NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Camera Talk => Topic started by: Zang on March 13, 2021, 04:07:01
-
Hey all,
I do not like screen protectors but my screens got scratched a lot in the past so I consider putting a protector glass on the tough screen. Did you have any issue with touch functionality?
Cheers,
Zang
-
I've been using screen protectors on all of my DSLRs and MLCs and haven't experienced any issue of the touch screen function of any cameras.
Currently I put a fairly thick protection "glass" on the screen of my SIGMA fp, but I have no issue either.
-
Thanks Akira. I'll try one.
-
I suffered burns on my thumb and index. Screen protectors on touch screens are not well functioning for me. I stopped using these. And I have zero scratches on my screens made of mineral glass (D5, D6, D850). I don’t believe these are necessary if you are a bit careful. But if a screen protector can contribute to your feel good factor ...
-
I have never used protectors and none of the back-screens on my Nikons (which have included D3, D3S and D5) have ever got scratched.
-
The slim, all glass protectors, I've found work fine, exactly like the one on my phone, which I wipe off with my trousers.
Get several. "That auction site" is an excellent source. I had to ruin a couple before I got it correct. (And, yes..... why does a scratch ruin everything?)
-
I think they are worth it, if nothing else than to prevent a scratch impacting on a resale price of the camera. BUT, to what degree can/do they increase the chances of mold or fungus behind the screen? Probably they make no difference at all, but I still don’t understand why the D3 has such a common problem of a cloudy/moldy LCD screen.
-
Thanks guys...
Too late, I have ordered a two-pack after Akira's response :)
I have bought Nikon z5 whose back LCD is said to be a plastic which is not as durable as those from the higher models. Let see how the protector works and in the worst case, I'll get rid of it.
Another question, is removing the protector a painful process? I bought the ones that said to have "silicon adhesive".
-
I never had a problem removing them from phones and iPads, but I never had to on a camera. But I wouldn’t worry, as when/if you resell you can tout the protector as a plus point. If someone mucks things up by removing it, that’s their problem!
But... as I mentioned before, I have never known mold and fungus under a phone screen, but I have seen it reported under a camera screen. Maybe it’s because in reality we hold a camera closer to our face much more than we do phones?, but more likely because camera manufacturers probably regard the LCD screen as a necessary evil, and haven’t mastered isolating it from the environment.
-
A screen protector is not only for scratches...
Here is my 1V3 (with no screen protector) after hitting hard against a not-so-sharp item (one of the car's armrests). Maybe a screen protector would have taken most of the hit, and the LCD would not have cracked. BTW, only the lower L triangle was still operative. I could still operate menus and look at photos by using the EVF: an added safety of mirrorless cameras, with a traditional camera most functions would have been impossible to act upon.
Fortunately I could find a replacement LCD (on lower L in photo), I will surely put on a screen protector this time!
Ciao from Massimo
-
Even though I have put the protectors on the LCDs of all cameras, I had never scratched them...well until a few month ago:
I was about to drop my current SIGMA fp and fortunately was succeeded in catching it, but I had a screwdriver in one of my hands which hit the screen and made a deep scratch. Luck in bad luck was that the scratch didn't reach to the cover glass of the LCD.
I replaced the scratched protector with the thicker protection glass for the better peace of mind. ::)
-
I suggest to put a protection screen on the protection screen. You never now ;D
-
Thanks guys for sharing your stories. Some of them sound scary and I am sorry you guys had some unfortunate accidents.
@MFloyd LOL... if the protectors are permanent, I would never use them.
I missed film cameras who did not require such kind of care :) When I bought Contax RTS III back then I wished the technology revolution stopped there :)
-
I have never used protectors and none of the back-screens on my Nikons (which have included D3, D3S and D5) have ever got scratched.
