michael_oxford Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 <p>Nothing is perfect, and for that matter, the 5dMkII is ALMOST sealed as good as the EOS 1n (read the Canon White Paper, pg33, I believe), which isn't saying much by "modern" standards. Thus, I'm not that shaken up by this. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
des adams Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 <p>Well lets be fair of course we shouldn't bother those nice people at Canon for weather sealing or an up to date AF on such a cheap camera as the 5D2.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobatkins Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 <p>There are lies, damned lies and statistics.</p> <p>I'd attach very little credibility to anecdotal reports of "tests" done under uncontrolled conditions with no attempt at statistical sampling. Some web authors have made certain statements which have lead readers to erroneous conclusions in the past. Facts are facts, it's the interpretation of that facts that's the tricky part.</p> <p>Anything is possible, and I suppose that Canon's adding of additional weather sealing to the 5D MkII could have actually made it more susceptible to water damage, but it seems highly unlikely.</p> <p>I think we have to wait and see on this one.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert_clark Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 <p>A couple of people here have blythely claimed that the 5DII is not weather sealed - this is contradicted by Canon who claim it is and even show exploded diagrams of the seals and claim that it is Water resistant up to 10 mm rain in 3 minutes.<br> 10 mm rain in 3 minutes! This is a downpour - heavy rain.<br> They go on to claim that it is almost as well enviromentally protected as the original EOS-1, a professional level camera.<br> Whether it is as effectively sealed as the D700 is another matter. But it is sealed.<br> Again, what this really means for the user is also another matter. If it conks out so willingly in cold, humid conditions, it is not a good sign (even if it is 'steamed' in a water-tight bag in a warm cabin).<br> Another difference with the 5DII over the earler 5D is the presence of tiny holes for the microphones. These are plenty big enough for water to get in, whether it can get any further I don't know.<br> It would be good to here something from Canon.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackaldridge Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 <p>Every now and then someone feels led to point something like this out as proof that one manufacturer is superior in some way to another. And usually it's the "Canon vs. Nikon" story. There have been other threads like this... all of about the same real merit. Anecdotal stories only promote pseudoscience... Who knows maybe the Nikon guys and gals just stayed inside more where it was warm... Show me a test where both brands were tested under laboratory conditions by an impartial third party and I might pay attention... otherwise it's just a story.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keith reeder Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 <p>"A couple of people here have blithely claimed that the 5DII is not weather sealed - this is contradicted by Canon who claim it is"</p> <p>Yeah, well Canon <em>would </em> say that - back in the day, Nikon persuaded me to buy a D200 by saying that it would be great at any ISO...</p> <p>Now, 5D Mk II reviews - <a href="http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews_canon_eos_5d_mark_ii.php">like this one</a> - would beg to differ:</p> <blockquote> <p>but it doesn't add any serious level of weather-proofing.</p> </blockquote> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ralph_jensen Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 <p>Lindy Stone wrote: <em>"I think its time Canon offers consumer grade full frame thats weathersealed like Nikon does and for less money than 5DII costs."</em></p> <p>And<em><strong> I </strong> </em> think it's time that Nikon offers a 20-megapixel-plus camera with 1080p video for less than $2700, like Canon does!</p> <p>Not every photographer who wants leading sensor tech wants to shell out $8000, and first in 2005 (<em>more-affordable full-frame 5D</em> ) and then again in 2008 (<em>more-affordable 21-megapixel 5DII</em> ) Canon proved that photographers don't have to pay that much.</p> <p>Et tu, Nikon?</p> <p> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lauren_macintosh Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 <p>Lindy : I agree with on this [i think its time canon offers consumer grade full frame thats weathersealed like Nikon does and for less money than 5DII costs. I'd rather have better seals than HD video] the only way that will happen if we all tell canon to get with the program and thats that !</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephen_asprey2 Posted February 7, 2009 Author Share Posted February 7, 2009 <p>Thanks everyone, for a robust series of responses. The usual polarisation of opinion is interspersed with some inciteful comment.<br> I had a direct email from a well known Canon photog here in Sydney. He said this:<br> "The image quality that one gets, even to A1 size these days from Canon and Nikon (and Sony), are to all intents and purposes as good as one another. The Nikon D700/D3 sensor can match it with Canons larger MP sensor for quality output, and technically we are about to hit the wall in terms of cramming cells into a 35mm frame. The more cells, the smaller and thus more noise. The D3x is only better that the D3 in certain low ISO conditions, like the studio where lighting is perfect. So the focus is now moving to body quality (inc sealing), ergonomics and ease of use. These things are much more challenging from a design point of view and Canon are very sensitive to the apparent advantage Nikon have grabbed with pro's with the D3. They are desperate to trump Nikon, but as Canon is making a loss right now, the development dollars or yen, have been pared back. They also admit that the D700 body is much closer in quality to the D3 than the 5Dmk2 is to the 1D*** range of bodies. But they did not have the time or resources to do both the 5D and the 1D successors at the same time".