Weather Sealing is a Gimmick.

rsmithgi wrote:

mpgxsvcd wrote:

I think a lot of the angst over this topic was due to the tone of my first post and I will own that. It probably wasn’t the best way to get my point across. However, there is good information here and I don’t want to lose sight of that.

A majority of people in this thread have expressed an opinion that “Weather Resistance” means more than what Olympus has stated it means. In fact the new E-M5 MK II article that was just posted here is full of misleading statements as to the effectiveness of the Weather Resistance.

The problem is not that the weather resistance does nothing at all. The issue is that it doesn’t do nearly as much as most people think it does.

While your improved tone is appreciated, you still are extremely presumptuous to claim to know what "most" people think.

Do you have some information about warrantee claims? Have you surveyed E-M1 and E-M5 owners? Did you have a bad experience with a weather resistant camera? Are you angry about the price of the cameras you have purchased?

Your replies throughout the thread have implied that weather resistance is (a) ineffective and (b) unnecessary. Seems like an odd pair of positions to take.

I can’t go into the full details. However, I have had an experience with Panasonic cameras and the weather sealing of those camera bodies. My “speculations” are based on the conversation I had with the Panasonic rep and what he said they would deny the warranty claims for if someone had a weather related issue.

And no it wasn’t an issue with the 35-100mm F2.8 lens. It was with a Panasonic weather sealed camera body. The dust in the lens doesn’t affect its performance at all in the manner I use it.