Just exactly how waterproof are weather resistant DSLR's?

So, when using a "WR" lens in combination with a "WR" DSLR body, can you truly shoot in POURING RAIN without any worries whatsoever about the electronics getting damaged by the water? Like, could it stand up to having an actual bucket of water poured on it? Where is the limit? I assume it cannot actually be submerged into a tank of water, but, how wet can it really safely get before damage is a concern?

Personally, I love the rain, and I think it would be cool to take some shots in the rain, but, I've never really been sure just how rain-safe the various "weather resistant" cameras actually are, given how tricky marketing teams and their lawyers can often be, and how many loopholes they might have of being able to claim one thing, when the actual device isn't truly able to handle much at all without breaking.

So, I figured I would just ask those of you who actually have these cameras and know from experience.

Also, I am wondering if there is a significant difference in how much water one brand of "weather resistant" camera/lens combo can handle compared to another, like, maybe Canon can take more than Nikon, or Pentax can take more than Canon, or I dunno, like, just wondering if they are all identical in how much water they can withstand if anyone knows.

But mainly am more curious about the first stuff I asked about, the latter question is of lesser importance, just figured I'd ask just in case anyone knows. Alright, thanks

I have shot with my K5 and WR lenses in hurricane/monsoon rains. No issue.

K-7/K-5 are interchangeable when talking about the sealing of the body, so some of these videos are K-7 (which the K5 uses the exact same chassis).

Go to the very end when he puts it under a shower head.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=uNgGiQd7-jk

You can hear the shutter going off as he is pouring water on the K5.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=gNh3wLJydAI

Put the K-7 + grip under a shower head and then shot with a flash.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Op9mBbo92Ik

Put K-7 under running faucet and covered completely all angles of it with water.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcgd-wFLgWc

K-7 taken on sailing trip - resisted wave splash, salt spray, etc.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GS4Ivsk3y58&feature=related

Need more?

-Heie
--

I'm a 23 year old lieutenant serving as a platoon leader in the US Army that has an extremely voracious appetite for backpacking and adventure. I am also finally feeding my passion for photography while working on the fluency of my two languages other than English: Spanish and Arabic, and now picking up some broken German as I live in the Fatherland.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/alexjansenphotography

Cool. Looks like weather sealed cameras really are actually legitimately weather sealed after all. That is what I was hoping.

I can't speak for the other brands, but for Pentax's K-7 and K-5, I can.

-Heie

pentaxfun said:

Cool. Looks like weather sealed cameras really are actually legitimately weather sealed after all. That is what I was hoping.

Click to expand...

--

I'm a 23 year old lieutenant serving as a platoon leader in the US Army that has an extremely voracious appetite for backpacking and adventure. I am also finally feeding my passion for photography while working on the fluency of my two languages other than English: Spanish and Arabic, and now picking up some broken German as I live in the Fatherland.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/alexjansenphotography

I know that the top of the line Pentax models are well sealed. I also know the top of the line Canons and Nikons are well sealed.

For example, Nikon has been building tank-like cameras and lenses for the professional photojournalist since 1959. They've pretty much owned that market for most of the years. Canon jumped in with better AF back at the start of Autofocus and Nikon lost a lot of Sports Professionals but they got them back and never lost many of the rest.

One of the reasons is that tank-like build and sealng. Photographers have been taking Nikon's pro-grade models into battles in Viet Nam, Greneda and about everywhere else. They've lived in foxholes coverer in mud and saltwater. They've been slammed and banged about by military solders and photographers for generations.

Nikon cameras have probably been on more National Geographic Expeditions than all other brands combined over the past fifty years. They been acknowledged for their robust no-nonsense build quality and reliability in the field. Nikon has gone into outer space for than any other 35mm film camera thoughout the history of NASA.

LOL You want videos? Fell off a motorcycle with a 300 f/2.8 lens while shooting the Le Tour Langkawi Malaysia. He taped it up and then in 4 hours of heavy rain, finished the assignment. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wsiR89nk86s

Nasa and Nikon: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_26lMGL57rA&feature=related

I have a D700 as well as a D300. I've stood in sleet and rain in the Grand Tetons for several hours waiting on light, where I've had to brush gobs of snow and freezing rain off the camera and Nikon 16-35 f/4 lens. I mean it was alternating between heavy snow, freezing rain and soaking rain. No problems. I had to wipe the front element occasionally to keep all the water from beading up on it. I also carry these rigs in the Everglades and Big Cypress Swam as well as off shore in small boats ringing gulls on small rookery islands. This is why I use Nikon gear. Pentax and Canon both also make weather sealed gear. I choose to trust in Nkon's legacy for building cameras that are more than just sealed.

