Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-01-2017, 05:39 PM   #61
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: SF Bay Area, CA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 613
QuoteOriginally posted by Steve Grosvenor Quote
Sorry, I should have specifically stated that there is an absence, even in the high end series, let alone entry or mid priced level, a single standard length WR fixed... with a crop sensor by standard length we are talking 28 to 40mm. Even the shortest fixed lens with WR would be considered a telephoto.
The DA 20-40 Limited WR sort of fits this role. Obviously not a prime, but prime like performance and handling.

11-01-2017, 07:26 PM   #62
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Michigan
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,207
I have already commented on this thread that in my opinion the early 18~55 lens is not very good .
(Not even by my rather relaxed standards!)

Now I would respectfully comment with counterpoints to the "experts" about Weather Resistance on low cost K-lenses.
I used K and -M lenses on Pentax film and dslr cameras since 1979, that is 38 years.
The first K and M lenses I purchased years ago are a bit worn superficially but show no signs of water damage or corrosion.
I still use them.
I used these lenses in : rain, steel mills, zinc coating mills, tropical countries, surf beaches, and most relevantly, water skiing.
Some of my old lenses travelled maybe 400,000 air miles.
In water skiing the lenses and the Pentax K- mount cameras were subject to water spray and often deluge water,
then were stored in a wet bag usually.

So I would invite comments about why a Pentax K- amateur user would ever need a WR lens.
11-02-2017, 02:57 AM   #63
Pentaxian
kh1234567890's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Manchester, UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,549
QuoteOriginally posted by wombat2go Quote
Now I would respectfully comment with counterpoints to the "experts" about Weather Resistance on low cost K-lenses.
There are no electronic components in the old lenses. DA etc lenses have rather delicate sliding contacts to read focus zone and focal length (in zooms) positioning as well as PCBs with surface mounted ICs. These will not take kindly to water ingress.
11-02-2017, 07:01 AM - 1 Like   #64
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 33,043
QuoteOriginally posted by wombat2go Quote
I have already commented on this thread that in my opinion the early 18~55 lens is not very good .
(Not even by my rather relaxed standards!)

Now I would respectfully comment with counterpoints to the "experts" about Weather Resistance on low cost K-lenses.
I used K and -M lenses on Pentax film and dslr cameras since 1979, that is 38 years.
The first K and M lenses I purchased years ago are a bit worn superficially but show no signs of water damage or corrosion.
I still use them.
I used these lenses in : rain, steel mills, zinc coating mills, tropical countries, surf beaches, and most relevantly, water skiing.
Some of my old lenses travelled maybe 400,000 air miles.
In water skiing the lenses and the Pentax K- mount cameras were subject to water spray and often deluge water,
then were stored in a wet bag usually.

So I would invite comments about why a Pentax K- amateur user would ever need a WR lens.
and now an opposing opinion.

Well that's your experience, I lost my first telephoto to mold, a few weeks after a canoe trip. So if you are trying to imply water damage won't happen, you're wrong. That lens was never in direct rain or mist. That was from atmospheric moisture and coming in contact with wet items like rain gear etc. and also from "zooming in" warm air with humidity that condensed inside the lens. Just because you were apparently lucky doesn't mean everyone will be. I recently had my FA 50 get wet and I had to partially disassemble the lens a dry it, for four days, to get the condensation off the inside element. I also recently bought a 100 macro WR because that lens would have prevented the issue. My first telephoto, some off brand 50-150 died in 1980. The 50 Macro was last year. So, it doesn't happen every year, but it does happen.

After some water got into the boat and the lens was briefly face down in the water, after a dog issue in the canoe I had water condensation inside the front element making the lens useless. As result, for 4 days of a 6 day trip I had no macro capability.

The biggest advantage to WR is not that you can't used baggies etc. to protect your camera, it's that you camera doesn't have to be in the dry bag. It can be in your hand ready to shoot, without causing stress.

I currently work up to 40 days a year as a canoe guide, out in the elements and close to water. WR doesn't mean I can leave the Pelican cases and dry bags home, it means the cameras are out more than they would be if they weren't WR. WR just makes things easier. That's worth paying for. The idea that water won't damage a non WR lens in wet shooting circumstances is crazy. It may not happen every time, but when it does, it costs you.

QuoteOriginally posted by Steve Grosvenor Quote
My daughter is also picking up a new camera (likely a K50 as the price is right) and debating between a third party lens, a used lens and a kit lens. Only the Kit lens at the price point offers WR, which as she plans to use the camera on hikes and the like is beneficial.
As a canoeist/ hiker, I'm going with "get a WR lens." It just saves a pile of stress, when you get caught in a shower out on a hike, it allows you to continue shooting in light showers and makes having your camera sealed away in a dry bag less necessary, It's like an insurance policy, you don't need it until you do. And then you better have it.


