Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-16-2014, 09:18 AM   #46
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,424
QuoteOriginally posted by cali92rs Quote
Yes, I was right, hit too close to home.

The Pentax system has the same quality shortcomings of any other camera manufacturer. No worse, but probably no better either.
Defending a certain brand just because it is what you bought, in spite of obvious shortcomings, and burying your head in the sand like an ostrich is fanboy behavior.
The "don't let you lens sit too long" was more of a "typical user error" comment than a helpful piece of advice. And quite honestly, if you need to give that advice, there is something wrong with the product.

You are the one that mentioned the "fanboys". And then, by your comment saying I was tilting at windmills, implied that no such fanboy behavior existed, when obviously they do.
I see you are unable to say which of those things happened on this thread.

I will say again: nobody here claimed Pentax is perfect; that's your strawman. And in the post you were quoting, I said "Isn't the "don't let your lens sit too much" just an advice to make a potential failure less likely to happen - while admitting the product is imperfect". What we're writing and what you're seeing are different things, it appears.

QuoteOriginally posted by DominicVII Quote
And where are those Pentax-baiters who claimed that all Pentax products are good for nothing? The polarisation here is of your own making.
Quote where I made claims about their existence here, please.
Cameras not being "made by the hand of god" was actually said in this thread, together with other things. I'm not confusing imagination with reality.
QuoteOriginally posted by DominicVII Quote
Indeed. An anthropological term for it would be "fetishism." Inanimate objectes are viewed as being invested with magical properties. And those who speak ill of these objects must be punished.
And this is exactly what I call by tilting at windmills.

05-16-2014, 09:19 AM   #47
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 456
QuoteOriginally posted by c.a.m Quote
Thanks to all who have provided interesting and objective comments and suggestions related to the weather resistance and reliability of Pentax gear under harsh environmental conditions. I was particularly glad to learn of the IPX2 rating.

However, I'm sort of missing the connection of the last several posts to the theme of the thread. For example, during my research I might have missed a link between SDM and water ingress. I guess both issues relate to system reliability, but the weather sealing feature presents a unique aspect - it's difficult to characterize the conditions under which water might enter the camera (other than the obvious of an open port or using a non-WR lens).

Ricoh-Pentax has been promoting the use of their cameras in challenging environments but they don't give enough information on which to determine the risk of using the gear under various conditions.

- Craig
Here is paraphrase from Ben Long's manual of photography:

"Don't be afraid of using your camera light rain, even if it is not weather-sealed."

I have done precisely this, and never experienced any problems.

Most DSLRs, apart from the low end plastic boxes, as well as some mirrorless (OM-D and GH) are designed to withstand the onslaught of the elements to some extent. Washing your camera under a tap of water like you do your dishes is not what I would call normal behaviour vis--vis electronic products.
05-16-2014, 09:28 AM   #48
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,424
Few years ago I was wiping condensation water from my non-weather sealed DSLRs, because I didn't wait for it to take room temperature in my bag. It continued to work for many years. A non sealed camera might be able to work in light rain, for a while.

But being lucky and using the proper tool for the job are different things.

I would call "washing your camera under a tap of water like you do your dishes" - and just to "prove" the ruggedness of your camera - looking for trouble.
05-16-2014, 09:34 AM   #49
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 456
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
I see you are unable to say which of those things happened on this thread.

Quote where I made claims about their existence here, please.
Cameras not being "made by the hand of god" was actually said in this thread, together with other things. I'm not confusing imagination with reality.

And this is exactly what I call by tilting at windmills.
"It's a fashion around here to call people "fanboys" (or worse) at the slightest sign of being even remotely happy with a Pentax product." And subesquently to accuse those advocating a sober attitude rather than fawning awe of "tilting at windmills" is a not-so-clever attempt at diffusing criticism of your position. You are taking the "hand of god" expression out of context; the poster held that Pentax products are laudable, but they are not made by the "hand of god." You are most certainly conflating the imaginary and the real, and the expression "tilting at windmills" is a fitting description of your own position. Thanks for bringing it to our attention.






05-16-2014, 09:45 AM   #50
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,424
Yes, whatever - it's pointless anyway. Just do me a favor, try that "sober attitude" you're talking about on a Canon/Nikon/etc (non-Pentax) forum and ask for an honest opinion about it.
Have a nice evening.
05-16-2014, 10:07 AM   #51
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 456
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
Yes, whatever - it's pointless anyway. Just do me a favor, try that "sober attitude" you're talking about on a Canon/Nikon/etc (non-Pentax) forum and ask for an honest opinion about it.
Have a nice evening.
I have already stated that fanboys come in all colours. Nowhere has it been suggested that this curious phenomenon is to be encountered solely among those with a soft spot for Pentax.

