UV camera filters are overrated
 

Got this link from a camera forum.

<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/q7SxrVMNR_Y?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/q7SxrVMNR_Y?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>

Ouch!

Sherwood

And to think...back in the film days, we'd screw on a UV filter for lens protection...:D

Any images recovered from the camera?

Oh well, put a camera on the wall at a drag strip and guess what?
$6000.00 lens? Not my league.

The D3s is pretty hardy body the lens is fragile.

This guy's a pro I'm sure he covered.

I would not hug the wall during that type of action.

Great video and stills

MT... It was a remote setup. He wasn't standing near the wall.

I noticed that, the technology saved him.

I would stick the lens through the fence to get shots in the old days.

Found these from IMS in May
Photographer unknown, Great Shots

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1289627805.jpg
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1289627823.jpg
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1289627841.jpg

Milt, I think it's all relative. As MT said, the guy is probably a pro, so while it may have hurt as it happened, he'll write it off as a hazard of work and insurance will take care of it. The guy driving just wrote off his car too... The hazards of his job.

Not many amateur photogs that will have $12,000 worth of kit like that.

Sherwood, the problem is NOT that UV camera filters are overrated.

Instead he was using the wrong kind of filter.

Dragsters do not emit in the UV range -- they do emit a bit in the visible light range and a LOT in the IR range.

If he had an IR filter on the lense, everything would have been just fine.

Q.E.D.