ahsanford said:Just a first glance look at this thing:
11) Takes 2 hands to put it on and remove it, judging by the video
Upvote
0
ahsanford said:Just a first glance look at this thing:
ahsanford said:unfocused said:I could not believe they were actually suggesting that these rubber sleeves would provide any real protection for a lens that gets dropped (as shown in the video). They better put aside a significant portion of their proceeds to hire a good attorney when some fool bounces his lens on the ground and then points to the video as an implied promise that their little sleeve was supposed to protect the lens.
I believe they did this to show that the silicone stays in place even in the event of a drop, something a traditional lens cap typically won't do. But I agree, it's irresponsible to imply you are drop-proofing your lens. Try that same test with a heavier lens and it won't matter if there's a small margin of silicone -- that lens would be toast.
- A
neuroanatomist said:I have an idea for an even better, more protective universal lens cap...with even more bounciness! Where can I get kickstarted?
unfocused said:I can't believe that more than 500 people thought this was a good enough idea to actually pledge money for this product.
Or maybe, they just have really big families.
slclick said:I was just talking to my preteen son about how things that try and do everything do many things only mediocre to poorly and things that have solitary purpose tend to do them much better. But hey, I don't have a marketing degree.
unfocused said:I am really, really hoping the Kuvrd person will see this thread and react like that crazy filter guy and start picking fights. We could use the entertainment.
jolyonralph said:Also, I guess people are running out of sensible names now that haven't been used by everyone else.
neuroanatomist said:unfocused said:I can't believe that more than 500 people thought this was a good enough idea to actually pledge money for this product.
Cameron: But we don't have any money.
Michael: Yeah, well, what we need is a backer.
Cameron: What's that?
Michael: Someone with money who's stupid.
</obscure movie reference>
slclick said:I can't help but think it was devised for another use (which failed) and they repurposed it.
ahsanford said:jolyonralph said:Also, I guess people are running out of sensible names now that haven't been used by everyone else.
Millenials in rock bands, entrepreneurial endeavors, etc. absolutely LOV dropping letters from existing words to name their projects. It gets them:
- Top of google's search results -- if this thing was called 'Covered' it would get lost amongst insurance carriers, CoveredCA, tupperware, trash can lids, etc.
- A free lane towards trademarking as there's very little chance of this being used elsewhere
- A free lane towards social media handles so that their identity is 100% consistent across all platforms (FB, Twitter, business URL, IG, etc.)
- The hip millennial startup vibe -- love it or hate it, it's a thing and has proven successful commercially
I'm no fan of it myself, but they are not doing it without good reason.
- A
ahsanford said:neuroanatomist said:slclick said:I can't help but think it was devised for another use (which failed) and they repurposed it.
Some other purpose for which an impermeable rubber slip-on barrier is required? :-X
Yep. Was thinking the same thing.
PVC piping end-caps.
- A
basisunus said:The only lens that I have is Canon TS-E 17mm F/4L
unfocused said:ahsanford said:Just a first glance look at this thing:...
...this appears to be a textbook example of a solution looking for a problem, or possibly someone with tunnel vision on one design concept despite it blowing up 6-7 other requirements that are already being well met with current technology.
I was tempted to dissect this as well, but you've done a great job.
Can't resist adding:
I believe the video specifically mentions the beach and/or sand. I can just imagine the damage these things would do once you get some sand inside and it starts to grind into your lens.
I could not believe they were actually suggesting that these rubber sleeves would provide any real protection for a lens that gets dropped (as shown in the video). They better put aside a significant portion of their proceeds to hire a good attorney when some fool bounces his lens on the ground and then points to the video as an implied promise that their little sleeve was supposed to protect the lens.
I really do hope that they call the largest size "magnum."
Thanks CR Guy for posting this. It's a fantastic break from all the dreary fights over Canon's impending doom.
slclick said:"Thanks CR Guy for posting this. It's a fantastic break from all the dreary fights over Canon's impending doom."
AND endless yammering about 85mm lenses. Wait...will this fit my 85?
ahsanford said:unfocused said:I could not believe they were actually suggesting that these rubber sleeves would provide any real protection for a lens that gets dropped (as shown in the video). They better put aside a significant portion of their proceeds to hire a good attorney when some fool bounces his lens on the ground and then points to the video as an implied promise that their little sleeve was supposed to protect the lens.
I believe they did this to show that the silicone stays in place even in the event of a drop, something a traditional lens cap typically won't do. But I agree, it's irresponsible to imply you are drop-proofing your lens. Try that same test with a heavier lens and it won't matter if there's a small margin of silicone -- that lens would be toast.
- A