Which brand has the most reliable weather sealing? I wanna shoot /out/ but I live in michigan.Has anyone had their 'weather sealed' camera die on them from heavy rain?
Plastic bag
>>4396883You really are immune to being useful, huh
>>4396886I just like thinking outside the box.
>>4396882I've used my D800 since 2013. Have shot in rain and storm. Still no issues so far.
>>4396882All weather sealing between 2019+ high end sony, pro level canon, nikon, olympus, pentax, and high end panasonic is the same, failure rate is basically set by the number of cameras being abused because any use of any control on the camera will temporarily break a seal and using a telescoping zoom will pump moisture through the device. The most important part is to make sure the lens you are using is fully sealed with seals at every spot including, especially the lens mount, not merely "dust and moisture resistant" like the nikon z 40mm f2 which can let water inside the mount, and avoid telescoping lenses.If you use a weather sealed camera while sailing the seas you will feel the financial pain of those seals breaking sooner rather than later, it only takes a little salt spray to wreck electronics, wipe your shit dry before pushing any buttonsWeather sealing on pre-2019 sony, any fujifilm, low end panasonic, low end sony (a6600 and worse), is totally absent.Weather sealing on cheaper nikon APS-C cameras may be absent, check to see if nikon published a diagram showing where the seals are.Weather sealing on sub-pro canon bodies (RP and worse) and non-L canon lenses is totally absent.With those cameras, you're just gambling on the low conductivity and low speed of corrosion development of non-acidic rainwater (and therefore, forum users claiming their camera totally survived rain)
>>4396883I don't see why namefags go off-topic instead either answering the question or shutting up when they don't know the answer / can't contribute to thread. Oh that's right you just want to shit up another thread as usual.
Pentax/OlympusThen professional Nikon/CanonThen Panasonic
>>4396945>any use of any control on the camera will temporarily break a sealIs putting rubberized flexible seals under buttons foreign technology? Because I'm pretty sure that's what cameras do, and what leads to people complaining about buttons being too squishy.
>>4396952It is on topic, its a legitimate tactic to avoid water damage on any type of camera and a lot of people do this.It doesnt answer the question but it rather opens up a new direction of thought which may not have been considered before.
>>4396883>plastic bagthat's to put over your head. now breathe.
>>4396958>Which brand has the most reliable weather sealing?Yeah completely off-topic. Next time stick to thread prompt or shut the fuck up. Preferably just stfu permanently.
>>4396956The wheels and some of the larger buttons get a ring instead of a pad. The whole camera deal is basically 2006 hardware repackaged forever with almost 0 software improvements. Why would the weather sealing get better than a d200s? I STILL use my d200 in the rain.
>>4396945Very true, no one is better or worse anymore unless they lie about wr (FUJI) or admit to having none
What a great opportunity for everyone to share photos they've taken in bad weatherI sure hope this is a thread of seasoned outdoor shooters, and not another thread for nophotos to larp they touch grass with others anecdotes
>>4396986Why don't you start us off?
>>4396972>>4396971Make me
>>4396986Why would anyone take photos in bad weather? Its drab and ugly as fuck and only cool when it subsides or gets dangerous, and another moron already climbed on a hill to photograph lightning. Pass.Weather sealing is for when you’re walking (i know, americans, crazy thought) and get caught in bad weather. Not for taking pictures of boring dull grain rain like we dont have enough of those. Its like an umbrella.
>>4396988Your turn>>4397001>Weather sealing is for when you’re walking (i know, americans, crazy thought) and get caught in bad weather.That's what backpacks and bags are for. I use weather sealing to take pictures in rain and snow (i know, crazy thought).You often find yourself walking outside for extended periods of time, with no bag or backpack, in inclement weather with a camera hanging, that you aren't using to take pictures?
>>4397006>carry a bag just for your camera in case it gets wetHow about instead of being a fag i just dont buy a fuji/old snoy and get something weather sealed aka basically any other camera?>You often find yourself walking outside for extended periods of time, with no bag or backpack, in inclement weather with a camera hanging, that you aren't using to take pictures?Yes. Cameras exist 99% of the time and take pictures 1%. They need to be accessible when the shot presents itself.
>>4397013uhm, everyone here on dpreview is either an ultralight thru hiker with a backpack or wears a purse, chud. how can you bring your prime collection and tripod every day without a purse? do you just not use a bunch of gear? are you insane?
