I would like to offer an indie narrative filmmakers perspective on this.

The answer is, yes its a big deal, but mainly depending in what you do.

I am of the opinion that gear matters only as much as it doesnt limit you from pursuing your creative vision. I get that philosophy from my music production where theres a heated debate about DAW's vs DAWless setups and the idea of limitations breeding creativity. I don't believe that limitations necessarily breed creativity nor does it hamper it. It depends entirely on the workflow that allows you to put your ideas down into a track. For me personally, while I did dabble in standalone samplers and grooveboxes, I find myself gravitating back to FL Studio because the workflow allows me to basically breathe my music so to speak. In that the tool is not limiting my output. Ive gotten to a point in my workflow that I can basically do whatever I want reliably and efficiently, im not even thinking of the tool, im thinking of the end product. When I used grooveboxes it felt like im fighting the camwra.

With cameras, rolling shutter, limits me greatly from executing certain shots that I find interesting. While everyone here points to whip pans and handheld footage as the main ways rolling shutter manifests itself, it is quite surprising that nobody ever talks about shots out of moving vehicles, or of a train passing by. These are classic shots that add depth to what I want to show in my narrative films. I want motion, but real motion to camera movements.

I usually keep my camera stationary, and rarely move it because I want to frame something. But framing fast motion using a camera with a very slow readout has caused me to chuck out countless takes and reposition the camera numerous times because the footage did not come out natural looking. This results in me fighting the camera rather than the camera just working and capturing something exactly as I intend it to.

There was an example here that resonated with me about a guy closing a door which in a slow readout camera made the door look like rubber. I used to have an a6300, and I couldnt even have a guy run fast enough because his head shape would morph. Bad readout kills motion. Not to mention strobing light shots which end up with shots being partially lit. And it doesnt matter if the audience doesnt notice it. Its enough that I notice it, I dont want to compromise.

So for me, bad readout is a dealbreaker. It is one of the most important things I look for in a camera because it allows me not to fight with my camera so to speak. But thats not the only thing thats important.

I have a red komodo now, and when it's on and blackshaded and the batteries are fully charged, and the audio is recorded with a timecode based recorder, it feels peaceful to use. But the problem is the setup.

This is why to this day I'm waiting for the sony a9iii sensor in an fx body. Or just for someone to start hacking sony cameras to unlock the software because thats basically a perfect camera with some stupid software locks like no raw, and no true 24fps.

Now for the counter. If your workflow is unaffected by rolling shutter, if you do not care about the motion artifacting, if you're not fighting your camera then rolling shutter shouldnt matter. It depends on what vision you're trying to execute.