Fuji X series and their lack of weather sealing

[Rod McD]

Hi,

The small size of the X series makes them well suited to travel, hiking and landscape photography. It's in that usage that environmental sealing against water and dust is at its most valuable. They are also premium cameras with a premium price, and in that price range (and cheaper), one can find a number of DSLRs that are weather sealed. They share this omission with all the Panasonic and Sony mirrorless cameras at the present time, including Sony's flagship NEX7. Only the OMD is WR.


Am I the only one in the forum who is somewhat disappointed by the lack of weather resistance in the Fuji cameras? It rarely seems to rate a mention. It's not a deal-breaker, but it's certainly a flaw that I accept with some reluctance. I feel that Fuji should be strongly encouraged to introduce WR as a feature in all the X series upgrades. I accept that it would add to cost, but why should premium mirrorless buyers have to accept greater exposure of their cameras to these risks?

Anyone feel the same?


Rod

 

[57even]

Rod McD wrote:

Hi,

The small size of the X series makes them well suited to travel, hiking and landscape photography. It's in that usage that environmental sealing against water and dust is at its most valuable. They are also premium cameras with a premium price, and in that price range (and cheaper), one can find a number of DSLRs that are weather sealed. They share this omission with all the Panasonic and Sony mirrorless cameras at the present time, including Sony's flagship NEX7. Only the OMD is WR.

Am I the only one in the forum who is somewhat disappointed by the lack of weather resistance in the Fuji cameras? It rarely seems to rate a mention. It's not a deal-breaker, but it's certainly a flaw that I accept with some reluctance. I feel that Fuji should be strongly encouraged to introduce WR as a feature in all the X series upgrades. I accept that it would add to cost, but why should premium mirrorless buyers have to accept greater exposure of their cameras to these risks?

Anyone feel the same?

Rod

OMD is not THAT WR either.

Mine seems to resist mild rain OK. I suggest you reset to old fashioned methods and use a plastic bag attached around the lens hood with a band. Worked for me for the last 30 years.

Maybe someone will make a rain jacket for it?

I have a good waterproof camera bag too, and have been though many downpours with no harm to the camera.

 

[Rod McD]

Hi 57even,


I know that water resistance isn't as strong as water proof, but I'm coming from Pentax where the K5 DSLR really is quite well protected and users' experience of the occasional bucketing is actually reasonable grounds for hope...... I still think sealing is an asset. If an alternative model emerged, and everything else was equal, full sealing might become a deal changer for me.

I've seen plastic bags at work and have used them occasionally. Unfortunately that only works where you predict the risk - the unexpected splashing or sand laden wind is as dangerous as ever.

Fuji must have considered whether to go down the WR road in designing the X series. I guess what I find disappointing is that their corporate position was that they wouldn't do so, despite the appeal of their cameras to outdoor photographers and despite the premium camera/premium pricing pitch. I guess I can hope that they will upgrade in a future model.


Cheers, Rod

 

[gearhorse]

I definitely wish it were weather sealed. The first night I had it out on a recent trip it started raining.

Is it protected in the rain at all?

 

[junyo]

Rod McD wrote:

Hi 57even,

I know that water resistance isn't as strong as water proof, but I'm coming from Pentax where the K5 DSLR really is quite well protected and users' experience of the occasional bucketing is actually reasonable grounds for hope...... I still think sealing is an asset. If an alternative model emerged, and everything else was equal, full sealing might become a deal changer for me.

I've seen plastic bags at work and have used them occasionally. Unfortunately that only works where you predict the risk - the unexpected splashing or sand laden wind is as dangerous as ever.

Fuji must have considered whether to go down the WR road in designing the X series. I guess what I find disappointing is that their corporate position was that they wouldn't do so, despite the appeal of their cameras to outdoor photographers and despite the premium camera/premium pricing pitch. I guess I can hope that they will upgrade in a future model.

Cheers, Rod

I've used my XPro at the beach a couple of times, and it survived salt spray and sand and getting caught in a couple of cloud bursts just fine. More importantly, the camera went places I'd have never have carried a DSLR, even my Kx. The in hand difference between a K-5 and the Fuji is considerable.

If weather sealing is a deal breaker, it's a a deal breaker. But the camera's aren't that fragile.

 

[nixda]

Rod McD wrote:

Hi,

The small size of the X series makes them well suited to travel, hiking and landscape photography. It's in that usage that environmental sealing against water and dust is at its most valuable. They are also premium cameras with a premium price, and in that price range (and cheaper), one can find a number of DSLRs that are weather sealed. They share this omission with all the Panasonic and Sony mirrorless cameras at the present time, including Sony's flagship NEX7. Only the OMD is WR.

