Lenses falling off Canon 6D

[borderjack]

I was in Chicago last fall at a nephew's wedding. I was shooting some pictures of the wedding dance when I was bumped by another guest. Next thing you know my 24-70 lens was bouncing off the floor. I know the lens was locked in as it was functioning perfectly at the time (it just auto-focused an image and was re-focusing for another when I got bumped) My hand was nowhere near the lens release button and I cannot figure out how this may have happened. Also, if it was not locked in place, my lenses do not autofocus.

I had it repaired the lens and am using it again. I had put this out of my mind until a long-time friend an professional photographer of 40 years+ called and asked about the accident I had with the lens falling off. He had thought I was crazy when I told him the story originally. He then proceeded to tell me he just had the same thing happen with his 6D and a 100mm Macro lens.

He was shooting some high school team photos when his lens came off the camera.

I am wondering how many other 6D owners have had this happen. Is there a lock issue? 

[Waddizzle · Accepted solution]

---

@diverhank wrote:

---

@Waddizzle wrote:

"But pressing the release button alone isn't enough to make the lens come off. The lens must also be rotated counter-clockwise about 60º. "

Exactly.  Releasing a lens from a properly functioning lens mount requires a "double action" to release it.

---

In my case the double action was: 1. accidentally touched the release button and 2. the bouncing rotated the lens. This was my 100-400L f/4.5-5.6 II and the tripod mount helped with the bouncing and gravity.

---

Ow.  Ow.  Ouch.  I hope that lens wasn't a total loss.  Anything is possible, but "double action" means concurrent events, not sequential events.

[RobertTheFat · Accepted solution]

---

@borderjack wrote:
I looked at the strap today, It is a CarrySpeed. I love way the strap allowed me to get the camera up and ready, but didn't like the way the camera flopped around as it is with most straps especially when a long lens is attached.

---

Some have reported that the flopping around caused their cameras to unscrew themselves from the mount, which would be an absolute deal breaker for me.

[TTMartin · Accepted solution]

---

@borderjack wrote:

Not using a Black Rapid strap. I was using a sling strap that is no longer sold in the USA and forget the name. The sling fastened to the bottom camera mount and is one of the best I have found. 

---

So far it seems that straps that attach to the tripod mount seem to be a common factor with the camera and lens coming detached. This could hardly be considered a Canon design flaw as Canon doesn't design their lenses or cameras to have the straps attached that way. 

As designed by Canon the camera has strap attachment points, and lenses that are too large to hang from the camera's mount unsupported have their own strap attachment points.

As seen in this photo from the-digital-picture.com

Those that want to second guess Canon engineers and attach their straps to the tripod mount which they aren't designed for are suddenly surprised that the camera and lens don't performed as designed. 

[TTMartin · Accepted solution]

Were you using a Black Rapid Strap?

[RobertTheFat · Accepted solution]

---

@borderjack wrote:
I looked at the strap today, It is a CarrySpeed. I love way the strap allowed me to get the camera up and ready, but didn't like the way the camera flopped around as it is with most straps especially when a long lens is attached.

---

Some have reported that the flopping around caused their cameras to unscrew themselves from the mount, which would be an absolute deal breaker for me.

[Waddizzle]

---

@RobertTheFat wrote:

---

@borderjack wrote:
I looked at the strap today, It is a CarrySpeed. I love way the strap allowed me to get the camera up and ready, but didn't like the way the camera flopped around as it is with most straps especially when a long lens is attached.

---

Some have reported that the flopping around caused their cameras to unscrew themselves from the mount, which would be an absolute deal breaker for me.

---

Having a big and heavy, naked camera bouncing around on my hip bone seems rather uncomfortable to me, which is why I bought a holster.  A holster is safer when I'm hiking.  It is less conspicuous when walking city streets.  It has become my "go to" bag whenever I leave the house.  Camera in the holster.  Lenses and a spare body in a messenger bag.

