"weather sealed" != "impervious to salt water"

[chromophore]

Just read this on PetaPixel:

http://petapixel.com/2016/02/05/shooting-a-winter-storm-killed-my-canon-7d/#more-202201

I don't understand how anyone can be so incredibly stupid. This misconception has been hashed out many times before: "weather-sealed" does not mean that you can let ocean waves hit your camera. Salt water is not rain and it is not weather.

And then, the other mistake is to think that all L lenses are "weather-sealed." Anyone who has owned an 85/1.2L knows that's not true.

To make it even worse, going back and rinsing the body and lens when salt ingress has already occurred, in the misguided belief that (1) tap water doesn't have any dissolved minerals itself; and (2) you can get enough water into the components to rinse away the corrosion?

Finally, sticking the whole thing in bags of rice? WHY do photographers spread around these stupid hacks? A large canister of silica gel put in an airtight, evacuated container with the camera, taking it out and heating it to 325 F to recharge it every 24 hours, will absorb more moisture more quickly than rice.

The repeated implications that his 1D2 survived just fine, therefore the 7D must have inferior sealing, is also galling. The 7D isn't a pro body and it's not expected to have the kind of sealing that a 1-series body needs, but that doesn't mean that it's not "weather-sealed." It just means that Canon sees fit to provide in their flagship bodies a level of sealing that goes above and beyond that needed to guard against damage from typical adverse weather, given the cost and the target market (pro shooters).

Part of the thing that irritates me as a photographer is how personal anecdotes and bad advice get passed around as if they were gospel truth. This guy got exactly what he deserved for his ignorance and misinformation.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I never knew the 70-200mm doesn’t have a rubber seal as I thought it was standard on all L lenses.

Because, you know, I never bothered to actually look at the lens. :

What a moron.

 

[Harv]

There is one simple truth in life that will never change..... THERE IS NO CURE FOR STUPID.

 

[Don Haines]

When mounting electronics on the frigates and trying to get a "weatherproof connection".......

Step 1 - ONLY use very high quality mil-standard circular connectors as everything else leaks.....
Step 2 - use heat shrink tubing over top of the connector.....
step 3 - generously coat the works with silicone seal....
step 4 - hope that it is good enough.... and re-apply the silicone regularly.....

When Canon (or Nikon) comes up with a more weatherproof way to join the lens to the body than that, only then will I believe that the junction is "weatherproof".... and on a lens with an extending element when you zoom it, what part of "air pump" do you not understand? ? ?

 

[ERHP]

On my desk at work I have a 5D MK III and 24-105 lens that were dunked in saltwater. They make great show and tell displays at to why we also have dive housings. The zoom on the lens is like one of those rock salt grinder/shaker combos. No electronic parts salvageable... The best part was the story "It wasn't under very long!"

 

[IgotGASbadDude]

A large canister of silica gel put in an airtight, evacuated container with the camera, taking it out and heating it to 325 F to recharge it every 24 hours

I'm not sure taking a camera out of "a large canister of silica gel", then "heating it to 325 F to recharge it every 24 hours" is such a good idea. : :

I'd personally prefer to keep my cameras out of ovens, but that's just me. :

 

[Don Haines]

A large canister of silica gel put in an airtight, evacuated container with the camera, taking it out and heating it to 325 F to recharge it every 24 hours

I'm not sure taking a camera out of "a large canister of silica gel", then "heating it to 325 F to recharge it every 24 hours" is such a good idea. : :

I'd personally prefer to keep my cameras out of ovens, but that's just me. :

You take the camera out of the silica, then bake the silica to dry it out again, then put the camera back in the silica.... you don't bake the silica with the camera in it.

In this case, it does not matter, with the amount of salt in the camera, it got more than damp.....there was salt water sloshing around inside to leave that much salt behind....

 

[expatinasia]

I notice that the 1DX II says "drip proof".