--
Cheers, Craig

Follow me on Twitter @craighardingsr : Equipment in Profile

Nice. This is what I was hoping for. Despite my screen-name, I am actually not one of those people who is super pro-biased towards my own brand and anti-other brands or wanting to one-up the other or whatever. I honestly was just curious to know whether the "weather resistant" camera models in general (as in, all the main brands), are really actually able to handle significant rain water on them without any risk of water damage, and it sounds like this is indeed the case. (I have always been wary of the term, since in some other forms of electronics (not cameras, but other stuff) I have been on the wrong end of the loophole-stick in some cases with "water resistant" devices breaking from just a little rain water splashing on them and crap like that, so, I just wanted to make sure that if I ever spend a decent chunk of change on a weather sealed camera, that it'll actually do what it claims, which, based on these posts, it sounds like they do. So, that's good to hear.

Guidenet said:

I know that the top of the line Pentax models are well sealed. I also know the top of the line Canons and Nikons are well sealed.

For example, Nikon has been building tank-like cameras and lenses for the professional photojournalist since 1959. They've pretty much owned that market for most of the years. Canon jumped in with better AF back at the start of Autofocus and Nikon lost a lot of Sports Professionals but they got them back and never lost many of the rest.

One of the reasons is that tank-like build and sealng. Photographers have been taking Nikon's pro-grade models into battles in Viet Nam, Greneda and about everywhere else. They've lived in foxholes coverer in mud and saltwater. They've been slammed and banged about by military solders and photographers for generations.

Nikon cameras have probably been on more National Geographic Expeditions than all other brands combined over the past fifty years. They been acknowledged for their robust no-nonsense build quality and reliability in the field. Nikon has gone into outer space for than any other 35mm film camera thoughout the history of NASA.

LOL You want videos? Fell off a motorcycle with a 300 f/2.8 lens while shooting the Le Tour Langkawi Malaysia. He taped it up and then in 4 hours of heavy rain, finished the assignment. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wsiR89nk86s

Nasa and Nikon: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_26lMGL57rA&feature=related

I have a D700 as well as a D300. I've stood in sleet and rain in the Grand Tetons for several hours waiting on light, where I've had to brush gobs of snow and freezing rain off the camera and Nikon 16-35 f/4 lens. I mean it was alternating between heavy snow, freezing rain and soaking rain. No problems. I had to wipe the front element occasionally to keep all the water from beading up on it. I also carry these rigs in the Everglades and Big Cypress Swam as well as off shore in small boats ringing gulls on small rookery islands. This is why I use Nikon gear. Pentax and Canon both also make weather sealed gear. I choose to trust in Nkon's legacy for building cameras that are more than just sealed.

--
Cheers, Craig

Follow me on Twitter @craighardingsr : Equipment in Profile

Click to expand...

Just to add that the strength of any chain is it's weakest link. You need to think about a sealed system . Your lenses must be sealed as well as the body or your body is not sealed.

--
StephenG

Guidenet said:

I know that the top of the line Pentax models are well sealed. I also know the top of the line Canons and Nikons are well sealed.

For example, Nikon has been building tank-like cameras and lenses for the professional photojournalist since 1959. They've pretty much owned that market for most of the years. Canon jumped in with better AF back at the start of Autofocus and Nikon lost a lot of Sports Professionals but they got them back and never lost many of the rest.

One of the reasons is that tank-like build and sealng. Photographers have been taking Nikon's pro-grade models into battles in Viet Nam, Greneda and about everywhere else. They've lived in foxholes coverer in mud and saltwater. They've been slammed and banged about by military solders and photographers for generations.

Nikon cameras have probably been on more National Geographic Expeditions than all other brands combined over the past fifty years. They been acknowledged for their robust no-nonsense build quality and reliability in the field. Nikon has gone into outer space for than any other 35mm film camera thoughout the history of NASA.

