The ULTIMATE gear test: - DPChallenge Forums

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

03/06/2007 06:45:13 PM · #1

Last month, Michael Reichmann of Luminous Landscape led a 3 week long photography expedition to Antarctica. The articles about the expedition itself are excellent (as I stated in this thread, Antarctica is one of my dream destinations), but what I found particularly interesting was the summary of what the Antarctic climate did to the gear that the photographers brought along with them:

Antarctica 2007 � What Worked? What Didn't.

A quick summary:
-there were plenty of gear failures
-photorescue saved them many times (corrupted cards, accidental formats, etc)
-Canons broke the most, but 85% of the photogs had Canons
-No Nikon failures (out of 5)
-No problems with the one Pentax K10D that made the trip :D
-Cost of the trip: $13-20000, depending on quarters

Message edited by author 2007-03-06 18:45:43.

DrAchoo

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5

03/06/2007 07:27:54 PM · #2

Ah, I just got all warm and fuzzy when I read this...

"Over a three week period in the Falklands, South Georgia and the Antarctic Peninsula I shot 7,024 frames totaling 182 Gigabytes. I shot roughly equally with the Canon and the Hasselblad. (More on this below). I ended up with some 92 frames which I consider worth printing, and a dozen which are portfolio / exhibition grade. Three of these are among the best work which I feel that I have ever done. "

3 lifetime keepers on one trip? That's pretty sweet.

wimbello

Canon EOS-10D

Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX DC HSM for Canon

03/06/2007 07:59:52 PM · #3

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

"...Three of these are among the best work which I feel that I have ever done. "

3 lifetime keepers on one trip? That's pretty sweet.

Yeah, and it only costs you $20,000 USD!!!

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM

03/06/2007 08:16:06 PM · #4

Originally posted by wimbello:

Yeah, and it only costs you $20,000 USD!!!

hey, 20k aint bad for an all inclusive 3 week expedition... I'd definitely jump on an opportunity like that when I'm a little older and wealthier.

crayon

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FH1

03/06/2007 08:25:04 PM · #5

that's the problem with modern technology - the more sophisticated it is, usually the more fragile it becomes as well

Ecce_Signum

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

03/06/2007 08:28:40 PM · #6

I see what your saying Userwimbello, but, and not wanting to sound bad here, for the Dr to get 3 lifetime bests from a single trip is an achievement well worth the investment, you or I may get thousands of 'our' lifetime best shots - works out much cheaper for us does it not?

*editid four speiling*

Message edited by author 2007-03-06 20:35:47.

Olyuzi

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7

Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH

03/06/2007 08:28:42 PM · #7

Aren't the Canon 1D series camera bodies supposed to be environmentally sealed? Could be then that the photographers were using non-sealed lenses. Are all L-lenses sealed as well?

Elvis_L

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM

03/06/2007 08:31:24 PM · #8

Originally posted by Olyuzi:

Aren't the Canon 1D series camera bodies supposed to be environmentally sealed? Could be then that the photographers were using non-sealed lenses. Are all L-lenses sealed as well?

I think it was because of the cold. sealed doesn't mean built in heater:P

thegrandwazoo

Nikon D750

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

03/06/2007 08:33:50 PM · #9

On the M8 "Not the usual quality of materials and construction that one expects from Leica."

Bummer for a $4800.00 camera.

Message edited by author 2007-03-06 20:34:27.

03/06/2007 08:33:50 PM · #10

Originally posted by Olyuzi:

Aren't the Canon 1D series camera bodies supposed to be environmentally sealed? Could be then that the photographers were using non-sealed lenses. Are all L-lenses sealed as well?

The article states that when they got caught in the rainstorm, it was early in the trip and caught them off guard. No one had any covers or anything to wipe the water off their cameras with.

Even my gore tex jacket soaks though, eventually.

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

Canon RF 24-70 f2.8 L IS

03/06/2007 08:36:26 PM · #11

It wasn't the cold, it was because they shot in the rain for 90 minutes or so. I'm rather surprised as well at the number of failures, but I'd expect that under those conditions there would be a few.

crayon

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FH1

03/06/2007 08:38:39 PM · #12

Originally posted by kirbic:

It wasn't the cold, it was because they shot in the rain for 90 minutes or so. I'm rather surprised as well at the number of failures, but I'd expect that under those conditions there would be a few.

"weather sealed" doesn't mean you can shoot in the rain with a naked camera, right?

Tamron 70-180mm F/2.8 Di III VXD

03/06/2007 08:45:12 PM · #13

Originally posted by crayon:

"weather sealed" doesn't mean you can shoot in the rain with a naked camera, right?

I go by the "if you don't need a raincoat, then neither does your camera" rule. If its not rainy/dusty enough to cause problems for you, then its probably not enough to cause problems with your weather sealed camera.

The worse the conditions, the less exposure you want your camera to have. Before the K10D came out, there was a video of a guy holding the Samsung version under running water from a tap, then using it afterwards. Did the weather sealing work? You bet. How long could you do that for before the seals broke? I have absolutely no idea...

