AW vs WR

**BruceBanner** · 05-07-2019, 02:55 PM

So what's the official difference between lenses marked as being WR vs AW?

Anyone?

Cheers,

Bruce

MarkJerling · 05-07-2019, 03:15 PM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by BruceBanner

So what's the official difference between lenses marked as being WR vs AW?

Anyone?

Cheers,

Bruce

Not sure about "official" but this has been discussed here before: WR and AW lenses: a difference you may not even know existed - PentaxForums.com

Pentax says this of AW: "Dustproof, weather-resistant construction
Developed as an AW (All Weather) model, this lens features a dependable dustproof, weather-resistant structure with eight special seals to prevent the intrusion of water and dust into the lens interior. When paired with a PENTAX weather-resistant digital SLR camera body, it forms a durable, reliable digital imaging system that performs superbly in demanding shooting settings — even in rain or mist, or at locations prone to water splashes or spray."

And this of WR: "Weather-resistant construction
This lens features a dependable weather-resistant construction with eight sealing parts to effectively prevent the intrusion of water into the lens interior. Paired with a weather-resistant PENTAX digital SLR camera body, it creates a durable, dependable digital imaging system that performs superbly in demanding shooting settings — even in rain or mist, or in locations prone to water splashing or spray."

Not very helpful really!

robjmitchell · 05-07-2019, 03:18 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by BruceBanner

So what's the official difference between lenses marked as being WR vs AW?

Anyone?

Cheers,

Bruce

WR = Water resistant
AW = All Weather, sealed against water and dust.

Adam · 05-07-2019, 03:24 PM

Originally posted by BruceBanner

So what's the official difference between lenses marked as being WR vs AW?

Anyone?

Cheers,

Bruce

AW has dust sealing as well and is standard on star lenses. Informally, it is generally applied to lenses with fewer moving parts.

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)

PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

**UncleVanya** · 05-07-2019, 05:01 PM

PENTAX Lens Glossary - RICOH IMAGING EUROPE S.A.S Still not very detailed.

Sandy Hancock · 05-07-2019, 05:19 PM - **1 Like**

I don't know about official, but the AW lenses I have owned (all of the DA* and DFA* lenses, plus the DFA 150-450) just feel like they are built to far greater tolerances than any of my WR lenses (all three 55-300 variants, DA 18-135, and even the DA 20-40 Limited).

They inspire confidence.

**Alex645** · 05-07-2019, 05:28 PM

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.

**BruceBanner** · 05-07-2019, 05:54 PM

Thanks all. Sounds like AW is just a bit bette than WR in that it does some level of dust proofing as well. If the K-1 is WR and you put a AW lens on it, does that mean the K-1 is now the weakest link

**clackers** · 05-07-2019, 06:11 PM

There are objective standards for water proofing and resistance - the IPX ratings that some phones acquire, for example, but the camera and lens manufacturers cleverly choose not to submit to them for testing.

Their warranties all say they won't cover water damage.

**aslyfox** · 05-07-2019, 06:26 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by clackers

. . . Their warranties all say they won't cover water damage.

when considering the " protection " against moisture provided by your camera or lens, whether WR or AW - this is a nice thread to review:

About those WR body weather seals...User responsibility and best practice - Page 4 - PentaxForums.com

**ramseybuckeye** · 05-07-2019, 06:35 PM

On the website they currently lump them together:
Dust-resistant, Weather-resistant Construction
PENTAX's SLR cameras are resistant to the adverse conditions of outdoor photography and can be used even under severe environmental conditions. To enable use with these cameras, the paired lenses must also have exceptional dust-resistant and weather-resistant performance. For this reason, PENTAX has developed dust-resistant and weather-resistant lenses that have been sealed for preventing the entry of water and dust. Some lenses also have an enhanced weather-resistant construction that can protect against the splashing of rainwater. We plan to overcome issues such as lens structures that require air removal due to the lens length or lens operation comfort for providing not only high-performance lenses, but lenses that can be used for a wider range of applications by enhancing the basic specifications of PENTAX interchangeable lenses.

http://www.ricoh-imaging.co.jp/english/products/lens/technology/

Fogel70 · 05-07-2019, 11:53 PM

Originally posted by clackers

There are objective standards for water proofing and resistance - the IPX ratings that some phones acquire, for example, but the camera and lens manufacturers cleverly choose not to submit to them for testing.

Their warranties all say they won't cover water damage.

