Foul weather camera?

Jock Elliott · 02-15-2019, 05:03 AM

I like to shoot the epic grandeur of the skies and sometimes very bad weather. I owned a Pentax K5 IIs and I really liked the image quality, but ultimately I decided the two-lens/body combo was too big, too heavy for everyday carry. I now have a small M43 kit for assignments (primarily because it is "good enough" and very quiet), but now I am thinking a used Pentax body, plus possibly the 18-135 WR (also used) to live in my car and be available for use in very difficult conditions.

Used sounds right, because the failure of a $400 lens/camera combo is less dismaying than the failure of a $1500 combo.

Suggestions? Ideas? (Or should I go back to "the home" and start taking my meds again -- grin --).

Additional: I already have a "rugged" camera, and the image quality isn't good enough.

Cheers, Jock

Last edited by MarkJerling; 02-15-2019 at 06:33 PM. Reason: Profanity removed.

**pepperberry farm** · 02-15-2019, 05:57 AM - **2 Likes**

good plan - I use the 18-135 on my K-3 in these situations... you'll get some suggestions on the DA 16-85 WR zoom also...

Navmaxlp · 02-15-2019, 06:38 AM - **1 Like**

If you are looking for the cheapest option, I'm thinking you might be able to get into a K-30 relatively inexpensively. Be aware, these cameras as well as the K-50 are prone to aperture block failures. If it were my money and I was looking at a rugged, weather sealed option for less money, I'd be looking for a K-5. They are less expensive, pair well with the 18-135 and are more reliable than the aforementioned K-30. Good luck!

**TER-OR** · 02-15-2019, 06:46 AM

Yeah, a K-5 and 18-135 is a solid option. That lens works well on my K-5 and the K3II. Images on the K5 look great, the Sony 16MP sensor is really nice.

**aslyfox** · 02-15-2019, 06:52 AM

this thread might have some " words of wisdom " to consider:

" About those WR body weather seals...User responsibility and best practice

With a few notable exceptions, most threads on this site that specifically relate to weather seals generally fall into three main groups: reports of failed seals and/or rants about expectation of seal performance and/or Ricoh voiding warranty when water is found inside the camera. The standard responses range from success stories ("seals saved my camera"), sympathy comments, more rant, and suggestions of user (victim?) blame. That last is particularly prominent to the point that I have been thinking that a short treatise on user responsibility may be more kind and ultimately more helpful. Note that this note specifically excludes discussion of lens flange seals and/or use of focus/zoom on a sealed lens. The intent here is focus on the body only . . . . "

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

Adam · 02-15-2019, 08:12 AM

I agree that the K-5 (mark II if you want good low light AF) would give you the most bang for the buck.

normhead · 02-15-2019, 08:50 AM

My wife is still partial to the K-5. She never liked my K-3, likes the K-1 but would rather borrow mine a few times year than have her own. As large as we can view them, the images are identical to K-1 images, we've never printed so large and we've printed canvas up to 30x20 and paper up to 16x20, that the larger K-1 files made any difference to the overall appreciation of the print, and on 4K TV, (3840x2160) there's no difference at all.

Last edited by normhead; 02-15-2019 at 09:03 AM.

**UncleVanya** · 02-15-2019, 08:56 AM - **3 Likes**

Keeping a camera in the car is very hard on the equipment. The temps tend to liquify lubricants and stress plastic parts.

**TER-OR** · 02-15-2019, 09:08 AM

Heat is hard on everything. Rubber, batteries, lubricants all degrade. If you're thinking about a go-bag you can tote along anytime, that's probably a better idea. There are some nice small camera bags where you can have some padding and some space for microfiber cloth, lenspen etc.

SpecialK · 02-15-2019, 09:10 AM

Plastic bag and rubber bands, or a store-bought camera condom?

Jock Elliott · 02-15-2019, 10:49 AM

Wow, this is great stuff.

Thanks!