>>4397013True, what cameras do you use?> take pictures 1%So can we see one of those pictures where the opportunity presented itself after being caught out in the rain shortly before?
>>4397016I use a generic full frame compact, one prime, with a spare lens cap, 3 stop ND, and CPL in a tiny pocket case on the side. And no, i genuinely believe you don’t deserve it.
>>4397018>another thread for nophotos to larp they touch grassConfirmed
>>4397019I sure have photos. Over 100 last month. I will not debase them for your stupid gear cope argument about purses. Sorry.
>>4397020I'm sure you do nophoto
>>4396883Hang yourself
>>4397029Cry all you want, but I am not going to debase my photos like it would prove anything. I said weather sealing matters for wearing your camera and getting caught in the rain whether or not you take a picture of the rain. You coped and said to keep it in a backpack or purse. That is cope. No one wants to hide their camera in a backpack or wear a purse in case it rains briefly on a day hike or a walk through town. That’s why even ancient DSLRs were weather sealed. Even film SLRs going back to the om4 in 1983 had weather sealing that held up when push came to shove. No idea why fuji cant figure it out for nearly $2000 cameras and sony took until 2019 to get it right but oh well, there have always been multiple camera brands so you’re not forced to buy a fujisnoy that cant handle rain or a little ukranian winter.
>>4397103>nophotos
>>4397018>generic full frame compactlmao what the fuck does this even mean. the only thing i can think of that maybe fits that is a snoy a7c, which is rich coming from someone claiming to shoot in bad weather.
>>4396993kys
Brother just use any camera at all and get a PortaBrace rain fly for it. It’s fine. You’ll be fine. Don’t overthink it.
>>4397142Tons of photos. >>4397151Mine has survived rain just as well as my canon and olympus DSLRs because I don’t ever trust a third party or low end lens in the rain, and didnt buy a shitty a7iii. Is simple trick. Sony finally stopped being as bad as fujislug scameras. Initially the colors bothered me because they look too close to nikon, but since i strip exif, rename, and resize everything to post so i cant be tracked no one else notices. They probably think it’s a d750.>oversaturated and green, sony: >:(>oversaturated and green, nikon: yep, now that’s a real photographic tool The only issue the better snoys and electronic viewfinder interchangeable lens cameras in general have but SLRs dont is at -30c the battery gets sucked dry fast (most other EVILs are even worse) and the EVF and screen stop refreshing fast enough for viewfinding while an OVF works okay. The only cope is how easy it is to fit under a coat instead of wasting valuable pack space, even when wearing layers with a pack strapped and a slung rifle, but bring an SLR instead.
>>4397165This thread is about camera weather sealing not who makes the best camera poncho
>>4397200No camera is 100% "weather sealed" eventually moisture will seep in somewhere, it's meant to just be a last resort protection for if you get caught in the rain or something and gives you a chance to put your camera away, or, get a sleeve or plastic bag out and put it over so you can take photos in the pouring rain.
>>4397201Nice opinion or whatever but again OP asked if anyone has had their weather sealing die on them from heavy rain. So have you personally had your weather sealing die on you from heavy rain and if so what brand camera was it? Or are you just spouting the same old shit no one asked to hear.
>>4397201>uhm weather sealing is a myth, its ackshually weather resistantcommon fujislug cope[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution144 dpiVertical Resolution144 dpiColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width750Image Height1218
>>4397202No camera company has in their fine print that their cameras or lenses can withstand long exposure to heavy rain. It's like gortex, it's advertised as "waterpoof" but it's not. Expecting to hear stories about someone taking their like z9 ot d500 into the Amazon and dropping it off puddles and using it in a monsoon isn't gonna happen.
>>4397212Olympus could always pull that off. 1983: first weather sealed olympus. 1989: first weather sealed canom2004: first weather sealed nikonEven snoy figured out how to make a camera (1988: first sony camera 2019: first weather sealed sony camera)First weather sealed fujifilm: waiting…
>>4397212>No camera company has in their fine print that their cameras or lenses can withstand long exposure to heavy rainNo one asked, but check out Olympus IP ratings or Nikonos cameras :) Not to mention the numerous weather sealed point and shoot cameras released over the years.Nice to know your "advice" is based on reading posts on the Internet and that you are capable of being objectively wrong due to lack of knowledge.
>>4397212>No camera company has in their fine print that their cameras or lenses can withstand long exposure to heavy rain.Even fucking snoy a7ivs are surviving torrential rain. Canon 1d series bodies and L lenses were in tropical and desert warzones for 20 fucking years If your shit camera can't handle heavy rain you got scammed.
