Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses
Thread started 20 Oct 2015 (Tuesday) 15:39
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

How bad is it for the lens if your lens cap comes off inside bag?

 
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
TeamSpeed's Avatar
32,841 posts
Gallery: 63 photos
Joined May 2002
Northern Indiana
Oct 22, 2015 14:46 |  #91

guns, wine, audio equipment, music, astronomy, oceanography, and a handful of other side topics at the moment.... :D


Past Equipment | My Gallery (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
Frodge
Goldmember
Frodge's Avatar
Joined Nov 2012
Oct 22, 2015 15:24 |  #92

The person that originally hijacked the thread (not sure who as I'm not going to back and reread) should be given a warning. Not fair to the op.


_______________
“It's kind of fun to do the impossible.” - Walt Disney.
Equipment: Tokina 12-24mm, Canon 40mm 2.8, Tamron 17-50 2.8 XR Di, Canon 18-55mm, Canon 50mm 1.8, Tamron 70-300VC / T3I and 60D

LOG IN TO REPLY
Xyclopx
Goldmember
Joined Jul 2008
San Jose, CA
Oct 22, 2015 15:34 |  #93

Frodge wrote in post #17756189 (external link)
The person that originally hijacked the thread (not sure who as I'm not going to back and reread) should be given a warning. Not fair to the op.

that wouldn't be a good policy. for instance, your own statement is "hijacking."

i once worked at an extremely large company where an email was sent to the entire company by accident. then people started to "reply all" to the email saying that the email was sent to the wrong distribution. then geniuses started replying to all saying "don't reply to all." after those great employees demonstrated their great intelligence, the entire email system blew up.


Dean Chiang (external link) | Facebook (external link) | Blog (external link) | Gear (external link)
My Photos (external link)
Instagram @xyclopx (external link) @feetandeyes (external link) @gastramour (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
BlakeC
"Dad was a meat cutter"
BlakeC's Avatar
Joined Jul 2014
West Michigan, USA
Post has been edited over 2 years ago by BlakeC.
Oct 22, 2015 15:41 |  #94

Xyclopx wrote in post #17756203 (external link)
that wouldn't be a good policy. for instance, your own statement is "hijacking."

i once worked at an extremely large company where an email was sent to the entire company by accident. then people started to "reply all" to the email saying that the email was sent to the wrong distribution. then geniuses started replying to all saying "don't reply to all." after those great employees demonstrated their great intelligence, the entire email system blew up.

He would just be an accomplice, not the original offender! lol


Blake C
BlakeC-Photography.com (external link)
Follow Me on Facebook (external link) , Instagram (external link), or Google+ (external link)
80D |70D | SL1 - Σ 18-35 1.8 ART, Σ 50-100 1.8 ART, Σ 17-50 2.8, Canon 24 2.8 Pancake, Canon 50 1.8 STM, Canon 10-18 STM, Canon 18-135 STM

LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
TeamSpeed's Avatar
32,841 posts
Gallery: 63 photos
Joined May 2002
Northern Indiana
Oct 22, 2015 15:49 |  #95

Frodge wrote in post #17756189 (external link)
The person that originally hijacked the thread (not sure who as I'm not going to back and reread) should be given a warning. Not fair to the op.

Considering that the reply to the OP only takes 1-3 replies tops, usually what happens is that we then veer off into other directions. The only way to stop this is to allow the TS to lock a thread or have mods lock threads after they have been answered, but that is a different level of silly. :)


Past Equipment | My Gallery (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
Talley
Talley Whacker
Talley's Avatar
10,183 posts
Gallery: 35 photos
Joined Dec 2011
Houston
Oct 22, 2015 16:22 |  #96

TeamSpeed wrote in post #17755890 (external link)
Chances are that the image is truly orientated that way, and whatever you are using to view is automatically resetting the view for you during the file display. I am sure AMASS doesn't rotate images for us when we upload them.

I downloaded the image, and right-sided it in Photoshop.

This might be what happens when you take a hobby too far to the point it infringes on your living space. :D I especially like the boxes of Dynamat and also the bricks on the bookcases, nice bookends!
thumbnailHosted photo: posted by TeamSpeed in
./showthread.php?p=177​55890&i=i131983902
forum: Canon EF and EF-S Lenses


Ah thanks for the lesson.

This does not infringe on his living space. He spent $60k adding onto the house just to add this stereo room and above that is his master bathroom :)

Talk about dedication.


