How low can they go? - Surprising results

atigun

Leading Member
Messages
922
Solutions
3
Reaction score
261
Location
Fairbanks, US
Living in interior Alaska during a long cold spell, like the one we have had now for two weeks with temperatures lingering around -40°C can be a lot of fun. One can for instance throw boiling water into the air and see it immediately become ice fog. Or one can blow soap bubbles and see them last for days after they hit the ground. Or one can do the best one can to deep freeze cameras and see if they still work…

I have used my different cameras at very low temperatures on many occasions before and have not had any other problem other than the need to feed them warm batteries. As my profession deals with how living animals overwinter and cope with low temperatures it was natural that I started to wonder if the cameras really had equilibrated to the ambient temperature when I used them in the cold. Often they stay in a bag or holster which might be well insulated, and they only get out of there during a short period of use. To get some idea what happens, I performed a quick test one night. I taped a 36G thermocouple (a very small temperature sensor) to my D200, placed it in my Thinktank Digital Holster 20 out in the cold at -41.7°C initial ambient temperature (thick horizontal line in graph below) and checked the D200 temperature with a digital readout now an then:



As suspected cooling is quite slow; it took 2h to reach to two thirds of the final temperature. Extrapolating (I needed to sleep…) 4h total will probably only result in a temperature of -34°C which means that on most trips under these conditions the camera would never be equilibrated to ambient temperature. (4 hours at -41°C is a long time for humans even with good clothing). Digital cameras may also be helped by heat produced in the electronic components when turned on to keep them above ambient temperature. Initial warming rate at room temperature of a cold camera in the bag (purple) was about the same as the initial cooling rate.

What if the camera has to stay outside for a long time, as during a winter camping trip (for instance if the camera is left out in a sled or if left out in a deep frozen car overnight as some do to avoid condensation)?

I set out for a simple test:

Leave my different cameras outside at about -40°C for 9-10 hours. Trip the shutter and see if the camera takes a proper image. If necessary, insert warm, fresh batteries and try again.

Here is a temperature record from data loggers at the test site, starting Dec. 29. The bar shows the period of testing. The dark blue is outside temperature, and the light blue is temperature next to where I hid the cameras, a site which was somewhat buffered. Recording with the data logger started somewhat late and the first half of the recording is estimated from a recording station in a couple of miles away.



The test was not aimed primarily at testing cold tolerance of batteries, since they can be easily swapped out. As I did not want to deal with developing film, “analog” cameras were checked by removing the lens and see if the shutter and mirror worked as it should. For lenses I checked if AF worked and if the lens could be manually focused and zoomed if applicable. All checks were performed outside to avoid potential problems with condensation (also after brief periods of re-warming inside). Cameras were kept in holster type bags during the cooling period, and in holsters or Ziploc bags during re-warming inside (no condensation occurred unless breathing directly on the camera though).

Contestants (all Nikon cameras, sorted by age):

F2A, originally an F2, bought new in 1974. It has stayed with me on countless of winter camping trips back in Norway.

F4 with small grip containing 4 lithium AA’s, bought in 1991. I have previously tested the F4 with film at -52°C (-60F) but only for a shorter period. Subhankar Banerjee in his book Arctic National Wildlife Refuge: Seasons of life and land (ISBN 0-89886-438-0, p. 172/ highly recommended) and also during the book signing stated that the only 35mm cameras that worked for him in the cold was FM2 and F4s, newer cameras like F5 and D1 series that also were available at the time were only used during summer. He lived in a tent for months in midwinter to take the photographs for his book. (This is in the North-East corner of Alaska).

D200 without grip, bought May 2006. It has worked many times previously at -40°C in Alaska during shorter exposures than the current test.

D40x, bought June 2008. My little “point and shoot” camera when used with my 28mm AIS which is chipped, allowing metering. But it isn’t a D200…

In addition the following lenses were tested briefly for function (not image quality):
AF 20mm
AF 60mm
28mm AIS
105mm AIS.
18-55mm G non-VR (only tested on D40x)
AF300 f/4 tested at about -33°C after main test period above.

