On Oct 9, 2011, at 11:53 AM, John Sessoms wrote: > A lens cap provides no protection while you are actually taking photographs. > The lens hood does not always adequately protect the front element. > > I slipped & fell while taking photographs. The camera hit the ground lens > first. > > The lens did not have a filter. I put a bad ding (like a chipped car > windshield) in the front glass that showed up in every photo I subsequently > took with that lens, so that I ended up having to replace it.
IMHO a hood can offer plenty of protection as whatever you land on will need to either destroy the hood or protrude into it to reach the glass (except maybe those collapsible rubber ones). I know this sort of thing has been discussed here a few times and I wouldn't be surprised if the usual level of consensus resulted. I'm curious now to know what it costs to replace a front element in addition to the near-inevitable barrel / filter ring repairs. I know this would vary a lot with the exact lens. > I have had other accidents where I banged up the filter, but the the lens > itself was not damaged. I've had a few little accidents too but only three (I think) with damage, two of which were just broken hoods. The only thing worse than breaking your own gear is breaking someone else's. I dropped a Pentax 67 400mm lens (the old outer-bayonet model) in the shop once. A heart stopping moment but it landed in a box of soft camera cases. Cheers, Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