Last edited by normhead; 11-03-2017 at 08:11 AM.
11-02-2017, 02:47 PM   #65
Des
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Des's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Sth Gippsland Victoria Australia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,682
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
As a canoeist/ hiker, I'm going with get a WR lens. It just saves a pile of stress, when you get caught in a shower out on a hike, it allows you to continue shooting in light showers an makes having your camera sealed away in a dry bag less necessary, It's like an insurance policy, you don't need it until you do. And then you better have it.
Yeah, and you don't have to be a canoeist, or a hiker in rainy conditions. I had a lens die of fungus just from living in a poorly ventilated room. I like to leave a pair of binoculars in the car. My pair of WR (Pentax as it happens) bins have outlasted 3 (non-WR) pairs of my partner's. Sure you can say, don't leave optical equipment in a car. Don't shoot in the rain; cover or dry the gear if it's damp. Store your stuff in de-humidified conditions. I try to do all these things. You do your best, but life isn't always that simple. WR gives more peace of mind. I wish all my lenses were WR. My small grab-and-go bag is all WR: K-S2, DA 18-135, DA 55-300 PLM, DFA 100. A small wide-ish prime would round it nicely, but one of the things that keeps me from adding a DA 15 or DA 21 is the lack of WR.

Last edited by Des; 11-02-2017 at 02:54 PM.
11-02-2017, 03:06 PM   #66
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Loyal Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 32,874
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
As a canoeist/ hiker, I'm going with get a WR lens. It just saves a pile of stress, when you get caught in a shower out on a hike, it allows you to continue shooting in light showers an makes having your camera sealed away in a dry bag less necessary, It's like an insurance policy, you don't need it until you do. And then you better have it.
Yep...What he said ^ ^ ^

That being said, I too have 45+ years of shooting in the all-too-often-wet Pacific Northwest without a single incursion. I also have NO WR or AW lenses in my current kit. In general, I don't treat my K-3 with Sigma 17-70/2.8-4 (C) any differently than I have my Ricoh XR7 with Pentax-M 50/1.7 (my walk-around film kit from 1982 to present). What this means is:
I treat both as fragile tools subject to damage by moisture, dust, impact, vibration, and extreme temperatures
I don't believe my practice would change much if the lens on the K-3 were WR, though I am fairly confident that risk of incursion would be lower than with my current kit.

In regards to the 18-55 kit lens, my advice has been and continues to be that users buy the WR lens, if for no other reason than to have the option for extra protection in the bag. I may yet do so for myself.


Steve

(...noticed that Ricoh is bundling the KP with the DA 18-55 WR as a temporary promotion...apparently they feel it is up to the 24 Mpx challenge... )
11-02-2017, 07:15 PM   #67
Forum Member




Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 60
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by wombat2go Quote
So I would invite comments about why a Pentax K- amateur user would ever need a WR lens.
Maybe I am missing your point, but are you suggesting that it is your opinion that only 'professional' photographers shoot in poor weather or harsh conditions?

I consider myself an amateur... my daughter even more so. But she Kayaks, loves the outdoors, and last year spent a week in the Amazon at the start of rainy season. The photographers skill has little to do with what environment the camera will be exposed to.

She has reached the point in her photographic development where she is ready to move up from a waterproof pocket camera to SLR. With her active life choosing a camera which are WR simply makes sense with the conditions the camera will be exposed to.

My old purely mechanical Film SLR got wet more than once, including getting completely submerged once, and once dried each time survived. With the electronics in both cameras and lenses they are far more susceptible to water damage.
11-03-2017, 11:35 AM   #68
Journeyman Cat Wrangler
Loyal Site Supporter
SSGGeezer's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Maine, U.S.
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,735
Why WR?

When the weather causes things like this, you can still get out of the car and shoot pictures. Rain, snow, wind, I don't really worry because I leave my non WR in the house.
Picture is of the road in my neighborhood two nights after the storm. Just because I didn't have electricity, does not mean I don't want to take pictures.

Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-50  Photo 
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
autofocus, browser, click, cost, da, da*300, drive, exif, fa, flickr, iso, k-mount, kit, lens, lenses, limitations, macro, options, pentax lens, pictures, post, price, screw, sigma, slr lens, water, weight
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K-5 vs MZ-S vs LX vs PZ-1p vs ist*D vs K10D vs K20D vs K-7 vs....... Steelski Pentax K-5 2 06-28-2017 04:59 PM
For Sale - Sold: Dal 18-55 & dal 55-300 taiweitai Sold Items 9 02-29-2012 11:30 PM
Need suggestions for Hoods for DAL 18-55 Kit Lens and DAL 55-300mm Lens photoleet Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 4 09-20-2011 03:15 PM
kx w/ 18-55 & 55-300bdal for $643 or k20d W/ grip & 18-55 & 55-300 DAL for $850. tubey Pentax DSLR Discussion 6 01-10-2010 11:30 AM
DA 18-55mm AL II vs DAL 18-55mm (kit lens) vs DA 18-55mm WR rustynail925 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 10 01-08-2010 02:06 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:54 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top