To be continued..

--



Atigun valley, a place north in Alaska
 
Sorry to tease you. Before I present the results of this contest I want to hear your guesses. Which one(s) of the camera bodies do you think did best in the cold and why?

The first one with a correct guess will be entitled to perform the next physical camera challenge contest and decide what kind of environmental perils to subject his/her own cameras to next time : )

I will get back with contest results in a day or so, provided that I get some guesses first…

--



Atigun valley, a place north in Alaska
 
I always wear a face mask when I am outdoors at these temperatures except during very short ventures outside. However during a couple of these tests right outside my door I forgot, not thinking what I was doing – actually putting a very cold object to my face... Result: I got a cold burn on my nose tip from the metal back of the D200 which held a temperature of -40°C. My nose did not get stuck to my D200 : ) nor did I immediately notice; only a very thin layer of my nose fell off after a couple of days : ) and seems to be getting OK now. As photographers we sometimes get so caught up with what we are doing that we forget about ourselves.

This gave me a good excuse to cancel plans to camp outside to endure the same temperature as my cameras… : )

--



Atigun valley, a place north in Alaska
 
I suspect that the two digital bodies, with fewer mechanical parts to have lubrication get sluggish, would have done the best.
--
--Bob
 
The D-40. Holding it in your hands kept its core temp a little warmer.
 
The title of your post indicates that the D40x may have won the contest. Wouldn't be a big surprise to me, though, because I know from experience that low temperature performance is rather unpredictable. My otherwise wonderful Nikon FA was unusable in cold weather, whereas the lowly F301 was totally reliable. My Mamiya 645 was very unreliable at any temperature below freezing point. My D100 and D200 have never let me down.

OK, I have never tested at –40 C (I would rather stay inside when it's that cold). But I have been winter tenting for eight days and nights in Swedish Lapland and my D200 was flawless. I would say that my digital bodies can take more cold than I can.

It's a pity you didn't test the film cameras with film. One thing I have experienced with some of my cameras is inaccurate shutter performance, resulting in underexposed or partially exposed images. You can't check for that just by looking, you need to take real pictures. And there's yet one more issue to consider: How does the film behave at –40 C?

Regards
Lasse
 
(Honors in ascending order)

The F2(A) get honorable mention for being an old classic and for its reliable service under less extreme conditions. However after 10 hours at -38C (tested during second half of experimental period together with F4) when the shutter was released I could see the mirror slowly go up to 2/3 up position and stay there. Shutter appeared to work. There was lots of resistance in “film” winding. Even after warm up for days the mirror was locked in this position and needed a gentle push up before it returned and started to work normally. There was a reason they replaced the grease/oil with graphite for cold weather use in the old days (normal lubrication in my F2). The temperatures were never lower than -30°C during my winter camping trips in Norway, and I only had a day trip at -36°C. The F2 is also excused since it has not been serviced for more than 17 years.

--



Atigun valley, a place north in Alaska
 
The F4 get honorable mention because it was the only electronic camera that was not completely dead before replacement of batteries (4 lithium AAs) with warm ones. It had probably been able to wind film if present. However the mirror did not rise completely, causing the secondary AF mirror to block the light path. This did not improve after batteries had been re-warmed (but camera still kept cold outside). The F4 started working again completely after a short period of heating at room temperature (15-30 min) inside a camera holster. It has not been serviced since I bought it more than 17 years ago.

--



Atigun valley, a place north in Alaska
 
D200 get honorable mention tied with the F4 because it works reliably at -40°C during shorter exposures. It is my favorite camera, and was also my favorite for winning this contest. Before changing batteries it only gave a short flash on the rear display and then died completely as expected. However I was disappointed that after replacing battery and releasing the shutter, the first frame or two came out black and the next ones with only a stripe exposed at the top. (I got slightly alarmed by a weak “Err” on the top display during the first trial…)



After some some more shutter actuations:



After a while it helped shooting straight up or straight down:



Autofocus worked fine, viewfinder display illegible, focus indicators almost frozen, top display very slow, rear display a bit slow.