LOL You want videos? Fell off a motorcycle with a 300 f/2.8 lens while shooting the Le Tour Langkawi Malaysia. He taped it up and then in 4 hours of heavy rain, finished the assignment. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wsiR89nk86s

Nasa and Nikon: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_26lMGL57rA&feature=related

I have a D700 as well as a D300. I've stood in sleet and rain in the Grand Tetons for several hours waiting on light, where I've had to brush gobs of snow and freezing rain off the camera and Nikon 16-35 f/4 lens. I mean it was alternating between heavy snow, freezing rain and soaking rain. No problems. I had to wipe the front element occasionally to keep all the water from beading up on it. I also carry these rigs in the Everglades and Big Cypress Swam as well as off shore in small boats ringing gulls on small rookery islands. This is why I use Nikon gear. Pentax and Canon both also make weather sealed gear. I choose to trust in Nkon's legacy for building cameras that are more than just sealed.

--
Cheers, Craig

Follow me on Twitter @craighardingsr : Equipment in Profile

Click to expand...

Just because more people use them does not make them better lmao. More people drive Honda's than Mercedez, but that doesn't mean the Honda is better.

While your argument is valid, these "tanks" you speak of are unnecessarily so in terms of their size. Here's true engineering (and IQ that beats the Nikon flagship D3x for less than one SEVENTH the price)

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/DxOMark-review-for-the-Pentax-K5

You can keep your D700 lol



--

I'm a 23 year old lieutenant serving as a platoon leader in the US Army that has an extremely voracious appetite for backpacking and adventure. I am also finally feeding my passion for photography while working on the fluency of my two languages other than English: Spanish and Arabic, and now picking up some broken German as I live in the Fatherland.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/alexjansenphotography

Unless you have a camera that came with a water-resistance rating, you will need to run the certification process yourself. That will determine the amount of water, pressure, and duration that the camera system will tolerate. Some systems can be submerged for a few seconds; it depends on how good the seals are, how much force was applied during the water entry, and how much pressure was applied by the water while submerged. A well-built camera and lens doesn't need any additional seals for basic water resistance, because the tolerances between surfaces are so fine that unpressurised entry is not possible.

The message for you, however, is don't try this yourself. Unless you know what you're doing, you're better off not taking the risk. The Canon 1D cameras and many "L" lenses carry a pseudo rating, but it's not a certified rating issued to the buyer. Lesser cameras and lenses don't carry a rating beyond the marketing speak. If you're interested, start by looking up MIL-STD-810F, Method 506.4.

--
http://www.alexanderrogge.net/arshutterbug

Hele, you're just one in the long line of Pentax fanboys who've come down the pike over the years. There's nothing wrong with Pentax cameras, but to even consider what I am talking about with regards to a robust solid build to an enthusiast camera like the K5 borders on foolishness even from a fanboy.

I was talking about a legacy of cameras built to take the extremes of war, space and arctic expeditions, not some crop enthusiast model you seem to derive current pleasure from today.

I like DXO. It's good information if you understand what they are testing. They test three aspects of sensor output. That's it. Read the various caveats. Now, consider that your K5's sensor is the same sensor used in the Nikon D7000, D5100 and various other Sony models, it's not a new thing unique to the K5. Any differences in DXO findings amoung the above cameras are within the error of those tests meaning they are all the same, basically with regards to DXO's results.

Moreover, there is a lot more to consider than dynamic range, depth and ISO in the purchase of a new camera. There's also price, framerates, lens choices, support, build quality, upgrade paths, long term viability of the brand, system support and a lot more, much of which are areas where the K5 doesn't do so well.

You probably need to stop with the huffig and puffing about the Pentax K5 and enjoy taking pictures with it rather than pasting camera pictures from other sites. There's been enough fanboys here over the years.

I'd be more worried about Pentax's business state these days. When Hoya owned them they were pouring red ink all over the boardroom. When the hemorage got too large, they were sold at a bargain to Ricoh. Now we'll see if Ricoh can save them or suck them dry and discard them. I hope they stay, personally. As a potential camera buyer, I'd be afraid of purchasing what might be a dead end.

