Advice on LCD protectors

<p>A lot of reviewers on Amazon are recommending LCD protectors that happen to be glass. On reviewer, however, did say that when his protector cracked, it scratched the actual LCD screen beneath it because, well, glass scratches. I would think plastic would be best. Any experience with cracking protectors?</p>

<p>I am not sure exactly your question but as a general rule glass is a lot harder (scratch resistant) than plastic but more fragile (prone to cracking). Nowadays, however, there are glass screens that are very tough, flexible and heat proof. If I was making a choice for a screen I would choose glass.</p>

<p>Given the durability of modern screens, I would not choose any "protector." All they're going to do is reduce viability to the LCD with minimal benefit.</p>

<p>But if that glass protector breaks, then it will scratch the LCD underneath, right? That's what one person's experience was. So while it may protect the LCD from shattering if the protector breaks, it won't protect the LCD from scratching. The broken glass of the protector will scratch the LCD.</p>

<p>The plastic they use for LCD screens are incredibly scratch resistant. My opinion is that "protecting" it is a waste of time.</p>

<p>I use a <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=Delkin+pop+up+shades&N=0&InitialSearch=yes&sts=ma&Top+Nav-Search=">Delkin Devices</a> pop-up shade. Good protection, and it serves as a sun shade when using it in the field...</p>

<p>When my dslr was new (2006) I too thought it would be a good idea to put some kind of protector on the lcd screen. I looked and researched till I was blue in the face. As time went by I just sort of forgot about it because I noticed it just wasn't getting any scratches on it. I use this camera almost daily and it's almost never in a camera bag. It now has a couple of "slight" scratches on the screen, but it in NO way inhibits my use of any function. Bottom line Chris is, it's your camera and money waste it as you will. ;-)</p>

<p>Screen protectors = total and complete waste of time and money.</p>

<p>I use flexible plastic LCD protectors (similar to what I bet lots of you use on your smartphones), and I'm very happy to do so - they're cheap, they <em>do </em>protect the LCD from scratches (and yes, I've badly scratched LCDs before), and in no way do they inhibit the usability of the LCD.</p>

<p>There's no good reason not to use them if you use your kit in relatively rough-on-kit situations: shooting wildlife and sport, I wouldn't be without them.</p>

<p>Screen protectors = total and complete waste of time and money"</p>

<p>Maybe. But I'm a firm believer in the principle that the disasters you're prepared for are less likely to happen...</p>

<blockquote>But if that glass protector breaks, then it will scratch the LCD underneath, right?</blockquote>

<p>No. A more accurate statement would be "But if that glass protector breaks, then it <strong><em>may </em></strong>scratch the LCD underneath."</p>

<p>The bottom line is that you don't know how hard that person whacked their camera, they may blame the protector, but it certainly is possible that the whack was hard enough that it would have scratched the LCD regardless (most likely it would have, and gone through the protector regardless of composition). </p>

<p>Personally, I use the plastic ones. I get enough sand, dirt, and abrasions on the camera that I have scratched the LCDs before (glass and plastic screens alike), and I feel that one more layer of protection can't really hurt -It never affected the visibility when I was gimping, and if you are relying on the LCD to faithfully show you the image you've captured, then, IMO, you are making an error. IMO An 'optically perfect' protector <em>is</em> a waste, since what comes through the glass isn't a 'perfect' picture anyway. And when the plastic one get scuffed enough to bother me, I can peel it off and replace it easily.</p>

<p>My vote goes to "waste of time and money." None of my Canon DSLRs show any significant scratching, going all the way back to my original 20D. All of my cameras travel in bags, on straps, in weather, etc. Maybe there is some microscopic scratching going on that I haven't noticed, as all I really use the LCDs for is watching the histogram and "blinkies". I can't imagine a use for the LCD that would be affected by almost transparent scratches. I think the sellers of screen protectors have an incredibly high gross profit margin interest to protect!</p>

<p>I have never put a "protector" on my cameras and I wouldn't do so. The glass is pretty durable and replaceable in the unlikely circumstance that you do damage it.</p>

<p>I have a seven year old 5D and a four year old 5D2, both heavily used - no damage to the screens at all.</p>

