[shuttertalk]

The title says it all but the results ain't pretty...

http://blog.digitalrev.com/2011/06/08/gi...ngry-rage/

[Zig]

Phew...only Nikon gear though...no harm done.



Seriously though, looks like the lady really was determined and sustained.

"Angry rage". I wonder what other sorts there are....

[matthew]

It makes the 600mm in a swamp incident seem pretty mild.

The machine translation of the original page is a mess, but I see in the EXIF that the photos of the destruction were taken with a Canon 40D and 24-105/4L lens. I can't help but wonder if there's more to this story than what we're seeing.

Maybe I should hide Penny's hammer collection, just in case?

[matthew]

(And, as an afterthought, how does this affect the "I used a filter and it saved my lens" side of the perpetual Protective Filters argument?)

[shuttertalk]

Seriously though, looks like the lady really was determined and sustained.

Yeah, she even went to the trouble of cracking the distance scales...

Anyone got a tally on the grand total?

[matthew]

The cost to replace them with all new lenses – I'd take the 16-35 in place of the 17-35, 24-70 to replace both (?) 28-70's, and stay with the 80-200 and TC14 – the total would be about $4700 USD at B&H.

Of course, UV/clear filters will add to the total price, as would a couple of Pelican cases with heavy padlocks, which might be the better protection.

[Toad]

I hope this isn't the guy that I sold my 80-200 to...

[Zig]

My, half a Leica-worth then!