Camera Armor

[Bosk]

Walking past a camera shop today (a yucky, digital only one) I spied something in the window I hadn't seen before, a new product called 'camera armor'.

I looked it up on the web tonight and found the site behind the product, http://www.camerarmor.com/.


Needless to say they look pretty cheap and horrible, (as if DSLRs didnt look like toys enough already) but I think they're a good concept.
They're made out of that spongy silicone rubber stuff which I know is also used to make iPod shields and those are pretty good at absorbing hard knocks.

Given how delicate rangefinders can be (particularly when it comes to bumps on the top plate) these 'plastic jackets' seem like something that'd be useful, on long trips especially.


What's everyone else think?

 

[Keith]

Certainly looks ugly ... but if it saves an expensive camera from a drop on to concrete or similar it's a worthwhile piece of ugliness I guess!

What a way to dress up an M3! 😛

 

[MartinP]

I saw these things in the context of multi-kilogramme DSLRs as well. I couldn't help thinking that what protected a 30 gramme iPod was going to be somewhat less effective when the huge camera got dropped or bashed. I suppose that the paint and surface would be protected but, with so much weight involved, a heavy knock is going to be just as traumatic.

Amusingly, the article I saw also said that it made pressing all the digital buttons very awkward !! However, I would think that for rangefinders this could be a slinky, modern alternative to a leather half-case ? A new idea for CQ ? Unfortunately the setup costs for the moulding probably mean it cannot happen 🙁

 

[Bill58]

Noooooooooooo...

These are used by people who put perspex covers on their headlights that cost more than the headlight glass, who scotchgard their silk ties, who wrap themselves and their every possession in virtual or literal cottonwool, and who believe everyone they don't know personally for less than a lustrum is out to get them.

Ghastly.

Regards,

Bill

Maybe these same guys also wear double "raincoats".

 

[sweathog]

I've had a chance to look at some of these up close and personal at work. They are foul little things. They smell, look and feel horrible. Also, given the price of them they don't cover very much camera, still leaving it vulnerable to 'sticky-out-bits-of-surface-dropped-onto'. My colleague and I realised that the cost (depending on variety) about 50%-75% of damage cover, and IMO I'd rather insure my kit than put that gunk on it.

 

[TheHub]

Good lord is that ugly. As if dSLRs these days weren't hideous enough 🙄

The testemonials are rather humorous.

 

[Pablito]

Maybe these same guys also wear double "raincoats".

heh heh...everything on their website has a "double meaning"....PLAY SAFE!!!

 

[Sparrow]

heh heh...everything on their website has a "double meaning"....PLAY SAFE!!!

Particularly if, as I did, you read the title of the OP as Camera Amor
😱

 

[Magus]

Post deleted by posters request

 

[shadowfox]

Particularly if, as I did, you read the title of the OP as Camera Amor
😱

Well, the product does make things bigger than they actually are, as in a way to compensate for ... er, something 😀.




sorry... it's late fried-day.

 

[John Robertson]

Maybe these same guys also wear double "raincoats".

or daipers + underpants😛

 

[Peter_Jones]

The "lens hood" bit is useless, they just ping off or cannot be fitted successfully. Leather ERC or half-case will give the same or better protection without going odd like most rubber products do.

 

[John Robertson]

Odd rubber products??? where is this going????😱

 

[thomasw_]

never. no way. no. forget about it.

 

[goo0h]

That's funny. Rangefinder rubbers. I wonder if that's something Stephen would carry?

 

[jpbob100]

That's funny. Rangefinder rubbers. I wonder if that's something Stephen would carry?

For those who want to practice "safe" photography.😱

 

[daaris]

Funny the responses to such a simple product, I am on "the other side" here. I purchased one for my dslr, it is great, I love it. It does not smell, the grip(to me) feels great around the camera. It fits like a glove covering the entire camera perfectly, while retaining all button functionality, and as far as the look, it is almost the same exact color as my camera and has no writing, brand name or other on it.... just plain flat black. Overall it is an unobtrusive and simple product.

For the downsides, the lens armor is not that great in my opinion(it came with the camera armor). The armor does add a little bulk to an already bulky camera. I do not care for the looks of my dslr so this armor doesn't really effect my opinion here, again the armor looks identical to the body of the camera without the brand name or model badges on the outside. Then there is functionality, how much would it really protect. Well, nothing will protect our cameras from damage resulting from being dropped aside from always wearing a good strap, and caution. The armor does feel rather absorbent(more so than traditional leather cases) for accidentally banging it into the door facing when leaving the house/area in a hurry when not in a bag, plopping it down on a table, the day to day dings and bumps that make us whence a little and think - that was a little to hard. Lastly, the cost was around $50, which seems like a bit much for rubber.

If one was made for my RF cameras I would purchase one. Also, I hold this opinion and own no scotchgarded ties.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/488149-REG/Camera_Armor_CA1120BLK_Canon_20D_Camera_Armor.html

 

[BillBingham2]

It’s for practicing safe photography!

B2 (;->

 

[__hh]

one word describes it... "fugly"