Hi allI'm a clumsy oaf and my dexterity isn't as wonderful as it once was.I find the "pinch" of the 200-600 lens cap a pain and a bit fiddly. Especially with cold digits.Any alternative options? I've bought some 3rd party caps to try to attach something to create a bigger surface area to grip onto.Thanks in advance.

Possible solution:  Don't use a lens cap.  They interfere with proper exposure.

jbuzzinco wrote:Possible solution: Don't use a lens cap. They interfere with proper exposure.Cap. Not hood.Ta

GeordieStew wrote:jbuzzinco wrote:Possible solution: Don't use a lens cap. They interfere with proper exposure.Cap. Not hood.TaI do not understand that reply.  A hood is the solution to protect your lens while shooting.  Are you saying you must use a cap and cannot use a hood for some reason?

I'm scratching my head on this comment also????

GeordieStew wrote:Hi allI'm a clumsy oaf and my dexterity isn't as wonderful as it once was.I find the "pinch" of the 200-600 lens cap a pain and a bit fiddly. Especially with cold digits.Any alternative options? I've bought some 3rd party caps to try to attach something to create a bigger surface area to grip onto.Thanks in advance.That sounds like a good plan.The Sony center pinch caps are about the best I've seen. Canon, Nikon, Zeiss, Tamron, Sigma, and Tokina all have 95mm center pinch caps of similar design. The Canon design has a bit of concave curve that might help a bit.

jbuzzinco wrote:GeordieStew wrote:jbuzzinco wrote:Possible solution: Don't use a lens cap. They interfere with proper exposure.Cap. Not hood.TaI do not understand that reply. A hood is the solution to protect your lens while shooting. Are you saying you must use a cap and cannot use a hood for some reason?A lens cap of course interferes with exposure as it entirely covers the lens (and protects it).How else do you protect the front of the lens?

GeordieStew wrote:jbuzzinco wrote:GeordieStew wrote:jbuzzinco wrote:Possible solution: Don't use a lens cap. They interfere with proper exposure.Cap. Not hood.TaI do not understand that reply. A hood is the solution to protect your lens while shooting. Are you saying you must use a cap and cannot use a hood for some reason?A lens cap of course interferes with exposure as it entirely covers the lens (and protects it).How else do you protect the front of the lens?By using the hood, non-reversed, on the lens instead of a lens cap (when storing and travelling as well as shooting). Certainly a lot more feasible with significantly smaller and shorter lenses with corresponding smaller hoods, not so realistic with the 200-600.

GeordieStew wrote:jbuzzinco wrote:GeordieStew wrote:jbuzzinco wrote:Possible solution: Don't use a lens cap. They interfere with proper exposure.Cap. Not hood.TaI do not understand that reply. A hood is the solution to protect your lens while shooting. Are you saying you must use a cap and cannot use a hood for some reason?A lens cap of course interferes with exposure as it entirely covers the lens (and protects it).How else do you protect the front of the lens?A hood is designed to do that while shooting.  If that isn't to your liking,what about a magnetic lens cap?Or a slip on cap?

Becksvart wrote:GeordieStew wrote:jbuzzinco wrote:GeordieStew wrote:jbuzzinco wrote:Possible solution: Don't use a lens cap. They interfere with proper exposure.Cap. Not hood.TaI do not understand that reply. A hood is the solution to protect your lens while shooting. Are you saying you must use a cap and cannot use a hood for some reason?A lens cap of course interferes with exposure as it entirely covers the lens (and protects it).How else do you protect the front of the lens?By using the hood, non-reversed, on the lens instead of a lens cap (when storing and travelling as well as shooting).that doesn't work on this lens, for several reasons:- glass gets filthy from dust and such- can't support the weight of the lens face-down on the hoodCertainly a lot more feasible with significantly smaller and shorter lenses with corresponding smaller hoods, not so realistic with the 200-600.maybe if you want to risk breaking the hood off.lensrentals returned my rental fee on a fe135/1.8, because their q.c. guy didn't notice that some genius had cracked the hood latch area, so it wouldn't stay fastened... i had to use gaffer tape to hold it on to the lens.

jbuzzinco wrote:GeordieStew wrote:jbuzzinco wrote:GeordieStew wrote:jbuzzinco wrote:Possible solution: Don't use a lens cap. They interfere with proper exposure.posting while drunk?Cap. Not hood.TaI do not understand that reply. A hood is the solution to protect your lens while shooting. Are you saying you must use a cap and cannot use a hood for some reason?A lens cap of course interferes with exposure as it entirely covers the lens (and protects it).How else do you protect the front of the lens?A hood is designed to do that while shooting.and what about while carrying the lens?a hood doesn't keep dust and grit off of the lens, at all, and it's prone to breakage.If that isn't to your liking,kudos for thinking outside the boxwhat about a magnetic lens cap?Or a slip on cap?slip-on over the reversed hood? or carry the hood separately? does the weight of the lens jam the slip-on over the lens, so it is hard to remove? or is it too loose to stay on by itself? not gonna gamble it for $36, have you actually used it?

GeordieStew wrote:Any alternative options? I've bought some 3rd party caps to try to attach something to create a bigger surface area to grip onto.did they have a deeper grip?this one looks like it does?Amazon.com : 95mm Snap-On Center-Pinch Lens Cap, Extra Strong Springs, Camera Lens Cover, Made from 100% Recycled Plastic - Compatible with Nikon, Canon, Sony & Other DSLR Cameras : Electronics

jbuzzinco wrote:Possible solution: Don't use a lens cap. They interfere with proper exposure.They also get in the way of the subject...

