how bad is it to take the lens off with the camera on at DVinfo.net

Dylan Couper · September 4th, 2002, 10:08 PM

I'm asking for this guy I know who might have accidently taken off his lens while his camera was on for about 4 seconds. His XL1 may not have been on, he's not sure. How much bad stuff may have occured to the camera if this was the case?

Ken Tanaka · September 4th, 2002, 10:30 PM

The proof's in the pudding; how did the camera image after he put it back together? Color shifted? Exposure blown-out?

As long as the camera wasn't pointed toward a very bright subject it's probably ok. But definitely not a maneuver to be repeated.

Dylan Couper · September 4th, 2002, 11:08 PM

I'm not sure actually if he had any immediate effects. I didn't go into details about it. Would any effects like that be permanent, or once the camera was shut down, would they reset?

Even if it looks fine, should there be any worry of sublte damage to the CCDs?

All I know is it would have happened inside, so that would limit the light. Probably.

Ken Tanaka · September 4th, 2002, 11:13 PM

I would imagine that any damage would appear immediately. I think CCD's are relatively robust within reason.

Simon Plissi · September 5th, 2002, 01:58 AM

I've removed the lens with the camera on a few times to no ill effect. All you have to do is re-colour balance and fix a few other camera settings, probably depends on which mode you're in at the time. Since the camera is designed to allow the removal of the lens I would expect they designed the camera accordingly.

Bill Ravens · September 5th, 2002, 07:16 AM

The CCD's are designed to accept light collected by the lens and focused on the image plane...ie the CCD itself. Diffuse light, that is to say, unfocused light, won't hurt the CCD's at all.

Nathan Gifford · September 5th, 2002, 07:17 AM

The book says that the camera should be turned off when removing or attaching the lens (page 9 XL-1 Instruction Manual). It is a shame its on page 9 because Canon shows how to attach and remove the lens on page 8!

Another thing if you are getting the flashing "lens" indicator and are using either the EF or extender w/o a lens mounted, you will also get this indication.

http://www.canondv.com/downloads/manuals/ins_xl1.pdf

Keith Loh · September 5th, 2002, 10:42 AM

So, "this guy". Was it you?

Ken Tanaka · September 5th, 2002, 11:46 AM

I wasn't going anywhere near THAT question, Keith. <g>

Dylan Couper · September 6th, 2002, 12:08 AM

Nope! If it WAS me, I would have phrased the question "SO this MORON I know..." :)

Actually I haven't had to change lenses at all since I got that second XL1 body from Ken. However, I did get quite worried about my first camera, because I know I've done this in the past without thinking about it.

September 4th, 2002, 10:08 PM	#1
Dylan Couper Wrangler Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Vancouver, British Columbia Posts: 8,314	how bad is it to take the lens off with the camera on I'm asking for this guy I know who might have accidently taken off his lens while his camera was on for about 4 seconds. His XL1 may not have been on, he's not sure. How much bad stuff may have occured to the camera if this was the case?

September 4th, 2002, 10:30 PM	#2
Ken Tanaka Retired DV Info Net Almunus Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 6,943	The proof's in the pudding; how did the camera image after he put it back together? Color shifted? Exposure blown-out? As long as the camera wasn't pointed toward a very bright subject it's probably ok. But definitely not a maneuver to be repeated. __________________ Lady X Films: A lady with a boring wardrobe...and a global mission. Hey, you don't have enough stuff! Buy with confidence from our sponsors. Hand-picked as the best in the business...Really! See some of my work one frame at a time: www.KenTanaka.com

September 4th, 2002, 11:13 PM	#4
Ken Tanaka Retired DV Info Net Almunus Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 6,943	I would imagine that any damage would appear immediately. I think CCD's are relatively robust within reason. __________________ Lady X Films: A lady with a boring wardrobe...and a global mission. Hey, you don't have enough stuff! Buy with confidence from our sponsors. Hand-picked as the best in the business...Really! See some of my work one frame at a time: www.KenTanaka.com

September 5th, 2002, 07:17 AM	#7
Nathan Gifford Wrangler Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Tickfaw, LA Posts: 1,217	The book says that the camera should be turned off when removing or attaching the lens (page 9 XL-1 Instruction Manual). It is a shame its on page 9 because Canon shows how to attach and remove the lens on page 8! Another thing if you are getting the flashing "lens" indicator and are using either the EF or extender w/o a lens mounted, you will also get this indication. http://www.canondv.com/downloads/manuals/ins_xl1.pdf __________________ Nathan Gifford Southern Cyclist Magazine & Productions For quick answers try our Search! To see me and Rob Lohman click here

September 5th, 2002, 10:42 AM	#8
Keith Loh Air China Pilot Join Date: May 2002 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Posts: 2,389	So, "this guy". Was it you? __________________ -- Visit http://www.KeithLoh.com \| stuff about living in Vancouver \| My Flickr photo gallery

September 4th, 2002, 11:08 PM	#3
Dylan Couper Wrangler Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Vancouver, British Columbia Posts: 8,314	I'm not sure actually if he had any immediate effects. I didn't go into details about it. Would any effects like that be permanent, or once the camera was shut down, would they reset? Even if it looks fine, should there be any worry of sublte damage to the CCDs? All I know is it would have happened inside, so that would limit the light. Probably.

September 5th, 2002, 01:58 AM	#5
Simon Plissi Regular Crew Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: London, UK Posts: 105	I've removed the lens with the camera on a few times to no ill effect. All you have to do is re-colour balance and fix a few other camera settings, probably depends on which mode you're in at the time. Since the camera is designed to allow the removal of the lens I would expect they designed the camera accordingly.

September 5th, 2002, 07:16 AM	#6
Bill Ravens Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: santa fe, nm Posts: 3,264 Images: 10	The CCD's are designed to accept light collected by the lens and focused on the image plane...ie the CCD itself. Diffuse light, that is to say, unfocused light, won't hurt the CCD's at all.

September 5th, 2002, 11:46 AM	#9
Ken Tanaka Retired DV Info Net Almunus Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 6,943	I wasn't going anywhere near THAT question, Keith. <g> __________________ Lady X Films: A lady with a boring wardrobe...and a global mission. Hey, you don't have enough stuff! Buy with confidence from our sponsors. Hand-picked as the best in the business...Really! See some of my work one frame at a time: www.KenTanaka.com

September 6th, 2002, 12:08 AM	#10
Dylan Couper Wrangler Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Vancouver, British Columbia Posts: 8,314	Nope! If it WAS me, I would have phrased the question "SO this MORON I know..." :) Actually I haven't had to change lenses at all since I got that second XL1 body from Ken. However, I did get quite worried about my first camera, because I know I've done this in the past without thinking about it.