Reading mode: Light Dark

A wet K5 - Wether Resistance failure...

Go to last post
K

Ken Knott

Forum Enthusiast
Messages
276
Reaction score
0
Location
Blacksburg, VA, US
I took my K5 and 18-135 out on the river in my kayak. I wear a harness (can't remember the name of the damn thing) that attaches my camera to my chest over my PFD.

I went through several smallish (level 1-2) rapids which did splash considerable water all over me an the camera, but I never flipped and it was never submerged. Certainly no worse than holding it under a shower head I would think...

Anyway, first I noticed the barrel on the lens sounding 'suctiony' when I would zoom in and out... then I heard some motor slowing when shooting... Perhaps the aperture blades or the shutter itself? Shots began to be over exposed despite the exposure settings as if something was staying open too long...

Then, after awhile, the camera said no card detected in camera....

Once I got to shore to inspect things.. it did seem that some moisture had gotten into the memory card area... and I saw some condensation under the top control LCD... The electronics, main LCD, and viewfinder all continued to work perfectly...

Well, I took out the battery, camera card, and removed the lens and left it all to dry...

Today, everything seems to be working normally. But I'm quite concerned that things are rusting away internally and certainly less confident about taking my K5 in such conditions again.

In the past I have taken my K7 with the 18-55 WR lens on the water. It may not have gotten 'as wet' as the k5 did, but I never had a single issue...

Thoughts?

Ken
 
The WR lenses are not as weather sealed as the DA Star lenses.
WR = weather resistant, not weather sealed.
Perhaps moisture came into the lens and then entered the camera...
But I have no idea how it could enter the memory card area from the lens.

Sounds like a warranty repair, the camera should stand dropping in the lake and then be fished up without problems (with a DA Star at least)...

--
Take care
Raphael
http://www.flickr.com/photos/raphaelmabo/
 
If this was a watch it would need to be rated at least water resist 50m to be suitable to take white water rafting.

I don't think the Pentax cameras have any stated standards for water resist so should not be exposed to any pressure water.

The fact some people are daft enough to put their camera under showers and get away with it does not indicate any extra WR.

The Pentax Water proof Optio rated at 2M is also not suitable for white water rafting but is rated considerably higher than Pentax dslr's having an IP rating of 58 (w10) meaning continuous immersion beyond 1m.

For reference a shower would require IP rating of x3 but water splashes would require IPx4
I don't believe the k5 has any IP rating designated !
--
My PPG

http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/home#section=ARTIST&subSection=1471087&subSubSection=0&language=EN
My Photo Stream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/awaldram/
 
lens changes it's internal volume when zooming, and sucks air in, together with some water in this case. this way moisture got into your camera.
 
Raphael Mabo said:
The WR lenses are not as weather sealed as the DA Star lenses.
WR = weather resistant, not weather sealed.
Click to expand...
Well, this part you got correct. Pentax makes nothing in it's DSLR range of cameras or lenses that is weather sealed. Never have to my knowledge.
Raphael Mabo said:
Perhaps moisture came into the lens and then entered the camera...
But I have no idea how it could enter the memory card area from the lens.

Sounds like a warranty repair, the camera should stand dropping in the lake and then be fished up without problems (with a DA Star at least)...
Click to expand...
Incorrect - and awful advice. Dropping your camera into a lake, with a DA* lens, and expecting that the pressure of the water and continual pressure on the seals will not cause any sort of water to enter the camera or lens ... would be described as weather sealed . Prior to dispensing shabby advice, Roland, I'd suggest you do the same to your camera (if you actually owned a K-5 or DA* lens) and report back to us. Your rep for stretching facts on this board precedes you.

-Prime
Raphael Mabo said:
--
Take care
Raphael
http://www.flickr.com/photos/raphaelmabo/
Click to expand...
--
My Website
http://www.andrewallenphoto.com

My Pentax Street Gallery - Arranged By Lens Used
http://photobucket.com/andy_allen
 
It's my understanding that if I can safely take my K5 in a rainstorm unprotected than it should be able to handle spray and splash from kayaking...

Note I am not saying it should be able to handle being submerged...
 
Raphael Mabo said:
The WR lenses are not as weather sealed as the DA Star lenses.
Click to expand...
True
Raphael Mabo said:
WR = weather resistant, not weather sealed.
Click to expand...
True, lower level of sealing.
Raphael Mabo said:
Perhaps moisture came into the lens and then entered the camera...
Click to expand...
Likely postulate seeing as the OP did zoom the lens.
Raphael Mabo said:
But I have no idea how it could enter the memory card area from the lens.
Click to expand...
it is not sealed inside, once water is in it can go anywhere I would think.
Raphael Mabo said:
Sounds like a warranty repair, the camera should stand dropping in the lake and then be fished up without problems (with a DA Star at least)...
Click to expand...
Bunk. Pure and total, nowhere does Pentax assert this level of sealing. Plus there are several stories I can recall off hand of people coming on here having briefly dunked their cameras and had water ingress.

I can easily imagine levels of water hitting the camera while in whitewater that would exceed that of rain. A Pelican case or dry bag should have been used between spots of useage.

Send me your K-7/5 and a DA* lens and I will dunk it for you to test your theory.

