# Suggestions for making my gear uglier



## Z (May 9, 2012)

Bit of a strange topic, I know. I'm planning on a bit of travelling this summer. My gear is all insured so this isn't life or death, but I'd like to make my shiny red ring lenses a little less attractive. So I thought 'hey, why not [carefully] cover them in gaffer tape?' ... Opinions? The main thing I'd like to avoid is leaving a sticky residue on the lenses, but I'm told gaffer tape is designed to avoid this. I hope I don't sound like a madman here.


----------



## Canon Rumors Guy (May 9, 2012)

I have taped red rings with hockey tape before, it worked well. Any sticky residue that might be left behind is easily removed with Goo Gone.

I cover all branding and I don't use the supplied Canon straps.


----------



## lonelywhitelights (May 9, 2012)

you could try this less invasive kind of stealth conversion for a white lens using neoprene 

http://www.flickr.com/photos/myartistsoul/5028405791/#sizes/l/in/photostream/


----------



## NWPhil (May 9, 2012)

gaffer's tape...
or Nikon stickers 

now seriously:
gaffer tape, will not leave residue behind.
That neprene sleve is a good idea too if, you have a white lens.
You can consider too a neoprene/rubber body armour thing
But last and not least, is all in the common sense and being discreet. Don't go flashing you camera and lens alone at night, in dark alleys....when in doubt, walk out!
A messenger bag type for carrying the gear, in special if it is a black or dark color one, will help, oposite of the typical gear bag. And get rid of the brand name camera strap. Those neoprene straps do make a difference at day's end, and yes, no logos either.


----------



## unfocused (May 9, 2012)

lonelywhitelights said:


> you could try this less invasive kind of stealth conversion for a white lens using neoprene
> 
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/myartistsoul/5028405791/#sizes/l/in/photostream/



Anybody have a source for these? Are these sleeves cut from sport wear?


----------



## DJL329 (May 9, 2012)

unfocused said:


> lonelywhitelights said:
> 
> 
> > you could try this less invasive kind of stealth conversion for a white lens using neoprene
> ...



LensCoat is one maker of them; they design them for specific lenses in different colors and patterns, including plain black. You can check their website or look up your lens(es) on B&H and check out the Accessories Tab under "Hoods & Covers."

http://www.lenscoat.com/


----------



## mws (May 9, 2012)

Could always get a Nikon strap.........


----------



## Cptn Rigo (May 9, 2012)

NWPhil said:


> gaffer's tape...
> or Nikon stickers



;D LOL


----------



## iaind (May 9, 2012)

An old Minolta or Ricoh strap


----------



## EOBeav (May 9, 2012)

*Re: Just out of curiosity*

When a thief finds a camera, does he/she really look closely to see if it has a red ring?


----------



## preppyak (May 9, 2012)

*Re: Just out of curiosity*



EOBeav said:


> When a thief finds a camera, does he/she really look closely to see if it has a red ring?


This is a fair point. Walking around with a camera with a big lens on will draw enough attention that a thief will target you regardless of how it looks.

But, it is a good idea potentially for concert/event photography. Security guards know to look for the white lenses and red rings; they might overlook something a little less shiny looking.


----------



## JerryKnight (May 9, 2012)

*Re: Just out of curiosity*



preppyak said:


> EOBeav said:
> 
> 
> > When a thief finds a camera, does he/she really look closely to see if it has a red ring?
> ...



So maybe the solution would be for LensCoat to manufacture a sleeve system that makes it look like you dropped the lens down a flight of stairs or used it for 30 years. Looks like a Canon lens, but adds gashes, scratches, scuffs, etc.

To potential thieves, the apparent resale value would go down quite a bit.


----------



## AmbientLight (May 9, 2012)

Perhaps it is just me, but I am getting perplexed here.

I travel a lot internationally (mostly in Europe, the Middle East, Asia and the U.S.) and have never gotten into any situation, where I feared my gear might be stolen and yes, I usually carry a lot of equipment including a white lens (70-200 f2.8 IS) with me, so I am not exactly hiding anything. Did anyone experience a situation where you had gear stolen or thiefs trying to steal your gear? Although I travel quite a lot I am not used to it.

All those suggestions for hiding your gear appear to me pretty well thought through, but why would I do this?


----------



## JRS (May 9, 2012)

*Re: Just out of curiosity*



EOBeav said:


> When a thief finds a camera, does he/she really look closely to see if it has a red ring?



IMHO, 99% of people don't know what that "red ring" means...