For obvious reasons camera manufactures can only put IPX ratings on fixed lens cameras.
When dust particles large as golf balls can enter the lens mount, it will not be meaningful to put IPX ratings on ILC and lenses.

Which is also why they cannot cover against water damages.

Paul the Sunman · 05-08-2019, 01:08 AM

I am dubious about the AW rating of the DFA 150-450. At least one person on PF has had their's fail in bad weather, and mine was full of dust when it arrived new in the box. It extends too much and so draws in too much air to be solidly AW, unlike the 70-200 for instance.

Sandy Hancock · 05-08-2019, 02:15 AM

Originally posted by Paul the Sunman

It extends too much and so draws in too much air to be solidly AW, unlike the 70-200 for instance.

The DA*16-50 and DA*60-250 also extend quite a long way. I'm haven't heard too much about their weather sealing failing.

My DFA150-450 got a flogging in Antarctica a few months ago, in blizzards and sea spray. No problem.

**BigMackCam** · 05-08-2019, 02:19 AM

Originally posted by Paul the Sunman

I am dubious about the AW rating of the DFA 150-450. At least one person on PF has had their's fail in bad weather, and mine was full of dust when it arrived new in the box. It extends too much and so draws in too much air to be solidly AW, unlike the 70-200 for instance.

In this case, I'd take AW to signify there's as much weather resistance protection incorporated as is reasonably practical, given the extending barrel zoom lens. As you rightly indicate, that has to be the weak spot in any lens of this type...

05-07-2019, 02:55 PM	#1
BruceBanner Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2015 Posts: 5,404	AW vs WR So what's the official difference between lenses marked as being WR vs AW? Anyone? Cheers, Bruce

05-07-2019, 03:15 PM - 2 Likes	#2
MarkJerling Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: May 2012 Location: Wairarapa, New Zealand Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 20,405	Originally posted by BruceBanner So what's the official difference between lenses marked as being WR vs AW? Anyone? Cheers, Bruce Not sure about "official" but this has been discussed here before: WR and AW lenses: a difference you may not even know existed - PentaxForums.com Pentax says this of AW: "Dustproof, weather-resistant construction Developed as an AW (All Weather) model, this lens features a dependable dustproof, weather-resistant structure with eight special seals to prevent the intrusion of water and dust into the lens interior. When paired with a PENTAX weather-resistant digital SLR camera body, it forms a durable, reliable digital imaging system that performs superbly in demanding shooting settings — even in rain or mist, or at locations prone to water splashes or spray." And this of WR: "Weather-resistant construction This lens features a dependable weather-resistant construction with eight sealing parts to effectively prevent the intrusion of water into the lens interior. Paired with a weather-resistant PENTAX digital SLR camera body, it creates a durable, dependable digital imaging system that performs superbly in demanding shooting settings — even in rain or mist, or in locations prone to water splashing or spray." Not very helpful really! Last edited by MarkJerling; 05-07-2019 at 03:21 PM.

05-07-2019, 11:53 PM	#12
Fogel70 Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Stockholm, Sweden Photos: Albums Posts: 3,062	Originally posted by clackers There are objective standards for water proofing and resistance - the IPX ratings that some phones acquire, for example, but the camera and lens manufacturers cleverly choose not to submit to them for testing. Their warranties all say they won't cover water damage. For obvious reasons camera manufactures can only put IPX ratings on fixed lens cameras. When dust particles large as golf balls can enter the lens mount, it will not be meaningful to put IPX ratings on ILC and lenses. Which is also why they cannot cover against water damages. Last edited by Fogel70; 05-08-2019 at 12:04 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
LowePro ProTactic 350 AW vs 450 AW?	CoolMan8	Pentax Camera and Field Accessories	16	04-03-2019 01:10 AM
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 & K-5 II	2	06-28-2017 04:59 PM
Enthusiast vs Prosumer vs Semi Pro vs Pro vs APSC vs Full Frame	mickyd	Pentax DSLR Discussion	10	11-12-2013 07:14 PM
18-55 WR vs Sigma 18-50. WR vs IQ ?	adr1an	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	9	07-30-2011 12:43 PM

05-07-2019, 03:18 PM - 1 Like	#3
robjmitchell Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Melbourne Aus Posts: 1,776	Originally posted by BruceBanner So what's the official difference between lenses marked as being WR vs AW? Anyone? Cheers, Bruce WR = Water resistant AW = All Weather, sealed against water and dust.