I sweat a lot, and I know that the 1DX does not like salt water, in fact my sweat causes more damage aesthetically than anything else.

 

[TeT]

Storms dont kill cameras, idiots kill cameras

 

[TexPhoto]

I've had this discussion with people in my camera club, and I try to explain it to them as a risk vs. reward thing. Are you really going to get photos that make the risk to your camera worth it? Do you really need to remember the rainy day at the beach?

And then to the really thick headed: Go buy a compact waterproof camera.

 

[Mogens Hansen]

I don't understand how anyone can be so incredibly stupid. This misconception has been hashed out many times before: "weather-sealed" does not mean that you can let ocean waves hit your camera. Salt water is not rain and it is not weather.

Not to encourage anybody to expose their equipment to salt water, I do have experience in that.
I have been photographing yacht racing for many years using Canon 1D series bodies (1D mkII, 1Ds mkII, two 1Ds mkIII and two 1DX). I have mostly been using the Canon 100-400/4.5-5.6L IS (mkI), which is not (fully) weather sealed, but also 70-200/2.8L IS (mkI) and 70-200/2.8L IS mkII which are weather sealed. When possible I do use UV filters to protect the lenses.
I do try to protect the equipment from water, but sometimes it will be hit by a wave.
Everyday when I get onshore, I wipe all equipment with a damp, clean dishtowel.
I have never had a single failure so far.

One of the events I photographed in 2015 was the World Championship for the Olympic Nacra 17 class (https://www.flickr.com/photos/sailingaarhus/sets/72157655427692796). It was photographed using two 1DX primarily with 300/2.8L IS (mkI) and 100-400/4.5-5.6L IS mkII on the race course.
The weather was quite bad during most of the event. When it was worst I used the Thinktank Hydrophobia rain covers (like https://www.flickr.com/photos/sailingaarhus/18897745314/in/album-72157655427692796/ - at this point the wind was to strong even for these world class athletes). Although the Hydrophobias are excellent, it does make it even harder to photograph these extremely fast boats.
During the final, very intense medalrace, the wind was close to the max limit (https://www.flickr.com/photos/sailingaarhus/19574966062/in/album-72157655427692796/ - the French coaches are cheering as their team approaches the finishing line as World Champions). I had a driver for my RIB boat who could cover me a little. So I chose not to use the raincover, to be able to work faster. But the 1DX with the 100-400/4.5-5.6L IS mkII was soaked in saltwater multiple time (and I dried it with a dishtowel) - the equipment worked absolutely flawless and still does.
By using 2 bodies, I dont have to switch lens - I switch camera. In general I only use one camera at the time.

That's the reason why I, and many yacht photographers, use 1D series bodies.

 

[Valvebounce]

Hi Folks.
This guy is obviously an idiot, but the most important thing I learned from this article is he is the kind of idiot willing to risk not only his life, he also risks the lives of those in the rescue services who might feel compelled to go looking for him when he is washed off by the waves. The rescuers won't hesitate or question if he was stupid, they will just go!
This is a fact that happens, it has happened at least twice near me that I know within a year or so.

quotes
"a few full immersions in sea water from 6 meter high waves,"
"Later when working there I would be fully submerged in giant waves spilling over all the way past the lighthouse stucture."
Just to post a bit on topic, does it have an IP xx rating, if not, it is not weather (or anything) proof!
Be safe folks.

Cheers, Graham.

 

[Maiaibing]

Finally, sticking the whole thing in bags of rice? WHY do photographers spread around these stupid hacks?

A large canister of silica gel put in an airtight, evacuated container with the camera, taking it out and heating it to 325 F to recharge it every 24 hours, will absorb more moisture more quickly than rice.

Rice is not a hack. Its great practical advice because most people can get hold of large quantities of rice very quickly but not so with silica gel which few people have lying around in any usable quantity.

We have bags of silica gel in the house, but when my wife dropped her iphone in the toilet she just ran into the kitchen and stuffed the iphone in a plastic bag with lots of rice for 5 days after giving it a quick wipe-off. That iphone is still working 4 years later.

