Z Cameras, Lenses Waterproofing

[mrt]

Just how far do you trust the Z8, Z9, Z600TC, and Z100-400 waterproofing? Next week I’m going to the Shetland Islands, Svalbard, and the northern coast of Norway where rain is to be expected. Camera rain jackets are annoying, but are they worth the trouble?

 

[JAJohnson]

If it's going to be a misty rain, your kit should be fine. I'd have microfiber cloths handy to dab away the moisture as needed. If it's going to be hard rain, I'd recommend some sort of protection for camera and lens. I have various rain covers by Ruggard, and they work well for me. I tend not to be outside shooting in steady rain, though.

Just my 2¢. There are varying points of view, I'm sure.

 

[mrt]

If it's going to be a misty rain, your kit should be fine. I'd have microfiber cloths handy to dab away the moisture as needed. If it's going to be hard rain, I'd recommend some sort of protection for camera and lens. I have various rain covers by Ruggard, and they work well for me. I tend not to be outside shooting in steady rain, though.

Just my 2¢. There are varying points of view, I'm sure.

Thanks JA. I appreciate your thoughts

 

[aolander]

They might be water resistant but not waterproof.

 

[Viathelens]

Just how far do you trust the Z8, Z9, Z600TC, and Z100-400 waterproofing? Next week I’m going to the Shetland Islands, Svalbard, and the northern coast of Norway where rain is to be expected. Camera rain jackets are annoying, but are they worth the trouble?

I trust them 100% based on my experience. I was shooting in Alaska in the snow without any cover and it was not a problem. Then we packed up and had to quickly board a small boat in large swells and I had to leave my non-waterproof backpack on the outside of the boat. Unfortunately I put it down first, some others did have waterproof bags, and then looked outside only to realize there was a lot of water coming into the boat right where my pack was...there was nothing I could do about it. The water swirled in for about a minute or two and then the boat got underway and it swirled out. When I got back to the room both my 600PF and my 100-400 lense covers, the kind that Nikon provides with the lens, were soaked. I removed the covers and dried the lens and the covers. That was March 15. I did wash the covers when I got home to get rid of the salt. A few days ago I shot over 20,000 photos with the 600PF and recently shot with the 100-400 as well. No problems at all, although I do keep peering into the front of the lens expecting something!

 

[John Navitsky]

not addressing the how much, but Morten Hilmer recently posted a vid of his after-care procedure. the after-care talk starts at the 50:15 mark.

 

[mrt]

I trust them 100% based on my experience. I was shooting in Alaska in the snow without any cover and it was not a problem. Then we packed up and had to quickly board a small boat in large swells and I had to leave my non-waterproof backpack on the outside of the boat. Unfortunately I put it down first, some others did have waterproof bags, and then looked outside only to realize there was a lot of water coming into the boat right where my pack was...there was nothing I could do about it. The water swirled in for about a minute or two and then the boat got underway and it swirled out. When I got back to the room both my 600PF and my 100-400 lense covers, the kind that Nikon provides with the lens, were soaked. I removed the covers and dried the lens and the covers. That was March 15. I did wash the covers when I got home to get rid of the salt. A few days ago I shot over 20,000 photos with the 600PF and recently shot with the 100-400 as well. No problems at all, although I do keep peering into the front of the lens expecting something!

Really good to hear. Thanks.

 

[mrt]

not addressing the how much, but Morten Hilmer recently posted a vid of his after-care procedure. it’s towards the end.

John, thanks very much for sharing that video. The guy is inspiring. I appreciate his dedication. His after-care is very useful.

 

[nmerc_photos]

I trust my equipment 100% in any type of water, short of a long period of total submersion.

Have dropped gear into "puddles" that submerged the entirety of the gear for a few seconds with no damage.

Additionally, insurance is always carried on all gear in the event something does happen.

No point in having gear if you can't use it when you need it.

 

[Winston Churchill (Sir)]

I have a couple of those disposable poncho raincoats in case of emergency. So small it takes no space - and handy to stick the gear under in the event of a sudden downpour.

not addressing the how much, but Morten Hilmer recently posted a vid of his after-care procedure. it’s towards the end.

I similarly have a dehumidifier in my camera room. Currently I am pulling at least several liters of water per week out of that room.

I trust my equipment 100% in any type of water, short of a long period of total submersion.

Have dropped gear into "puddles" that submerged the entirety of the gear for a few seconds with no damage.

Additionally, insurance is always carried on all gear in the event something does happen.

No point in having gear if you can't use it when you need it.

To say you trust your equipment in any type of water is foolish. No camera is waterproof (except those used for underwater photography.) Have you ever seen what saltwater does to gear?

Secondly - if you get fungus growth inside your lenses - insurance will not cover your damage

 

[nmerc_photos]

I have a couple of those disposable poncho raincoats in case of emergency. So small it takes no space - and handy to stick the gear under in the event of a sudden downpour.

I similarly have a dehumidifier in my camera room. Currently I am pulling at least several liters of water per week out of that room.

To say you trust your equipment in any type of water is foolish. No camera is waterproof (except those used for underwater photography.) Have you ever seen what saltwater does to gear?

