Question about camera body lens mounts

Would a mount wear off after excessive lens changing? I've been reading online and there was this case of a Nikon lens falling off and breaking. What about canon? Especially the rebel series?

Naaaa - can't see it myself. Maybe, just maybe, some of the plastic lens mounts could suffer, but not the metal ones, not from wear alone.

One thing you have to remember is that many of the bodies themselves are plastic. The mount may be metal, but what the mount gets screwed into is plastic, or a female thread embedded in plastic. I can see it happening.

Ah cause I'm shooting occasionally at high rise areas and I don't want to entertain the possibility what if my lens fell off my camera body because of a faulty mount..

Well, if you want to be as secure as you can be, there are strap systems that allow independent restraint of the body and the lens. There was a recent thread on this - I'll see if I can find it.

You can be absolutely certain that if a lens falls off that the cause is due to a loose nut on the back of the camera.

Here's the thread, for what it's worth: https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1346429

Ev0d3vil wrote in post #16530368
Would a mount wear off after excessive lens changing? I've been reading online and there was this case of a Nikon lens falling off and breaking. What about canon? Especially the rebel series?

The chance of that happening was engineered out of existence when Canon switched to the EF lens mount in 1987.

This unwarranted fear was most popular in the 1990's when Canon sold the EOS 500 35mm SLR which had a plastic lens mount on the body. From actually owning one of these frequently maligned cameras, I know that the camera's lens mount remained pristine after years of frequent use.

The only case of a Nikon lens mount failing that I know of came when an acquaintance had a basketball player crash into him at full speed and the mounted lens was torn out of the body by the impact.

On this forum, it's common to read what are likely apocryphal tales of lenses falling off cameras; they come from inattention and sloppy work.

The question is the latest example of the wisdom of Franklin Roosevelt's 1933 inaugural speech where he said. "the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance."

I can see that happening after about 14.679 lens changes.

Metal-to-metal contact does cause wear of the surfaces...the piston rings on the cylinder walls of your automobile engine are an example:
150000 miles at 2500rpm, plus overhead of engine running at stop lights at 800 rpm, might be 1400 Million up-down rubs of the piston rings against the cylinder walls of a 4-stoke engine. It takes a lot of rubbing!

Wilt wrote in post #16531572
150000 miles at 2500rpm, plus overhead of engine running at stop lights at 800 rpm, might be 1400 Million up-down rubs of the piston rings against the cylinder walls of a 4-stoke engine. It takes a lot of rubbing!

As long as you don't take out the oil.

awesomeshots wrote in post #16531617
As long as you don't take out the oil.

Right, you are. OTOH lens mount friction is low, and the rate of speed of rub is a bit slower than inside the engine! And, most likely, the number of rubs is greatly diminished...but digital photographers are a pretty crazy lot for number of exposures in a year!

It is possible, but highly unlikely.

The most likely thing would be a user failing to fully latch the lens... Or the user dropping the lens or camera during a lens change.

I was leading a workshop and a Nikon shooter who was participating was having trouble setting the aperture on his brand new D800 and 14-24/2.8 lens. A slight twist on the lens to finish latching it in place... problem solved (and a rather pricey disaster averted).

I'd wager 99 out of 100 "bayonet mount failures" are due to incorrect mounting of the lens by the user. Not due to any actual failure of the mechanisms. Incidentally, Nikon bayonet mount is rotated the opposite direction from Canon and many other mounts.

I've got SLRs that are 50+ years old and their bayonet mounts still work fine.... and the current Canon EF/EOS mount is one of the strongest. Even the plastic-bodied cameras lenses are well reinforced to support their weight and endure regular use. The only ones I'd be at all concerned about are the entry level kit lenses using plastic bayonet mounts (instead of stainless steel or chromed brass). And even those mounts are very easily replaced, should it ever be necessary.

IMO, you really don't have much to worry about.

Agree with amfoto1

KirkS518 wrote in post #16530505
One thing you have to remember is that many of the bodies themselves are plastic. The mount may be metal, but what the mount gets screwed into is plastic, or a female thread embedded in plastic. I can see it happening.

Probably unlikely in the lifespan of a digital camera, provided you dont go mad with swapping all the time.

Ive got an old film EOS lying around that has a plastic EF mount and that still works after ~15 years of twice weekly lens changes. The only time I saw a metal mount fail was on ~30 year old T70 with an FD mount,