1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

    Any content, information, or advice found on social media platforms and the wider Internet, including forums such as AP, should NOT be acted upon unless checked against a reliable, authoritative source, and re-checked, particularly where personal health is at stake. Seek professional advice/confirmation before acting on such at all times.

Some thoughts on screen protectors

Discussion in 'General Equipment Chat & Advice' started by GeoffR, Dec 21, 2019.

  1. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    When I bought my second D3 in 2015 it came with a screen protector, this seemed like a good idea to me so I bought another one for the other D3. In the intervening nearly five years I have broken two, both on the same camera. As the camera came with a Giotos glass screen protector, when the first one broke I bought another one of the same make now that one has broken too.

    Neither suffered the kind of impact that would break the camera's screen, what happened was that the edge of the protector got chipped and then a crack developed across the whole thing. I am still not sure what caused the original chip at the edge but I can say that I am wary of this particular make. The edges seem to be proud of the back of the camera and very vulnerable to being knocked.

    The question I now have to answer is, do I buy a replacement or do I use the camera without? The D3 is now an old camera, a very capable one but its successor's, successor's replacement is promised for next year.
  2. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    I've never bothered. They seem fairly tough. But I regard the camera more as a tool than anything, not too bothered about whether it has to look pristine at some point in the future should I wish to trade it in. My 5D screen was OK after 9 years of use. I think my 1Div has a slight mark on it (bought 2012) and that gets bumped around a fair bit.
  3. daft_biker

    daft_biker Action Man!

  4. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    daft_biker likes this.
  5. SqueamishOssifrage

    SqueamishOssifrage Well-Known Member

    I have one on both my Sonys, and one of them fell on grenade for the greater good. I replace the protectors at he least sign of damage, and both cameras have immaculate screens after eight years of use, and 12 K frames each...so I guess I'm a believer.
  6. RobertCoombes

    RobertCoombes Well-Known Member

    I have a D70 and a D90 both came with hard plastic screen protectors. I have recently bought a D7500 that came with no protector. On enquiring I learnt that none is available.
  7. EightBitTony

    EightBitTony Well-Known Member

    I'm a firm believer that screen protectors are a cynical attempt to earn money from something which is unnecessary.

    True for cameras as it is for phones.
    daft_biker likes this.
  8. dream_police

    dream_police Well-Known Member

    I disagree. The screen on my Panasonic with a protector on it is in far better condition (as new) than that of my daughters same camera without.
    SqueamishOssifrage likes this.
  9. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    Going back a bit, the Nikon D2 came with a plastic screen protector that had two lugs at the top that fitted into two sockets on the underside of the finder eyepiece surround and another small ones at the bottom that fitted into a land above the bottom display. Move forward to the D3 and the sockets and the land are still present but no screen protector. Forward a few more years and the D4 and the same fittings are still present despite the screen being substantially bigger (D4 3.5" D2 2.5"), the lugs on a D2 screen protector will fit in the sockets on a D4.

    Nikon will tell you that the actual window on the D3 is tougher than that on the D2 and the protector is no longer needed, similarly the D4, but for some reason they still have the attachment points for screen protector.

    Not that the D2 item is very helpful, it stands a couple of mm away from the screen and there is a gap at the sides, when the camera rubs on the fabric of the photographers clothes it liberates dust which promptly gets between the protector and the screen. It doesn't take long for the view to be obscured meaning the screen protector has to be removed to see the screen! The plastic is also easily scratched. Almost anything is more useful than a D2 screen protector but I still have the one on my D2X.

    12K in eight years seems low, I have taken 11K with my D4 in 17 months you are obviously a more discerning photographer.
  10. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    My iPad mini 4 has a screen protector because the screen is so badly damaged that without the protector I would need to replace it. (Bought used)
  11. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    Both our iPads are held together with sticky tape - to protect fingers from the sharp edges of the broken glass. It is amazing how they still work. Beware of bags that have both a rear pocket and an open pocket for slinging on a wheeled bag handle. That's how our iPads get broke - iPad in bag, bag out of car, iPad on concrete.
  12. nimbus

    nimbus Well-Known Member

    My Nikon D610 came with the clip-on Nikon protector and it does itself have some light marks, I leave it on. My spare D3200 body had a glass type fitted when I bought it from CEX, I don't really fancy trying to remove it. My other cameras have the low cost plastic film type to prevent scratching, I feel that if a protector received a heavy knock it would be unable to save the screen anyway, you have to take some risks.
  13. Footloose

    Footloose Well-Known Member

    I suppose it would be far too difficult for camera manufacturers to recess or have a protruding lip around the edge of the screen?
  14. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    They seem to try very hard to have the screen flush with the back of the camera or the mounting frame on articulated screens.

Share This Page