>>4397215>even with the whole industry to copy, it took sony 31 years to develop functional weather sealing>coincidentally after they got sued for a7iii shutters and threatened with lawsuits until they changed their weather sealing marketing languagelol. only leica is this scummy
>>4397215How about panasonic/lumix? RTINGS says my s5ii is weather sealed, and I kinda want to shoot in the snow / light rain, but I cannot afford to replace it.
I brought back a Sony A7R3 from the dead after it took a swim in the Grand Tetons. The worst point of intrusion was the bottom plate which was not weather-sealed at all. The VF has a fair amount of sealing but it's not impervious.The Tamron 28-75 attached to it had zero water intrusion. I spent about an hour with the whole combo blowing the water out of it and eventually got it to work again. It was definitely a freshwater swim, had that been salt water it would have been fucked.
>>4397232I’ve heard this exact sony dropped in water story before from a non-sugar (who did sugarlike things) and I think he had a 28-75 tooHm
>>4397233They were from New Zealand I believe, saved their camera at a shop in Salt Lake City
>>4397103>only photo posted itt is from a fujibeing a nophoto is the real cope
>>4397231I've had my s5ii drizzled on a few times, also handled it with wet handsso far no issuesI still try to keep my nice lenses esp zooms dryI had a trip this summer in Bergen where it rains like 250 days an year on average so I went prepared with a few plastic baggies, those thin transparent ones without zippers. I found a size that fit the camera snugly with enough slack for the full zoom range when I got it cramped using the lens hoodI still tore a few and got some water on it but I changed em out asap and made sure to dry the cam and lens out every evening, even brought some silica but I didn't use itI'll post a few pics I took out in the rain>>4396883correct but unironically[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakePanasonicCamera ModelDC-S5M2Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 13.2 (Windows)Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)26 mmImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2024:11:17 22:24:22Exposure Time1/160 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/2.8Exposure Bias0.7 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageLight SourceCloudy WeatherFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length26.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBRenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlNoneContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormal
>>4397220I cam guarantee anyone who says they took their camera into super harsh environments and claim ghat they sat in a tropical storm in tirnidad to get a photo of a bird or some shit had covers on their cameras.
>>4397216Ok go read the warrenty of any of these camera, or lenses. Get back to us.
>>4397256warranty*ftfw nnttmHowabout you go read up and learn what adults are discussing instead of repeating things you read on the Internet and talking out your ass (zoomer).
>>4397254based inclement weather poster, look at that drizzle!
>>4397247>fujifags dishonor their photos by using them for petty gear argumentsFits for a fashion brand
>>4397266at least i have photos to dishonor
>>4397268clearly reflex bro does too he just has nothing to prove lol
>>4397269whatever you say nophoto
>>4397259You mean like reading the fine print of the factory warranty and seeing that no camera compnay covers water damage, and then using some basic critical thinking to realize they can't back their "weather sealing"? It's the same shit as gortex for boots, the fine print behind it doesn't say it's 100% waterproof, hence why rubber boots exist. And camera/ lens covers exist you moron.
>>4397259I'll also point out there's no "standard" at all for "weather sealing" of camera equipment. It's all based on how much the company gives a shit about their customer experiences. And generally speaking, for you OP >>4396882, you get what you pay for in camera land, the more you pay, the more shit and protection you get.
>>4397270Mindbroken by >>4397103Not everyone wants to be like doghair and huskyfag and spam shit photos because you think thats how gear arguments are wonFuji sealing sucks and a purse is a shit copeDeal with it
>>4397263it was one of those storms where it switched between really bad to really mild every 5 minutespic related I had to take in the worst downpoor or else I'd miss it completelyeither eay, I'd recommend to anyone to go out and shoot in bad weather[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakePanasonicCamera ModelDC-S5M2Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 13.2 (Windows)Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)70 mmImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2024:11:17 22:24:21Exposure Time1/160 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/2.8Exposure Bias0.7 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageLight SourceCloudy WeatherFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length70.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBRenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlNoneContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormal
>>4397288>mindbroken at the thought of actually posting a relevant photo on a photo boardkeep larping nophoto
>>4397292>noooo you need to use your photos as weapons in argumentsWould essentially lighting one of my beloved photos on fire really change that weather sealing has uses other than taking pictures of the weather and wearing a purse or burying a camera in a backpack aren’t acceptable alternatives to having it ready?No. That becomes an entire set I can’t post elsewhere because the fujislug got btfo.