After re-warming at room temp for 5-15 minutes, still inside the closed holster bag, it started working normally. I thought the problem was the shutter not opening completely. I tested it on 3 different nights with the same result. After seeing what the F2 and F4 did, I took the chance and did a quick 2s exposure without lens while holding my breath to avoid condensation. It confirmed the same problem with the mirror not coming up completely and the secondary mirror for AF (still down) blocking the light path as with F4. The shutter appeared to work fine.

A further test with a D200 equilibrated to room temperature and exposed on a tripod at -38°C, using the timer to take one exposure every 5 min and occasional manual checks for low battery gave the following result:
-First battery lasted 40 min before it got too cold.
-Second battery (inserted after a 10 min lapse) lasted 20min.

-Problems with the mirror started at 80 min (bottom of frame dark). (Temperature on D200 surface was not measured due to steep temperature gradients).

After weather had warmed up a bit (last part of temperature plot) I repeated the test with D200 + AF 300f/4 mounted. Ambient temperature (Ta) at start = -36°C.

-After 3h Ta=-34°C, D200 worked fine, AF of 300 f/4 worked OK, a little slow, focused fine on moon. Initial battery dead.

-After 5h Ta=-33°C Case temp ca. -30°C (uncertain). D200 worked fine, AF of 300 f/4 worked OK, a little slow, focused fine on moon and other subjects. Flash OK, perhaps a bit weak (could have been too long distance).

-After ca 12h Ta=-26°C, D200 probably colder, average temperature for whole exposure probably about -32°C. Camera was not completely dead, but needed warm battery. AF worked, hunting in low light (no moon), First 3 exposures mirror blocked half of the frame, then OK.

It seems that the long term temperature limit of my D200 is somewhere between -30 and -35°C (roughly -20 to -30°F). That is actually not bad at all.

--



Atigun valley, a place north in Alaska
 
D40x. Surprise! (Well perhaps not any longer for some forum members...).



(shown with my chipped 28mm AIS)

After replacing the dead battery with a warm one, I was unable to prevent this camera from taking reasonably correct exposed and focused (with the 18-55mm) images even when equilibrated to about -40°C (and from the first frame):



(the crooked tree to the right is called "drunken trees" and is caused by instability due to permafrost in the ground).

Viewfinder display was illegible, but opposed to the D200, shutter speed and f-stop could be viewed on the rear display which was just a bit slow. The first night had a minimum of

I also had it outside exposed without a bag at -38°C in parallel with the tripod test on D200. When I turned it on after 80 min, the rear monitor was still operating and showed blinking battery warning sign and other info, not bad at all. And it was of course operating normally after inserting a warm battery.

--



Atigun valley, a place north in Alaska
 
(Comments that were written before starting the thread)

There are several things not controlled for here:
I only tested one of each camera model, there could be sample variation.

The newest camera worked best and the older cameras worst. The grease/oil might perhaps stiffen with age. Also old cameras probably did not have the same quality grease/oil that is used in newer cameras. There is obviously a reason why NASA ordered D2x with special lubrication.

The winner D40x had only about 5,000 shutter actuations, being 6 months old, while D200 was 2 years older with > 40,000 clicks. The test should be repeated with the D40x in two years…

I was surprised that the F4 did not do better especially considering Subhankar Banerjee’s positive comments in his highly recommended book (see above). Cold spells as low as -40°C to -55°C might occur in Northern Alaska, however more common temperatures are -30 to -35°C from my experience during work (and temperature records) at our field station next to ANWR; high winds are more of a problem. General experience with mechanical things during winter in interior Alaska is that they mostly work reasonably well down to -30°C (roughly -20°F), things start to get weird between -30 and 35°C (-20-30°F) and very difficult at -35°C to -40°C (-30 to -40°F), almost impossible below -50°C (roughly -60°F) unless heated…

It is tempting to speculate that the slow mirror and cheap construction of the D40x actually helps here. High-speed cameras like F4/ D200 and above probably need to have less friction in the mirror mechanism than a slow camera like D40x, making use of grease or oil necessary. Perhaps lubricant free plastic bushings were chosen to make the D40x cheaper. Lubricating all those spots probably adds to cost.