Pentax hasn't released anything but the Q model in recent times. I've seen no really new lenses. I see nothing even for the 645 other than red paint. They are now down to two models; an entry level Kr and an enthusiast K5 with zero really high end or professonal gear left in this format. They had to drop their full frame research because of lack of cash. Some of their lens lineup is still rebadged Tokina and Tamron models. Cosina might still be there too.

The point is that Pentax is no bed of roses right now. If all you have in that fanboy mentality is a Sony made 16 mp sensor, that's really not a lot to get excited about. I know you want others to support Pentax by purchasing one, but temper that desire with some common sense. The question by the OP here was about weather sealing or build level as I see it, not about Sony sensors.

Now, on the other hand. I love the company and the brand. Pentax is what I started with in 1959 and used until 1968 when I decided I needed a larger systems camera and switched to Nikon. Pentax still holds a warm spot and I still have much of that old gear. I have also liked the fact that Pentax and Nikon build for photographers more than anyone else who tend to build for engineers. So, enjoy your K5 if you have one and stop with the foolishness.







--
Cheers, Craig

Follow me on Twitter @craighardingsr : Equipment in Profile

Guidenet said:

Hele, you're just one in the long line of Pentax fanboys who've come down the pike over the years. There's nothing wrong with Pentax cameras, but to even consider what I am talking about with regards to a robust solid build to an enthusiast camera like the K5 borders on foolishness even from a fanboy.

I was talking about a legacy of cameras built to take the extremes of war, space and arctic expeditions, not some crop enthusiast model you seem to derive current pleasure from today.

I like DXO. It's good information if you understand what they are testing. They test three aspects of sensor output. That's it. Read the various caveats. Now, consider that your K5's sensor is the same sensor used in the Nikon D7000, D5100 and various other Sony models, it's not a new thing unique to the K5. Any differences in DXO findings amoung the above cameras are within the error of those tests meaning they are all the same, basically with regards to DXO's results.

Moreover, there is a lot more to consider than dynamic range, depth and ISO in the purchase of a new camera. There's also price, framerates, lens choices, support, build quality, upgrade paths, long term viability of the brand, system support and a lot more, much of which are areas where the K5 doesn't do so well.

You probably need to stop with the huffig and puffing about the Pentax K5 and enjoy taking pictures with it rather than pasting camera pictures from other sites. There's been enough fanboys here over the years.

I'd be more worried about Pentax's business state these days. When Hoya owned them they were pouring red ink all over the boardroom. When the hemorage got too large, they were sold at a bargain to Ricoh. Now we'll see if Ricoh can save them or suck them dry and discard them. I hope they stay, personally. As a potential camera buyer, I'd be afraid of purchasing what might be a dead end.

Pentax hasn't released anything but the Q model in recent times. I've seen no really new lenses. I see nothing even for the 645 other than red paint. They are now down to two models; an entry level Kr and an enthusiast K5 with zero really high end or professonal gear left in this format. They had to drop their full frame research because of lack of cash. Some of their lens lineup is still rebadged Tokina and Tamron models. Cosina might still be there too.

The point is that Pentax is no bed of roses right now. If all you have in that fanboy mentality is a Sony made 16 mp sensor, that's really not a lot to get excited about. I know you want others to support Pentax by purchasing one, but temper that desire with some common sense. The question by the OP here was about weather sealing or build level as I see it, not about Sony sensors.

Now, on the other hand. I love the company and the brand. Pentax is what I started with in 1959 and used until 1968 when I decided I needed a larger systems camera and switched to Nikon. Pentax still holds a warm spot and I still have much of that old gear. I have also liked the fact that Pentax and Nikon build for photographers more than anyone else who tend to build for engineers. So, enjoy your K5 if you have one and stop with the foolishness.

Click to expand...

Talking about fanboys......

Do you read your posts before you hit the button to make sure you aren't what you call other people?

Wheatfield said:

Talking about fanboys......

Do you read your posts before you hit the button to make sure you aren't what you call other people?

Click to expand...

