UKC

Looking at getting a new body and maybe some glass. Probably a choice between a Sony A6400, 6500 or 6600. Before committing I’ve been reading up on weather sealing. Opinions seem divided. I don’t envisage my camera being out of my bag for more than a few minutes at a time, standing around in a downpour isn’t my thing. So just wondering if any of you have any experience/thoughts on the subject?

It's a huge confidence boost for me (Olympus E-M5 mk1). I don't have to worry about anything getting wet or snowy, and as we are all well-aware, electronics are only vulnerable to two things these days - being dropped, or getting wet. If I'm on a mountain day with any sort of visability my camera is invariably round my neck.  Having said that, I've used non-weatherproof lenses in the rain and snow without any obvious issues.  The A7 is known to be vulnerable to sitting in shallow water, not sure about the latest versions.  Lemming has killed a camera with a big wave, dunno if that was impact or just seawater (which is the antichrist for electronics).

I'd say it's worth it, even if you think you'll only be out a few minutes that often changes. A week in Iceland I'd have ended up with only a few photos if I wasn't prepared to brave the weather, well get the camera out.

It can also protect in the event of an unforeseen incident, my camera departed stage left due to a tripod failure and ended up at the bottom of the canal. I jumped in and rescued it, no damage done even though it was fully submerged for about 20 seconds.

The only camera I have killed was not weather sealed and was being used in a snow flurry, dampness managed to get into the camera body and short the electrics making it unrepairable, I didn't particularly like that camera body so was a good excuse to exchange.

Thanks. I did think the confidence boost would be a factor but want to be sure I’m not being fooled into something which isn’t really effective.

Accidents are a good point, hadn’t really considered those. Ta

Having ruined a camera that claimed to be weather sealed inside a bag that claimed to be 'all weather', I'd be a bit wary of manufacturer's claims. Admittedly the rain was exceptional and continuous. If your camera gets wet only for a few minutes in a shower of rain it's going to be ok, but anything more, probably not (you probably won't be using your camera anyway). Also check if the lens you attach also has sealing (sometimes they don't!). In addition, use a good quality uv filter to protect the front element from the wet; it's easier and less damaging to wipe water off a filter than lens glass.

That’s the bit, isn’t it. It’s not like you can evidence how rainy it was the day your camera got ruined, in support of a warranty claim.

Checking out other features I think I’ll end up with an A6400. 

I thoroughly tested the weather proofing on my Fuji X-T2 on a snowy day doing an adventure photography course. It worked a treat even after being covered in snow. My X-T3 has been used in the rain and my Canon 1DX just shrugs everything off. I wouldn't buy a camera without weather proofing.

I’m not sure how well the Sony weatherproofing works, but the Canon is perfect. I’ve often used my 1D series and L lenses out in the pouring rain for hours on end and they’ve been absolutely fine. I will still always use a rain cover if I can as it’s senseless to let things needlessly get wet, but I don’t worry about it if not. 

Don't weatherproof cameras have IP ratings like phones? The IP rating should tell you how waterproof something is e.g. will withstand a brief shower, can be immersed in water up to 5 metres.

I’m wondering.....

if I’m using a Sony A6000 series the lenses aren’t always sealed. Does that mean water can get from the lens to the body? Rendering the body’s sealing pointless?

Mostly (might be a few exceptions) they don't. Just like a rain jacket, there is an obvious big hole in there - the lens mount. Makes it kinda hard to state an IP rating...

Even when lenses have rubber grommets or seals, these don't last forever. Working as a PJ, most of the seals on my L lenses would need replacing every year or so (of course, that was 8+ hours a day usage with lot of "pictures first, equipment second" mentality back in the days - even though we used raincovers and such for sports, sometimes it just wasn't practical). 

Still, just for landscape or climbing photos, I'd say any kind of weather resistance is a big plus for me.

I love the thought that my camera and lenses are all weather sealed.

However I tested my last camera to distruction filming the biggest storm to hit our shores this century.

I had a whale of a time being engulfed by 20ft high spray from waves but one salty wave too many slamming me in the face killed toys.

Bit of snow and rain, I don't blink an eye at.

One reason for having a Nikon is that they repair any rain ingress damage very quickly, but it can cost. I've had 2 cameras turned around in 24hrs!

Unless you have UW camera or UW housing, salt water is a no for any weather sealing. As you found out

The thing with water ingress is that it's quite non-intuitive. A seal may be able to withstand 3m submersion indefinately, but splashing onto a hard surface can generate much higher localised pressure due to the incompressible nature of water. On a human body it doesn't feel too bad, but that's because the flesh has some 'give', much more than a rubber 'o'-ring, never mind a metal body.

Although I have lost an rx100 to damp, I'm still not convinced water resistance is a key feature to look for.

Models with it are likely to be way more expensive than those without. You'd have to want all the other better features they might have too. 

I've subjected my entry level canon dslr's to a reasonable amount of wet and had no problems. And if they had failed, I could have bought a new one, and still had change from the price of the weather sealed options. 

That last wave which nearly knocked me off my feet, almost completely dislodged the lens from the body.

Do you think that may have impacted on the weather sealing?

Should I have complained to Panasonic about their marketing with the weather sealing?

That’s kind of my thinking. I’m really enjoying the results I’m getting, and everything I’m learning, from my A5100. Not sure I really want to commit to another body at nearly a grand if it’s not going to make that much difference.

My weather sealed camera also has a metal body to aid the durability of my expensive toy.

After breaking Fuji X100F, Olympus EM5 mk2 and Panasonic GX80, I finally gave up on build quality claims and weather sealing. Oly EM5 is weather sealed and has dials glued on that kept falling apart... and on/off switch broke internally with no signs of damage outside. 
 

I got Sony RX100m6 for best IQ given its size that I can take hill running and fastpacking. It’s definitely not robust so I’ve got a full protection insurance including weather damage for £7 a month. It’s a good enough compromise, although admittedly not so good for environment if/when it breaks without being able to be repaired. 

Separate insurance? Thanks, I’ll look into that. 

In the Canon system that would be a yes. The lenses with sealing have a rubber gasket around the mount which seals the join with the body.

This:

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2020/08/the-fujifilm-gfx-100-vs-salt-water...

is an article from a repair expert that actually sums up weather sealing quite well. 

No sealing is perfect, just like a jacket or a shoe, you can't seal something with holes in it. I'd still take a weather sealed camera over one that wasn't (e.g. I'd photographed in pouring rain with Canon 1Dx body a lot and it survived well, apart from few lens errors due to water seeping between a deteriorated lens gasket and the lens mount - the body & lens had several years of professional abuse, so definitely not like new), but don't expect miracles, especially with salt water near the sea. Salt kills electronics, period. And not all sealing is created equal, there is a reason manufacturers don't give out IP numbers. Still, something is better than nothing.

Ta 😀

Check out your House Contents insurance, as it may cover stuff taken outside the home. if not ask for this to be added next time you go shopping for Home Insurance.

When I killed my camera and lens through user stupidity filming a storm in salty sea conditions back in February, the insurance company paid out with no quibbling. Well, they replaced like-for-like rather than give me a cheque. I even explained what, where and how the camera died.