Which white lenses are weather sealed?

[Helios68]

Hi,

I have read a plenty of reviews and discussions about various Canon white lenses and I feel more and more confused. Some say that all white lenses are sealed and others tell just the opposite.
I know that the 70-200 L IS II is sealed and 300 f/4L should not be.

I've read topics where one 300 f/4 user complains about mold inside the barrel...

I am considering the 300mm f/4L and 400mm f/5.6L for my next buy but I want to be sure I can use them in difficult weather situations like light rain or dust.

Can anyone share his/her experience about this subject?

Thanks.

 

[DominoDude]

Hi,

I have read a plenty of reviews and discussions about various Canon white lenses and I feel more and more confused. Some say that all white lenses are sealed and others tell just the opposite.
I know that the 70-200 L IS II is sealed and 300 f/4L should not be.

I've read topics where one 300 f/4 user complains about mold inside the barrel...

I am considering the 300mm f/4L and 400mm f/5.6L for my next buy but I want to be sure I can use them in difficult weather situations like light rain or dust.

Can anyone share his/her experience about this subject?

Thanks.

I can tell you straight away that the 400/5.6L is not weather sealed.
I believe that there is a site that lists all L-glass and whether they're sealed or not, and some are weather sealed only if you have a filter on the front. Bits like that are what I remember. Will check later if I can find a link to it...

 

[hollybush]

The 300mm f/4 IS is not weather sealed. For example, there is no gasket around the rear mount. I have used this in rainy weather, but as soon as it starts drizzling I try to get it inside a waterproof case in say, 30 seconds. I would not use it in the rain purposely.

 

[dslrdummy]

Hi,

I have read a plenty of reviews and discussions about various Canon white lenses and I feel more and more confused. Some say that all white lenses are sealed and others tell just the opposite.
I know that the 70-200 L IS II is sealed and 300 f/4L should not be.

I've read topics where one 300 f/4 user complains about mold inside the barrel...

I am considering the 300mm f/4L and 400mm f/5.6L for my next buy but I want to be sure I can use them in difficult weather situations like light rain or dust.

Can anyone share his/her experience about this subject?

Thanks.

400mm f/5.6 isn't sealed but I used it on safari in Africa for two weeks without any issues.

 

[Loswr]

The 300/4L IS and 400/5.6L are partially sealed.

According to Chuck Westfall:

Pre-1999 white EF lenses such as the 200/1.8L, 300/2.8L, 300/4L, 300/4L IS, 400/2.8L, 400/5.6L, 500/4.5L, 600/4L, 35-350/3.5-5.6L, 70-200/2.8L, and 100-400/4.5-5.6L all lack mount gaskets but have moderate dust and moisture resistance for their switches, focusing rings and zoom rings where applicable.

The ones in bold above are 'current' lenses. All other current white lenses have a mount gasket and are sealed, with the exception of the 70-200/4L (non-IS) – that lens is from 1999, therefore not a 'pre-1999 lens, has no gasket, and I'm not sure if it's partially sealed or not.

 

[DominoDude]

The 300/4L IS and 400/5.6L are partially sealed.

According to Chuck Westfall:

Pre-1999 white EF lenses such as the 200/1.8L, 300/2.8L, 300/4L, 300/4L IS, 400/2.8L, 400/5.6L, 500/4.5L, 600/4L, 35-350/3.5-5.6L, 70-200/2.8L, and 100-400/4.5-5.6L all lack mount gaskets but have moderate dust and moisture resistance for their switches, focusing rings and zoom rings where applicable.

The ones in bold above are 'current' lenses. All other current white lenses have a mount gasket and are sealed, with the exception of the 70-200/4L (non-IS) – that lens is from 1999, therefore not a 'pre-1999 lens, has no gasket, and I'm not sure if it's partially sealed or not.

