RE: Pentax USA Rep and WR lenses in rain

I just got off the 'phone w/ a Pentax USA Tech Support Representative. I called them to find out the official Pentax position regarding use of the WR lenses "in the rain" and the Rep (Randy) said yes, no problem, that's why they are weather sealed. I have a K5, 18-135WR and 100 macro WR. I've used both in rain, but only light and intermittent so not much of a test.

He went on to say that "of course they can't be submerged" though.

I also asked about warranty service if they conked out while being used in the rain and he just said that the lens would have to be examined to determine cause of failure, but if a weather seal had failed, then, yes they would repair it under warranty.

It seems some on this forum don't think this is the case and that only the DA* lenses are sealed well enough for use in the rain-- I felt better about it after talking with the Pentax Rep. I live on the very rainy Oregon coast.

This is just a FYI, but comments and discussion are welcome.

Cheers. ernie

Ernie I think the recent case of failure that has sent the cat among the pigeons was effectively a submerge situation. I have not heard of a case of failure in the rain, although I have heard of total submerges where everything was fine but this is certainly not reccomended.
Weathersealing means that - Sealed against Weather.

Water proof means it can be submerged but usually a pressure depth is specified eg to 10m.
--
Regards Dean - Capturing Creation

I have the DFA100mm Macro WR for nearly 18 months now and i've used it in the same conditions as my DA*50-135mm and no trouble.Even used it in muddy pond shore and after cleaning it it looks new again
--
Leopold
Pentax forever
http://smarcoux.zenfolio.com/
http://www.limagier-photo.com/
http://www.firstlight.com/galleries.php

Yep; as the Pentax Rep noted they can't be put under water, but that's only common sense. But used in rain-- no problem.

Cheers. ernie

I had my K20 with 50-135 DA* in blowing rain. Not sleet or anything but heavy blowing rain. The kind that no matter what happens your getting wet. Everything came out OK for me. Now I did not put on the 16-45 f4 (non WR) until I got back inside the meeting hall.
--
in my bag...
K20D, 16-45 f4 DA, 50mm FA f.14, 50-135 f2.8 DA*
360 flash

FWIW, I've used my K-5 and 18-135WR in the rain without any issues.

Thanks for verifying I was not a complete idiot making the video "Zooming In The Rain". But after starting to read so much doubt among perhaps newbies to the Pentax system I just had to "risk losing a K20D... " to prove the point.

I have used Pentax bodies in rain/snow for years now (lens with covers) and the WR lens for I believe about 17 months now and with not even a hint of moisture in the lens. I have studied the service manuals and all material on the internet. I have read the various Pentax forums (and participated) for years now. Very, very few and that's literally have had a body leak. Some as jen (if I remember correct) had a lens leak and a couple others with some problem. But overall its truly a non-issue.

Now lets think about the WR lens the topic of this post. Pentax made it for all to have sealed lens and for a standard all weather kit lens for the K-7. Does anyone really think Pentax does not know many will go out in the rain and zoom their lens. Does Pentax not know if there was a 5% chance of failure with them on the K-7 and K-5 the net would be flooded (pun?) with users SHOUTING THIS IS JUNK ITS LEAKING WATER. No the WR lens are sealed pretty good. I believe the performance limit is something in the area of when a person would run for cover or close to it. Its hard to put a performance limit on the lens other than to say its fine to use with some common sense in all weather.

My test

http://youtu.be/GiLdx3KtOBI

--
jamesm007,

http://www.flickr.com/photos/jamesm007/
http://s195.photobucket.com/albums/z77/jamesm700/

ernieF said:

I also asked about warranty service if they conked out while being used in the rain and he just said that the lens would have to be examined to determine cause of failure, but if a weather seal had failed, then, yes they would repair it under warranty.

It seems some on this forum don't think this is the case and that only the DA* lenses are sealed well enough for use in the rain-- I felt better about it after talking with the Pentax Rep. I live on the very rainy Oregon coast.

Click to expand...

Actually both WR and DA* lenses are weather (dust, rain, snow) resistant, but the DA* have more advanced seals that can resist a certain amount of water splash too.

--

If photography can be considered like painting, then I'm still at the preschool "paint with your fingers" level.

Glad to hear that, I've only used my WR lenses in light/intermittent rains.

Cheers. ernie

It was interesting to me that the Rep openly recognized that yes, it is occasionally possible for a lens/camera seal to fail as well but it's not a common problem it seems. I don't think a sales Rep would have said that. Anyway, I was pleased w/ the response and the honesty of the Pentax Tech Rep.

Cheers. ernie

tigrebleu said:

Actually both WR and DA* lenses are weather (dust, rain, snow) resistant, but the DA* have more advanced seals that can resist a certain amount of water splash too.

Click to expand...