Am I the only one in the forum who is somewhat disappointed by the lack of weather resistance in the Fuji cameras? It rarely seems to rate a mention. It's not a deal-breaker, but it's certainly a flaw that I accept with some reluctance. I feel that Fuji should be strongly encouraged to introduce WR as a feature in all the X series upgrades. I accept that it would add to cost, but why should premium mirrorless buyers have to accept greater exposure of their cameras to these risks?

Anyone feel the same?

Rod

I hear you! I was just out in the woods for a week, and the weather was quite nasty for a couple of days, plus all that spray from various water falls... Anyway, I will be looking for some serious protection, because there are many good subjects even in foul weather. Let us know if you come across a good solution.

 

[d2f]

Do you agree that most photographers have a degree of common sense and are aware of their shooting environment to the level that they are prepared to handle what ever comes up as far as protecting your camera gear?

One could speculate that for the majority of camera users weather sealing is not a requirement or even desired considering the cost to benefit ratio. This is why it is not a deal breaker to the consumer market and maybe why most camera manufacturers don't bother with it.

That and what metric does the camera industry measure the weather sealing?

It just maybe just marketing hype than anything else, to help separate one product form the other to help sell more cameras. Some folks might think it is foolish to buy a camera based on the weather sealing (hype) alone. But that could be what the camera marketing is betting on.

Case in point. Looking back at professional film cameras, especially those used by war photographers, none were weather sealed to the level of the modern professional DSLRs. It was not a requirement. To the best of my knowledge, the top of the professional camera food chain Leica M series cameras, film and digital, are not weather sealed either. Do Leica photographers demand weather sealing?

Yet the professional cameras past and present served their intended purpose faithfully and in the hands of a knowledgeable craftsman consistently produced images with impact, that tell a story, and that record history faithfully.


D2F

 

[jcharding]

Camera makers intentionally do not use a metric for weather sealing. One exists, but no camera maker wants to be held to it - at least t that I know of.

i don't expect Fuji to weather seal the system. For one they would have to reintroduce all the current lenses, which is fairly unlikely.

Given how well the original Olympus 43 system was sealed, the OMD and its successors are probably the best mirrorless bet. The GH3 is supposedly sealed to some extent as well.

 

[hellocrowley]

junyo wrote:

I've used my XPro at the beach a couple of times, and it survived salt spray and sand and getting caught in a couple of cloud bursts just fine. More importantly, the camera went places I'd have never have carried a DSLR, even my Kx. The in hand difference between a K-5 and the Fuji is considerable.

If weather sealing is a deal breaker, it's a a deal breaker. But the camera's aren't that fragile.

Given the amount of dust in my XPro1 viewfinder and lenses, I wouldn't take it out in the rain at all.

 

[John M Roberts]

d2f wrote:

Do you agree that most photographers have a degree of common sense and are aware of their shooting environment to the level that they are prepared to handle what ever comes up as far as protecting your camera gear?

One could speculate that for the majority of camera users weather sealing is not a requirement or even desired considering the cost to benefit ratio. This is why it is not a deal breaker to the consumer market and maybe why most camera manufacturers don't bother with it.

That and what metric does the camera industry measure the weather sealing?

It just maybe just marketing hype than anything else, to help separate one product form the other to help sell more cameras. Some folks might think it is foolish to buy a camera based on the weather sealing (hype) alone. But that could be what the camera marketing is betting on.

Case in point. Looking back at professional film cameras, especially those used by war photographers, none were weather sealed to the level of the modern professional DSLRs. It was not a requirement. To the best of my knowledge, the top of the professional camera food chain Leica M series cameras, film and digital, are not weather sealed either. Do Leica photographers demand weather sealing?

Yet the professional cameras past and present served their intended purpose faithfully and in the hands of a knowledgeable craftsman consistently produced images with impact, that tell a story, and that record history faithfully.

D2F

I can't say about the Leica digital but my M6 was mostly mechanical other than the meter if my memory serves me well. Canon's first F1 was as well. It could still shoot without a battery. There was a huge difference in susceptibility to weather then but that gradually changed and so did the need for more weather sealing. I certainly rely on my cameras to take on some dampness and with these elaborate electronic systems of today that need is not insignificant for those needing to be in less than moderate conditions. I would welcome this addition in such a small package where fussing around with plastic bags would be much more annoying than with larger cameras.

I just came in from shooting in some cold rain. This time I used my cap over my D700 with a small wash cloth to occasionally wipe while shooting, then in down moments I'd drape an extra coat or plastic over. I wouldn't bank on the X-E1 to being able to take on much moisture.

 

[MoreorLess]

d2f wrote:

Do you agree that most photographers have a degree of common sense and are aware of their shooting environment to the level that they are prepared to handle what ever comes up as far as protecting your camera gear?