Cheers, Jock

PDL · 02-15-2019, 02:34 PM

I have taken my K-10D, K-20D and K-3II into really bad weather with non-WR and WR lenses. I have not had that many issues.
I have been in the rain on the Olympic Peninsula (non WR Lens) during the Northwest "drizzle a few times, once I was underwater with a wave but the camera was held over my head. I was wet, cold but the camera was not really affected.
I was on the Olympic Peninsula beach while a Typhoon was off shore with my K-20D and my DA* 18-50mm with out an issue. My boots ended up getting full of water as the rain hit my back and ran down my leg. Camera and lens survived without issue, I was cold and wet.
I have been in a torrential downpour in Prague (K-3II and DA* 18-50mm) where I got soaked to the bone walking from the city square back to our hotel. And I got the K-3II and 50-135mm thoroughly soaked (off and on drizzle) in Scotland at the Loch Lomond Highland games. Not a problem with either scenario, kit wise.

One issue with shooting in "crapstorms" is that you really need a reasonably fast set of lenses and a body that can handle relatively high ISO's. If you can afford to switch to a new brand, I suggest that you investigate the weather sealing available for fast glass and bodies.

If weight is really that much of an issue then really take a good look at that as your initial starting point. I, however, find that my K-3II and DA* lenses are just fine in "crapstorm" areas. They are not light, but then I am used to carrying camera bags with "stuff" in them around.

funktionalphotog · 02-15-2019, 06:01 PM

I am also going to suggest the K5 with the 18-135mm WR lens as well. Despite its age, the K5 still captures wonderful shots and is built like a tank. I've got a K5 and a K3 and also use the 18-135mm lens in some pretty nasty weather. Weather like rain and snow in the Yukon and the west coast of Canada in the rain forest. Although the K3 is now my primary camera, I'm never disappointed with shots from my trusty old K5.

**pepperberry farm** · 02-15-2019, 06:16 PM

I recently purchased a 'used' K-5 IIs from Roberts Camera with less than 300 actuations on it... it's a great camera and the 16MP sensor is a sweetheart...

**Kobie** · 02-18-2019, 06:00 PM

Originally posted by PDL

I have taken my K-10D, K-20D and K-3II into really bad weather with non-WR and WR lenses. I have not had that many issues.
I have been in the rain on the Olympic Peninsula (non WR Lens) during the Northwest "drizzle a few times, once I was underwater with a wave but the camera was held over my head. I was wet, cold but the camera was not really affected.
I was on the Olympic Peninsula beach while a Typhoon was off shore with my K-20D and my DA* 18-50mm with out an issue. My boots ended up getting full of water as the rain hit my back and ran down my leg. Camera and lens survived without issue, I was cold and wet.
I have been in a torrential downpour in Prague (K-3II and DA* 18-50mm) where I got soaked to the bone walking from the city square back to our hotel. And I got the K-3II and 50-135mm thoroughly soaked (off and on drizzle) in Scotland at the Loch Lomond Highland games. Not a problem with either scenario, kit wise.

One issue with shooting in "crapstorms" is that you really need a reasonably fast set of lenses and a body that can handle relatively high ISO's. If you can afford to switch to a new brand, I suggest that you investigate the weather sealing available for fast glass and bodies.

If weight is really that much of an issue then really take a good look at that as your initial starting point. I, however, find that my K-3II and DA* lenses are just fine in "crapstorm" areas. They are not light, but then I am used to carrying camera bags with "stuff" in them around.

Do you mean DA* 16-50? Or HD DA 18-50? I've never heard of a DA* 18-50 (I just searched google for it and got no results either). Just curious which lens it actually is.

02-15-2019, 05:03 AM	#1
Jock Elliott Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2014 Posts: 29	Foul weather camera? I like to shoot the epic grandeur of the skies and sometimes very bad weather. I owned a Pentax K5 IIs and I really liked the image quality, but ultimately I decided the two-lens/body combo was too big, too heavy for everyday carry. I now have a small M43 kit for assignments (primarily because it is "good enough" and very quiet), but now I am thinking a used Pentax body, plus possibly the 18-135 WR (also used) to live in my car and be available for use in very difficult conditions. Used sounds right, because the failure of a $400 lens/camera combo is less dismaying than the failure of a $1500 combo. Suggestions? Ideas? (Or should I go back to "the home" and start taking my meds again -- grin --). Additional: I already have a "rugged" camera, and the image quality isn't good enough. Cheers, Jock Last edited by MarkJerling; 02-15-2019 at 06:33 PM. Reason: Profanity removed.