[borderjack]

Hi Bob,

I attended WPPI this year and this is where I was introduced to the Spyder Pro holster. (https://spiderholster.com/spider-pro)  A lot of the well known professionals were carrying thier cameras that way and I was real curious as I was still looking for the perfect solution.

I didn't like that the fact that the bracket was attached to the mounting hole on the bottom of the camera. Most slings and holsters use a ball-joint pin for this and it makes for a more time consuming swap when I use my tripod. This system was more like my CarrySpeed in design as the mounting bracket is flat  and has threaded mounting holes on the bottom of the mounting platefor the tripod quick release plate. 

Still being skeptical, I went and visited the booth and tried one out. I walked away with theSpyder Pro version and carried my camera that way during the rest of the show. I love it.

The camera(s) are always at the ready in a great position with this holster. It is hard to describe how they are carried, but they slide into the holster bracket and the camera is rotated so that the lens is pointed backwards. The camera and lens are very stable in this position and on top of that, there is a seperate lock if you really want to be safe. The lock can be operated and camera removed from the holster in one fluid motion and you are ready to shoot. There is no flopping of the camera unless you decide to take off at a trot or full gallop. I just walk or a slight jog when carrying camera gear anyway and running is not an option, unless I am being chased by something big and mean.

All of the weight is on the hips instead of the neck and shoulder which is really nice. I have the two camera system and with both cameras and long / heavy lenses, it does tend to find a place low on the hips. I am looking for a set of suspenders for those time I am carrying both. 

They also have some nice accessory pieces like lens and data card holders that fasten to the belt. Being somewhat or a large person, I have a little more real estate to mount accessory pieces. 

[Waddizzle]

I don't understand how this could happen with a properly functioning lens mount.  In order to release a lens, a "double action" is required, one which should require two hands.  You must hold the button depressed, while turning the lens.  

You can fully press the lens release button, and then release the button.  The lens stays locked in place.  So, just merely pressing the button should be insufficient to release the lens.  That's not how it works.

Has it ever happened to me?  I would have to say, "Yes."

Both times, I realized that I was at fault.  The first time was a day or two after I bought my first Canon DSLR.  I was lounging in the Lay-Z-Boy, experimenting with holding the camera and turning the zoom ring, when the lens dropped into my lap.

The second time it happened was when I had a super telephoto mounted on a tripod, when I wanted to rotate the camera to portrait position.  Apparently, when I loosened the collar, I must have left it a bit too tight.  When I grabbed the camera with both hands, like a steering wheel, and turned the camera body, it came right off the lens.  One of my left fingers must have been pressing the button when I rotated the camera body.

The release requires what engineers call a "double action", which makes it difficult to have an accident.  You almost have to do it on purpose, or just not pay attention.

[diverhank]

---

@Waddizzle wrote:

I don't understand how this could happen with a properly functioning lens mount.  In order to release a lens, a "double action" is required, one which should require two hands.  You must hold the button depressed, while turning the lens.  

You can fully press the lens release button, and then release the button.  The lens stays locked in place.  So, just merely pressing the button should be insufficient to release the lens.  That's not how it works.

Has it ever happened to me?  I would have to say, "Yes."

Both times, I realized that I was at fault.  The first time was a day or two after I bought my first Canon DSLR.  I was lounging in the Lay-Z-Boy, experimenting with holding the camera and turning the zoom ring, when the lens dropped into my lap.

The second time it happened was when I had a super telephoto mounted on a tripod, when I wanted to rotate the camera to portrait position.  Apparently, when I loosened the collar, I must have left it a bit too tight.  When I grabbed the camera with both hands, like a steering wheel, and turned the camera body, it came right off the lens.  One of my left fingers must have been pressing the button when I rotated the camera body.

The release requires what engineers call a "double action", which makes it difficult to have an accident.  You almost have to do it on purpose, or just not pay attention.