I've often said I'm biased towards Nikon, but I don't jump into discussions with the Rah rah rah.. nonsense. I don't tend to jump off topic with something out of DXO pasting a bunch of images and whatnot. I also tend not to ridicule another camera expecially in an off topic manner. I wouldn't say something like "Enjoy your D700 LOL"

Most people who read my posts find them fairly well balanced. This time, I admit I was responding to nonsense in an inappropriate manner possibly, but Hele keeps jumping into discussions with this one model attitude. Moreover, nothing I said was not pretty factual. On top of that, I'm somewhat of a fanboy of Pentax as well and have been for years.

I notice you're also a Pentax fan. Are you jumping to the rescue? One of those hit and run type remarks possibly? If so, stop with the nonsense. I'm really tired of the brand wars. As a long time Pentax owner myself, I'm getting tired of the newer ones over doing it. If you followed my posting history for very long, you'd know I promote and suggest Pentax way more often than any other brand exept Nikon. I often add it to lists of cameras I'm suggesting even when the OP leaves them out. I often suggest Pentax over Nikon if I think it's a better choice.

Pentax is a great company and makes wonderful high quality gear. They have their own great legacy and don't need tomfoolery in forums to gain acceptance. If they stay on their game and Ricoh decides to keep them long term I'll be most happy. What we don't need is immature nonsense or hit and run name calling. Pay closer attention prior to hitting that button yourself. If you have a disagreement with the factual nature of what I post, voice it. If you want to play the my gear is better than your gear, I'm not interested.
--
Cheers, Craig

Follow me on Twitter @craighardingsr : Equipment in Profile

I'm with you on this one, Guidenet.

I know my screen name probably makes it look like I am just another annoying Pentax fanboy, but this couldn't be further from the truth. I actually can't stand people who constantly brag about how great their brand is and bash everyone else's, even in cases where the other brands sometimes have better stuff than their own. It's ridiculous and I feel bad that my screen name even is what it is, now that I realize how many people are like that, and that people will probably assume I am that type of person too.

Basically, at the time that I bought my Pentax K-x (which is my first DSLR), my thought process was that it was $500, and it had in-body focusing motor, and in-body stabilization, and good high ISO performance and just more or less seemed like the best bang for the buck of any APS-C camera available at the time. I was too much of a clueless novice at that point to take lenses into account, or the future of the camera companies or any of that type of stuff, and had no biases (nor knowledge for that matter) about the history of any of the brands really. So, just looking at its specs and review it looked like the best deal available, at least, as far as the actual camera itself, and was also within my budget too, and I was desperate to get my hands on my first DSLR asap at that point, since I had been reading about photography for a good half year or so by that point and was beginning to understand the types of stuff I'd be able to do with a DSLR that I couldn't do with my point and shoot, and was all sweaty palmed and excited to get my hands on one, and was thrilled to see that there appeared to be a decent one that had just about everything I wanted and all for a very reasonable price. So I bought it.

And I like my Pentax K-x a lot. I don't think I've been as thrilled/pleased/satisfied with a new electronic gadget since the time I got my Nintendo 64 for Christmas when I was like 11 years old, lol. It's super fun, I enjoy using it, even though I suck massively and am a total n00b and everything, I still notice myself learning something new just about every time I use it, and am very glad I pulled the trigger when I did and got myself my first DSLR, it was everything I had hoped it would be, and then some.

THAT SAID, as I become more and more aware about lens lineups, and the future trends/paths that the companies are taking, I definitely feel increasingly aware/worried about whether in the longrun I may have hurt myself a little bit by going the Pentax route instead of Nikon, in case I ever actually get decent enough to where I want a full frame, or want certain lenses in which Nikon holds advantages, or want to upgrade to a new camera only to find that my brand went out of business and now all my lenses are useless and the money I spent on them essentially wasted and I have to re-start my lens collection all the way from scratch, that would totally suck. So, I definitely have some fears now in the back of my head in terms of that type of stuff, but, in the moment at least, when I'm actually taking pictures, those types of thoughts obviously are stuffed away in an unrelated drawer of the hypocampus and are not an issue and I just have fun taking pictures with my K-x, plain and simple, etc.

