #18482090
No one said it was fun, we just it was doable

After spending the good part of a day shooting 1500 photos, spending merely another 15 seconds to initially look at, decide whether or not to keep, and to adjust each kept photo adds another 6+ hours to the day