----------



## NWPhil (May 9, 2012)

AmbientLight:

lucky and smart you to never ever been in the wrong place at the right time - or vice -versa.
I had a few close calls in Boston, and while travelling, I do avoid night photography and wandering around if I am alone, or outside fairly busy/crowded areas

Truth is, most gear get stolen from inside cars or homes. Another percentage is sort of found and never returned, which is technically theft - I think it goes along the lines of any item/object valued more than $100 found, you have the obligation to try to return it to the rightfull owner, or an official entity that can do such.
Don't quote me on this, but I am not too far away from the truth.

Now, go find yourself at night, taking pictures alone in a city street, chances are that you are going to get robbed, if you insist flashing around your big camera. and lens...

Common sense will go a longer way than any lens and camera cammo


----------



## AmbientLight (May 9, 2012)

You are certainly correct that where you are and at which time does make a lot of difference. Not knowing an area, before you go there is of course also a potential risk.


----------



## NWPhil (May 9, 2012)

*Re: Just out of curiosity*



JRS said:


> EOBeav said:
> 
> 
> > When a thief finds a camera, does he/she really look closely to see if it has a red ring?
> ...



+1


----------



## nebugeater (May 9, 2012)

*Re: Just out of curiosity*



JRS said:


> EOBeav said:
> 
> 
> > When a thief finds a camera, does he/she really look closely to see if it has a red ring?
> ...



...........May of those that are out to rip you off will


----------



## Razor2012 (May 10, 2012)

I don't know but I think a lot of thieves that go after high-tech equipment might know what the 'red ring' means.


----------



## wickidwombat (May 10, 2012)

is this an america only thing? I've been all over the world (except america) and never ever felt remotely concerned about being robbed for my camera gear, obviously i keep it close at ahand and dont leave it lying around for opportunistic thieves but as for being assaulted and robbed? no way


----------



## RendrLab (May 10, 2012)

If you are really that concerned that someone will see you walking around with a fancy camera and target you for theft, then you must be going somewhere dangerous and nothing you do to camouflage it will make one bit of difference. I mean, if you're planning on going to Libya or Iran or some place like that, your red ringed lenses are not what is going to draw their attention anyway. What will draw their attention is a fanny pack, camera bag of any sort, or anything that makes you look like you don't live down the street from them. If you are of a different ethnic background then your surroundings, you may as well paint yourself bright pink because in a dangerous place, camera or no camera, you can easily become a target/victim regardless of what you do.

My suggestions are no bag on your shoulder, use a BlackRapid strap or something similar and keep the camera concealed the best you can. 

You could always go to a sign shop and have them design you a wrap for your camera/lenses. I actually did vehicle wraps for a long time and the vinyl used for them is very conformable, so a round lens and curvy camera is no problem for someone that actually knows what they are doing. Also, wrap vinyl is designed for easy removal with little to no damage to car paint after 7 years. So, wrap vinyl on your camera for even 6 months will not hurt a single part of your camera and goo won't be a factor either as it won't have time to seperate from the vinyl. IF by chance there is a tiny bit of goo after removal, you can get Rapid Remover (sign shops use it and swear by it) and it will be gone in less then 10 seconds with no damage to your camera.

If you don't want to wrap your stuff, you could still go to a sign shop and have them contour-cut you a few pieces of matte black vinyl to at least cover up the logos on your camera/lenses.

Just my 2 cents...


----------



## imkev (May 10, 2012)

wickidwombat said:


> is this an america only thing? I've been all over the world (except america) and never ever felt remotely concerned about being robbed for my camera gear, obviously i keep it close at ahand and dont leave it lying around for opportunistic thieves but as for being assaulted and robbed? no way



Just like everywhere else, America has its bad spots, some worse than others, and the few that you just dont want to ever go near. As far as the "bad" places, most of the people that would attempt to do you harm wouldnt know the difference between a disposable and a dslr, they would just take it from you either way. For the most part though they are going to leave you alone if you leave them alone. Just remember, safety in numbers so bring a friend or two and let someone who isnt there know where you are and when you expect to return...

Oh yeah, and dont be flashy with your gear or clothing either...


----------



## Cosk (May 10, 2012)

I travel to some pretty sketchy places with my gear, and I do tape my camera. I'm a big fan of black Gaffer's tape - I cover the red rings, the canon and 5D badges, the bottom, and the prism bump to help prevent scuffing. I also put it on the grip - I like the feel and I cover the on/off switch and the diopter adjustment - so I don't inadvertantly bump them anymore. 

Gaffer's tape never leaves a residue and never comes off unless you want it to. Be careful putting it over any serial number stickers - it's so strong it will pull them off when you remove it. 