To conclude, the time factor and thermal insulation around equipment has to be taken into account when evaluating ability to function in the cold. I suspect that the issues seen here when equilibrated at about -40°C will never surface for 99.9 percent of users even when living in cold regions, as the camera can take these temperatures longer than most photographers before getting too cold. It is probably restricted to expedition activity like trans-polar treks, trans-Greenland treks, participants in the Yukon Quest Dog race, high altitude climbing, and extreme winter camping or research like these guys did many years ago: http://newsminer.com/news/2009/jan/11/scientists-know-all-about-rigors-research-cold/ . For most users the cameras will probably just keep working as long as we feed them warm batteries and avoid excessive condensation.

A final advice in severe cold is to not keep the camera outside (like overnight in a car or sled) unless it is absolutely necessary; there are other ways to avoid condensation.

--



Atigun valley, a place north in Alaska
 
AIS lenses focus got very stiff when equlibrated to about -40°C, but workable.

AF lenses manual focus did not get quite that stiff, and the AF worked on the D200 although slow, especially the AF 60mm. Aperture setting and depth of field preview on the camera with AF and AIP lenses (28mm) worked, but aperture was difficult to read on the D200 top display and viewfinder displays.

The AFS 18-55mm kit lens’ zoom mechanism completely jammed after moving it a tiny bit from 35mm toward 55mm! AF and MF worked reasonably well. So as a single focal length lens it is usable if focal length is decided beforehand… After warming up again everything worked as normal.

So only one lens had severe problems in the cold, and it was only limiting its use, not preventing it. It is hard to know how AFS lenses with ultrasonic motors would work, especially the clutch mechanism for manual focus, and if slowdown of focus speed could cause it to become uncalibrated. VR lenses use magnetic suspension; however power feed could perhaps be an issue.

--



Atigun valley, a place north in Alaska
 
That would not be bearable for Alaskans right now, Faibanks has warmed up to above 0°F, and people start complaining about the heat and put on shorts and T-shirts ; )

--



Atigun valley, a place north in Alaska
 
I've dealt with negative temperatures before on Mt. Koya-san Japan with the D70s. But, I don't think I was hitting the temperatures youre at. Only thing I noticed was a shorter battery life.

This test reminds me of an article I read from some photographers hitting Antarctica and the problems they faced with their cameras. Both Nikon and Canon. Needless to say there were many problems and even some dead camers. I'll see if I can't find the article to link.
 
Very interesting and I agree with your comments. I'm glad to see that the digital cameras stood up so well. Your conclusion that -30–35 C is the limit for a used D200 seems accurate. And I'm fine with that, I'm not sure I can take a lot more than -35 for an extended period of time.

By the way, I think I've read many years ago about cameras being adapted for extremely low temperatures with special grease. Maybe something to consider for your F2. I would still be a little concerned about the film, though. Can modern film bases take the cold?

Regards
Lasse
 
Hi Robert,

good point in that simplicity of digital bodies might help. Particularly might apply to D40x, although you did not guess on which body.

Hi Steve,
The D-40. Holding it in your hands kept its core temp a little warmer.
Right body, interesting explanation, however D40x was taken directly from the holster with gloved hands and triggered within seconds, so that isn't plausible.
Heat transfer from my nose to the metal body of D200 is another matter : ).
The title of your post indicates that the D40x may have won the
contest. Wouldn't be a big surprise to me, though, because I know
from experience that low temperature performance is rather
unpredictable.
Hi Lasse,

Perhaps I should not have used the word surprise in the title - made it too easy to guess D40x; I hoped it would spur some curiosity : )

I called Rich at Alaska Camera Repair here in Fairbanks for comment. He gets lots of calls from worried photographers each winter who is coming up to cover the Iditarod Sled Dog Race. He actually was surprised that the D40x did that well, and F2 did not do better. Old mechanical cameras are supposed to be very reliable, he said FM2 was one of the best in the cold. Graphite for winterizing cameras has not be used for a long time (would not want that in a digital body!). If winterizing is done it is more about removing lubrication at the cost of some extra wear. [Same method is used for bicycle freewheels]. He also has some extremely thin oil. It did not sound like it is done much on digital SLR's these days, not needed much.

