Adding weather seals to your un sealed lenses

its a very cool accessory, but at a retail price of 25 bucks, that is INSANE. set them at .99 and they'll sell like hotcakes....anyone with a lens will buy them for all of their lenses...

When you bring in lens for service at canon I think they will put the rubber gaskets on for you if you ask them - YMMV

jwm9289 wrote in post #15495894
Yes it is spam when it's your first post and marketing is the theme.

Not like he's selling computers or sneakers.

scroller52 wrote in post #15495943
its a very cool accessory, but at a retail price of 25 bucks, that is INSANE. set them at .99 and they'll sell like hotcakes....anyone with a lens will buy them for all of their lenses...

Try and be a little more realistic. I'll like to buy a nice 60" LED TV for $10 (that will sell like hotcakes too) but that's not going to happen.

He's starting off and he needs money to build and manufacture. $10-15 is a bit more reasonable. If people can spend a couple hundred to over a thousand dollars on a lens, I'm sure they can spend $10 or even $25 on this product. It's piece of mind and an investment on protecting your gear.

jwm9289 wrote in post #15495509
First time ever a first spam post gets praise......

Marked in the history book!

While you will be sealing the lens to the body I don't think I would take of my non sealed lenses into the rain until figuring out if the lens it self it water resistant. Lots of openings and cracks on the bodies of lenses that could let water in.

Here's a list of the "partially" sealed EOS lenses which are the only ones that would probably truly benefit from this.I've been planning to pick up an O ring for my 300 f4 IS but it may be a hassle when it's lens change time.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/News-Post.aspx?News=996

Sorry but I see no point in this to be honest, the dust gets in more from changing lenses than from the weather sealing I think and clearly this does nearly nothing for water because the water will still get in around the focus rings etc as already mentioned.

I guess we need to see some test results.

True water and dust can get in when you're changing the lens, but I almost always use a rocket blower and/or brush to remove any debris before changing a lens. It's also true that other parts of the lens may not be sealed, but every little bit of sealing helps.

I understand why he needs to charge $24.99...start up costs are high. But I do know that if he's successful, and the price gets down to $15, I will buy one for every lens I own that doesn't have a seal. It's worth it to me.

I also don't consider this spam either. He's a fellow photographer that's come up with a great idea that may be beneficial to us all. I welcome threads like this as long as they are photography related.

Bryan

This is a great idea, but I don't understand why Canon doesn't include a 10 cent gasket with lenses in the in the first place. I predict some Asian country is going to start selling these for $1.00.

Not spam... Disappointed that the post got removed. Oh well, I'll try my rubber band idea and report back.

I didn't see the first post, but advertising with your first post is considered poor form I think...

Maybe Pekka can negotiate a POTN discount / group buy?

elguapo wrote in post #15497060
but I don't understand why Canon doesn't include a 10 cent gasket with lenses

Because cheap rings will rot and can cause potential for all kinds of problems when not integrated within the mount. By mating a ring with the lens permanently this would lead to excessive repair cost for the average consumer upon needing replacement.

Would you trust $.10 or even a $1 gasket to be used for the engine in your car?

All in all it's just not in Canon's best interest to bother with doing something like this. The last thing most of us would want is super cheap rubber rings being added to an expensive lens. If they used a high quality ring it might be worthwhile but that raises cost for assembly + parts + profit needing to be made on the added investment. So even a $5 part might increase the lens cost by $20-30 which could be a deal breaker when trying to be competitive against other brands.

Plus anyone who sells something like this needs to sell thousands of them to make it worthwhile and affordable to mass produce/market. If you can only sell a few hundred at the start you have to charge early adopters a premium or you wont make a nickle for your effort. Then even once all your initial expenses are covered you have to reinvest yet again if you want to get your product into stores. Consider the cost of shipping even just a few hundred of these things to retailers with no guarantees of selling a single one.

Google this part number and tell me that the Dust Donut is unreasonably priced...

YA2-3463-000

I guess the administrators agreed. SPAM!