What has been suggested here is the following:

There are no grounds for exalting Pentax's weather sealings while pooh-poohing the weather sealings of others, whether it be Olympus or Lumix. In doing so, not only do you show yourself inacapable of conferring value-free judgement; you also illustrate the fact that you are an easy prey to marketing stratagems.
05-16-2014, 10:58 AM   #52
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,424
I wonder about that. Olympus for example claims a protection equivalent to IPX-1 for e.g. the EM-1 (it's in the manual). The Panasonic GH3 AFAIK doesn't have weather sealing material around the SD card slot. Some mid-level Canon cameras relied on a tight construction.

If the IPX-2 rating for Pentax is real, and since they're using sealing materials everywhere - that's a good reason to believe they put a bit more effort into sealing.
05-16-2014, 11:00 AM   #53
Site Supporter
cali92rs's Avatar

Join Date: May 2011
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 3,201
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
Don't worry, it's not your fault. It's a fashion around here to call people "fanboys" (or worse) at the slightest sign of being even remotely happy with a Pentax product.
This first post of this particular discussion is the definition of "tilting at widmills"

I would like you to post any threads where anyone that makes the bolded claim above.

05-16-2014, 11:41 AM   #54
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 456
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
If the IPX-2 rating for Pentax is real, and since they're using sealing materials everywhere - that's a good reason to believe they put a bit more effort into sealing.
Or maybe Pentax are a bit more optimistic in their claims, which they, unlike Olympus, do not even bother to print in their user manual? And because Lumix avoid the IPX scale together, does that give us sufficient reason to assume that their weather sealings are any worse? I don't think so. Water damage renders the warranty null and void in the case of all manufacturers. Hence the degree of efficacy of the weather sealings of the different manufacturers remains a moot point. We have seen that Canons, Pentaxes, and Olys are capable of surviving considerable beating, but we have also seen them fail when they shouldn't have.
05-16-2014, 12:38 PM   #55
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,424
I said "If the IPX-2 rating for Pentax is real", didn't I? With a single source (be it Ricoh Imaging Germany) I can't take it as an absolute proof. But it's not "nothing", either.

The Lumix was one with no sealing material around the SD card slot.

The Sony Xperia waterproof smartphones, which have certifications up to IP58 and can work underwater, have water detecting materials inside with one purpose: to void the warranty if water makes its way in (even if there's otherwise no apparent water damage). However, they're much better protected than my Pentax camera.
It's a mistake to assume that vaguely similar warranty conditions would imply similar levels of protection.
05-16-2014, 12:41 PM   #56
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 456
QuoteOriginally posted by cali92rs Quote
This first post of this particular discussion is the definition of "tilting at widmills"

I would like you to post any threads where anyone that makes the bolded claim above.
It is part and parcel of human nature to project one's own errors onto other.

The two positions advocated in this thread can be reduced to the following:

(1) Pentax are better.

(2) Pentax are no better, no worse.

To advocate the latter is somehow a case of tilting at windmills. Go figure. A claim like this would make sense only if he were referring to himself.

This is the same guy who holds that the Pentax products should be more expensive, presumably because it would add to the glamour of owning a Pentax.

It is interesting to note that nowhere in the K3 user manual do the words "weather" and "seal(s)" occur.

Regards,
Sancho Panza

---------- Post added 05-16-14 at 21:51 ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
I said "If the IPX-2 rating for Pentax is real", didn't I? With a single source (be it Ricoh Imaging Germany) I can't take it as an absolute proof. But it's not "nothing", either.

The Lumix was one with no sealing material around the SD card slot.

The Sony Xperia waterproof smartphones, which have certifications up to IP58 and can work underwater, have water detecting materials inside with one purpose: to void the warranty if water makes its way in (even if there's otherwise no apparent water damage). However, they're much better protected than my Pentax camera.
It's a mistake to assume that vaguely similar warranty conditions would imply similar levels of protection.
How do smartphones enter into this debate?

You yourself admit that the following statement "If the IPX-2 rating for Pentax is real" is merely hypothetical. So where does this leave us? Does it give you sufficient reason for holding that those who advocate the sober view "no better, no worse" are tilting at windmills? It is a sign of intelligent prudence to suspend judgement until something can be determined with certainity. In the meantime, you are free to believe in the hyperbole of the marketing division of your favourite brand.

Last edited by DominicVII; 05-16-2014 at 01:33 PM.
05-16-2014, 01:36 PM   #57
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,424
The windmills are fanboys who would claim/think that Pentax cameras are "made by the hand of god", or have a fetish about them, or have magical properties, and would try to punish people for not believing the same. Until I see such nonsense blurted by people other than the fanboy hunters, they are windmills.