It's possible to scratch any of these but my experience with the back screens of my D2H, D300s, D800 and so far with my D850 is the same, no scratches. These are all mid and pro level Nikon DSLR(s) if that makes a difference. I'm careful with the handling of my camera equipment. I treat them as precision instruments. They are generally free of dings and scratches but paint frequently gets polished off and plastic and rubber parts frequently get polished smooth.
Protectors may be a good idea as accidents happen. I’m thinking this over.
Dave
-
A screen protector is not only for scratches...
Perhaps screen protectors are a similar issue to protective filters. In this case a screen protector might or might not have help. Sometimes the wrong glancing impact will break the protector and not the item being protected.
Dave
---
I replaced the scratched protector with the thicker protection glass for the better peace of mind. ::)
Any recommendation for the makers of protection LCD covers? Anyone?
Dave
---
A friend's precocious cockatoo tasted the flat screen monitor of an very old MacBook. It wasn't pretty. This bird can crack open Palm Nuts with her powerful beak. :o
Fortunatly the computer was worth less than $100.00 (USD) at the time.
Dave
-
My D5 « for sale » picture: 3 ½ years old & 50’000 clicks. Professional use. Pristine; no scratches; never a protection screen. :)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50616787106_7255dc9782_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2k7QgkY)
_8524036.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2k7QgkY)
(Sold in the meantime).
-
I suggest to put a protection screen on the protection screen. You never now ;D
Sane advice, Christian! ;D
Any recommendation for the makers of protection LCD covers? Anyone?
Dave
The one on my fp now is Gramas Extra Camera Glass made by Gin-Ichi. The protection films/glasses are mostly dedicated to specific models, and Gin-Ichi (a well known camera shop for professionals in Tokyo) makes one for D850.
-
The "mold/fungus" on the D3/D300 inner display was not exactly that and probable cause was the mounting tape, underneath. (On my old D300 it also looks like they wiped off the underside glass with a damp finger.)
When powered off, it looks cloudy around the edges. When used for chimping the bugger is fine.
Do your homework. Applying a glass protector is a good idea to keep it looking new. Removing ANY protector from a plastic touch screen, I've found can pull off the non-glare coating, pretty much ruining what you intended to fix.
-
My D5 has a little scratch in the screen. Only visible with the screen "off" so it doesn´t affect viewing or compromise in anyway. I´m thinking about a screen protector...
-
I have Domke bag with an iron hardware to secure the top cover. It is a solid piece of metal and one time it hit the front of the lens inside the bag pretty hard. Luckily, there was a UV filter on the lens. It would be heart breaking if the hook hit the front element. I know people who toss their gear around and clean lenses with their sweater hats. I am not one of those :)
-
While I may not add a protective secreen to the back of my camera, and the only lens filter I ever might use is a polarizer for removing reflections, I am a very strong believer in using a Lens Cap at all times except when actually shooting!
That Domke fastener could have done a number on both the filter (and on the lens behind it as well) but it would have left a lens cap unharmed.
Just sayin' . . .
::)
-
Good point, Ann. I did the same thing in the very early past and regardless how well I kept the lenses closed, they collected the dirt from the air after a while (believe me, the air is pretty oily and I am talking about European climate :) ). The lenses that I keep protective filters on still look new after 25 years. As the picture quality degradation caused by the filters is unnoticeable, I decided to use filters. But hey, I am a weekend photographer, not a war correspondent LOL.
-
The protectors arrived! There were so many "brands" on Amazon and the prices are comparable so I selected a random one. The quality is not top-notch and out of the two protector glasses, one had so many defect out of the box so I decided to throw it away. The second one looks decent. The English of the instruction was probably Google-translated from Chinese LOL
Putting and removing is actually a piece of cake. I dropped the protector on the screen and it started stick to the screen edge to edge. It can be easily removed using the edge of a piece of paper. The protector is a bit smaller than the screen.
Considering the ease of installation and the cheap price (I paid ~12 CAD tax included) I would say it is worth trying.
-
As the picture quality degradation caused by the filters is unnoticeable...