He had not serviced the mirror suspension of D200 and D40x - he thought the idea about simpler suspension with plastic (delrin) bushings in D40x was plausible and could be causing the better performance of the mirror in the cold.

My otherwise wonderful Nikon FA was unusable in cold
weather, whereas the lowly F301 was totally reliable. My Mamiya 645
was very unreliable at any temperature below freezing point.
My D100
and D200 have never let me down.
Same here for my D200 under normal use.
OK, I have never tested at –40 C (I would rather stay inside when
it's that cold). But I have been winter tenting for eight days and
nights in Swedish Lapland and my D200 was flawless. I would say that
my digital bodies can take more cold than I can.
Good to hear. I checked some of your images, really nice. I am curious how cold it was (in the night) during your winter camping. Except for effects of equilibration temperature I also wonder if there could be any time factors involved, not related to equilibration time. Like when you try to start up a car that hasn't benn used for a week at forty below here.
It's a pity you didn't test the film cameras with film. One thing I
have experienced with some of my cameras is inaccurate shutter
performance, resulting in underexposed or partially exposed images.
You can't check for that just by looking, you need to take real
pictures.
Did you confirm that partial images wasn't a mirror problem? I would agree to and Rich also mentioned that shutters might be another issue, especially with horizontal traveling shutters not exposing evenly. As my test came out, the failure of the mirror mechanism in both film cameras made it unnecessary and impossible to do that test.

And there's yet one more issue to consider: How does the
film behave at –40 C?
I have previously only performed one shorter test of my F4 at at -52°C (-60°F)

without any problem, and many times at -35-45°C. The film is pretty close to the surface of the camera, but it might still have been a too short to cool the film down completely. I have seen a very few cases of damaged perforation. I cannot recall any other problems.



Muskox at forty below - Nikon F4 20mm f/2.8

ianz28 and mato22
Thanks for your apprechiation, and reminding me about that article.

It seemed to be very different conditions; wet cold vs. deep dry cold. In wet cold completely different things would be important, and I bet the D40x would not do too well then.

In dry cold, snow/moisture does not stick to the camera (after brief cooling). I think the important message is that cold can be many different things. If it is deep dry cold where mechanics stiffens up, the actual time of the cold exposure is important for how cold those mechanical part become. In fact you should not trust guys like me bragging that "I used my D200 at forty below" without giving any information about the time factor. Sometimes even the perception of how long one was out in the cold can be quite distorted and that hour at forty below was only 15 minutes when the EXIF was checked.... : )

Cheers,
Øivind

--



Atigun valley, a place north in Alaska
 
Very interesting and I agree with your comments. I'm glad to see that
the digital cameras stood up so well. Your conclusion that -30–35 C
is the limit for a used D200 seems accurate. And I'm fine with that,
I'm not sure I can take a lot more than -35 for an extended period of
time.
Hi Lasse,

I think one other confirmation I got regarding that limit was during field work early March last year North of Brooks Range (next to ANWR). It had warmed up to about -35°C from a cold spell that had challenged the temperature recording equipment of the field station, but a strong breeze blowing gave pretty good cooling. At my site I put the D200 up on a tripod while working with an instrument for an hour, and then skied back to the field station. Totally I was out about at least 3 hours. At the very end of the trip the release sounded longer and camera seemed slower. I almost bet it was getting close to that mirror problem. All exposures were OK.
By the way, I think I've read many years ago about cameras being
adapted for extremely low temperatures with special grease. Maybe
something to consider for your F2. I would still be a little
concerned about the film, though. Can modern film bases take the cold?
See my general comment to responses with info on winterizing. Admittedly behaviour of film has more academic interest for me as my film use is close to zero these days, except for underwater photography that it is too long since I have been able to do...

Cheers,
Øivind

--



Atigun valley, a place north in Alaska
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top