[amoringello]

Not even the company believes it, or the warranty conditions would reflect that.

And *that* is the moral of the story.

The weather/water sealing is top notch and beyond compare... when it works.
... and when it fails? Well, you're S.O.L. and on your own.

Yes, Dominic, anyone who subjects their Pentax to water because of ads/reputation/becauseothersgotawaywithit are on their own.


Not even the company believes it, or the warranty conditions would reflect that.

As clear as it could be:

"This warranty does not cover any damage caused to the product, including, but not limited to: impact, moisture, liquid, sand, excessive temperature, battery leakage, chemical corrosion, mishandling, operation contrary to operating instructions, tampering, modification, or servicing by an unauthorized repair shop."

Product Repair & Service - RICOH Imaging

To Pentax's credit, they are nowhere as vague as Olympus:

"Any defect that occurs due to sand, mud, etc. entering the inside of the product casing."

etc. is the key word here.

Olympus - Warranty Regulation

Canon:

Korrosion, Schmutz, Wasser oder Sand

Canon Deutschland - Warranty information

Nikon:

lighting, water, fire, misuse or neglect.

Nikon UK

[clackers]

Sure ... we can rightly be proud of the Pentax design and manufacturing effort, but we shouldn't overstate the case.


As your link explained, the only claim by Pentax Germany was IPX 2, which is not immersion, nor water jets, nor splashing, not even spraying, but water dripping onto the case from above ...


IP Code - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Kunzite]

water dripping onto the case from above ...

It sounds remarkably similar to rain...

[Timd]

It sounds remarkably similar to rain...

Perhaps in climates where an umbrella can be used. Here our rain is usually blown from the side. An umbrella is useless and a device needs to be IPX3 to survive rain.

[clackers]

It sounds remarkably similar to rain...

Then I recommend you leave yours out in the rain tonight, Kunzite - have faith!

[Bolt]

While the manufacturer's failsafe of voiding warranty and using technical language to avoid directly implying the ability of any product is obvious, I don't believe this negates from Pentax's ability to provide the best quality DSLR's on the current market with regard to build quality and environmental endurance.

There are plenty of videos to support Pentax's DSLR lineup. I think we have all witnessed Alex Jansen's "Pentaxian-famous" PENTAX DUST AND WEATHER SEALING IN AFGHANISTAN

You Tube

You Tube

[You should also check out his photography at http://www.alexjansenphotography.com]

There are also a number of other videos that demonstrate the resilience of a Pentax DSLR, with The Phoblographer and others running them underwater. Recently a Russian group found satisfaction in roughing up a K3 with water, sand and mud.

You Tube

You Tube

Another video I have witnessed but have been unable to find is a Japanese [Presumably] video in which a K5 is placed inside a freezer while in time lapse mode. Very impressive stuff.

[Kunzite]

Then I recommend you leave yours out in the rain tonight, Kunzite - have faith!

I'm weather proof to a certain extent - yet I wouldn't leave myself out in the rain tonight...

Another video I have witnessed but have been unable to find is a Japanese [Presumably] video in which a K5 is placed inside a freezer while in time lapse mode. Very impressive stuff.

Not Japanese; Chinese perhaps? It was an Apacer rugged SD card test, and they used the best camera for this job:

You Tube

You Tube

[cali92rs]

People can show all the youtube videos and give personal testimonials from here until eternity.
THe fact is, these cameras are not made by the hand of god and some have indeed failed under much more benign conditions than what is shown above. It is not a fault of Pentax, because no product is 100% perfect and failures do occur.

But the simple fact is that, under their warranty conditions, they will NOT repair your camera under their warranty if the damage was caused by something as harsh as dunking it in water, or something as benign as get a single drop of water that happens to migrate into the wrong place.

With that in mind, the prudent thing would be to protect your camera as much as possible and not to rely on it's weathersealing, because if it fails (most of the time it doesn't, but sometimes it does), then you will be stuck with the bill.

[grhazelton]

I recall seeing a K5 totally immersed to take a picture of a swimmer. I presume that the dunking was brief, and that the lens wasn't zoomed or focused during its bath. I don't remember if the post mentioned how the camera was in a day or so.... Seems pretty risky to me.

