Buy or Fix PLEASE! (Page 2): After you get your gear repaired/replaced, contact your home owner's insurance company about insuring your gear. I have over $4000.00 in camera gear, my...

nicksr1125 Loc: Mesa, AZ

After you get your gear repaired/replaced, contact your home owner's insurance company about insuring your gear. I have over $4000.00 in camera gear, my wife's jewelry, and sewing gear through USAA for about $100.00/year with a $50.00 deductible. USAA calls it Valuable Personal Property coverage. It's saved my bacon a couple of times.

Dngallagher Loc: Wilmington De.

Swede wrote:

Bummer -- BUT. I was cleaning up the basement this weekend and I came across this very lens AF-S 18-55 3.5- 5.6 G that I've had for over 5 years and used it for MAYBE 10 pictures, I'll sell it to you for $150 Cdn and I'll do the shipping costs. Can't sens a picture right now but if you're interested it's yours!

I can send the pics in a couple hrs- or sooner, it's been stored in it's original little cloth bag

Swede

Err...18-55 is hardly an 18-300 now is it?

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Dngallagher wrote:

Err...18-55 is hardly an 18-300 now is it?

Yeah, and he is a birder, not going to work out well at all.

leenso52

I really appreciate the fast response, input and suggestions today!!! Since I just posted this am! I just checked with my home insurance people and I have a $500 deductable so that's out. She said if I'd made a schedule of items the coverage might have been better.
Definitely food for thought. I believe it is the first element, not a removable filter. The fact that the element didn't shatter hopefully prevented as much of a risk of scratching the next element.Some of the glass is stuck to the thread but otherwise thread seems to be intact. You are all very right, an 18-300 lens is not a birder's best friend! But for now I've been making do. It's why I take pleasure out of shooting pics of them at my 3 feeders right in front of my kitchen sink window. I loved this lens! Because I was no longer spending my time and stress limits on constantly changing my lenses, especially when traveling.
I'm going to enclose a couple more pics. (no, must do from cell. I have so much to learn...)Also, I did as suggested and took some shots at various focal lengths. All seem ok. But I would not think it wise to use as is. I'm hopeful that one of the first responders said the $375 computerized quote was worse case scenario and will be (much!) less! I think I will go ahead and send it, maybe wait another day for any convincing reasons to do otherwise... And hope I've learned my lesson. I can be too casual with my stuff. But I read with great interest how many of you cherish your equipment and give tlc to their care. I have learned so much from this site. And am thrilled the snarkyness level is barely a dull roar compared to before, say, last Christmas!
Thanks again!

lamiaceae wrote:

It that actually the front element of the lens? I don't see a filter or filter ring. I'm so sorry. I also see a crack in the (plastic?) below the glass you are holding there.

Thus far I've never damaged any of my lenses from a drop. I once let an old metal constructed one drop about three foot on to carpeting with no effect - just the lens when I was swapping on a camera on a tripod. I do fear dropping any of my newer film or digital lenses. They seem to be made out of plastic and glass. My old ones were glass, steel, and brass, heavy and would destroy the flooring! After seeing your catastrophe I may not any longer leave my camera out on a tripod when the dogs are around! My tripods I don't worry about one would have to drive over a Gitzo to damage it.

Can you get to a place where you can buy another lens in time for your trip? You might just forgo fixing it as it is only a DX lens and not an FX model. You might be better off and making a step up by getting a higher quality (not so much due to possible brakage) Nikkor AF-S FX f/2.8 or 4 lens. Yes, more $$$. The most generally useful lens you could probably have is a Nikkor AF-S FX 24 - 120mm f/4 lens. A zoom to 300mm is barely enough for birding, really not actually. Your camera is not the most basic D3xxx model. The build of FX lenses is so much better. In any case, even for the future there is nothing wrong with refurbished or used equipment. On the other hand if that front "element" is only a front optical glass "cover" glass and the insides are not cracked or damaged the repair might be less than the estimate.

Your situation with your lens and vacation is very different than mine would be. I have rather limited funds too but in a pinch like this I have plenty of other lenses that have overlapping focal length with say a 18-300mm. I could just take another lens. Hell, if I had Nikon lenses to spare I might just give you one. But I use Pentax and any "extras" would not work as AF lenses on your camera. Seems people using MILC use all sorts of lenses with adapters. Good luck!

P.S. Actually that 18-140mm referb someone else gave you a link to might be a good idea.

It that actually the front element of the lens? I... (show quote)

leenso52

Pics from cell.

Gitchigumi Loc: Wake Forest, NC

OK... definitely not a broken filter! Your best option is what you are planning to do... send it in to Nikon. They will make sure it is completely repaired and good-to-go. Let us know how it worked out for you.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Considering the price of new or used, repair looks like your best option. Getting it returned to you in time could be a concern.

ggenova64

Sorry this happened. I dropped a lens also! "Your not a Photographer until you break something!" According to your photograph only the lens filter is cracked. Just like what happened to my lens when it dropped. Goto your local camera store and have them check the lens and clean it up for you. If it's okay, than purchase another UV filter. If the lens is beyond repair, rent a lens until you return from your trip. This will give you some time to make a decision.

ggenova64

Now that we are on the topic of filters.... Heddgehoggers always use a UV filter to protect your lens from falls! It is much cheaper to replace a UV filter than a lens.

Don, the 2nd son Loc: Crowded Florida

Dngallagher wrote:

What is important, how does the damage effect the actual images taken now? The damage may look catastrophic, but in reality not be very noticeable in the image taken.

Before I would jump at repair/replacement I would compare images taken after the damage to before images for sure.

While you may have already committed to repairs you may not need to decide so quickly, unless the actual images now taken are much different.

Don, the 2nd son Loc: Crowded Florida

YEP, front element. FYI: I just sent my Canon 300 f/4 in for Cleaning, Lube and Adjustment. Qoute was $59, went ahead, they added $43 postage. I went ahead with provided label etc. to UPS. Shipping added $60, went ahead. E-mail from Canon "needs new focusing unit; add $385." .... be sure you have the complete costs (except $385 estimate) before you commit! I was into it for $162 before any repairs!! But, of all my images those from this lens are clearly the best optical quality and I can't replace it for less.

Dngallagher Loc: Wilmington De.

ggenova64 wrote:

Now that we are on the topic of filters.... Heddgehoggers always use a UV filter to protect your lens from falls! It is much cheaper to replace a UV filter than a lens.

False...: I use no filters for protection from a fall.... I will only make use of a good quality UV filter to protect the len’s from a harsh environment like wind blown sand.

In fact, I own ONE UV filter, and many lenses! Pretty much the filter only fits one lens.

ggenova64

Thank you Donald. This brings me to an interesting topic or discussion.

Hedgehoggers "Should UV Filters also be used to protect our glass from drops?"

1Feathercrest Loc: NEPA

Dngallagher wrote:

What is important, how does the damage effect the actual images taken now? The damage may look catastrophic, but in reality not be very noticeable in the image taken.

Before I would jump at repair/replacement I would compare images taken after the damage to before images for sure.

While you may have already committed to repairs you may not need to decide so quickly, unless the actual images now taken are much different.

"effect" is a result, "affect" is the action. You should have said "does the damage AFFECT the...."

leenso52

snarky... that's why I was so care to spell everything right...!

1Feathercrest wrote:

"effect" is a result, "affect" is the action. You should have said "does the damage AFFECT the...."