PDA

View Full Version : 10D took a dive


Littlebike
7th of October 2003 (Tue), 20:02
My 10d fell out of my backpack last night. Luckily my Sigma 24-70 2.8 ex lense broke it fall. Unfortunately, it broke the lens as well.

I took a few shots in MF mode to see if the 10d is functional and it seems to be just fine, the lens on the otherhand is pretty messed up. The motor tries to focus but the gearing will not allow it. The Glass is in perfect condition so I just have a mechanical issue.

I sent the lens to Sigma this morning to be evaluated.

danphoto1
7th of October 2003 (Tue), 20:28
My 10d wasalso dropped but is no worse for the accident.

CyberDyneSystems
7th of October 2003 (Tue), 23:33
Bummer abpout the lens BUT :D for the camera!
Wow!

ChrisNardone
7th of October 2003 (Tue), 23:40
Sorry about the lens. Hopefully they'll be able to fix it. Good news about the 10D. I almost had this happen to me. I had my 10D with my 300 f/4 L IS piggyback on my Nexstar 5 when a tripod leg broke. Luckily I caught everything as it was tipping over.

perfectpixel
8th of October 2003 (Wed), 02:05
did the 10D focus better after the drop?
I'm thinking of dropping mine on purpose.....

scollins
9th of October 2003 (Thu), 00:19
Sorry to hear about the drop. I would be in the dumps if I dropped my camera. It's a good and bad thing that the lens was there to take some of the shock. Maybe Sigma will be very kind and replace your lens.

Littlebike
9th of October 2003 (Thu), 18:58
I doubt they will just replace the lens and certainly dont expect them to.

It's my faultand thats all there is to it.

I am waiting to get a repair extimate. If it is within a $150 or so dollars of a new lense then I will just buy a new one. I fear the repaired lens would not be as reliable.

Maybe I am being a bit paranoid in that regards.

I'm just glad it is only a $400 lens and not something like the 70-200 2.8 or the 120-300 2.8 I want to buy, then I would be sick.

MarkH
9th of October 2003 (Thu), 19:15
Littlebike wrote:
I'm just glad it is only a $400 lens and not something like the 70-200 2.8 or the 120-300 2.8 I want to buy, then I would be sick.

No insurance?

It might be worth getting some insurance, expecially if you get more lenses.

My insurance was free, I already had household contents insurance so I took the receipts in and they noted the photo gear on my policy.

Littlebike
9th of October 2003 (Thu), 20:18
I didnt think my houshold insurance would cover me doing something stupid. I have made camera equipment claims in the past when all my gear was stolen on vacation.

I will defenitely get my equipment put on the list, though.

When I did make that claim in the past my insurance went up by $125 the next yeaNeedless to say I went to another insurance company.

slin100
9th of October 2003 (Thu), 23:15
I'm not an expert and the following doesn't apply to professional equipment. Claims against your homeowners insurance are usually subject to the deductible, which can be substantial. Mine, for example, is $1000.

I opted to add my equipment to my personal effects policy. Coverage was around $1.25 per $100 per year. No deductible. Replacement with no questions asked, even due to stupidity.