One could speculate that for the majority of camera users weather sealing is not a requirement or even desired considering the cost to benefit ratio. This is why it is not a deal breaker to the consumer market and maybe why most camera manufacturers don't bother with it.

That and what metric does the camera industry measure the weather sealing?

It just maybe just marketing hype than anything else, to help separate one product form the other to help sell more cameras. Some folks might think it is foolish to buy a camera based on the weather sealing (hype) alone. But that could be what the camera marketing is betting on.

Case in point. Looking back at professional film cameras, especially those used by war photographers, none were weather sealed to the level of the modern professional DSLRs. It was not a requirement. To the best of my knowledge, the top of the professional camera food chain Leica M series cameras, film and digital, are not weather sealed either. Do Leica photographers demand weather sealing?

Yet the professional cameras past and present served their intended purpose faithfully and in the hands of a knowledgeable craftsman consistently produced images with impact, that tell a story, and that record history faithfully.

D2F

However much common sense you have there are going to be situations were its a choice between getting shots or keeping the camera dry or out of dusty condictions. I'd suggest that the reason we see less of this in the mirrorless market is because there by en large aimed at amatures who can choose protection over getting the shot.

As far as film cameras go thats clearly a very different situation, the potential for water damage in a camera with few or even no electrical componants is obviously far less.

I'd point out that the new Leica M is indeed weather sealed although I'm not sure I'd call that the "top of the professional food chain", the Leica S is much closer to that and was weather sealed from the start.

 

[mr moonlight]

I've taken my X cameras out in the rain and in very wet conditions and never had an issue. Never a torrential downpour, but I've never worried about a little rain. Whenever I am in such conditions, I use a full case and the camera only comes out when I'm taking a shot. So it's exposure to water is as minimal as possible. That said, the more weather sealing the better as long as it doesn't interfere with size and weight. The less I have to worry about my gear being exposed to the elements the better. It's not a deal breaker, but it would be a nice plus.

 

[Rod McD]

d2f wrote:

Do you agree that most photographers have a degree of common sense and are aware of their shooting environment to the level that they are prepared to handle what ever comes up as far as protecting your camera gear?

One could speculate that for the majority of camera users weather sealing is not a requirement or even desired considering the cost to benefit ratio. This is why it is not a deal breaker to the consumer market and maybe why most camera manufacturers don't bother with it.

That and what metric does the camera industry measure the weather sealing?

It just maybe just marketing hype than anything else, to help separate one product form the other to help sell more cameras. Some folks might think it is foolish to buy a camera based on the weather sealing (hype) alone. But that could be what the camera marketing is betting on.

Case in point. Looking back at professional film cameras, especially those used by war photographers, none were weather sealed to the level of the modern professional DSLRs. It was not a requirement. To the best of my knowledge, the top of the professional camera food chain Leica M series cameras, film and digital, are not weather sealed either. Do Leica photographers demand weather sealing?

Yet the professional cameras past and present served their intended purpose faithfully and in the hands of a knowledgeable craftsman consistently produced images with impact, that tell a story, and that record history faithfully.

D2F

Hi,

Yes, of course I'd agree that most photographers have a degree of common sense, but in outdoor and adventurous pursuits (hiking, climbing, caving, skiing, sailing, etc) there is a grey area where photographers take calculated risks that place them somewhere between not getting a shot and potentially risking the camera...... I have used unsealed cameras extensively outdoors and most of the time no harm has been done. OTOH, there have been occasions when they did come to grief. I've also lost unique and magnificent opportunities because the weather was just too risky for an unprotected camera.....

Like I said, I'm coming from Pentax DSLRs and have some confidence in the sealing of the K5. I believe it's better than just marketing hype. And it's not diminished a lot by the fact that many of the Pentax lenses aren't sealed. Some are. Sure, it would be even better if they all were, but the problems in the camera start when rain or dust get under the switches and dials.


I agree with the poster who pointed out that Fuji would have to re-design the existing lenses. That's not going to happen except in the long term. Nevertheless, Fuji could still adopt a policy of making all future gear WR, and then build it progressively into new models and new lenses as they are released (or upgraded).

Most people seem to agree that WR is beneficial. I mean, why would anyone choose to not have it?? It just needs consumers to express a preference and perhaps Fuji would adopt the corporate will to add that extra benefit for future X series buyers. For those that aren't fussed, this is one design option that carries no loss for you....... It causes no loss of any feature - there's no disadvantage. It's as close as you're ever going to get to a completely transparent improvement. (I do acknowledge that it adds a manufacturing cost that would have to be passed on in the retail price.)