>>4397277> there's no "standard" at all for "weather sealing" of camera equipment>IP rating >Ingress Protection rating>made by IEC>International Electrotechnical CommissionNot only is there a standard, there is an international standard which I already mentioned how many posts up w/ Olympus Learn to read stupid fucking retardTo reiterate: This thread is about weather sealed cameras not camera condoms (something your parents should have used).
>>4397301But outside of some Olympus bodies (apparently, can't be bothered to look them up) and fixed lens compacts no one else gives their bodies and lenses IP ratings. That's what he means when he says there's no standard, manufacturers can call their shit weather sealed or weather resistant and that can mean anything from light rain and large particles like sand to being able to be dunked under water for a short period.
>>4397306No, there is a standard, which most manufacturers fail to use.
>>4397301Lamo basic standards that all electronics need to face, like handheld radios and shit? That's not the same as what "weather sealing" claims to be, there is no standard beyond the most basic consumer electronic bullshit. Because they can't guarantee anything, again, find in any warranty where water damage is covered.
>>4397314I see, the problem is you do not know what the word "standard" means. Perhaps you are trying to discuss what you believe are necessary regulations regarding weather sealing. Learn to type what you mean and mean what you type.
>>4397307Again, you're missing the point. Weather sealing, or weather resistance, is not a standard. It is merely a claim made by manufacturers.
>>4397323There is a standard, which most manufacturers do not use. Your refusal to accept this does not change fact. Show me where a manufacturer claims a product is "weather sealed." If you browsed forums a little longer you'd see the often repeated phrase "weather resistance does not mean weather sealed." Yet you repeatedly conflate the two, demonstrating your ignorance.
>>>4397323Look at this picture, see the standards? Zoomers are so fucking retarded it's incredible.
>>4397301And it doesnt matter. Very few IP ratings actually say no water gets in under realistic use. Water jets from an angle while no controls are being used? Lol. Nikon has NO IP RATINGS and their cameras are insanely durable. Early e-m1 models were IP rated and consistently had several controls fail due to water damage because unlike the standard test, buttons were being pressed and camera angle varied. Olympus fixed this later but it wasnt ever part of the IP standard. Obviously the standard is a waste of money and a sack of marketing horseshit. Just stop being an autist. If most peoples are surviving rain, they are good. Sony a7iv good, sony a7iii bad. Nikon full frame good. Canon pro model good, canon cheap model bad. Olympus m1/m5 good, m10 and epl bad. No fuji can be trusted. If panasonic calls it weather sealed it is. You do not need the government or a contrived standards organization to know this. And you would not know it with them anyways because their only real customers are samsapple. >>4397314Is this purse/backpack coper whose fuji would die if exposed to water for more than 5 minutes?Again no one else has a problem, the closest is sony continuing to lie because their older models are still in production.>>4397327That phrase? I see it tossed around by fujislugs and the snoys. No one else. Know why?When nikon, canon, olympus, and panasonic call it weather sealed, they are not lying like fooljifail. Their internal standards are BETTER than IP ratings. This is widely known. An IP rating is just another company’s standard, bought by still more companies, and mostly exists to be a marketing line which is why the actual tests dont represent real useNikon/canon internal standards for weather sealing exist to maintain trust in their brand and have been CONSISTENTLY trustworthy. Unlike fujifilm, who is lying. And unlike sony, who is still lying about their older models and a lot of lenses
>>4397330>Just stop being an autistNo. :^)
>>4397331Standards for durability are bought off and made misrepresentativeNikon canon panasonic and olympus have been consistently trustworthy.Sony has improved but might get worseFuji has lied every generation, even on the gfx100Simple as.
>>4397332I agree with everything you typed. You didn't mention Pentax for whatever reason however.Glad to see that unlike that other anon, you agree that there are/were standards.
>>4397295>mindbroken at the thought of actually posting a relevant photo on a photo boardkeep on coping nophoto
>>4397194>STILL nophotos
>>4396886>>4396952>>4396971>>4397032These paid premium for the weather sealing meme
>>4397329Those aren't standards, that's just a specification, a claim from the manufacturer. Nowhere do I see an IP rating for that standard. Regardless that is one body, the vast majority of others making the weather sealed or resistant claim do not give any specification nor do they meet any standard.>>4397327>There is a standard, which most manufacturers do not use.You are missing the point. Yes a standard does exist, but manufacturers calling stuff weather sealed or resistant is not a standard. That is the point, their claims do not follow a standard and so are open to interpretation and the results can vary.