Second - for someone using such blusterous language - I wonder why you seem unaware that silica gel comes in a variety of bags and compounds and has to be treated accordingly when it comes to heating method, temperature and drying time? Many modern silica gel compounds will be ruined at 325 F or the bags will melt if bagged.

You also seem to ignore that re-drying silica gel in an oven takes hours - so the camera will just have to survive while you first oven heat it - then let the silica cool - and finally toss it in again? Seems to me your practical experience is very limited since you suggest re-drying. Replacing is the way to go for those who have the quantity needed.

Of course you could put your camera in a bag of sealed rice while you re-dry your silica gel...

 

[AlanF]

There is a website listing stupid idiots who have killed themselves by unthinking folly.

http://www.darwinawards.com/
"The Darwin Awards commemorate individuals who protect our gene pool by making the ultimate sacrifice of their own lives. Darwin Award winners eliminate themselves in an extraordinarily idiotic manner, thereby improving our species' chances of long-term survival."

There should be a parallel site for idiots who needlessly destroy their cameras by their own stupidity.

 

[chromophore]

Finally, sticking the whole thing in bags of rice? WHY do photographers spread around these stupid hacks?

A large canister of silica gel put in an airtight, evacuated container with the camera, taking it out and heating it to 325 F to recharge it every 24 hours, will absorb more moisture more quickly than rice.

Rice is not a hack. Its great practical advice because most people can get hold of large quantities of rice very quickly but not so with silica gel which few people have lying around in any usable quantity.

We have bags of silica gel in the house, but when my wife dropped her iphone in the toilet she just ran into the kitchen and stuffed the iphone in a plastic bag with lots of rice for 5 days after giving it a quick wipe-off. That iphone is still working 4 years later.

Second - for someone using such blusterous language - I wonder why you seem unaware that silica gel comes in a variety of bags and compounds and has to be treated accordingly when it comes to heating method, temperature and drying time? Many modern silica gel compounds will be ruined at 325 F or the bags will melt if bagged.

You also seem to ignore that re-drying silica gel in an oven takes hours - so the camera will just have to survive while you first oven heat it - then let the silica cool - and finally toss it in again? Seems to me your practical experience is very limited since you suggest re-drying. Replacing is the way to go for those who have the quantity needed.

Of course you could put your camera in a bag of sealed rice while you re-dry your silica gel...

Just because I don't go into every single excruciating detail about how to properly select and use rechargeable silica gel doesn't mean there isn't a way to use it effectively and simply, or that I'm ignorant of its proper usage. I use it all the time in my Pelican cases. You are being rude and attacking me for ranting against this guy for using rice, when it is your fault for assuming that I must be stupid because I haven't published a complete instruction manual on the proper use of silica gel. It isn't rocket science.

Why is rice a bad idea?

Rice is of limited effectiveness. Yes, your own personal anecdote SURELY means that it works better, because obviously, relating one story on an internet forum is ironclad proof it is better. : Rice has a desiccating effect but it is weak; you need large volumes of it to make up for that weakness, and you can't recharge it. Once it starts absorbing moisture--which, by the way, happens while it's sitting in the grocery store--it gets progressively slower at absorbing more moisture.

Another reason why rice is bad is because it is frequently fortified with additional nutrients by powdering it. During transport, it also creates its own dust. A camera is a precision instrument. We talk about the need to avoid dusty conditions; yet it's somehow okay to bury the whole thing in a bag of rice? Yeah, that's really logical. Talk about creating an ideal environment for mold growth.

Finally, where bodies are concerned, most people would put the body cap on if putting the camera in rice. You would not need to do that with a silica gel canister. Note I say "canister." We're not talking about those little packets you find in food products. If you can't tell the difference between the two, then you're either a troll or blind or both. By leaving the body cap off (or in the case of lenses, the rear cap), you are VASTLY increasing the access to the innards of the device. This is far, far better than anything else you can do.

