[UncleVanya]

I always thought of Niagara Falls as a place with pleasant mist and an interesting swooshing sound until I actually went there. The "weather" is a violent storm. Anything short of a 10 meter diving rig is just asking for trouble. Sorry, this isn't a close call.

We just will have to have different opinions. The fact that others have been and their camera survived makes it clear that - not everyone feels the same about this as you do; and the cameras can live through without a 10M diving rig. Personally it never felt worse than a driving rain - but it was not a light sprinkle.

[hjoseph7]

I don't think there should be any hostility toward the poster unless one works for Pentax. They are just expressing their experience with something that happened to them with a product that somehow let them down. To me this is good information in case I plan to visit a soggy water-fall in the future. My guess is that one or more of the seals failed either on the camera or the lens. Pentax has been boasting about their weather sealed cameras since I think the K7. So if it there was a product defect it would have made news by now. I'm not sure what Pentax does as far as quality assurance, but sometimes I think some defects slip through, which could be what happened here.

[UncleVanya]

I don't think there should be any hostility toward the poster unless one works for Pentax. They are just expressing their experience with something that happened to them with a product that somehow let them down. To me this is good information in case I plan to visit a soggy water-fall in the future. My guess is that one or more of the seals failed either on the camera or the lens. Pentax has been boasting about their weather sealed cameras since I think the K7. So if it there was a product defect it would have made news by now. I'm not sure what Pentax does as far as quality assurance, but sometimes I think some defects slip through, which could be what happened here.

I agree. I also think if the design parameters do not permit a specific situation like Niagra Falls boat excursions - Pentax needs a more up front disclaimer to express what is and isn't OK.

[savoche]

I likely would have done the same thing as the OP and been just as upset. I have seen many videos of the camera in sprinklers and water fights and it just works. There may actually be a failed seal in one of the two devices - my guess is the camera.

Agreed. I use my cameras in the rain without worries, and though I try to wipe off my lens before zooming I don't expect problems. I would definitely be upset if I experienced what the OP did.

My guess, too, is a bad seal or some particle somewhere it shouldn't be.

[UncleVanya]

Agreed. I use my cameras in the rain without worries, and though I try to wipe off my lens before zooming I don't expect problems. I would definitely be upset if I experienced what the OP did.

My guess, too, is a bad seal or some particle somewhere it shouldn't be.

My hope is that he gets a diagnosis and reports back on the outcome. If it is "as designed" and failed I'm going to be much more conservative using mine. If it is a - whoops seal was busted at x location - I'll feel less worried.

[ScooterMaxi Jim]

Driving rain or its equivalent calls for complete weather sealing (as in water-proofing) which Pentax has never warranted. Some marketing materials (I'm thinking of the K30 in particular) have been misleading, but the wording of the warranty is clear. Look at the device, how it is sealed, and think through the situation. Sure, you have a good chance of not getting water damage in a Niagara Falls excursion, but the potential for damage exists - and it is especially high for the lower-end WR products such as the K30 and 18-135. While I appreciate that the OP has suffered loss, and sharing the experience provides enhanced collective wisdom, there is no substitute for common sense and taking individual responsibility.

[hjoseph7]

How about this for common sense:


U.S. soldier tests Pentax DSLRs’ weather sealing in sand and rain “storm” in Afghanistan (VIDEO)

[UncleVanya]

Driving rain or its equivalent calls for complete weather sealing (as in water-proofing) which Pentax has never warranted. Some marketing materials (I'm thinking of the K30 in particular) have been misleading, but the wording of the warranty is clear. Look at the device, how it is sealed, and think through the situation. Sure, you have a good chance of not getting water damage in a Niagara Falls excursion, but the potential for damage exists - and it is especially high for the lower-end WR products such as the K30 and 18-135. While I appreciate that the OP has suffered loss, and sharing the experience provides enhanced collective wisdom, there is no substitute for common sense and taking individual responsibility.

K3 not K30 per the original post. I have also seen ads that pentax ran that showed these cameras in rain and water splash that certainly was more than the boat cruise exposes you to. I'm not sure why you feel compelled to push the common sense line - the experiences of other users echo's the OP's the camera was believed to be able to handle this without question. The seals were checked, the camera was not damaged and yet it suffered a loss. This is not the expected outcome so not common sense.

[narual]

I don't think it's the splashes of water that caused the problem.. its the mist. The water vapor. If you're using a lens that isn't internal focus/internal zoom, the lens has to bring air in or push air out to focus or zoom. The DA* lenses are all internal focus, and I didn't zoom my 16-50 much, if at all, while I was out. The weather sealing does a pretty good job keeping liquids and solids out, but it can't keep out air, even mist. And since it was summer, there was probably a lot more humidity in the air there than there was in December, and as soon as you got into a cooler location, all that mist condensed inside your gear.

HJoseph - that's Heie: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/18-monthly-photo-contests/290335-soldier-...ian-night.html

[ScooterMaxi Jim]

My mistake on the OP. I would feel a bit more confident with the K3 if the shooting was done with care. I strongly suspect the zoom action is the most likely culprit in any event - and it's a good point that even mist can be drawn into the lens (it would be extremely heavy mist on that adventure). However, a small amount of moisture often isn't going to do much harm - and could dry out nicely. It would be helpful to know the extent of the water inversion, and resulting malfunction.

Examples of daring in rough elements certainly can result in no harm, but that does not make it likely to hold true all of the time. The point becomes a dare if the extent of exposure is beyond what the warranty covers. If you drop a camera on concrete and nothing mechanical or optical is damaged, would you say to yourself that it surely won't be damaged the next time?

[clackers]

Afaik, the warranty does not cover water ingress.

i.e. the company doesn't believe its own advertising. ☺

[FantasticMrFox]

i.e. the company doesn't believe its own advertising. ☺

It's more likely the company (and all other manufacturers of weather sealed DSLRs and DSLMs) have no way to find out how the water ingress came to happen and are not willing to cough up for repairs of cameras that their owners took snorkelling or dropped into a lake

[clackers]

It's more likely the company (and all other manufacturers of weather sealed DSLRs and DSLMs) have no way to find out how the water ingress came to happen and are not willing to cough up for repairs of cameras that their owners took snorkelling or dropped into a lake

Sure, but they could at least IPx certify them to prevent misunderstanding. ☺

[mag07]

My K7, bought about a month after it came out, has been alternately used either out in the desert in the Middle East, or the UK in the rain as I travel back and forth. It also handled a snow storm just fine up in the Tatra Mountains. All I do is make sure it isn't 'soaked' and blow away dust and sand when traveling from one climate to another. Never had any issues with the body, or the kit lens - my only WR one. Can't imagine the K3 being of a worse quality when it comes to weather sealing.

It's under warranty, I'd have it checked/fixed or replaced as you stated clearly you had it under your rain coat most of the time anyhow.

[clackers]

It's under warranty, I'd have it checked/fixed or replaced as you stated clearly you had it under your rain coat most of the time anyhow.

Water damage isn't covered by warranty, IIRC.