---

Nobody said it wasn't their fault - at least partly.  The fact that it could happen at all points to the fact that the design is not robust enough to be foolproof.  Even in your experience that you described, it didn't take much for the stupid lens to fall out.  In my case the bouncing motion was enough to turn the lens to the fall out position.  Believe, it was not hard to reproduce it.

[Waddizzle]

@diverhank 

Maybe so,  But.  It should still require a "double action".  My advice is for people to test their release buttons.  If merely pressing and releasing the button unlocks your lenses, then your lens mount needs to be repaired.  

[TCampbell]

The lens lock is designed to make this unlikely... but that doesn't mean it's not possible.

On the camera body (I don't have a 6D, so this photo of my 5D III will have to suffice... all Canon EOS cameras use the same mechanism) you'll notice a small pin on the lens mounting flange (front of camera body) which is adjacent to the lens release button.

If you press the release button with no lens attached, you'll see the pin retracts and this allows rotation of the lens.

Meanwhile on on the lens (this is my Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM original... not the "II") you'll see there is a small hole milled into the mounting ring.

When the pin "clicks" into that hole, the lens cannot be rotated without pressing the release button to retract the pin.  

But pressing the release button alone isn't enough to make the lens come off.  The lens must also be rotated counter-clockwise about 60º.  

I have had this happen to me only once in all my years of shooting... but I caught the issue before the lens came off the camera.

It turns out that it's possible to hit the button and rotate the lens just enough so that the locking pin is no longer aligned with the locking hole -- it's resting on the edge of the locking hole.  The electronic contacts that allow camera & body to communicate are still touching because the contacts are large enough.  This gives you the illusion that your lens is attached because the camera can control it.  

Generally you will make some adjustment to either a zoom ring or to the focus ring... and that rotates the lens the rest of the way.

In my own incident, I retraced my actions and I realized that I had allowed myself to develop a bad habit -- not of how I was holding the lens -- but rather of how I was retrieving it from my camera bag.  My most-used lens is a 70-200 and it lives on my camera body.  My camera bag is configured so that it fits in the bag with the lens still attached.  But the easiest way to retreive the camera is to grasp the lens with my left hand and lift it out of the bag... then put my right hand on the camera body.  When doing this, the knuckle on my left thumb was pressing up against the lens-release.  While I wasn't deliberately attempting to release the lens, the weight of the camera body (and the fact that my right hand wasn't holding it) allowed just enough rotation to prevent the locking pin from re-engaging.

Consequently, I developed a better method of pulling the camera from the bag and giving the lens a gentle twist when I retrieve my camera to make sure the pin actually is still locked.

I've never had a recurrence.

[Waddizzle]

"But pressing the release button alone isn't enough to make the lens come off. The lens must also be rotated counter-clockwise about 60º. "

Exactly.  Releasing a lens from a properly functioning lens mount requires a "double action" to release it.

[diverhank]

---

@Waddizzle wrote:

"But pressing the release button alone isn't enough to make the lens come off. The lens must also be rotated counter-clockwise about 60º. "

Exactly.  Releasing a lens from a properly functioning lens mount requires a "double action" to release it.

---

In my case the double action was: 1. accidentally touched the release button and 2. the bouncing rotated the lens. This was my 100-400L f/4.5-5.6 II and the tripod mount helped with the bouncing and gravity.

[Waddizzle · Accepted solution]

---

@diverhank wrote:

---

@Waddizzle wrote:

"But pressing the release button alone isn't enough to make the lens come off. The lens must also be rotated counter-clockwise about 60º. "

Exactly.  Releasing a lens from a properly functioning lens mount requires a "double action" to release it.

---

In my case the double action was: 1. accidentally touched the release button and 2. the bouncing rotated the lens. This was my 100-400L f/4.5-5.6 II and the tripod mount helped with the bouncing and gravity.

---

Ow.  Ow.  Ouch.  I hope that lens wasn't a total loss.  Anything is possible, but "double action" means concurrent events, not sequential events.