I'm only a film photographer but have lots of experience with movements. Outside of studio product shot or direct architectural assignments (i.e. shoot the building like a product shot) it always struck me that there were few interesting shots that cried out for swings or tilts at all. Because unless you were photographing completely bland horizon line landscapes with nothing but pebbles in the foreground, any tilt would adversely affect focus of any near foreground object not in the plane. Likewise for swings if you dare show any foreground on the opposite side of the image.
If you look at a student's work with tilt and see a crisp sharp foreground and a nice sharp horizon... look up at the blurry clouds in the sky! hahaha No free lunch!
What is invaluable is rise/fall and shift vertical and horizontal movements. No drawbacks until the lens vignettes or softens.
Later on in my career, free from assignments or impressing gullible art directors, I used a simplified camera with limited movements and never missed a beat.
If you read between the lines in Ansel Adams, "The Camera" you can tell that he set out to find subjects (at great pain) to use as camera demonstration examples, not art pieces. I bet if he were left to his own devices he probably rarely used any tilt or swing with his landscapes. (They didn't call themselves the f/64 Group for nothing.)
The other point, in case you're new, is that the wider the lens, the more you range you'll need of shift and rise/fall. With a longer lens a little smidge goes a long way (or just cheat).