I shouldn't argue with Chuck W, or you, and I agree that the mount gasket is non-existent in the 400/5.6L. However, I don't hesitate much in using it in all kinds of weather - so far it hasn't let me down.
_______

I promised a link earlier, and here it is:
http://gronjord.com/daniel/faq/#B.3

According to Daniel G's site, the listed info has not seen any update since Sept 2012, so take it for what it is.

 

[Loswr]

I promised a link earlier, and here it is:
http://gronjord.com/daniel/faq/#B.3

According to Daniel G's site, the listed info has not seen any update since Sept 2012, so take it for what it is.

He needs to * the 50/1.2L, as that lens also requires a front filter to complete the sealing (like the UWA zooms).

 

[Loswr]

There was a product about a year ago (Kickstarter IIRC, don't know if it's actually available) called Dust Donut, basically a rubber gasket sized for the EF lens mount. IMO, they promoted it with egregious deception, promising that it would 'add weather sealing to any non-sealed lens' (they demoed it on a 17-55, IIRC). However, a product like that actually makes sense for the partially-sealed white lenses listed above.

 

[DominoDude]

I promised a link earlier, and here it is:
http://gronjord.com/daniel/faq/#B.3

According to Daniel G's site, the listed info has not seen any update since Sept 2012, so take it for what it is.

He needs to * the 50/1.2L, as that lens also requires a front filter to complete the sealing (like the UWA zooms).

Yupp, he needs to update in a consistent manner, and make a note to reflect the date. I have had that page bookmarked for a long time, and I think he has altered some information on it during that time.
At least he has gathered a few useful links to other pages/sites and has some useful information on his own pages, so it could fit as a bookmark for a lot of our readers on here.

 

[Maiaibing]

I promised a link earlier, and here it is:
http://gronjord.com/daniel/faq/#B.3

According to Daniel G's site, the listed info has not seen any update since Sept 2012, so take it for what it is.

His list is not accurate. But even Canon is confused.

To clarify the facts I once took the time to get Canon Japan to write me about weather sealing. I asked about two things: what does it imply (answer; very little, we give no promises and camera mount must be weather sealed too - see link below) I also asked which lenses need a front filter to complete the weather sealing. In fact it turned out that even Canon Japan was slightly confused - as you can see below I had to ask them twice...

===

The question is: do your non-white weather sealed L series lenses need a front filter to be rain and dust sealed?

The short answer is: a hand full do, the rest do not.

Long version:

I had a discussion in another thread where I claimed that Canon's non-white weather sealed L series lenses needed a front filter to be rain and dust sealed. These lenses are:

EF 14mm f/2.8L II USM
EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM +needs front filter
EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM +needs front filter
EF 17-40mm f/4L USM +needs front filter
EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM
EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM
EF 100mm f/2.8L IS USM Macro
EF 50mm 1.2L USM +needs front filter
EF 85mm 1.2L II USM
EF 24mm 1.4L II USM

Someone disagreed (someone always does) and asked Canon, USA, and got the following reply:

"Only our white "L" Series lenses are weather sealed. None of our weather sealed lenses need a filter to be weather sealed."

Needless to say my jaw dropped in disbelief, as I knew this was wrong. However, I also know that Canon's info on this is sparse and difficult to understand, so I decided to get things right once and for all, so I replied:

"I'll take the opportunity to pose the same question to Canon, Japan, and see what they say... "

And what did Canon, Japan say? Well, they actually also did not get it right the first time I asked (but at least it was ALMOST right). But to spare you the details here are the hard facts in translation:

"The water and dust proof mechanism is explained in the below URL:
http://cweb.canon.jp/ef/technology/eflens-technology.html#tecProof

We do have some water and dust proof Lens, but to enhance the proof, it needs to be used together with water and dust proof camera.

Also, for some Lenses we ask customers to put filters to prevent water coming in from the front part.