02-15-2019, 06:52 AM	#5
aslyfox Seeker of Knowledge Join Date: Aug 2016 Location: Topeka, Kansas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 24,581	this thread might have some " words of wisdom " to consider: " About those WR body weather seals...User responsibility and best practice With a few notable exceptions, most threads on this site that specifically relate to weather seals generally fall into three main groups: reports of failed seals and/or rants about expectation of seal performance and/or Ricoh voiding warranty when water is found inside the camera. The standard responses range from success stories ("seals saved my camera"), sympathy comments, more rant, and suggestions of user (victim?) blame. That last is particularly prominent to the point that I have been thinking that a short treatise on user responsibility may be more kind and ultimately more helpful. Note that this note specifically excludes discussion of lens flange seals and/or use of focus/zoom on a sealed lens. The intent here is focus on the body only . . . . " Read more at: About those WR body weather seals...User responsibility and best practice - Page 4 - PentaxForums.com Last edited by aslyfox; 02-15-2019 at 07:58 AM.

02-15-2019, 08:12 AM	#6
Adam Administrator Site Webmaster Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 51,595	I agree that the K-5 (mark II if you want good low light AF) would give you the most bang for the buck. 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:

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Optical differences between Pentax "K", "M", and "A" lenses	6BQ5	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	31	01-10-2014 01:02 PM
Don't say Pentax "Q" in French ... "Q" = "cul" = "A--"	Jean Poitiers	Pentax Q	52	11-10-2013 06:25 AM
Going from a "film" to a "digital" back to a "film" lens?	6BQ5	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	9	06-18-2013 03:40 PM
Suggestion Can we call "Register" - "Sign in" or "Sign in or register"?	Laurentiu Cristofor	Site Suggestions and Help	7	11-21-2010 04:39 PM
"Hunger for a DA50-135?" or "The DA50-135 as a bird lens!" or "Iron age birds?"	Douglas_of_Sweden	Post Your Photos!	4	08-13-2008 06:09 AM

02-15-2019, 05:57 AM - 2 Likes	#2
pepperberry farm amateur dirt farmer Join Date: Dec 2014 Location: probably out in a field somewhere... Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 41,678	good plan - I use the 18-135 on my K-3 in these situations... you'll get some suggestions on the DA 16-85 WR zoom also...

02-15-2019, 06:38 AM - 1 Like	#3
Navmaxlp Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Pennsylvania Photos: Albums Posts: 167	If you are looking for the cheapest option, I'm thinking you might be able to get into a K-30 relatively inexpensively. Be aware, these cameras as well as the K-50 are prone to aperture block failures. If it were my money and I was looking at a rugged, weather sealed option for less money, I'd be looking for a K-5. They are less expensive, pair well with the 18-135 and are more reliable than the aforementioned K-30. Good luck!

02-15-2019, 06:46 AM	#4
TER-OR Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Dundee, IL Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,699	Yeah, a K-5 and 18-135 is a solid option. That lens works well on my K-5 and the K3II. Images on the K5 look great, the Sony 16MP sensor is really nice.

02-15-2019, 08:50 AM	#7
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	My wife is still partial to the K-5. She never liked my K-3, likes the K-1 but would rather borrow mine a few times year than have her own. As large as we can view them, the images are identical to K-1 images, we've never printed so large and we've printed canvas up to 30x20 and paper up to 16x20, that the larger K-1 files made any difference to the overall appreciation of the print, and on 4K TV, (3840x2160) there's no difference at all. Last edited by normhead; 02-15-2019 at 09:03 AM.

02-15-2019, 08:56 AM - 3 Likes	#8
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,403	Keeping a camera in the car is very hard on the equipment. The temps tend to liquify lubricants and stress plastic parts.

02-15-2019, 09:08 AM	#9
TER-OR Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Dundee, IL Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,699	Heat is hard on everything. Rubber, batteries, lubricants all degrade. If you're thinking about a go-bag you can tote along anytime, that's probably a better idea. There are some nice small camera bags where you can have some padding and some space for microfiber cloth, lenspen etc.