>>4397233>non-sugar>sugarlikeSugar? Is this slang for photo newb? sorry, just bought my first camera.
>>4397254Sigma 20-70 art?
>>4396887how about thinking outside the bag
>>4397406Nah Sugar is a dude who regularly post here.>>4397408Still mad im right huh?
>>4397406>Is that sland for photo newb?You are correct in a way.
>>4397398see>>4396971
>>4397398too bad they have no pictures to show for it
>>4397006I passed under the waterfall right after taking the photo, with the camera under my coat. It was still perfectly fine and I kept shooting but all of my clothes got soaked.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON D750Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 13.0 (Windows)Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.7Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern844Focal Length (35mm Equiv)50 mmImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2025:01:06 17:10:09Exposure Time1/100 secF-Numberf/5.6Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating1400Lens Aperturef/5.6Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length50.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBRenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlHigh Gain UpContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknown
>>4397237>using "their" to refer to single personTrucker education everyone
>>4397399>Yes a standard does existGlad you finally came to your senses.
>ctrl+f>no sony battery door photowhat the hell happened to this board
>>4397438no1curr that sony didnt have weather sealing onceits funnier that fuji still doesnt have weather sealing todayslugs btfo
>>4397399Why does it matter if canon, nikon, olympus, and panasonic have never lied?The only deviations are fuji and sony, the latter of which improved for at least two release cycles leaving the worm cameras. Fuji also lies about xtrans being sharper, more film like, and immune to moire when they actually fuck with super strong color noise reduction in the camera jpeg converter and its anything but sharp, so lying about weather sealing is pretty on point for slugs. https://medium.com/@nevermindhim/x-trans-the-promise-and-the-problem-31407fa43452Lol @ slugs
>>4397432>>4397291>based photo posters>>4397442>>4397440>nophotos with FDS
>>4397471FujiDoesnt have weatherSealing
How dangerous would "cold" dry weather (say 0C/32F) be to cameras and lenses without any weather sealing? Does "feels like" temp – that uses humidity and wind – apply to non-living things like camera equipment?
>>4397478yes they do nophoto, I use my fujis in the rain and snow often
>>4397489>for 5 seconds then its back in the /p/ursehttps://www.reddit.com/r/fujifilm/comments/122hx7k/so_my_xh2_died_in_the_rain/kekhttps://www.reddit.com/r/x100v/comments/1csw3xm/beware_even_with_a_filter_weather_sealing_isnt/lolfuji: its weather resistant not weather sealed you cant soak it theres no ip ratingnikon: lol camera work in hurricane
>>4397492its actually fucking insane how non resistant fujis are, i wet my shutter button because it was sticky and the whole motherboard got soaked. a friend of mine took apart the whole thing, dried it up and made sure there were no corroded traces and it was fine, but jeez.my M8 on the other hand i've been out in the rain with. i was sopping wet and the camera chooched on just fine and that thing should really be fragile like glass[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeLeica Camera AGCamera ModelM8 Digital CameraCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CC 2018 (Windows)Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.0Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2024:08:25 18:23:46Exposure Time1/45 secF-Numberf/9.5Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating160Lens Aperturef/9.5Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, AutoColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1500Image Height1009White BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandardUnique Image ID000000000000000000000000000036ED
>>4397492here's some wet fuji's for yousilly to base your view off a handful of anecdotes you see onlineany idiot can rip a weather sealed camera, and not being sealed isn't an automatic death sentencemy fuji's have handled rain and snow like >>4397006 just fine for many yearswhen can we see some of your weather sealing relevant photos? or are you just gonna keep on with the larping?
>>4397511i big dumb
>>4397513Some of these arent even marketed as weather sealed, so this isnt saying fuji has sealing. Its saying you have gotten lucky because rainwater doesnt conduct electricity that well and your cameras only got sprinkled, not persistently soaked.
>>4397511Lol this is like the one guy who says his a7ii got a little wet for a little bit once like it changes the other 10000 guys with dead cameras
>>4397514>>4397515whatever cope you need nophotosi'll keep shooting in the rain and snow carefree
>>4397513>post collage of a bunch of ruined fooljis ???