5D4 |12mm 2.8 FE | 16-35L 2.8 III | Σ 35A | Σ 50A | Σ 85A | 200 F2 IS | 1.4xIII
X-T20 | X-E3 | 18/2 | 35/1.4 | 56/1.2 | 18-135
My Gear Archive

LOG IN TO REPLY
eddieb1
Senior Member
eddieb1's Avatar
709 posts
Joined Apr 2013
Oregon
Oct 22, 2015 16:38 |  #97

TeamSpeed wrote in post #17755980 (external link)
Mmmmm sig sauers, yes indeed!

oh yes! Have several myself.




LOG IN TO REPLY
Frodge
Goldmember
Frodge's Avatar
Joined Nov 2012
Oct 22, 2015 16:51 |  #98

So once a question has three responses, the thread is allowed to veer into any direction anyone sees fit? I'm just curious. It seems to be the same cast of characters that does this each time. I think its silly to say that I'm as guilty. The thread has been off track for pages now. Maybe they should have a general discussion forum for people that are bored and want to talk about different things. Works well in other forums I belong to.


_______________
“It's kind of fun to do the impossible.” - Walt Disney.
Equipment: Tokina 12-24mm, Canon 40mm 2.8, Tamron 17-50 2.8 XR Di, Canon 18-55mm, Canon 50mm 1.8, Tamron 70-300VC / T3I and 60D

LOG IN TO REPLY
Xyclopx
Goldmember
Joined Jul 2008
San Jose, CA
Oct 22, 2015 17:06 |  #99

Frodge wrote in post #17756316 (external link)
So once a question has three responses, the thread is allowed to veer into any direction anyone sees fit? I'm just curious. It seems to be the same cast of characters that does this each time. I think its silly to say that I'm as guilty. The thread has been off track for pages now. Maybe they should have a general discussion forum for people that are bored and want to talk about different things. Works well in other forums I belong to.

frodge, you've probably seen more posts than i have, but in my experience it's almost a certainty that after the first page or 2 the thread will change subjects. i mean, i haven't tracked this, but i'm pretty sure the vast majority of threads do this. the only threads that seem to stay on track are those like, "post your bw pictures." then it's very clear when someone is not posting a picture or it's now bw. but these discussion like threads almost always change subjects.

it's as teamspeed said, usually all the information that is pertinent is presented in the first few replies. sometimes maybe it takes a page or two. certainly the op already got all he needed in the first 2 pages.

i never did understand why people care so much about closing threads and things. to me, the only hurt is to the infrastructure that has to hold all the data, but otherwise it doesn't diminish my experience. just read from the beginning and once it changes subjects feel free to read a different thread.

if you really want this to be about getting the right answers to questions, you're gonna have to do this stack exchange style--and upvote good responses and downvote bad ones, and then close the thread once the op declares a best answer.

however, that would be terrible for a photography forum. absolutely no fun. you wouldn't want that.


Dean Chiang (external link) | Facebook (external link) | Blog (external link) | Gear (external link)
My Photos (external link)
Instagram @xyclopx (external link) @feetandeyes (external link) @gastramour (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
mcoren
Senior Member
mcoren's Avatar
Joined Mar 2015
Northern Virginia, USA
Oct 22, 2015 18:05 |  #100

Any time anybody uses the words "front element", it rapidly degenerates into a debate over UV filters. From there it only goes further off into the weeds.


Canon EOS 7D, EOS 7D Mark II | Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II, EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM, EF-S 24mm f/2.8 STM, EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM | Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM, 100-400mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM | Canon Speedlite 430EX II

LOG IN TO REPLY
Left ­ Handed ­ Brisket
That's my line!
Left Handed Brisket's Avatar
Joined Jun 2011
The Uwharrie Mts, NC
Oct 23, 2015 07:53 |  #101

Talley wrote in post #17756275 (external link)
This does not infringe on his living space. He spent $60k adding onto the house just to add this stereo room and above that is his master bathroom :)

Talk about dedication.

wow.

he has apparently spent minimum $100k on the listening experience but buys 2 dollar wicker baskets from china and hauls in bricks from the back yard for sound dampeners.

:lol

i'm not in any way saying i wouldn't love to sit amongst the wicker and bricks and listen to music all night.


PSA: The above post may contain sarcasm, reply at your own risk | Formerly he's gone before apostrophe-gate | Not in gear database: Canon 70-210 3.5-4.5, Auto Sears 50mm 2.0 / 3x CL-360, Nikon SB-28, SunPak auto 322 D, Minolta 20

LOG IN TO REPLY
sparksdjs
Senior Member
Joined May 2001
Seattle, WA
Oct 23, 2015 09:42 |  #102

mcoren wrote in post #17756390 (external link)
Any time anybody uses the words "front element", it rapidly degenerates into a debate over UV filters. From there it only goes further off into the weeds.

