Remember - all money spent on insurance is a bad bet. The insurance companies compute the odds and make sure they will make money. The only reason to "invest" in insurance is to protect yourself from a real disaster! Otherwise you are loosing.
Thanks for the input about the Polish study. Polish mathematicians in the late 1930's were the first to crack the ultra secret German code, Enigma, and they helped the British later who get the credit.
RWR wrote:
The only thing I can tell from this fuzzy blob of a picture is that the glass is cracked. Without detailed views of the threads (filter ring and lens), I cannot determine whether or not the lens was protected.
We must be looking at the same picture. There is not enough detail in the threads for me to tell if they're damaged or not. Perhaps others have better eyesight or a better monitor than I.
Leitz wrote:
We must be looking at the same picture. There is not enough detail in the threads for me to tell if they're damaged or not. Perhaps others have better eyesight or a better monitor than I.
That's just it. We all look at images on the screen we have. Mine changes brightness as I get closer to a window.
In the photo lab at the local JUCO most the monitors in the class looked a little different. The cute blond on my screen had green hair on most the schools monitors!
All in good fun, I guess.
Marion
Stanton wrote:
Great advice, Ecobin. My favorite camera store in Phoenix has a shelf in its most prominent display case dedicated to the display of broken lens filters. The "collection" grows every year. All a salesman in that store will do when fielding a question about the advisability of using a protective filter is point to the case. ...snip...
Does he also have a case of broken front elements on lenses? While I have never taken a poll, I think that there are still plenty of people that do not use a protective filter on their lenses, and so there should also be a good number of lenses with broken front elements.
Two incidences from my own experience: I dropped my Ricoh on the floor, the front of the metal part of the lens was bent, the lens itself not damaged at all. No problem taking photos either, I just could not use the CP filter. Managed to bend the rim back into shape with a pair of pliers, using very gentle pressure, till the CP would screw on again, and that was it. I used the camera till it was replaced with a digital.
My OM-D E-M1 had the 40-150mm lens on it, and because I'd just been outside with it, the lens hood was extended. Put the camera on the table, walked away and somehow caught the strap. Camera and lens fell on a solid hardwood floor. Lens hood now positioned at a 45 degree angle. Gently twisted, pushed and pulled and got it straightened, something inside was loosened; pushed and pulled, till it snapped back into place, checked over the lens itself and the camera very carefully, nothing obvious, and it's still working fine.
Apaflo wrote:
Which proves that filters are much more fragile than lenses, and unlike the lens will break every time. It didn't protect your lens in any sense.
I guess a lens hood isn't necessary either, in your opinion?
JimKing
Loc: Salisbury, Maryland USA
While I don't consider a filter is necessary, I do believe a hood is a very good idea and never take mine off. I mentioned earlier that this seems a little like a religion. If you want use it if you don't don't. If your right and the other guy is wrong your costs will be lower and your photos will be better. Well, maybe.
Six pages plus who knows how many main topic talks and only a few people seem to understand what the term "protection" really means.
it doesn't mean it will stop a bullet, a drop, or anything like that. PROTECTION, as in filter use, is only for prevention of premature glass wear on the outer lens glass. What do I mean by that? Let me tell you.
Take a regular piece of glass and rub it with fine sand paper. What happens? Duh... you scratch the glass.
Think about this. Why was microfiber so well accepted when, to the naked eye, a tee shirt would do a similar cleaning of a lens. Could it be that microfiber was less abrasive than a clean tee shirt.
Duh... (again)
As an end to this crazy message. Forget the rocks and drops. Nothing common will "protect" against that. (You break a filter or chip a lens glass, so what. Accidents happen.)
Inexpensive PROTECTION against having to replace a scratched, hazy or foggy filter, sure. I personally find flat glass much easier to clean than convex glass too.
For what it matters, a 32 year old lens I bought new and have always used a "protection" filter on, still has beautiful glass. The outer barrel is a bit worn from use but the glass us excellant.
A 12 year old lens, bought used a couple years back from someone who apearently didn't use a filter, shows minor haze scratches. I sometimes use it for a soft look. LoL
If some say it's not to bad to repair lens, think about this. I asked about replating the barrel of my 32 year old lens and was told that it's a good thing the glass wasn't in need of replacement because they don't make those anymore. One would need to be reground and coated to match. The average repair cost just tripled.
Remember what protection really means!
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.