05-07-2019, 03:24 PM	#4
Adam Administrator Site Webmaster Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 51,594	Originally posted by BruceBanner So what's the official difference between lenses marked as being WR vs AW? Anyone? Cheers, Bruce AW has dust sealing as well and is standard on star lenses. Informally, it is generally applied to lenses with fewer moving parts. Adam PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide \| Site Help \| My Photography) PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

05-07-2019, 05:01 PM	#5
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,398	PENTAX Lens Glossary - RICOH IMAGING EUROPE S.A.S Still not very detailed.

05-07-2019, 05:19 PM - 1 Like	#6
Sandy Hancock Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,272	I don't know about official, but the AW lenses I have owned (all of the DA* and DFA* lenses, plus the DFA 150-450) just *feel* like they are built to far greater tolerances than any of my WR lenses (all three 55-300 variants, DA 18-135, and even the DA 20-40 Limited). They inspire confidence.

05-07-2019, 05:28 PM	#7
Alex645 Site Supporter Join Date: May 2015 Location: Kaneohe, HI Photos: Albums Posts: 3,526	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.

05-07-2019, 05:54 PM	#8
BruceBanner Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2015 Posts: 5,404 Original Poster	Thanks all. Sounds like AW is just a bit bette than WR in that it does some level of dust proofing as well. If the K-1 is WR and you put a AW lens on it, does that mean the K-1 is now the weakest link

05-07-2019, 06:11 PM	#9
clackers Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Melbourne Photos: Albums Posts: 16,397	There are objective standards for water proofing and resistance - the IPX ratings that some phones acquire, for example, but the camera and lens manufacturers cleverly choose not to submit to them for testing. Their warranties all say they won't cover water damage.

05-07-2019, 06:26 PM - 1 Like	#10
aslyfox Seeker of Knowledge Join Date: Aug 2016 Location: Topeka, Kansas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 24,581	Originally posted by clackers . . . Their warranties all say they won't cover water damage. when considering the " protection " against moisture provided by your camera or lens, whether WR or AW - this is a nice thread to review: About those WR body weather seals...User responsibility and best practice - Page 4 - PentaxForums.com

05-07-2019, 06:35 PM	#11
ramseybuckeye Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Hampstead, NC Photos: Gallery Posts: 17,291	On the website they currently lump them together: Dust-resistant, Weather-resistant Construction PENTAX's SLR cameras are resistant to the adverse conditions of outdoor photography and can be used even under severe environmental conditions. To enable use with these cameras, the paired lenses must also have exceptional dust-resistant and weather-resistant performance. For this reason, PENTAX has developed dust-resistant and weather-resistant lenses that have been sealed for preventing the entry of water and dust. Some lenses also have an enhanced weather-resistant construction that can protect against the splashing of rainwater. We plan to overcome issues such as lens structures that require air removal due to the lens length or lens operation comfort for providing not only high-performance lenses, but lenses that can be used for a wider range of applications by enhancing the basic specifications of PENTAX interchangeable lenses. http://www.ricoh-imaging.co.jp/english/products/lens/technology/

05-08-2019, 01:08 AM	#13
Paul the Sunman Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Melbourne Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,843	I am dubious about the AW rating of the DFA 150-450. At least one person on PF has had their's fail in bad weather, and mine was full of dust when it arrived new in the box. It extends too much and so draws in too much air to be solidly AW, unlike the 70-200 for instance.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-08-2019, 02:15 AM	#14
Sandy Hancock Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,272	Originally posted by Paul the Sunman It extends too much and so draws in too much air to be solidly AW, unlike the 70-200 for instance. The DA16-50 and DA60-250 also extend quite a long way. I'm haven't heard too much about their weather sealing failing. My DFA150-450 got a flogging in Antarctica a few months ago, in blizzards and sea spray. No problem.

05-08-2019, 02:19 AM	#15
BigMackCam Digitiser of Film Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: North East of England Posts: 20,669	Originally posted by Paul the Sunman I am dubious about the AW rating of the DFA 150-450. At least one person on PF has had their's fail in bad weather, and mine was full of dust when it arrived new in the box. It extends too much and so draws in too much air to be solidly AW, unlike the 70-200 for instance. In this case, I'd take AW to signify there's as much weather resistance protection incorporated as is reasonably practical, given the extending barrel zoom lens. As you rightly indicate, that has to be the weak spot in any lens of this type...