Lloyd

--

“For every problem there is a solution which is simple, clean and wrong.” Henry Louis Mencken

http://lloydshell.blogspot.com/
http://lloydshell.zenfolio.com/
WSSA #354

 
Strange, it's a second occurence of this combo (K-5 + 18-135 WR) I've seen recently to fail. The other one is here (had to shorten the url as it leads to the "other" pentax site):
http://bit.ly/kPzsPw
 
Ken Knott said:
It's my understanding that if I can safely take my K5 in a rainstorm unprotected than it should be able to handle spray and splash from kayaking...
Click to expand...
Ken,

I think it is most likely the splash (i.e. water moving at high speed) that forced it's way through the seals abetted by zooming the lens with water up against the seals that got through to your body. In my limited whitewater experience I have taken a lot more water against my body in spurts than a rainstorm would.

I would recommend mounting a Pelican Case ( http://pelican.com/cases_detail.php?Case=1200 ) on your kayak, or at the least a drybag. I have done very wet slot canyons (Swim through passages, rappel into a floating disconnect etc...) with a K200d and Sigma 17-70 in a drybag without difficulty or camera problem.
Ken Knott said:
Note I am not saying it should be able to handle being submerged...
Click to expand...
Smart to not buy into that thought.

Best wishes on your camera to continue functioning well for a long time.

LLoyd

--

“For every problem there is a solution which is simple, clean and wrong.” Henry Louis Mencken

http://lloydshell.blogspot.com/
http://lloydshell.zenfolio.com/
WSSA #354

 
Ken Knott said:
It's my understanding that if I can safely take my K5 in a rainstorm unprotected than it should be able to handle spray and splash from kayaking...
Click to expand...
I took my k10d out in driving rain (really pouring) and 40 mph winds and was myself soaked to the bone through "waterproof" attire but my k10d and 50-135 had no problems. I've never been white water rafting. It must be stronger forced water than 40mph winds with hard rain I guess.
Ken Knott said:
Note I am not saying it should be able to handle being submerged...
Click to expand...
agreed!

--
LaRee
http://www.flickr.com/photos/27204583@N05/
http://laree.zenfolio.com/
http://laree.smugmug.com/
 
Ken Knott said:
In the past I have taken my K7 with the 18-55 WR lens on the water. It may not have gotten 'as wet' as the k5 did, but I never had a single issue...

Thoughts?
Click to expand...
Four descriptions are relevant here:

waterproof : you can submerge it safely up to a stated depth, or squirt water at it all day long

water-resistant : you can submerge it or squirt pressurised water, but only to a limited degree

Only true diving style watches are waterproof, most are water-resistant. Same with underwater cameras.

weatherproof : any amount of sprinkled or lightly splashed water (wet weather conditions) is fine

weather-resistant : you can allow rain to fall on it (etc) to a limited degree.

Some Olympus E-series dLRs and lenses, for example, have been classed as weatherproof (though NOT waterproof). No Pentax ones have AFAIK.

The "WR" in a WR lens, is short for Weather (not water) Resistant (not proof).

RP
 
WR lenses are made to resist light rain, snow, fog, mist and dust. DA* lenses are made to resist heavy rain, sleet, snow, fog, mist and dust, and can resist a certain amount of water splash.

Neither line of products is designed to resist water soaking and the WR lenses are not meant to resist water splash. The K10D, K20D, K200, K-7 and K-5 are built pretty much like DA* lenses, BTW.

Your lens was probably subjected to more than it was meant to resist...

Just my two cents.

--

If photography can be considered like painting, then I'm still at the preschool "paint with your fingers" level.
 
The only way I am taking a K-5 whitewater rafting is in an underwater housing.
 
laurynas said:
lens changes it's internal volume when zooming, and sucks air in, together with some water in this case. this way moisture got into your camera.
Click to expand...
Actually, a zoom like the 18-135mm WR changes its outer length when zooming, which is worse (a major issue, in fact). But a zoom like the DA*50-135mm only changes its inner length, which as little effect if the lens is properly sealed.

As you said, the inner change of length still does change the volume of the lens a little (although not as much as changing the outer length), which sucks in or pushes air out of the lens. But with a properly sealed lens, this should have little impact on water getting in, for the water surface tension prevents it from entering the very tight gaps provided by a lens that is fully weather sealed (rather than just water resistant).

Of course, the longer you subject the lens to water, to more likely it is to enter then lens. That why special care should be made to avoid the lens being splashed by water, and why the zoom and focus rings shouldn't be used immediately after receiving a big splash. Rather, wipe out the water with some cloth and make sure no water got in before using the zoom or focus ring after receiving a splash...

--

If photography can be considered like painting, then I'm still at the preschool "paint with your fingers" level.
 
Thats horrible but WR doesn't mean water tight, it means weather resistant, take it out in the rain, dust and all but don't get it soaked... weather sealed means the darn this should stand up to everything but being submerged, thats the DA* lens line and body.
--
Mike from Canada

'I like to think so far outside the box that it would require a telephoto lens just to see the box!' ~ 'My Quote :)'



http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?sort_order=views%20DESC&first_this_page=0&page_limit=180&&emailsearch=mighty_mike88%40hotmail.com&thumbnails=
 
Do not ever try your DA* lens to test for weather seal system. DA* or any WR lens is for "resistance" alone, not water proof! Be extreme careful! I've brought my K7 and DA* 50-135mm / DA* 16-50mm on a kayak (or even a jet ski) in the ocean before with the assurance that it will not fail on me with some water plash but not try to test the water proof part since the system is not designed that way.
 
O-ring seals do become gradually less trustworthy with time and use...

--
keepers: K10D, Sig 17-70, DA 55-300, FA 50/1.4 "Billy Bass"

discards: DA 50-200 "zipper", F 100-300, Sigma 135-400 "piglet", M 400/5.6 "the Great Truncheon"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top