<br> Interesting points he makes. It suggests better made, better designed bodies in the near future. The personal environmental issues I have with sealing etc are heat, dust and sand, not cold and moisture. I think I will hold off my decision to see what Canon do about this.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ellis_vener_photography Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 <p>As I recall, when they did this trip last year , they had an even higher failure rate with all Canons including 1Ds Mk 2 & Mk 3 and 1D Mark 3 bodies after a rain storm in the Falklands.</p> <p>On the other hand these are really , really extreme conditions.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_wu6 Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 <p >Arguing stats does not mean very much here. Even one single failure means 100% to the particular shooter (few would bring two or more 5D2 bodies). For a life time trip like this, none should take the risk.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_ralph1 Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 <p>Michael Reichmann does say that he is awaiting the information from the repair of the failed cameras before trying to figure out what occurred. But, if indeed it is simple moisture or condensation, then maybe one should do as Moose Peterson suggests when bringing a camera in from the cold. He puts his camera gear (Nikon) into a sealed bag as soon as it comes in from the cold. That way the camera can warm up to room temperature without water vapor from the room air condensing on or in its, or the lenses', various parts.</p> <p> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ralph_jensen Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 <p>Stephen, I don't want to "incite"(!) anything, but don't read <em>too </em> much into what one "pro" says. For one thing, pros often think in terms of publication (page) sizes, and those needs are often surprisingly modest compared to the needs of a photographer who owns a 24-inch inkjet printer. For another, I think your friend is about a year behind in his market analysis. True, a lot of Canon shooters were envious of the D3 when it came out in 2007, but since the 5DII came out in late 2008 I've heard a lot of Nikon shooters say they wish <em>Nikon </em> had a 20-megapixel plus camera that cost a lot less than $8000 (Google "D700x" if you don't believe me). The 5DII is a revolutionary camera considering its price, and there's no indication yet that Nikon will be able to match both its price and output anytime soon.</p> <p>I don't think we're about to "hit the limit of how many cells can be crammed into a 35mm frame"; a recent essay by the renowned Harold Merklinger on the website you linked (luminous-landscape) speculates that 35mm-sized sensors will peak at around 35-40 megapixels. If that's true, then the manufacturers - both Canon and Nikon - would do well to focus a lot more on making better lenses than on anything else!</p> <p>Different photographers have different needs. If a landscape photographer is willing to get the best lenses and wants to make very very large prints (say, 30x45 inches), there IS a difference between 12 megapixels and 21. I own a 5DII, and I chose it over the D700 (knowing the Nikon had a more rugged body) because ultimate image quality is important to me. I can protect my camera from the elements and sudden temperature changes, but I can't magically turn a 12-megapixel capture into a 21-megapixel one--not without sacrificing some quality. Photographers who disagree or think I have that backwards can forgo the 5DII and pick up a D700 for an amazingly low price.</p> <p>The Canon 5DII was probably the most eagerly awaited camera ever, and even almost three months after they started shipping they're still not easy to find and certainly aren't discounted yet. I doubt the experience of six photographers on one Antarctic trip are going to seriously hurt Canon profits.</p> <p>So one can disagree with the megapixels-and-video-over-weatherproofing choice embodied in the 5DII, but judging from market demand, clearly Canon was doing <em>something </em> right when they designed it!</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samoksner Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 <p>Without knowing the cause of the failures, the lens' mounted and so on it's impossible to take these statistics seriously. When I had a D200 it failed once, that's 100% of my D200s to that means that it's 100% of all D200s... yea right. The day that I hear that 25% of 5D MkII failing all across the world in a controled test, then i'll pay attention but it could just be that a few people took the cameras inside too quickly, or the lens' used weren't sealed, or some guyu droped his in a puddle of salt water but felt too ashamed to admit it. without that information this is a pretty useless test.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_ralph1 Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 <p>From the horse's mouth, and description of Canon repair's response to one owner of two failed 5DMkII's.<br> http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=31851</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alan_cox3 Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 <p>I just got back from 3 weeks in Hawaii. Only in the blowing rain did I have temporary problems with the 5D2 -- it started taking pictures on its own until I turned it off. Came in from the rain, dried it off and it was fine a few minutes later.