Posted on 06/11/2018 7:13:04 PM PDT by Leo Carpathian
I have a Nikon 1 that is rated at 60 fps at full resolution. It can shoot 400/1200 fps at lesser resolution.
For the same reason during White House briefings there is a room full of reporters, they work for different organizations. The photogs are pool and independent working for multiple news agencys both foreign and domestic, hence, lots of cameras.
They’re not worried about the video guys, they are doing their job, stills. A still is catching a brief moment in time, they want the best one. They get paid for their pictures, I’m guessing you probably don’t get paid for drinking.
Of course it exists in a (some) digital camera(s). It’s the shutter in the mirror box.
You are talking video, and on a camera like that the pixel pitch is “ itty-bitty”, not what pros are going to use for various reasons.
My thoughts also, how many photos/photographers do we really need in this day and age. Decades ago the various newspapers really did need their own photographer to take pictures rush back to the office get them developed in time for the next edition of the newspaper. Now one picture can be shared almost instantly with the whole world. There is no need for 20 photographers taking the same picture of someone at some congressional hearing.
Not since I got out of the Navy 52 years ago.
Those shutter bugs are in the same category as Paparazzi. The only way they get paid any real money is if they catch a goofy expression on the President.
bump
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.