<p>Dan</p>

<p>Buy a set of those thin mobile phone screen protectors and cut one to shape. Cheap, replaceable, effective.</p>

<p>I got a Delkin pop-up shade for my 1Ds2. It was very poorly made and the two springs to make it pop up soon broke. Then the rubber eyecup also started to become loose and flabby and get in the way. So I don't recommend one of these.</p>

<p>If you plan to sell your camera second-hand then you may get a higher price if you can say there are no scratches on the rear LCD. In that case maybe get a thin plastic film, like the ones you buy for your smartphone. Otherwise, I wouldn't bother with any protector.</p>

<p>I did completely crack the rear LCD on an old Kodak DSLR - I could have done with a protector for that - but the Canon ones are much better built.</p>

<p>As far as I know, Nikon still supply a travel protector that is easily removable. I still like thin plastic protectors though they can be tricky to place without bubbles. But glass? I would worry about an extra layer of reflection there. And I've never had a cracked plastic protector.</p>

I believe there is a reason Canon doesn't supply a screen protector (and Nikon does). My cameras' displays don't show

scratches, back to my 20D with well over 100k shutter actions, to my newer 7D. My friend's Nikons have the LCD

protector all the time, and I always think is a waste to have a high tech screen if you will hide it beneath a piece of cheap

plastic.

 

I made a decision to rather have the outer layer of the screen replaced than having something on top of it when I bought

the 20D some 9 years ago... and never had to replace it.

<p>I thought I would need a protector on my EOS 400d maybe 6 years ago, so got one of those rubber shell arrangements with acrylic LCD protector. Waste of time; no cover, never any damage, though I'm probably a little careful. Use it lots, but admittedly mainly for work, so I don't drag it around a lot now. 18-55 lens is getting forgetful from knocking around, but LCD screen only vaguely damaged.<br>

Leica M9, nearly 3 years ago, thought this would be even tougher, so a doddle. Same treatment, but grey paint scratching off, LCD screen visibly scratching, after around 4 months, so now, grungy tape all over the exposed parts of the body and replace plastic self adhesive LCD protector yearly.<br>

So, both, in my opinion, great cameras, but viva Canon for good basic homework. Leica had to bring out a new model to install new miracle harder glass.</p>

<p>Thanks for all the opinions, people.</p>

<p>The LCD screen covers on most Canon DSLR cameras are replaceable. Canon sell the parts and they are no more expensive than a decent screen protector. So why bother? Do you buy a protector for your car windscreen/windshield?</p>

<p><em>"</em><em>Given the durability of modern screens, I would not choose any "protector." All they're going to do is reduce viability to the LCD with minimal benefit."</em><br /><br>

What Rob said, ditto. My EOS DSLR's have been out there for 10 years now. No need to protect the LCDs. They have been in all sorts of conditions. They are tools not heirlooms.</p>

I have never in donkey's years used a protective filter or screen protector and my DSLR's are still pristine.

Except for my 1D mk4 which is supposed to be extremely scratch resistant. I have two fairly deep

scratches on the two rear screens. I must have caught my belt buckle or something. A bit annoying but I

can live with it. I now also have a chip out of my 24-105. Years and years with no problems and within a

few months this. Luckily neither has any effect on the image.

<p>I've just installed an "Expert Shield" - plastic film but (if the hype and reviews are correct) should prove fine! Excellent customer service reputation too! <a href="http://www.expertshielduk.com/">http://www.expertshielduk.com/</a></p>

<p>i live in a dusty humid environment ant much rather spend a few dollars replacing a screen protector than have to replace a LCD screen.</p>

<p>Not on my end..I've never an issue with a cracking protector, though I guess it comes down to the quality of the LCD protector itself. Testing out for quality lcd protectors isn't something I would ever chance on my expensive gadgets like my X-T1 camera. You have to go by word of mouth which is how I ended purchasing my lcd portectors from GEARMAXX which sell on eBay. They customize the protectors to your needs and only pay around 10 bucks per customization which is great. Here it's the link to them <a href="http://stores.ebay.com/GEARMAXX">here</a> </p>