In the daylight a proper lens hood or for a wide angle or zoom shading the front element with the hand can make a greater difference than removing a filter. Today’s filters with superior coatings can have almost zero effect on an image. I keep a lens hood on all lenses almost all of the time.
At night however a filter can often cause a related ghost from a light source like a street light or car's headlights. At night I frequently remove any filter from my lens.
Dave
-
Always front lens cap when not in use; always lens hood when in use; never filter.
-
I would consider putting a protector filter on a lens only in those marine conditions when you have a lot of salty mist in the air, and salt is quite nasty to remove from a precious front lens.
Otherwise, no filter.
Polariser and close-up lenses? OK with me. The best recent polarisers have nanocoating that repels dust and fingerprints (and they work as advertised!). Cost is a little steep...
Ciao from Massimo
-
Always front lens cap when not in use; always lens hood when in use; never filter.
Exactly.
-
... let get back on track... so do not use screen protectors as well? :)
What is the downside?
-
... let get back on track... so do not use screen protectors as well? :)
What is the downside?
Screen protectors do not alter the image quality, lens protectors do.
Ciao from Massimo
-
Screen protectors do not alter the image quality, lens protectors do.
Ciao from Massimo
Hey, that I understand. Did not try to compare protectors to filters. Just wanted to learn why people are not using protectors.
The downside for me is, instead of a nice LCD, I now have a cheap looking plastic protector. The LCD protector of my D800 got scratched a lot, though. Probably from the sharp edges of the Velcro strips of the dividers, so I'll probably keep the protector on my Z5.
-
While Nikon prosumer cameras are delivered with a plastic screen protector, « pro » cameras are not. What I know for quite sure, is that the screens of the pro cameras are from mineral hardened glass, which is « unscratchable », at least under normal circumstances. Personally I didn’t made any scratches in my single digit cameras (D4s, D5, D6), neither my D850. While I initially followed the trend of applying glass protectors to the rear screen, I quickly abandoned the practice, starting with my D5’s, to never come back. I follow the same policy with my smartphones. But I am a person who handles his equipment carefully, even used professionally. Hope this helps.
-
Not all screen protectors are the same. There are protectors made from a softish plastic and protectors made from a much harder, almost glass-like material. The ones I use on my smartphone and my D7500 are of the latter type, and there are no scratches after two years of hard use. They are typically also better optically than the soft plastic ones.
-
The one I bought from Amazon says "tempered glass" but I can bend, twist it easily so I guess it is actually plastic.
-
The one I bought from Amazon says "tempered glass" but I can bend, twist it easily so I guess it is actually plastic.
You can bend glass.
-
You can bend glass.
...if it is thin and somewhat flexible. How much does it bend?
Dave
The eldest of the starfish
spoke, after a sigh,
"Youthfull as you are young man
you have a 'Wisdom Eye';
Surely you must know a looking-glass
is made from sand?
These youngfish are fooling you
about this banjo man."
--Donovan Leitch
-
Zang, "plastic" was an adjective before it became a noun. ;D
-
@David, @MFloyd - Fact, I did not want to break it (yet) so I think I bent it 1mm at the longer edge :)
@Kenn - They ruined the original meaning LOL
-
Long ago I read that Glass was the first Plastic as it can be shaped when hot and retain its shape when it cools. Even clay can be molded so it must be "plastic" also. :D
-
And I am a keen fan of Philip Glass ;) Not sure this helps ;D
-
A bit off topic, but concrete is classed as a plastic.
Long ago I read that Glass was the first Plastic as it can be shaped when hot and retain its shape when it cools. Even clay can be molded so it must be "plastic" also. :D
-
Long ago I read that Glass was the first Plastic as it can be shaped when hot and retain its shape when it cools. Even clay can be molded so it must be "plastic" also. :D
That's why the glass-mold aspherical elements can be made.
And I am a keen fan of Philip Glass ;) Not sure this helps ;D
He is famous for the minimalistic optical design!
-
Vello makes good screen protectors