02-15-2019, 09:10 AM	#10
SpecialK Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: So California Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,480	Plastic bag and rubber bands, or a store-bought camera condom?

02-15-2019, 10:49 AM	#11
Jock Elliott Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2014 Posts: 29 Original Poster	Wow, this is great stuff. Thanks! Cheers, Jock

02-15-2019, 02:34 PM	#12
PDL Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: PNW USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,127	I have taken my K-10D, K-20D and K-3II into really bad weather with non-WR and WR lenses. I have not had that many issues. I have been in the rain on the Olympic Peninsula (non WR Lens) during the Northwest "drizzle a few times, once I was underwater with a wave but the camera was held over my head. I was wet, cold but the camera was not really affected. I was on the Olympic Peninsula beach while a Typhoon was off shore with my K-20D and my DA* 18-50mm with out an issue. My boots ended up getting full of water as the rain hit my back and ran down my leg. Camera and lens survived without issue, I was cold and wet. I have been in a torrential downpour in Prague (K-3II and DA* 18-50mm) where I got soaked to the bone walking from the city square back to our hotel. And I got the K-3II and 50-135mm thoroughly soaked (off and on drizzle) in Scotland at the Loch Lomond Highland games. Not a problem with either scenario, kit wise. One issue with shooting in "crapstorms" is that you really need a reasonably fast set of lenses and a body that can handle relatively high ISO's. If you can afford to switch to a new brand, I suggest that you investigate the weather sealing available for fast glass and bodies. If weight is really that much of an issue then really take a good look at that as your initial starting point. I, however, find that my K-3II and DA* lenses are just fine in "crapstorm" areas. They are not light, but then I am used to carrying camera bags with "stuff" in them around.

02-15-2019, 06:01 PM	#13
funktionalphotog New Member Join Date: Dec 2018 Posts: 5	I am also going to suggest the K5 with the 18-135mm WR lens as well. Despite its age, the K5 still captures wonderful shots and is built like a tank. I've got a K5 and a K3 and also use the 18-135mm lens in some pretty nasty weather. Weather like rain and snow in the Yukon and the west coast of Canada in the rain forest. Although the K3 is now my primary camera, I'm never disappointed with shots from my trusty old K5.

02-15-2019, 06:16 PM	#14
pepperberry farm amateur dirt farmer Join Date: Dec 2014 Location: probably out in a field somewhere... Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 41,678	I recently purchased a 'used' K-5 IIs from Roberts Camera with less than 300 actuations on it... it's a great camera and the 16MP sensor is a sweetheart...

02-18-2019, 06:00 PM	#15
Kobie Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2014 Location: Bowmanville Photos: Albums Posts: 1,211	Originally posted by PDL I have taken my K-10D, K-20D and K-3II into really bad weather with non-WR and WR lenses. I have not had that many issues. I have been in the rain on the Olympic Peninsula (non WR Lens) during the Northwest "drizzle a few times, once I was underwater with a wave but the camera was held over my head. I was wet, cold but the camera was not really affected. I was on the Olympic Peninsula beach while a Typhoon was off shore with my K-20D and my DA* 18-50mm with out an issue. My boots ended up getting full of water as the rain hit my back and ran down my leg. Camera and lens survived without issue, I was cold and wet. I have been in a torrential downpour in Prague (K-3II and DA* 18-50mm) where I got soaked to the bone walking from the city square back to our hotel. And I got the K-3II and 50-135mm thoroughly soaked (off and on drizzle) in Scotland at the Loch Lomond Highland games. Not a problem with either scenario, kit wise. One issue with shooting in "crapstorms" is that you really need a reasonably fast set of lenses and a body that can handle relatively high ISO's. If you can afford to switch to a new brand, I suggest that you investigate the weather sealing available for fast glass and bodies. If weight is really that much of an issue then really take a good look at that as your initial starting point. I, however, find that my K-3II and DA* lenses are just fine in "crapstorm" areas. They are not light, but then I am used to carrying camera bags with "stuff" in them around. Do you mean DA* 16-50? Or HD DA 18-50? I've never heard of a DA* 18-50 (I just searched google for it and got no results either). Just curious which lens it actually is.