I've never worried about light rain or drizzle with either my K10 or K5 with a WR lens mounted, but I carry a plastic bag just in case there is a deluge.

While the manufacturer's failsafe of voiding warranty and using technical language to avoid directly implying the ability of any product is obvious, I don't believe this negates from Pentax's ability to provide the best quality DSLR's on the current market with regard to build quality and environmental endurance.

A judgement like this, based as it is on unmistakable bias in favour of a brand, is not worth much. There is no reason to believe that the weather sealings of Pentax are any better or worse than those offered by Olympus or Lumix.

[Fogel70]

Too bad Ricoh isn't using the IP code...

I doubt they could use any any higfher IP code than IPx0 on a Pentax DSLR. With a 40+ mm hole on the front of the camera, it's not much advantage of using IP coding.

---------- Post added 15-05-14 at 20:48 ----------

Why don't they just publish this in international magazines and capitalize on this strength? Redo all lenses to be WR at the very least. I think this would be a strong selling point.

It seems to have been published in Amateur Photographer dec 14 2013 issue. Ricoh probably hired AP to make this.
It even show the review score from AP on each camera.

I guess this will make it difficult to publish in any other magazine.

[Zygonyx]

How should we interpret "weatherproof"? I wonder what Ricoh uses as their definition. What's the difference between "weather resistant" and weatherproof? Is the K-30 really protected more robustly against the elements than the other models?

And most importantly - should I take my K-5 II with WR or DA* lens out into the pouring rain?

- Craig

Well, as others here, i did it with K-5 and DA*16-50mm on the atlantic thunderstormed coast.
No problem after abundant rinse under the tap.
But if you don't wanna take risks, i would advise WG-4...

[Bolt]

A judgement like this, based as it is on unmistakable bias in favour of a brand, is not worth much. There is no reason to believe that the weather sealings of Pentax are any better or worse than those offered by Olympus or Lumix.

Of course this is 'bias', we are talking about Pentax in a Pentax forum. If you want 'evidence' as to the objective legitimacy of my statement, it could be reflected in results portrayed by the owners and users of said devices. Pentax has a renowned, almost stereotypical synonymization relating to the endurance of their cameras, other brands while known for their quality, do not have said reputation. As is shown throughout the internet, Pentax DSLRs can handle more then their fair share of abuse. Lumix and Olympus might also be able to hold its own relative to the general competition, but I do believe Pentax is in another ball game. If not, there would be more evidence showing Olympus and Lumix cameras sustaining equal amounts of abuse.
'
If I were to Google Search 'Olympus Weather Sealing Fail', it would return 8,920,000 results, whereas 'Pentax Weather Sealing Fail' only 426,000 results. It does not take a genius to notice the difference.

Of course this is 'bias', we are talking about Pentax in a Pentax forum. If you want 'evidence' as to the objective legitimacy of my statement, it could be reflected in results portrayed by the owners and users of said devices. Pentax has a renowned, almost stereotypical synonymization relating to the endurance of their cameras, other brands while known for their quality, do not have said reputation. As is shown throughout the internet, Pentax DSLRs can handle more then their fair share of abuse. Lumix and Olympus might also be able to hold its own relative to the general competition, but I do believe Pentax is in another ball game. If not, there would be more evidence showing Olympus and Lumix cameras sustaining equal amounts of abuse.
'
If I were to Google Search 'Olympus Weather Sealing Fail', it would return 8,920,000 results, whereas 'Pentax Weather Sealing Fail' only 426,000 results. It does not take a genius to notice the difference.

There are pleny of data testifying to the durability of other brands as well. Fanboys come in all colours.

Here is one for Canon:

You Tube

You Tube

Here is one for Olympus:

You Tube

You Tube

Your google survey is downright ludicrous. "Pentax water damage" will yield 2 hits on Austrian google, "Olympus water damage" 5, and "canon water damage" 16100. What does this tell us apart from the fact that there are lots of Canons out there? Very little.

While we are walking down the path of comedians: "olympus weather seals still fine" yields 501000 hits and "Pentax weather seals still fine" 424000. Guess Olympus must be better?