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

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

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.

Frodge wrote in post #17756189
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.

Xyclopx wrote in post #17756203
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

Frodge wrote in post #17756189
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.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #17755890
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. I especially like the boxes of Dynamat and also the bricks on the bookcases, nice bookends!

Hosted photo: posted by TeamSpeed in
./showthread.php?p=177​55890&i=i131983902
forum: Canon 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.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #17755980
Mmmmm sig sauers, yes indeed!

oh yes! Have several myself.

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 wrote in post #17756316
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.

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.

Talley wrote in post #17756275
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.

mcoren wrote in post #17756390
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 ...).

sparksdjs wrote in post #17757131
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.

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

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

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.