These are the Lenses we ask to have filters on:
・EF16-35mm F2.8L USM　
・EF16-35mm F2.8L II USM　
・EF17-40mm F4L USM

For details, please refer to the below URL:

◆EF16-35mm F2.8L II USM　特長
http://cweb.canon.jp/ef/lineup/wide-zoom/ef16-35-f28lii/features.html

◆EF17-40mm F4L USM　特長
http://cweb.canon.jp/ef/lineup/wide-zoom/ef17-40-f4l/features.html "

As I knew that this was not quite right I wrote to them again:

"I am sorry for our mistake.
We have forgotten to mention EF 50mm F1.2L USM.
As you mentioned, this also needs a filter on the lens."

So for these lenses you need a front filter for the lens to be fully rain and dust sealed (I also noted this on the list above for a quick full reference):

EF16-35mm F2.8L USM

EF16-35mm F2.8L II USM

EF17-40mm F4L USM

EF 50mm F1.2L USM

===

And remember: The seal at the lens mounts will only work with a select few professional Canon bodies. Canon 5Dii and below need not apply.

Is this then the ultimate truth?

I really hope so, but I'd be lying if I did not admit that to me the front of the 50L and 85L II are such lookalikes that I almost wrote to Canon, Japan a third time...

 

[Loswr]

I had a discussion in another thread where I claimed that Canon's non-white weather sealed L series lenses needed a front filter to be rain and dust sealed. These lenses are:

EF 14mm f/2.8L II USM
EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM +needs front filter
EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM +needs front filter
EF 17-40mm f/4L USM +needs front filter
EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM
EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM
EF 100mm f/2.8L IS USM Macro
EF 50mm 1.2L USM +needs front filter
EF 85mm 1.2L II USM
EF 24mm 1.4L II USM

Someone disagreed (someone always does)...
...
(I also noted this on the list above for a quick full reference)

Your parenthetical statement suggests that in your discussion on that other thread you were suggesting that the listed lenses need a front filter to complete the sealing. If so, I'd certainly disagree with your list, if for no other reason than you were suggesting that the EF 14mm f/2.8L II needs a front filter...that lens cannot even take a front filter because of the bulbous front element.

But it's pretty clear which lenses require a front filter to complete the sealing, even if some Canon reps aren't knowledgable about the issue. Just check the instruction manual, if a filter is required the first page states that explicitly: "Since the front element of this lens moves when zooming <or focusing, depending on lens>, you need to attach a Canon PROTECT filter sold separately for adequate dust- and water-resistant performance. Without a filter, the lens is not dust or water resistant. Trust Canon to not miss an opportunity to try and sell an accessory, even if their screw-in filters are mediocre quality glass OEM'd by someone else (used to be Tiffen, might still be).

So for these lenses you need a front filter for the lens to be fully rain and dust sealed (I also noted this on the list above for a quick full reference):
EF16-35mm F2.8L USM
EF16-35mm F2.8L II USM
EF17-40mm F4L USM
EF 50mm F1.2L USM

For the sake of completeness, the new EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM is weather sealed and requires a front filter to complete the sealing.

I really hope so, but I'd be lying if I did not admit that to me the front of the 50L and 85L II are such lookalikes that I almost wrote to Canon, Japan a third time...

Look harder. What distinguishes the lenses which require a front filter for weather sealing is an inner barrel which moves but the movement is entirely behind the front of the outer barrel to which the filter is attached. The ultrawide zooms (all three 16-35 lenses and the 17-40) all have an inner barrel which moves with zooming, the 50/1.2L has an inner barrel which moves with focusing, and in all cases, that inner barrel movement never extens out as far as the filter threads on the outer barrel. The 85L II has an inner barrel which moves with focusing, but the filter attaches to the front of the inner barrel itself...and in any case, the 85L II is not a weather sealed lens (note the lack of a mount gasket).

 

[Loswr]

"The water and dust proof mechanism is explained in the below URL:
http://cweb.canon.jp/ef/technology/eflens-technology.html#tecProof

And remember: The seal at the lens mounts will only work with a select few professional Canon bodies. Canon 5Dii and below need not apply.