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danielleetaylor Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 <p>We have no way of knowing how any of this equipment was treated, especially in relation to rapid temperature shifts and condensation. Since no interchangeable lens SLR will ever be truly air tight, you have to be cautious moving between environments with significant differences in temperature and humidity (i.e. cabin - outside). With extreme temperature shifts you also need to give the equipment some protection and time to adjust. Leave it sitting in its bag for 20-30 minutes to cool off/warm up more slowly.The reason I bring this up is because of the report of a cracked top 5D2 LCD. Unless he failed to mention a bump against that LCD, that tells me somebody had their camera near a heat source then walked out into the freezing cold without thinking. <em>People have busted windshields by subjecting them to similar temperature shifts!</em> What makes you think your LCDs or lens elements are any stronger?<br /> <br /> <br /> I would love to know how many failures were related to the grip. Perhaps that is a weak point people need to be made aware of. Beyond that I wouldn't read too much into this ancedotal evidence. And I wouldn't hesitate to use a 5D mkII in cold or wet environments. I just have a sneaking suspicion that this report, like the last one, involves some people who have not done their homework when it comes to equipment and cold/wet environments. The Nikon name has been lucky only because of numbers. Put enough Nikons in enough hands and somebody will do something stupid, then complain that their "weather sealed" camera failed.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alan_cox3 Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 <p>I just got back from 3 weeks in Hawaii. Only in the blowing rain did I have temporary problems with the 5D2 -- it started taking pictures on its own until I turned it off. Came in from the rain, dried it off and it was fine a few minutes later.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danielleetaylor Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 <p><em>From the horse's mouth, and description of Canon repair's response to one owner of two failed 5DMkII's.</em></p> <p>I read their description. I hate to tell them this, but that didn't happen within a few minutes outdoors in Antarctica with a rain cover over both bodies.</p> <p>What's the history of those two bodies? Something happened to them to cause enough internal corrosion that Canon doesn't want to honor the warranty after the repair. And it wasn't a couple minutes of light rain. This is reinforced by the fact that the two bodies are owned by the same couple, suggesting a similar history.</p> <p> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerry_grim Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 <p>Why is it that we hear of 5DII failure only from cameras on this Antartica trip and none others? I am still suspicious of this entire mess. Lets not panic here.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sarah_fox Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 <p>"What's the history of those two bodies? Something happened to them to cause enough internal corrosion that Canon doesn't want to honor the warranty after the repair. And it wasn't a couple minutes of light rain. This is reinforced by the fact that the two bodies are owned by the same couple, suggesting a similar history."</p> <p>Exactly! Salt water corrodes. Distilled water (and uncontaminated rain water) does not. I think this supports my salt spray getting washed into the camera theory. That would kill ANY camera -- even an unsealed Nikon.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul_russell1 Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 <p>and again begs the question of what lenses they were using? Were they weather resistant rated (NOT ALL L SERIES ARE!) and did they have the necessary skylight or uv filter in place to complete the sealing?<br> I shot into a force 7 wind with a consumer 70-300IS lens, but with a raincover velcro'd round the lens and a uv in place, no problem at all.</p> <p>Even with my EOS 3 (rated weather sealed to the same standard as the 5Dmk2 i.e. near the EOS 1n) and 17-40 lens, I'm not silly about the situations i put my gear in.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul_russell1 Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 <p>"Of particular concern were two <em>(EOS 5DMk2)</em> cameras which stopped working while completely protected within Kata rain covers during a light rain ashore. They came back to life the following day though and were mostly fine for the rest of the trip"<br> my italics.</p> <p>Sounds like cold weather battery failure.<br> The spontaniously cracked LCD sounds like a problem moving from antarctic weather to a heated area, a glass tumbler would have done the same.<br> One of the terminal failures was shooting video, so an exposed hot cmos sensor meets arctic cold air, hmmm.<br> So far thats five out the six accounted for, the other had a mount problem, likely qc issue, can happen with any mass produced object. In antarctic temps they are also well outwith the rated operating temperatures.<br> 5 of these cases are down to normal limitations of use (batterries fade in the cold) or user error. The other seems like bad luck.</p> <p>Hopefully the full report will detail the lenses.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_ralph1 Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 <p>Michael reports temps were within a narrow band, "Temperatures were moderate, ranging from about +2C to -3C during our two weeks at the Peninsula." That is 27 degrees Fahrenheit to 36 degrees. Is the camera not supposed to perform in that temperature range? That is balmier than most of the northern half of the United States on a typical winter day. Somehow I have doubts temperature is the culprit.</p> <p> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ellis_vener_photography Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 <p>The full report on the trip is here: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/antarctica-2009-worked.shtml</p> <p>and there is a section on the entire group's report on "failures " towards the bottom of that page.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now