I use a Canon FD lens cap, material basically. I do use a rolanpro lens cover set and they are excellent. I probably should get one of these instead of the Canon tele lens cap.Anyway, from rolanpro .........https://www.aliexpress.com/item/33042927273.htmlThey do have the Sony 200-600 in there as well. It will be excellent quality from rolanpro.Make sure to use option "A" for the hood, or "B" for the lens only options if you do go that way.Danny.

GeordieStew wrote:Hi allI'm a clumsy oaf and my dexterity isn't as wonderful as it once was.I find the "pinch" of the 200-600 lens cap a pain and a bit fiddly. Especially with cold digits.Any alternative options? I've bought some 3rd party caps to try to attach something to create a bigger surface area to grip onto.Thanks in advance.My Canon EF 200mm f/2L lens used a lens-cap substitute (called a "lens cover") that was kind of like a sock - it was tube a bit wider than the lens (which was something like 5 inches across), and several inches deep. It had a deep padded front on it to protect the lens. Maybe you could get a similar sock like contraption for your lens. It provided excellent protection, and did not require any "pinch" to put on or take off. It was called an E-145B Lens Cover. It was designed to go over the reversed lens hood (which was metal, and secured with a thumb-screw)I've been trying to find a link to show it, but most of the search hits are for third party regular lens caps to replace it!!I think you can see it here:https://www.cameraland.co.za/canon-ef-200mm-f-2l-is-usm-lensin one of the additional photos.

I never put the cap on mine, it lives with its hood on, with or without camera, in a Think Tank Glass Limo backpack.Will even fit in this with camera and a TC on and is always 'ready for action'!!

Rol Lei Nut wrote:jbuzzinco wrote:Possible solution: Don't use a lens cap. They interfere with proper exposure.They also get in the way of the subject...I thought I was going mad. Very confused.

MILC man wrote:jbuzzinco wrote:GeordieStew wrote:jbuzzinco wrote:GeordieStew wrote:jbuzzinco wrote:Possible solution: Don't use a lens cap. They interfere with proper exposure.posting while drunk?How could I possibly do this sober?Cap. Not hood.TaI do not understand that reply. A hood is the solution to protect your lens while shooting. Are you saying you must use a cap and cannot use a hood for some reason?A lens cap of course interferes with exposure as it entirely covers the lens (and protects it).How else do you protect the front of the lens?A hood is designed to do that while shooting.and what about while carrying the lens?Depends on exactly what you mean by "carrying".  If I'm walking and the camera is ready to shoot, the hood is forward.   I carrying it vertically in a holster with the hood forward.  You can stand that lens on the locked hood all day without issue.  The only time I use a cap is when the lens is packed out of reach and I have no intention of actively shooting.  Like if it's inside a backpack.a hood doesn't keep dust and grit off of the lens, at all, and it's prone to breakage.Yes, it does keep junk off the lens.  No it is not prone to break.  Takes considerable lateral force to break one off.If that isn't to your liking,kudos for thinking outside the boxwhat about a magnetic lens cap?Or a slip on cap?slip-on over the reversed hood? or carry the hood separately? does the weight of the lens jam the slip-on over the lens, so it is hard to remove? or is it too loose to stay on by itself? not gonna gamble it for $36, have you actually used it?

GeordieStew wrote:Hi allI'm a clumsy oaf and my dexterity isn't as wonderful as it once was.I find the "pinch" of the 200-600 lens cap a pain and a bit fiddly. Especially with cold digits.Any alternative options? I've bought some 3rd party caps to try to attach something to create a bigger surface area to grip onto.Thanks in advance.Dear Gordie,Have you considered the neoprene lens covers from OP-Tech?They have two different styles that come in sizes to fit almost any lens.Snoot Boot - Camera Lens Case | OP/TECH USA (optechusa.com)This one covers almost all of the lens depending on the model.Hood Hat - Lens Cover | OP/TECH USA (optechusa.com)This one is designed to fit over the lens with the lens hood attached.Regards,Tim MurphyHarrisburg PA

jbuzzinco wrote:MILC man wrote:jbuzzinco wrote:GeordieStew wrote:jbuzzinco wrote:GeordieStew wrote:jbuzzinco wrote:Possible solution: Don't use a lens cap. They interfere with proper exposure.posting while drunk?How could I possibly do this sober?lolCap. Not hood.TaI do not understand that reply. A hood is the solution to protect your lens while shooting. Are you saying you must use a cap and cannot use a hood for some reason?A lens cap of course interferes with exposure as it entirely covers the lens (and protects it).How else do you protect the front of the lens?A hood is designed to do that while shooting.and what about while carrying the lens?Depends on exactly what you mean by "carrying". If I'm walking and the camera is ready to shoot, the hood is forward. I carrying it vertically in a holster with the hood forward. You can stand that lens on the locked hood all day without issue. The only time I use a cap is when the lens is packed out of reach and I have no intention of actively shooting. Like if it's inside a backpack.a hood doesn't keep dust and grit off of the lens, at all, and it's prone to breakage.Yes, it does keep junk off the lens. No it is not prone to break. Takes considerable lateral force to break one off.this hood does not have a lock screw on it; here are at least three people who have had the 200-600 hood come off during use:https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1608605/0this is not a situation where the weight of the camera/lens should be getting bounced around on the hood threads, it's clearly not designed for that kind of abuse.If that isn't to your liking,kudos for thinking outside the boxwhat about a magnetic lens cap?Or a slip on cap?slip-on over the reversed hood? or carry the hood separately? does the weight of the lens jam the slip-on over the lens, so it is hard to remove? or is it too loose to stay on by itself? not gonna gamble it for $36, have you actually used it?