Slick Willie Loc: The U. S.

:thumbup: :-) Thank you! It sorta looked to me like DelDerby was on the wrong side of the issue and proving his own point and I thought I'd give him a chance to figure his way back to the right side.

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

I'm ON the right side! As a brand new member you have called into question all and any comments that Grandpa (a well respected member of this community) makes.
I am surprised that Sharpshooter (who I realise can be controversial) agreed with you. He is obviously canvassing for friends!
You describe yourself as "Slick". I wouldn't disagree with that! In the interests of this community I suggest that we do not converse - as we won't get along. :thumbdown:

Slick Willie Loc: The U. S.

I am a new member but I've been a lurker longer than you have been a member, much longer, for whatever that matters. An ill-logical analogy such as was used in this instance does indeed make me question anything else one might say who used such an analogy when it comes to information that I do not already know the answer to - which was my point. For a new person who knows about changing fan belts and knows nothing about camera equipment, if the use of that analogy would not give pause to accepting further knowledge emitting from that source, I don't know what would.

I was not insulting, condescending, and made no derogatory comments about the person, just the deed which clearly was not in anyone's favor. I see "Grandpa" has remained silent, which you probably should have done. I would imagine that "Grandpa" would like to have that one back. That you choose to attempt to control what I have to say is, to me, worse than what I said and frankly I don't care what you think or who you converse with, the fact remains that it was an inappropriate analogy that should make any further comment questionable to anyone who is looking for answers. If you choose to avoid me, so be it but don't be surprised if I should choose to comment about something you've said. And, perhaps you might want to think about letting other people take care of themselves and not intercede where an issue is clearly none of your concern. "Grandpa" is a big boy and doesn't need you to protect him. As you might say in your country - "bugger off."

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

Lurking with intent perhaps? What is said on this forum is of concern to all members, whether or not they choose to pass comment. I chose to pass comment! Your last comment places you where I had already thought it would. Bye bye! :thumbdown:

rob s Loc: La Mesa, CA

Delderby you started this dissent by hijacking the thread to voice your views on a topic of personal interest completely unrelated to the topic under discussion.
Please take your distaste for hunting to a different forum or start a new thread.

Slick Willie Loc: The U. S.

Don't be a fool and "judge a book by its cover," especially if there's a chance that your comprehension is impaired. Further, you can cease acting as though the forum is your private domain that needs your protection and consider that a person who arrived as a member today has just as much collateral in the forum as do you - not one iota. You do not need to protect anyone or anything from me nor anyone else, just yourself. My last comment to which you refer was purposely pointed and appropriate so you would understand perfectly and as I said, you sir, can simply bugger off! Now, if you don't choose to converse with me, now would seem to be a good time to shut your cake hole.

donnahde Loc: Newark, DE

Ditto!! And I've heard many times although not in this thread as far as I've read that by not turning the camera off when changing lenses you're attracting dust onto the sensor.

It such a simple thing to do that I can't imagine taking a chance by not turning the camera off when changing lenses, SD cards or batteries. One time I didn't when changing an SD card and it didn't work right until I took it out and put it back in and re-formatted. Never forgot again.

raferrelljr Loc: CHARLOTTE, NC

I always turn the camera off because as long as it is on there is a magnetic charge around the sensor which when a lense is changed will attract dust particles within the magnetic range of the field.

rob s Loc: La Mesa, CA

Do you know this to be the case or is this supposition? Power to the sensor, particularly at the current levels suggested by power consumption, suggest that these are almost non existant.

raferrelljr Loc: CHARLOTTE, NC

I read it somewhere, but it makes sense.

CHOLLY Loc: THE FLORIDA PANHANDLE!

^^^THIS!!! :thumbup:

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

How many forums have you been slung off? :-D
Have you got a camera? :D

Slick Willie Loc: The U. S.

I haven't joined a lot but I've never been kicked off... yet.

...and yes, I have a camera. Are you trying to become my best buddy now or what?

Reinaldokool Loc: San Rafael, CA

All electronics are subject to damage (or confusion) because of stray charges which can happen when a circuit is broken or made. Switches are the safest way to make/break an electric circuit (And even they sometimes need to be protected by a capacitor-resistor circuit.) Doing so with the lens-camera contacts is probably a bad idea. If you have ever walked down the supermarket aisle and then touch the handle on the frozen food box only to get a shock, that is the similar to what happens in the camera.

rob s Loc: La Mesa, CA

Since the sort of voltages you're describing are in the multiple kilovolt range and no one so far has actually reported actual damage to their cameras from neglecting to shut off the power this is an absolutely ridiculous assertion.
High voltage arcs at switches are normally the result of back emf from high inductance loads or very high voltages. Neither of these pertain inside your camera.