If you could find anywhere in any form of Pentax literature that it says "WR" lenses (18-55, 50-200, 18-135, 100macro) are sealed for dust I would be very curious to see this. In all the studying on the difference between WR and DA* sealing I did, one of the things I noticed is that the bodies and the DA* lenses specify both in writing as well as in the "sealing" icon on the box they come in that they are sealed against both water and dust, while the "WR" lenses make no claims in regard to dust and accordingly in the diagram shown on the box of these lenses for their sealing only show rain drop and omit the dust portion of the icon included on DA* and K-7 boxes.

Loren E said:

Loren E said:

Actually both WR and DA* lenses are weather (dust, rain, snow) resistant, but the DA* have more advanced seals that can resist a certain amount of water splash too.

Click to expand...

If you could find anywhere in any form of Pentax literature that it says "WR" lenses (18-55, 50-200, 18-135, 100macro) are sealed for dust I would be very curious to see this. In all the studying on the difference between WR and DA* sealing I did, one of the things I noticed is that the bodies and the DA* lenses specify both in writing as well as in the "sealing" icon on the box they come in that they are sealed against both water and dust, while the "WR" lenses make no claims in regard to dust and accordingly in the diagram shown on the box of these lenses for their sealing only show rain drop and omit the dust portion of the icon included on DA* and K-7 boxes.

Click to expand...

More so I would like to see the source that says the DA* lens can handle a bit of splashing water that the WR lens can't. Alarm bells went off when I read this; why? Because in most of the WR literature when it came out was the point that it could withstand splashing water . This is a misstatement about splashing water.

Take a read...

"PENTAX's protections against harsh environments have been extended to the lens that comes standard with the K-7 Lens Kit. The water- and air-sealing technologies developed for the K-7 camera body and DA-Star-series lenses have been applied to the lens's mount and moving parts, creating a simplified weather-resistant construction. These are unusual features for a lens included in a camera package. Even when the lens is used in drizzle or in splashing water , you can keep on shooting by simply wiping it with a piece of dry cloth. A telephoto lens with the same weather-resistant features has also been developed for the K-7, making it a perfect complement to the standard zoom lens in the lens kit."

http://www.pentax.jp/english/products/digital/k-7/feature_2.html

Its obvioius to differentiate the DA* and WR lens for the sake of sales Hoya chose to downgrade the WR lens a bit in written words. Hoya did not want to take any sales from the DA* lens. This is probably (logicaly) why it took so long to come out with a low cost sealed lens. As we can now see it adds little to cost or design in most lens. Just the DA* are the stars but for SDM that burnt many.

--
jamesm007,

http://www.flickr.com/photos/jamesm007/
http://s195.photobucket.com/albums/z77/jamesm700/

I've been caught in an utter downpour in my home neighborhood with my K7 and 50-200WR, and still stopped, zoomed, focused and snapped some pics on the walk back to the house.

The body, lens, seals and doors all worked just as they should.

This is all very good to hear. I'm afraid I was one of the Pentax newbies who recently posted something to the effect that WR lenses were good for damp conditions but not on par with DA* for actual splashing quantities of water or a downpour. I figured the cutoff was to still be happy shooting in the rain with the WR series but probably avoid too much zooming. Looks like I was misinformed or jumping to conclusions, and I am very happy to hear that.

So in summary, the only real difference in terms of environmental resistance is that the DA* series typically resists dust intrusion (and scratching? Is that correct?) better?

What I still don't quite understand, in that case, is how you make a lens more resistant to dust entry (which i suppose comes down to particle aspiration when zooming or changing temperature) without making it also measurably more resistant to water entry?

Or maybe the DA* series' additional resistance to desert-like dust and grit conditions is limited to just a stronger coating on the front element? If that's the case my understanding would now be all settled/corrected.

Thank you all for this informative discussion.

All good points. Here on the Oregon coast i't so humid that I don't really have any concern about dust, but I can see that in drier climates. Beyond rain, and salt water spray/splash, I'm concerned about humidity as during much of the year, on beaches and headlands humiities are often-- even mostly-- over 80% and 90-100% has to be common. While raining humidity has to be at saturation or 100%+.

So, just like dust, on extending type zooms, moisture in the air is sucked into both lens and camera. In almost all dslr specs, the camera body is rated for (typically) 80, 85, or 90% humidity-- many companies appear to use 85% for their body rating. I've come to the conclusion that this is a "CYA" rating as all dslrs are packed w/ sensitive electronics and water and electronics seldom mix well.

That said, I've never had a body (or lens) fail due to prolonged exposure to high humidity over time, so it seems to me that the 80-90% humidity ratings are conservative. I used Olympus gear for years w/ no problems. In practice, changing lenses in really wet atmospheric conditions may be the biggest danger?

Cheers. ernie