Rod

 

[abelits]

Rod McD wrote:

Most people seem to agree that WR is beneficial. I mean, why would anyone choose to not have it?? It just needs consumers to express a preference and perhaps Fuji would adopt the corporate will to add that extra benefit for future X series buyers. For those that aren't fussed, this is one design option that carries no loss for you....... It causes no loss of any feature - there's no disadvantage. It's as close as you're ever going to get to a completely transparent improvement. (I do acknowledge that it adds a manufacturing cost that would have to be passed on in the retail price.)

Cost is one thing. But there is also size, presence of easily deteriorating components, need for more powerful motors to move sealed parts, greater energy use, so higher current power supplies, heat dissipation, larger batteries, have I mentioned the size before? there is also mass... Engineering is hard, and it's full of tradeoffs.

On the other hand, I would happily buy a transparent pouch made of strong, thin plastic with built-in lens hood, shaped to allow operation of all controls through the plastic, with top seal that clips to the strap and a pass-through tripod mount (or even a whole plate with sliding battery door) at the bottom, or designed as an extension to a half-case that can be used without the pouch.

 

[baobob]

Another sensible solution is the typical leather hat from australia provided you order and use the widest model, protects the camera very well against rain when shooting









--
Good judgment comes from experience
Experience comes from bad judgment

 

[abelits]

baobob wrote:

Another sensible solution is the typical leather hat from australia provided you order and use the widest model, protects the camera very well against rain when shooting

I can't use that, it won't work in the wind, and it makes me look like Tom Baker!

 

[John Bean (UK)]

abelits wrote:

I can't use that, it won't work in the wind, and it makes me look like Tom Baker!

Tom erm... Who?

 

[baobob]

The hat comes with a very strong leather lace to tighten it in the storm It works well (saint Malo, french Brittany, 50 knots wind...)

It makes me looking more Indiana Joness

 

[John M Roberts]

abelits wrote:

Rod McD wrote:

Most people seem to agree that WR is beneficial. I mean, why would anyone choose to not have it?? It just needs consumers to express a preference and perhaps Fuji would adopt the corporate will to add that extra benefit for future X series buyers. For those that aren't fussed, this is one design option that carries no loss for you....... It causes no loss of any feature - there's no disadvantage. It's as close as you're ever going to get to a completely transparent improvement. (I do acknowledge that it adds a manufacturing cost that would have to be passed on in the retail price.)

Cost is one thing. But there is also size, presence of easily deteriorating components, need for more powerful motors to move sealed parts,

What parts would those be that would be affected by resistance. I'm having a hard time coming up with an area driven by motors that isn't completely internal anyway. Maybe the lens but I thought that was internal as well?

greater energy use, so higher current power supplies, heat dissipation, larger batteries, have I mentioned the size before? there is also mass... Engineering is hard, and it's full of tradeoffs.

On the other hand, I would happily buy a transparent pouch made of strong, thin plastic with built-in lens hood, shaped to allow operation of all controls through the plastic, with top seal that clips to the strap and a pass-through tripod mount (or even a whole plate with sliding battery door) at the bottom, or designed as an extension to a half-case that can be used without the pouch.

 

[Daniel from Bavaria]

Hi,




as a former Olympus E1 and E3 owner (now some years Canon + Fuji since beginning of the year), weather sealing is very welcomed feature.

I used my E-1 and my E-3 in partly very harsh, and wet and dusty conditions (heavy rain, rafting, waterfalls, extrem dust on a vulcano) and I just didn't care. And these bodies never get spoiled by these conditions.

Water is one thing, but very fine dust is nearly uncontrollable.





Indead I was very tempted to buy the OM-D over the X-Pro1 due to the weather and dust-sealing.

That is USP which can be very usefull or is just helping me to feel more comfortable.

Nevertheless, I decided to go for the X-Pro1 because I prefer the control-layout, the hybrid-viewfinder and finally the little edge on the image quality of the X-Pro1. Also the lens lineup (partly I have to say the roadmap) fits better to my needs.

Next thing, and in my eyes a major failure from Olympus, is that all the interesting lenses for the OM-D do not have weather-sealing. What a pitty. So there is only the dark kit-zoom (not interested in) and meanwhile the Macro (very nice) and now the Panasonic. But the 12 f2 and the 75 f1.7 and 45 f1.8 - they are all not sealed. So finally I would be in the same situation as with my X-Pro1.

Very stupid.




Summarized, there is no reason to deny that weather- and dust-sealing is very useful. And I would appreciate if Fuji would have gone that way. But they weren't and so far I was able to come along with it.

And for the really hard stuff I bought my wife the Olympus TG-1, no replacement for the X-Pro1, but therefore you can use it also for snorcheling




Take care,

Daniel