[BigMackCam]

dear Big Mack Cam,

I know everything that you post already.

But I simply want more scientific measuring.

If I put on my wristwatch some rubber, and hardly taped it with plastic band,

does that mean it's weather proof ?

NO.

No, you're quite right, it doesn't mean it's weather proof.

But if that wristwatch has gaskets between the back and the case, the glass and the case, around the winding stem, and a screw-down crown, that means it's more weather resistant than a watch that doesn't have those features.

I've worn a 300m water-resistant watch while scuba diving and had that suffer water ingress. It happens. It wasn't water proof - just water resistant.

[Racer X 69]

dear Big Mack Cam,

I know everything that you post already.

But I simply want more scientific measuring.

If I put on my wristwatch some rubber, and hardly taped it with plastic band,

does that mean it's weather resitance ?

NO.

For such claim, there should be facts behind, and you know - FACTS ARE - SCIENTIFIC REASEARCH AND MEASURING

Perhaps you should contact Ricoh Pentax directly and ask them for the data you are so insistently demanding.

Surely they would be the one and only true source.

[panonski]

No, you're quite right, it doesn't mean it's weather proof.

But if that wristwatch has gaskets between the back and the case, the glass and the case, around the winding stem, and a screw-down crown, that means it's more weather resistant than a watch that doesn't have those features.

I've worn a 300m water-resistant watch while scuba diving and had that suffer water ingress. It happens. It wasn't water proof - just water resistant.

I edited my post,

to be more accurate.

We can all agree that Pentax claims on Wheater Resitance could be, and could be not - the true.

Such claim is useless, and can lead to damage your camera, because you were naive enough to believe that.


that's why we have a forum comunity

---------- Post added 05-21-18 at 02:47 AM ----------

Perhaps you should contact Ricoh Pentax directly and ask them for the data you are so insistently demanding.

Surely they would be the one and only true source.

I dont want to - or should I say - I don't need too... For me is enough what I read from here, and from my experiance too.

Camera is not good sealed, specially in flash hot shoe, and I don't believe anymore in WR.

[BigMackCam]

I edited my post,

to be more accurate.

We can all agree that Pentax claims on Wheater Resitance could be, and could be not - the true.

Such claim is useless, and can lead to damage your camera, because you were naive enough to believe that.


that's why we have a forum comunity

Right. And I do agree that Ricoh's advertising claims present the value of weather resistance rather optimistically. That's the part I have a problem with - not the level of weather resistance, which I know is far better than for non-weather-resistant cameras - but the marketing aspect which is far too bold.

[panonski]

yes, exactly that ... We finally have right words here

[volley]

I am not sure if Pentax ever published the level of protection according to the IEC standard 60529 (IP Code, Internationally Protection Marking). My guess is it might be IP53.
But then again, in all fainess, these codes are typically suited as an acceptance criteria during final inspection of goods. You might want to check the test specifications, but these are difficult to translate into "real life" conditions.
Especially when users (like us) interfere with the integrity of the product ... in other words are changing lenses

At the end of the day it is mainly marketing and I would consider it as "a design with many seal should be better than a design without seals". In reality I dont treat WR lenses and cameras differently than non-WR equipment. Both should work under "normal" circumstances and that includes some moderate rain or snow of course.

[MarkJerling]

I've shot with my K-5 in the pouring rain many times. The camera is, undoubtedly, weather resistant. We've seen heie rinse his camera under running water. Clearly, (most) Pentax cameras are reasonably water resistant. If I had a KP, I'd expect it to be able to handle a bit of rain and if it did not, I'd expect Ricoh to repair it to ensure it was weather resistant. I don't think that's an unreasonable point of view.

Certainly, in our jurisdiction, under our consumer laws, if a company advertises a product as being weather resistant and showed that product in marketing materials complete with water droplets on and around the product, then I would be able to go to court and win on the basis that the item is not fit for purpose in that it's clearly not weather resistant if it fails when a not unreasonable amount of moisture comes its way.

I can understand the OP and some others frustration with this issue. Either the OP's KP is a defective product and he should be able to have it repaired at no cost to him, or, Ricoh needs to remove their weather resistant advertising materials and not make claims about the weather resistance of their products, if the purchasers of those cameras cannot expect weather resistance.

After all, what is "weather"? By definition, that should mean some rain, snow, wind, fog, humidity etc should be fine. I agree with Mike. The marketing department should not make claims that the production or design departments cannot match.

[stevebrot]

I can understand the OP and some others frustration with this issue.

What is getting tiresome is the same old voices expressing the same old gripes (copy paste?). Perhaps we could create a sticky with the most common comments and leave a reference to it when threads like what this has turned into are quite reasonably closed.


Steve

[Racer X 69]

What is getting tiresome is the same old voices expressing the same old gripes (copy paste?).


Steve

I concur.

[photogem]

THE WEATHER RESISTANCE CLAIMS FOR THE PENTAX KP ARE DEEPLY SUSPECT!

Well the report is back from the UK service centre with an offer to replace my four month old KP for £802.80. I have received photographs (attached) purporting to show water damage on a large circuit board which considering my camera was only exposed to a small amount of snow and is heavily marketed as weather resistant makes me unbelievably angry. If I hadn't invested so much in the Ricoh/Pentax platform I would consider ditching all my kit, I feel conned. Weather resistant? My a-rse.

If you have a KP my advice would be only use it indoors and if don't have a KP I would say buy something else. I have used my K3 and my K50 in far worse conditions without any problems, this is not good.

I have now raised a formal warranty claim with Ricoh UK through the service centre, see below.

"Dear Paula,

Thanks for your assessment, to be honest I am shocked and gravely disappointed that my Pentax KP has suffered "fluid" damage. The Pentax KP is sold as being as weather resistant and all the product marketing by Ricoh makes a great play of this attribute. The only "fluid" my KP has been exposed to was a little light snow a couple of weeks ago, at the time it was fitted with my Pentax D-FA 28-105 DC WR lens and my Pentax DA - Rear Converter 1.4X AW both of which claim to be weather resistant. I was using my KP well within the conditions and parameters set by the manufacturer, taking great care with it, the camera is in otherwise excellent condition.

How can I make a warranty claim? Do I make the claim through you as the recommended (by SRS Microsystems) warranty repair centre or do I have to contact Ricoh-Pentax directly?

I am a loyal customer of Ricoh-Pentax and have purchased a large number of their products , this is the first time I have had a problem with anything, I am completely surprised by and did not foresee this camera's fragility at all.

Thank you for assistance.

Nick"

Nick: Even this being an old thread, this new one might be of interest to you:
KP screen black out when flipped. - PentaxForums.com

Simply because now we have photos of a problem which hits more and more Pentax KP's and it is something serious and imo very possibly related to yours:

- the flex-ribbon cable can push the WR silicon part through the inside of the body and then there is not only no more WR but truly "an open door or window" for
water gushing in!


- this is because the cable does get damaged there due to the fact that it was un-professionally constructed designed!

I have used my K5 which has a high shuttercount and is very rugged in pouring rain as well and I would have expected that the KP would be as good protected as the K5 but it isn't: K5 77 seals, KP just 67 seals... the K30 has 81, K-70 has 100 !!!)

[Racer X 69]

Beating a dead horse won’t bring it back.