But, I would never dream of bashing a Nikon, or any other brand for that matter, if they had a superior camera for a better price, or pushing my camera on people if it isn't the best thing available for them or whatever, that just seems silly. I mean, I can understand with sports teams being a fan and being like "SCREW USC, GO BRUINS!!!!!!" but to do such a thing with cameras just seems absurd. I literally laughed out loud the first time I saw people having a fanboy battle on here between their brands. I mean, at first I thought they were doing it jokingly, and then I realized that some of them were actually being serious, and it just totally blew my mind. I honestly had no clue that such a thing even existed, like, back before I got into photography at all, I had no idea that there are actually human beings out there who treat camera brands like sports teams that they are fans of/have rivals of etc, it just seems so weird and ludicrous lol.

Anyways, I don't think anything you said was unreasonable at all, it seems to me like everything you said was based on logic and facts, not biased rif raf, and it was the Pentax in this thread who were the ones going a bit overboard.

Anyways, thanks for answering the actual question of my thread, I appreciate the information.

Amen brother. I think a lot of these forums just end up being battlegrounds for people who really don't care about the promotion of photography as an art and craft. Heck, we're all brothers and sisters here just trying to learn how to do our thing better.

That Pentax Kx of yours is a wonderful camera too. I almost bought one just to keep a Pentax in my toolkit and because they're darned fun to use. I thought about it and that wonderful 15 f/4. A Pentax friend here told me about it and showed me some of his images and they were fantastic. I only wish Nikon came out with a 12 or 15mm dx prime like that. Maybe they will. Lots of people have requested one since Pentax came out with theres.

But, I'm not rich and can't blow money on a two brand system. I'm saving for whatever replaces the D700 in the very near future and it will be darned expensive. But, can you imagine how much cropping of a little bird I could do with 36 megapixels on a full frame?

Again, thanks pal and have a great New Year.

I can't wait until nesting season. That's when my fun begins.





--
Cheers, Craig

Follow me on Twitter @craighardingsr : Equipment in Profile

Guidenet said:

Wheatfield said:

Talking about fanboys......

Do you read your posts before you hit the button to make sure you aren't what you call other people?

Click to expand...

Most people who read my posts find them fairly well balanced. This time, I admit I was responding to nonsense in an inappropriate manner possibly, but Hele keeps jumping into discussions with this one model attitude. Moreover, nothing I said was not pretty factual.
If you have a disagreement with the factual nature of what I post, voice it.

Click to expand...

You make some good points, but your posts still paint you as a Nikon fanboy. Your claims to Nikon build quality are not based on balanced, empirical evidence, but the 'legacy' of Nikon, which really stands for jack. Saying that old Nikon film cameras are tough means absolutely nothing with regards to new models. Throwing in a youtube video of a guy who happened to ding his camera short of stopping it working is not evidence that Nikon cameras are especially tougher than any other brand.

Shutterbug provided a lot more balanced and constructive information than your slew of Nikon praise.

Your only contribution is a drive by spamming of a 2 month dead thread?

Craig's post was accepted and appreciated by the OP. What value did you seek to add? Just noise.
--

See my plan (in my profile) for what I shoot with. See my gallery for images I find amusing.

I totally agree with Bjorn's comments.
--
Chris R

I'll jump in here 9 hours later to say the same. Craig posts are always reasonable and fairly balanced....and I shoot Pentax and have shot it for years!

Plus it's sometimes fun to dredge up and old thread now and then......LOL

--
John Glover
WSSA #141PX

Waterproof? Not at all.

Not even my dive watches are waterproof and the watch industry stopped using that word years ago.

Water resistance is based on how much pressure a case can take before water entry.

I have no doubt that good camera equipment that is advertised as weather sealed can withstand moisture. But they are not waterproof.
--
My Smugmug photos http://www.brianshannonphotography.com/
My photo blog http://brianshannonphotography.blogspot.com/
My 500px photos http://500px.com/brianshannonphotography/

Facebook http://www.facebook.com/pages/Brian-Shannon-Photography/157237647635870

I would never bash a Nikon, or any other brand except my old Practika MTL3. I actually used it as a defence weapon once, fell from a second floor balcony another time, uncountable parties and camping on beaches; 35 years old and it still works.

Now I have a Pentax k5, and have used it in heavy rain to no adverse effect.

I was just thinking, and I can't remember buying the same brand of camera twice in a row. I have of course owned the same brand cameras, but not one after another. I just buy the one that suits me better, and sell the other one, lenses and all. Except with the cameras I decide to keep for whatever the sentimental reason.