Let me combine these topics - lens cap off inside the bag and UV filters. After contemplating removing the B+W filter from my 15-85mm lens, I decided to remove it. Went to my bag, took out my 70D with the lens & filter on it, and found that I had neglected to put the lens cap back on and I also had the hood reversed. The filter was not damaged or even smudged and I have since removed it. I'll count on proper hood use to protect the lens (and use the cap ...).


Canon 70D | 15-85IS | 70-200 f/4L IS | 35mm f/2 IS | 18-135IS STM | 18-55IS | 70-300IS | 10-22mm | 100mm macro | 85mm f/1.8 | 50mm f/1.4 | 580EX II | Canon G12 | 270EX II

LOG IN TO REPLY
Xyclopx
Goldmember
Joined Jul 2008
San Jose, CA
Post has been edited over 2 years ago by Xyclopx.
Oct 23, 2015 11:09 |  #103

sparksdjs wrote in post #17757131 (external link)
Let me combine these topics - lens cap off inside the bag and UV filters. After contemplating removing the B+W filter from my 15-85mm lens, I decided to remove it. Went to my bag, took out my 70D with the lens & filter on it, and found that I had neglected to put the lens cap back on and I also had the hood reversed. The filter was not damaged or even smudged and I have since removed it. I'll count on proper hood use to protect the lens (and use the cap ...).

and i have done just that and actually did find scratches on the filter. (though not with the hood on properly. i believe i have had the hood reversed though, and the cap did come off, and thus.... you know...)

but i also have had that hood save my butt too.

and i've also run (well, walked briskly anyway) into pointy objects lens first, with said pointy object passing the hood going straight into the filter.

......and thus ends this list, to stop from ending in a full on filter debate. but i do have many examples of a filter saving my butt. but yes, please always use the hood. every time i see people walking around on the street with the hood reversed i chuckle mildly to myself, and i get happy, and i have a better day. :-)


Dean Chiang (external link) | Facebook (external link) | Blog (external link) | Gear (external link)
My Photos (external link)
Instagram @xyclopx (external link) @feetandeyes (external link) @gastramour (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
DreDaze's Avatar
17,776 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Joined Mar 2006
S.F. Bay Area
Oct 23, 2015 11:32 as a reply to Xyclopx's post |  #104

lenses are a lot tougher than filters...have you ever seen this video?
https://www.youtube.co​m/watch?v=P0CLPTd6Bds (external link)


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)
my 366 for 2016 (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
Xyclopx
Goldmember
Joined Jul 2008
San Jose, CA
Post has been edited over 2 years ago by Xyclopx.
Oct 23, 2015 11:59 |  #105

DreDaze wrote in post #17757281 (external link)
lenses are a lot tougher than filters...have you ever seen this video?
https://www.youtube.co​m/watch?v=P0CLPTd6Bds (external link)

i haven't seen that specific video, no. but i've seen others along the same lines. they also all completely miss the point of what kind of protection filters provide. but that said... there's probably some value, so i'll check it out when i get home from work. thanks.

as for the statement "lenses being tougher than filters".... i don't think that's a good argument. it's like saying cars are tougher than 3m clear bra film. um.... i guess. or perhaps car paint is tougher than 3m clear bra film. um......... yeah. so, just cause a filter is weaker than a lens element (if that's what you mean, as opposed to simply "a lens"), doesn't mean it doesn't have value.

also............... i think that there are some more technical problems with such arguments:

1. as you noticed, in the video, he did not use good filters for testing. i'm guessing the schott glass in the high-end filters is stronger than the stuff used on lower-end stuff. i dunno, but it seems reasonable. that said, i don't think it matters in these crash tests. but that would matter in testing for fine scratches.

2. so, i think it would be a clear hypothesis that the reason filters break is due to their thickness. i'm guess many lenses have thicker front elements than the filters. i am also gonna guess that some lenses do indeed have thin front elements. if you want to have a true smash test, you should compare apples to apples. use a lens with a known thin front element.

anyway.... i still thinking smashing is not a legitimate test for the effectiveness of a protective filter. that's the equivalent of the crap coming out of politicians using anything they can pull out of their ass to support their argument.

FINALLY, one note that i guess should be pondered: My filters DO have scratches. And I STILL use them on the same lenses they saved. One even has a pit in it, right smack in the middle--that one is on my 50 1.2. Never replaced one yet. So, that says something in itself, for both camps. ;-)a


Dean Chiang (external link) | Facebook (external link) | Blog (external link) | Gear (external link)
My Photos (external link)
Instagram @xyclopx (external link) @feetandeyes (external link) @gastramour (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

9,322 views & 34 likes for this thread
How bad is it for the lens if your lens cap comes off inside bag?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.00212 for 6 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.06s
Latest registered member is vanderlinden
906 guests, 403 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017