Originally posted by BruceBanner So what's the official difference between lenses marked as being WR vs AW?
Bruce
Manufacturers seem very reluctant into stating anything officially. As I also shoot Nikon, many of my lenses are WR/AW but there is no designation and you'd have to tear the lens apart to discover the seals or lack thereof.
My impression from Ricoh/Pentax marketing is that AW is a step up from the WR designation. In the same way both the K-70 and K-1 are weather sealed, the amount and extent of sealing on the K-1 are greater than the K-70.
With any DSLR body that is marketed as WR, using a WR lens assures the photographer that the lens is as protected as the body. With AW, the sealing and design is such that there is greater protection.
I am not aware of any standards or ratings of this by Ricoh or anyone else. ISO does have ratings for water proofing (submersion), which is not the case for WR or AW.