As for proper use of silica gel, since someone clearly needs a lesson:

1. Get three canisters of rechargeable color-indicating silica gel of the non-toxic variety.
2. With a pen, number the canisters 1, 2, 3.
3. Two ziploc bags large enough to hold the device(s) in need of drying plus all the gels.
4. Remove all body or lens caps.
5. Place all of the objects in one bag. Push or squeeze excess air out of the bag and seal it.
6. Place that bag inside the second ziploc bag, and seal that one.
7. Wait until the color indicator changes, or 24 hours, whichever comes sooner.
8. Remove canister 1, and recharge it in an oven according to the gel manufacturer's directions.
9. After the gel has cooled down enough to handle, replace it and rotate out canister 2.
10. Do the same with canister 3. The rotation schedule should be evenly spaced, say every 8, 12, or 24 hours depending on how wet the device is. Repeat as necessary.

 

[George D.]

"Waves hitting the pier. Later when working there I would be fully submerged in giant waves spilling over all the way past the lighthouse structure"

If you expect waves to splash on your camera then you seek an underwater housing not weathersealed.

Or quit your DSLR and get Olympus Tough.

 

[Maiaibing]

Just because I don't go into every single excruciating detail about how to properly select and use rechargeable silica gel doesn't mean there isn't a way to use it effectively and simply, or that I'm ignorant of its proper usage.

Maybe. But you surely made us sit guessing with your "advice".

 

[IgotGASbadDude]

A large canister of silica gel put in an airtight, evacuated container with the camera, taking it out and heating it to 325 F to recharge it every 24 hours

I'm not sure taking a camera out of "a large canister of silica gel", then "heating it to 325 F to recharge it every 24 hours" is such a good idea. : :

I'd personally prefer to keep my cameras out of ovens, but that's just me. :

You take the camera out of the silica, then bake the silica to dry it out again, then put the camera back in the silica.... you don't bake the silica with the camera in it.

Someone needs to get his sarcasm meter checked

Did you really miss the 6 winky faces and rolly eyes? Those were supposed to tell you I was being sarcastic.

An besides, we all know you put the camera in the oven at 350 F. 325 F isn't hot enough to dry the moisture. ???

 

[rfdesigner]

When mounting electronics on the frigates and trying to get a "weatherproof connection".......

Step 1 - ONLY use very high quality mil-standard circular connectors as everything else leaks.....
Step 2 - use heat shrink tubing over top of the connector.....
step 3 - generously coat the works with silicone seal....
step 4 - hope that it is good enough.... and re-apply the silicone regularly.....

When Canon (or Nikon) comes up with a more weatherproof way to join the lens to the body than that, only then will I believe that the junction is "weatherproof".... and on a lens with an extending element when you zoom it, what part of "air pump" do you not understand? ? ?

sounds about right. But I only use heat shrink with glue inside it, the plain stuff wicks fluids.

in the photogs case I'd have used a propper bag affair to go over the whole lot.. and counted myself dumb if I'd allowed water to get in.

Now I have had dew dripping off the old 30d with no problems.. but that's dew, which is the kindest form of water.

 

[Don Haines]

But I only use heat shrink with glue inside it, the plain stuff wicks fluids.

That's the stuff! It's worth it's weight in gold.... until you have to take it off

in the photogs case I'd have used a propper bag affair to go over the whole lot.. and counted myself dumb if I'd allowed water to get in.

Now I have had dew dripping off the old 30d with no problems.. but that's dew, which is the kindest form of water.

It's things like that, that I got myself a waterproof P/S for.... When the spray is flying, the fog is thick, or the rain is driving, you don't need an expensive DSLR with big lenses because you don't have enough visibility to warrant them.... and besides, even with a 1DX and Canon's best sealed lens, you can't hold the camera underwater and take a selfie....well, ok...., can't take a second selfie......