Weather resistance with cameras and lenses

[Photon42]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The request for weather resistance of photographic equipment seems start even outdoing the requests for a second memory card slot. What is the real benefit in everyday life for you? Do you reasonably often come across a situation you cannot handle because of missing environmental sealing of your equipment?

My personal experience is that in all cases I was out shooting in rainy conditions, I wanted to protect the lens anyway for optical reasons (unless looking for a somewhat watered effect). I have never noticed any issue with any camera getting a bit wet. I completely get there are certain applications where one needs sealing. I am just wondering how important is it overall.

[jaapv]

As long as camera makers (including Leica) call IP X1 and IP X2 "weathersealed" the use is rather limited. An umbrella, or even a shielding hand, is just as effective or more so. I suspect that many non-rated cameras are at least IP X1.

To really be of any use, a camera should be at least IP 53 or higher.

In fact, I think the touting of the Q2 as "weathersealed" is a risky tactic, it will make users overconfident.

[pgk]

14 minutes ago, Photon42 said:

The request for weather resistance of photographic equipment seems start even outdoing the requests for a second memory card slot. What is the real benefit in everyday life for you? Do you reasonably often come across a situation you cannot handle because of missing environmental sealing of your equipment?

My personal experience is that in all cases I was out shooting in rainy conditions, I wanted to protect the lens anyway for optical reasons (unless looking for a somewhat watered effect). I have never noticed any issue with any camera getting a bit wet. I completely get there are certain applications where one needs sealing. I am just wondering how important is it overall.

I've seen a Canon 1D stop working due to water ingress (very heavy continuous drizzle for several hours finally got in) and it was resistant! It was fine after a night on a radiator. So it depends on what you do and where you are. If there is ANY danger of salt water (spray) then care is needed. Get salt in a camera and it continues to absorb water and will eventually destroy the camera - often repairers won't deal with salt water ingress which you might even consider as being terminal. So I'm very careful not to allow my cameras to get salt water on them - water resistant or otherwise (I've had a camera destroyed by seawater but that's another story). The 'problem' with water proof or water resistant cameras are the seals which all need to be effective and the user operated ones (card cover, battery cover, lens throat seal (if fitted), all need to be kept scrupulously clean - and maintained so, which few users bother to do. The camera is therefore as waterproof/resistant as its weakest link. [FWIW things like underwater flash units are usually sealed between the battery compartment and the rest of the camera too - the user maintainable seal for the battery compartment is a potential risk and I've seen several flooded. Replacing the batteries and contacts is a lot cheaper than the unit. Its trickier to do this for a card compartment with numerous contacts though.]

[Photon42]

I am  just wondering if this isn't effectively an internet creating desire much more than a real world requirement for most. A bit like every "vlogger" seems to think every camera needs a flip-out back screen, because they need it.

[pgk]

24 minutes ago, Photon42 said:

I am  just wondering if this isn't effectively an internet creating desire much more than a real world requirement for most.

Personally, although I use none water resistant cameras, I think that unsealed electronics in equipment designed to be used outdoors is a poor design decision. I think that ALL cameras should feature water resistance. That said I think that there should be new definitions of how its tested because the current IPs are pretty meaningless in all honesty and don't reflect real world usage.

[Stuart Richardson]

Living here in Iceland, I find it a very desirable feature. There is often rain and driving wind. That said, I think the necessity of it is somewhat overblown. As Photon42 mentioned, often the conditions will make most photography impractical. Still, there are conditions where it is very useful, where photos can still be made with a good lenshood protecting the lens and so on. Still, I often use my M cameras, 4x5 and Mamiya 7 in rain and snow, and by using sensible precautions, I have not had any problems. Transport the gear in water resistant bags, only take them out to photograph, wipe them dry and give them ample time to dry out before putting them away. Of course this is not fool proof, but it is certainly better than nothing. I will say, however, that the weather sealing on the S has given me a lot of confidence and convenience by letting me not worry about protecting the camera so much in bad weather. I can carry it on my shoulder in the rain, for example, and given its large hoods, it can still effectively shoot without an issue. This is particularly useful on days that we often have in the spring and autumn where the conditions change very rapidly from heavy rain and snow to sun and back again many times in a day.

[kivis]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I hear the OM Systems OM-1 digital camera and Pro level lenses are  IP 53 weather resistant.

[Jeff S]

On 10/29/2022 at 5:05 AM, kivis said:

I hear the OM Systems OM-1 digital camera and Pro level lenses are  IP 53 weather resistant.

This discussion is 3.5 years old, but since you mention IP ratings, the SL2/SL2S are IP 54 rated.  Don’t know about the S3 rating, but it might be the most robust system in the Leica portfolio, with 36 gasketed seals. Consistent with Stuart’s above comments, David Farkas (Leica Miami / Red Dot Forum) has written about using his S system, in Iceland and elsewhere, unprotected in constant rain, snow and cold.

Jeff

[250swb]

On 10/29/2022 at 10:05 AM, kivis said:

I hear the OM Systems OM-1 digital camera and Pro level lenses are  IP 53 weather resistant.

I had an Olympus E-3 which back in 2007 was advertised by putting the body and lens under a shower to demonstrate the weather sealing. Owners then went further by pouring beer over it, standing under a waterfall, surfing etc. You could genuinely use it in conditions that were impossible for other cameras and lenses. Leica, follow that.

[kivis]

On 10/31/2022 at 4:03 AM, 250swb said:

I had an Olympus E-3 which back in 2007 was advertised by putting the body and lens under a shower to demonstrate the weather sealing. Owners then went further by pouring beer over it, standing under a waterfall, surfing etc. You could genuinely use it in conditions that were impossible for other cameras and lenses. Leica, follow that.

I thought that experiment was done with an earlier version of a Pentax K-3.

 

[250swb]

https://flic.kr/p/5UStuy

I think the Pentax K3 was released six years later.

 

[Guest]

Saw a nicely scratched up SL in the Wetzlar exhibition ... had been to a recent war zone, I believe in Syria.

Another article about 'point and shoot' camera scenarios

[Stevejack]

I use the think tank Hydrophobia covers on my Sony camera, would love a similar cover for the Leicas but the covers usuallyrely on strapping around rather large diameter lens hoods. 
I’ve used plastic bags etc before which are ok when taped up but I’ve always wondered why Leica never released their own line of rain covers. Liability I suppose.