>>4397434And that standard is not "weather resistant" or "weather sealed". When a manufacturer makes those claims about their bodies and lenses it is not to a standard. That is the point and you would have understood if you weren't an autistic pedant.
>>4397442The point is that nobody lied, because there is no standard to their claims (it would be different if they were claiming IP54 ingress protection, for example). The point is you can't just take their word for it because what one considers sealed or resistant might not cut the mustard for another manufacturer.
>>4397529Aaand you're gone again. Can't even call you autistic because you are just plain retarded. Yes they all have standards, Just because you don't know what they are does not mean they don't exist. >>4397530>it would be different if they were claiming IP54 ingress protection, for exampleOk so Olympus then>what one considers sealed or resistant might not cut the mustard for another manufacturerOmg manufacturers have different standards? Color me surprised. Almost like with every superceding model they release camera manufacturers inform buyers how the weather sealing compares to previous models so people know exactly what to expect.
>>4397398We don't care about weather sealing we just want tripfags to leave the site.
>>4397531No they don't have standards, because the amount of sealing can vary from body to body, lens to lens.>Almost like with every superceding model they release camera manufacturers inform buyers how the weather sealing compares to previous models so people know exactly what to expect.So you admit it. If "weather sealing" from one year means one thing and then "weather sealing" from a later year is improved, then "weather sealing" is not a standard. It would be like calling a car fast, or a bicycle light.
>>4397538> If "weather sealing" from one year means one thing and then "weather sealing" from a later year is improved, then "weather sealing" is not a standard.It clearly met/surpassed the manufacturer's standards for weather sealing. Either you are a troll or legitimately retarded.
why does weather sealing of all things bring out the schizos so hard, holy shit.
>>4397550the schizos are always out
>>4397550its just the regular schizos larping they go outside
>>4397556>fujislug still seething
>>4397539>It clearly met/surpassed the manufacturer's standards for weather sealingThat is not a standard.
>>4397557>still a nophoto
>>439740724-70 art mk2[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakePanasonicCamera ModelDC-S5M2Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 13.2 (Windows)Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)38 mmImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2024:11:17 22:24:50Exposure Time1/250 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/2.8Exposure Bias0.3 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length38.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBRenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlNoneContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormal
>>4397558Just because it doesn't meet your standard of what the word standard means in your standard dictionary doesn't mean that the standards others set are not standards. STANDARD
>>43975881. Something is not a standard if only one manufacturer abides by it2. Something is not a standard if it is vague, if they apply the same term to varying levels of that standard3. Something is not a standard if the specifications of that standard are not published publiclyAs I said, it's the same as calling a car fast. Ferrari could very well go and call their Purosangue fast, it might meet their minimum definition of what they consider fast, but we don't know what that is and "fast" is not a standard.
>>43975901. wrong2. wrong3. wrong
>>4397590Who cares? Nikon canom olympus and panasonic have always had good weather sealing. Everyone else has way too many horror stories, so either they have poor QC or poor designs.
>>43976041. it's NOT STANDARD2. muh warranty3. ???Unlike camera rain ponchos which1. have an unlimited lifetime warranty2. are standard
do camera service centers conduct pressure test? and do they recommend changing the seals every 'X' number of years? or even pressure test for the camera housing for diving?I'm just thinking like how watch service centers do a pressure test for let's say, the standard citizen/seiko 200m dive watch, or even a gshock. there are even chink pressure testers from aliexpress but for watches.
>>4397614Fujislug copeStandard or not, nikons works!>>4397617Camera weather sealing doesnt hold up to pressure. It’s basically like household weather stripping. 1 foot of water is too much. And if you have a fuji, 30 minutes in a light drizzle is too much.
>>4397513That one that is second from the left on the bottom was ruined as I recall from the original post. I think the one left of it was too, but that was probably because of the saltwater. No idea about the others though.
>>4397617No.>>4397635Nope, these were all examples of people who posted positively about their experience with Fuji. The XS-10 was even left out overnight in the snow.
>>4397481cold is no problem, the problem is when you bring a camera that has been in the cold into a warm indoor setting because the camera is still cold and humidity from the air will condense on/in it. It's hard to find anything consistent about it, the people from my local camera shop were like "Uh IDK" and B&H's tech chat told me to strap handwarmers to the camera and keep it warm the whole time it's outside.Consensus on forums seems to be to buy a heated dew shield for each of your lenses.
>>4397567damn that one's nice. Anyway thanks, I'll be saving up some money I guess.
PENTAX