No, the claim of IPX-2 rating is not merely hypothetical; I trust that you weren't lying when you said it's classified as IPX-2. You were pretty clear about it:
QuoteOriginally posted by DominicVII Quote
Regarding the weather sealing: it is not just a gimmick. In Europe at least, there are definite criteria that must be met before a manufacturer can classify a given product as weather-sealed. Pentax K30/50's weather-sealing is classified as IPX2: "Vertically dripping water shall have no harmful effect when the enclosure is tilted at an angle up to 15 from its normal position [test-duration: 10 minutes]."
I'm afraid that a "no better, no worse" claim is not free from the burden of proof, nor is it inherently more likely than "better" or "worse" claims. No, it's not "the sober view" no matter how much you'd like to think that way. What's so "sober" in claiming to have evidence then ignoring it?

Smartphones are consumer electronic products subjected to similar warranty regulations as cameras. Like cameras and unlike other electronic consumer products like a normal TV, they are meant to be taken and used outside - where weather conditions might happen.

If you wait until things are determined with certainty, then you'll spend your life waiting. "There are dark clouds outside" shouldn't result in a "I should suspend judgement about weather because I can't be certain"; but in a "it will probably rain, I should take my umbrella".

Last edited by Kunzite; 05-16-2014 at 01:47 PM.
05-16-2014, 01:45 PM   #58
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 456
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
The windmills are fanboys who would claim/think that Pentax cameras are "made by the hand of god", or have a fetish about them, or have magical properties, and would try to punish people for not believing the same. Until I see such nonsense blurted by people others than the fanboy hunters, they are windmills.

No, the claim of IPX-2 rating is not merely hypothetical; I trust that you weren't lying when you said it's classified as IPX-2. You were pretty clear about it:


If you wait until things are determined with certainty, then you'll spend your life waiting. "There are dark clouds outside" shouldn't result in a "I should suspend judgement about weather because I can't be certain"; but in a "it will probably rain, I should take my umbrella".
Are you into the habit of contradicting yourself? Here is what you yourself wrote:

QUOTE

I said "If the IPX-2 rating for Pentax is real", didn't I? With a single source (be it Ricoh Imaging Germany) I can't take it as an absolute proof.

END QUOTE

As for your clumsy windmill metaphor, it is clear that you have never read Don Quixote but merely gleaned the quote from somewhere on the internet, because it makes absolutely no sense to use it in the manner in which you use it. Somehow I have the feeling that you evaluate the quality of different camera brands with recourse to the same dodgy methodology which you apply to literature.


05-16-2014, 02:01 PM   #59
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,424
I'm sorry, but your logic is completely flawed. We're not living in a world where only extremes can exist; it can be both "not merely hypothetical", and "not an absolute proof".
And talking about that, could you please give us a source where the IPX-2 claim is made? Thank you in advance.

"Tilting at windmills is an English idiom which means attacking imaginary enemies." - according to Wiki. I'm doing my best at expressing myself in a foreign language, but in this case I think I've managed to convey what I meant.
05-16-2014, 02:21 PM   #60
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 456
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
I'm sorry, but your logic is completely flawed. We're not living in a world where only extremes can exist; it can be both "not merely hypothetical", and "not an absolute proof".
And talking about that, could you please give us a source where the IPX-2 claim is made? Thank you in advance.

"Tilting at windmills is an English idiom which means attacking imaginary enemies." - according to Wiki. I'm doing my best at expressing myself in a foreign language, but in this case I think I've managed to convey what I meant.
"Until I see such nonsense blurted by people others than the fanboy hunters, they are windmills."

It is actually a phrase stemming from a Spanish novel. To refer to fanboy hunters as windmills is absolutely nonsensical.

Until something is demonstrated beyond doubt, it remains a hypothesis. If you cannot understand that, then there is very little I can do to help you.

The IPX-2 claim was referenced by me. Read with care and you shall find.

Thanks
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!
ap, camera, code, da*, dslr, evidence, gear, guide, ii, ip, k-30, k-5, lens, lenses, page, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, product, proof, rain, ricoh, uk, water, weather, weatherproof, wr, wr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
All Weather vs. Weather Resistant jjeling Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 5 01-10-2014 12:31 PM
PENTAX Introduces New K-30 Digital SLR Camera Featuring weather resistant capabilitie Adam Homepage & Official Pentax News 18 09-25-2012 04:23 PM
Weather resistant durability palmerchan Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 8 08-17-2012 06:04 AM
Technical Data for the new Weather Resistant Pentax DFA 100mm F2.8 Macro Adam Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 11 12-12-2009 09:11 AM
New DA series Weather Resistant Lens's vk4akp Pentax News and Rumors 23 07-01-2009 05:35 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:24 AM. | See also: NikonForums.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