The bigger thing is to get rid of your Canon strap... I like Domke or Gordy's straps. Also, I use a domke messenger bag instead of a traditional camera bag. 

Now, all that said, putting black gaffers tape over your camera will not prevent it from getting stolen. I do it because I just like how it looks - my personal preference. Keeping a hand on your camera and being observant are the only things that will keep it safer. And bring a point-and-shoot or two as backup. 

but don't so afraid that you don't take a camera with you... some of the best photo ops are in the most dangerous places.


----------



## expatinasia (May 10, 2012)

*Re: Just out of curiosity*



preppyak said:


> But, it is a good idea potentially for concert/event photography. Security guards know to look for the white lenses and red rings; they might overlook something a little less shiny looking.



True, but security are only looking for people that shouldn't be shooting - not accredited media. Just look at the regulations on taking pictures at the Olympics, if you are not authorised, I would imagine you will have a very hard time getting anything of size in whether it is bright pink, or as black as a ninja.

I really do not get the camouflage issue unless you are doing something a little (or a lot) iffy, or shooting wildlife (and even then) or if you are in a war zone/dangerous place. And are thieves so tech-savvy that they wander around looking for people with cameras, and just because it is has a black lens they let them pass - it could be a quality Nikon lens.

The link with the neoprene sleeve looks good, but just its sheer size would indicate it is of a certain quality.


----------



## EOBeav (May 10, 2012)

My gear was stolen once. They took a Rebel with a 75-300mm f/5.6. You know the one. I doubt they even knew the difference. What's more, I was able to replace it with a 70-200mm f/4 L. Good trade.


----------



## sparda79 (May 10, 2012)

*Re: Just out of curiosity*



JRS said:


> EOBeav said:
> 
> 
> > When a thief finds a camera, does he/she really look closely to see if it has a red ring?
> ...



unless it's a "red ring on a white lens"...


----------



## EOBeav (May 10, 2012)

*Re: Just out of curiosity*

I guess my question was meant to be taken rhetorically, as if the answer was already there. That's difficult sometimes to convey that online, though. My point was that if somebody is looking for something to steal, they're going to take it whether you've got an L lens attached or not. 



JRS said:


> EOBeav said:
> 
> 
> > When a thief finds a camera, does he/she really look closely to see if it has a red ring?
> ...


----------



## archangelrichard (May 10, 2012)

Seriously

either a thief knows you and your equipment (and where it is and what it is worth) or they most likely don't know a dam thing about cameras but that they are hockable for money and / or drugs. They would as like steal a Rebel XS (film, worth about 40) as a Digital XS (worth around 3 - 400); They just see a camera

I don't use a camera bag when I am not able to lock them up unseen / unviewable; the cheapest trick is to buy what looks like a kids backpack, gymbag, things that do not look like they would hold anything of significant value that can be hocked easily -- make it look like "not worth the effort" to steal

Get a bag that fits in with the surroundings, make it look less like you are a dumb tourist who doesn't know the customs (note: I pack equipment inside towels, etc so the shape isn't obvious // added protection)


----------



## briansquibb (May 10, 2012)

If I am being a tourist I always have the camera hooked onto my BR and tucked under a loose coat.

This is when I roll out the 7D and the 70-300L as the cheapest and lightest.


----------



## Marsu42 (May 14, 2012)

*Re: Just out of curiosity*



Canon Rumors said:


> I have taped red rings with hockey tape before, it worked well. Any sticky residue that might be left behind is easily removed with Goo Gone.



Same for me - and taping your lens even protects its edges if you bump into something. I did this to my 70-300L to make it look less like a "red ring big white here comes the money lens".



EOBeav said:


> My point was that if somebody is looking for something to steal, they're going to take it whether you've got an L lens attached or not.



But taping the lens does it make it look amazingly cheap, so it at least lessens the chance of theft a bit. It's like with bikes - make your bike look bad, get a good lock and always put it to a more expensive one with a cheap lock...


----------



## Z (May 14, 2012)

Thanks for all the replies to this thread - even a reply from CR guy himself... I'm a little starstruck.

I'll go ahead with gaffing up my lens(es) and post a photo when I'm done, if anyone cares


----------



## EOBeav (May 14, 2012)

Conversation that a camera thief has with himself:


> Hey, a camera! Oh, it's just a Rebel with a 75-300mm f/5.6. Clarity and chromatic aberration are both notably poor on this glass. I guess I'll just leave it alone.



Or how about this one?


> Hey a camera! And it's a 5DmkIII with a 70-200mm f/2.8 L, non-IS. Exceptional IQ, and the bokeh quality is to die for. I'd better grab it before somebody else does.


----------