MadMan2k

Sony Alpha a6400

03/06/2007 08:50:20 PM · #14

Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:

On the M8 "Not the usual quality of materials and construction that one expects from Leica."

Bummer for a $4800.00 camera.

The M8 pretty much turned out to be a disgrace. The film M's are amazing, they're precision tools that can be beat to hell and still adjusted back to working perfectly. Electronics belong in the big magnesium DSLRs with rubber gaskets under all the buttons and machine gun drives.

*end thread jack*

I would love to go on a trip like that, maybe it'll happen someday. I read on another forum about a guy who was excited to be promoted so he could earn 14 hours a month of vacation time... I'd rather drive a bucket and shoot with old equipment and live in a cheap apartment than work my life away for fancy stuff and never be able to go on trips dedicated to shooting, or just relax.

*end thread jack, again*

Olyuzi

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7

Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH

03/06/2007 09:18:56 PM · #15

I'm wondering if weather sealing can degrade over time and if the seals have to be cared for. eg, exposure of cameras to hot dry places for extended periods may dry out the rubber seals producing cracks and allow for seepage of water through minute openings. Maybe application of some kind of seal coat could be applied to maintain them?

crayon

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FH1

03/06/2007 09:29:53 PM · #16

Originally posted by Olyuzi:

I'm wondering if weather sealing can degrade over time and if the seals have to be cared for.

of course they degrade - everything else does, so i'm sure the same law applies to a camera's weather seals. how long before the seals start to fail is the better question. now if only i can convince that seller on ebay to reduce his weather-sealed camera's price with this reasoning, hehe

thegrandwazoo

Nikon D750

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

03/06/2007 09:32:50 PM · #17

Originally posted by Olyuzi:

Sure rubber and elastomer components can contain plastisizers. Having your equipment in the extremes, especially the heat, those plastisizers can leach out causing weakness and a potential for failure.

03/07/2007 02:09:44 PM · #18

Well this is interesting... in an interview with Hisashi Tatamiya of Pentax Japan, the question "How secure is the weather proofing [in the K10D]" was asked.

The response:

Originally posted by Hisashi Tatamiya:

It is usually difficult to guarantee the weather sealing performance for
SLRs which inherently require lens changes. However, the level of
performance we aimed at is this. As possible environment that users might
encounter, it was tested and confirmed that the camera would have no problem
under the torrential rain storm or typhoon.

It also states that while not waterproof, the current DA lenses are more water resistant than people think. The new DA* lenses will be "typhoon-proof" to match the body... :D

03/07/2007 02:11:52 PM · #19

Originally posted by option:

Originally posted by wimbello:

Yeah, and it only costs you $20,000 USD!!!

hey, 20k aint bad for an all inclusive 3 week expedition... I'd definitely jump on an opportunity like that when I'm a little older and wealthier.

Ill take the 13 dollar package and hope for good luck!

03/07/2007 02:13:10 PM · #20

Originally posted by option:

Well this is interesting... in an interview with Hisashi Tatamiya of Pentax Japan, the question "How secure is the weather proofing [in the K10D]" was asked.

The response:
Originally posted by Hisashi Tatamiya:
It is usually difficult to guarantee the weather sealing performance for
SLRs which inherently require lens changes. However, the level of
performance we aimed at is this. As possible environment that users might
encounter, it was tested and confirmed that the camera would have no problem
under the torrential rain storm or typhoon.

It also states that while not waterproof, the current DA lenses are more water resistant than people think. The new DA* lenses will be "typhoon-proof" to match the body... :D

Unlike the Nikon DX lenses mounted to a D200, The K10D and the DA lenses do not have a seal where they mount to the camera body. Supposidly the DA* lenses might have a weather seal at the mount. Let me know when u get ur DA* i want to know.

03/07/2007 02:19:02 PM · #21

Originally posted by RainMotorsports:

Haha, well I wont be putting the "typhoon-proof" claim to the test, but I will be hauling it around the mountains of northern BC when I'm working this summer. And the article doesn't claim that the DA lenses are waterproof, just that its harder for water to get into a lens than people think.

I'll be buying the DA* 16-50 the second I can get my hands on it.

03/07/2007 02:21:03 PM · #22

Originally posted by option:

Originally posted by RainMotorsports:

Unlike the Nikon DX lenses mounted to a D200, The K10D and the DA lenses do not have a seal where they mount to the camera body. Supposidly the DA* lenses might have a weather seal at the mount. Let me know when u get ur DA* i want to know.

Haha, well I wont be putting the "typhoon-proof" claim to the test, but I will be hauling it around the mountains of northern BC when I'm working this summer. And the article doesn't claim that the DA lenses are waterproof, just that its harder for water to get into a lens than people think.

I'll be buying the DA* 16-50 the second I can get my hands on it.

What im worried about is the water getting inside the mount. The camera doesnt have a seal there and neither do the current lenses. But as i said the DA* supposidly have a seal there to complete the body sealing all around.

03/07/2007 02:25:48 PM · #23

Camera worked after this...

But anyway, I'm derailing my own thread. Antarctica. Cold. Rainy. 5Ds and M8s breaking. Who brings a non-sealed camera to Antarctica??