Thanks for the link! The Google translation suggests that the bodies with some degree of sealing (which includes crop models down to the 50D, and all of the current/recent FF bodies including the 5DII and 6D) are dust- drip-proof compatible, although the better sealing of the 1-series bodies is mentioned in a subsequent footnote.

But there's a obvious and likely important difference in the design of the mounts on the 1-series vs. most other 'sealed' bodies. On most Canon bodies (e.g. the 5DIII shown below), the area immediately surrounding the lens mount is the same slightly textured surface as the rest of the body. That textured surface may not be ideal for sealing against the rubber lens mount gasket. The 1-series bodies have a smooth plastic ring surrounding the metal lens mount, and that may form a better seal with the lens gasket. Interestingly, the new 7D Mark II has that same smooth plastic surface surrounding the lens mount as seen on the 1D X below.

 

[Maiaibing]

I had a discussion in another thread where I claimed that Canon's non-white weather sealed L series lenses needed a front filter to be rain and dust sealed. These lenses are:

EF 14mm f/2.8L II USM
EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM +needs front filter
EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM +needs front filter
EF 17-40mm f/4L USM +needs front filter
EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM
EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM
EF 100mm f/2.8L IS USM Macro
EF 50mm 1.2L USM +needs front filter
EF 85mm 1.2L II USM
EF 24mm 1.4L II USM

Someone disagreed (someone always does)...
...
(I also noted this on the list above for a quick full reference)

Your parenthetical statement suggests that in your discussion on that other thread you were suggesting that the listed lenses need a front filter to complete the sealing. If so, I'd certainly disagree with your list, if for no other reason than you were suggesting that the EF 14mm f/2.8L II needs a front filter...that lens cannot even take a front filter because of the bulbous front element.

I can see why this snip can be misunderstood - however I specifically indicated the lenses that require a front filter with: +needs front filter. As noted in the text. So only the four - as was indeed confirmed by Canon Japan HQ.

 

[Loswr]

I can see why this could snip can be misunderstood - however I specifically indicated the lenses that require a front filter with: +needs front filter. As noted in the text. So only the four - as was indeed confirmed by Canon Japan HQ.

Sorry, I didn't realize that everything betweent the dividers (===) was a copy past from that old DPR post. Clear now.

Obviously, the 24-70mm f/2.8L II, 24-70 f/4L IS, are 16-35mm f/4L IS are non-white weather sealed lenses that have been launched since your DPR post, of which the last one requires a filter for sealing.

 

[beforeEos Camaras]

here is yet one more chart to add to the confusion
http://web.canon.jp/imaging/l-lens/spec/lens_spec.html#21
at least its in english

 

[brad-man]

"The water and dust proof mechanism is explained in the below URL:
http://cweb.canon.jp/ef/technology/eflens-technology.html#tecProof

And remember: The seal at the lens mounts will only work with a select few professional Canon bodies. Canon 5Dii and below need not apply.

Thanks for the link! The Google translation suggests that the bodies with some degree of sealing (which includes crop models down to the 50D, and all of the current/recent FF bodies including the 5DII and 6D) are dust- drip-proof compatible, although the better sealing of the 1-series bodies is mentioned in a subsequent footnote.

But there's a obvious and likely important difference in the design of the mounts on the 1-series vs. most other 'sealed' bodies. On most Canon bodies (e.g. the 5DIII shown below), the area immediately surrounding the lens mount is the same slightly textured surface as the rest of the body. That textured surface may not be ideal for sealing against the rubber lens mount gasket. The 1-series bodies have a smooth plastic ring surrounding the metal lens mount, and that may form a better seal with the lens gasket. Interestingly, the new 7D Mark II has that same smooth plastic surface surrounding the lens mount as seen on the 1D X below.

Interesting. Being a lower-tier body user, I was unaware of that difference of texture in lens mounts. I guess I'll just have to whip out the 600 grit sandpaper!