Secondly - if you get fungus growth inside your lenses - insurance will not cover your damage

Sorry, I should have specified FRESH water. When I said "type of water" I was imagining specific scenarios. Heavy rain, melting snow, accidental drops, boating, etc. Not the make up of the water (salt vs fresh). I apologize.

I do not mess with salt water ever. Even if that stuff doesn't get into anything.. it still wreaks havoc.

My insurance covers gear no matter the issue. Fungus, accidental drops, water submersion, theft. If you have insurance that doesn't cover fungus, you should probably get different insurance.

 

[Len Shepherd]

Just how far do you trust the Z8, Z9, Z600TC, and Z100-400 waterproofing?

They are described by Nikon as water resistant, not waterproof in all situations.

Having being caught out in an underground cave during very wet outdoor weather with water running off the roof almost as heavy as from a shower in conditions where I had to take photographs I was pleased the Z8 and 24–120 performed flawlessly though one of the portable LED's I had temporarily stopped working.

I would not regularly shoot in these conditions without somehow protecting the equipment from the heaviest falling water.
If you aim to photograph in a possible heavy rainstorm, then my advice is either use rain covers or if you are lucky have an assistant carrying an umbrella.

 

[fcotterill]

I agree there are very real limits on how much abuse modern cameras and lenses can handle in wet weather and worse. The engineering chart - link below - shows how much water abuse camera gear can handle.

And yes, very minor ingress of salt will kill electronic devices, modern lenses included
Insurance is wise to pay for but useless on a trip out there when disaster strikes

Links to more technical data and camera teardowns etc in earlier threads referenced herein;

Affordable (Relatively) ILC system for Wildlife Photography

The author discusses telephotos mostly. The "Big Lens" is often the watershed purchase...usually after much mulling of all the options (whilst saving!). I'm often asked by beginners for overview articles, such as this, introducing the scope of needs/costs etc: to help one begin to dissect the...

bcgforums.com

Water Resistance Expectations for Professional Camera Equipment

I was wondering what realistic expectations folk have of professional grade camera equipment used in wet conditions. I was photographing and videoing rugby games last week in persistent rain. I was out in the rain for 3-4 hours. I would not call it torrential, as one might expect in the tropics...

bcgforums.com

 

[mrt]

Prudence seems wise in general, so even a plastic bag in extreme circumstances can be helpful. It’s good to know the Z equipment can take it when those harsh moments show up. We’ll be gone for a month. I can’t imagine not taking pictures during this kind of trip. While I have good insurance coverage I would hate to lose the use of say the 600TC.

 

[mrt]

I agree there are very real limits on how much abuse modern cameras and lenses can handle in wet weather and worse. The engineering chart - link below - shows how much water abuse camera gear can handle.

And yes, very minor ingress of salt will kill electronic devices, modern lenses included
Insurance is wise to pay for but useless on a trip out there when disaster strikes

Affordable (Relatively) ILC system for Wildlife Photography

The author discusses telephotos mostly. The "Big Lens" is often the watershed purchase...usually after much mulling of all the options (whilst saving!). I'm often asked by beginners for overview articles, such as this, introducing the scope of needs/costs etc: to help one begin to dissect the...

bcgforums.com

Water Resistance Expectations for Professional Camera Equipment

I was wondering what realistic expectations folk have of professional grade camera equipment used in wet conditions. I was photographing and videoing rugby games last week in persistent rain. I was out in the rain for 3-4 hours. I would not call it torrential, as one might expect in the tropics...

bcgforums.com

Thanks for pointing to the other thread. I missed that.

 

[wotan1]

I have a Nikonos, a Nikon camera that was designed for underwater use. I know what we had to do to protect the camera and it was excruciating.

Waterproofing requires the use of O rings. Each time we opened the camera to reload film there was an elaborate process we had to follow in order to protect the camera. Even so little as a tiny hair across an O ring could cause a leak and the camera became a catastrophic loss. The O ring had to be inspected carefully each time we loaded film. Similar things have to happen with underwater camera housings. One mistake and the camera is toast.

The Nikonos is a fixed lens and the only opening is the door for the film compartment.

The Z series cameras have interchangeable lenses. The bayonet mount may have a gasket but it is nowhere near equivalent to the kind of seal used on a waterproof camera or underwater housing; If water gets between the lens and camera it enters the highly sensitive sensor area. No way that can be good.

These are tough cameras but they are not immune to water. OK for mist or light rain but I would not risk immersion or unprotected in heavy rain.

How useful is shooting in strong rain. We have enough problems with atmospheric diffraction in daylight what does a sheet of rain do to image quality.

 

[EricKlees]

I've been caught it in a driving rain with my Z9 and 800PF a couple times and had zero issues. Even had mud slung on the kit and just rinsed it off with a bottle of water and continued shooting and washed it off and dried it later, again, no issues.

However, I'd never trust an external zoom like the 100-400 in this situation. If i got caught out in the rain and the barrel extended, I'd never trust the zoom ring to retract the barrel with moisture on it. Make sure to dry the extended barrel before pulling back to 100mm.

 

[mrt]

I've been caught it in a driving rain with my Z9 and 800PF a couple times and had zero issues. Even had mud slung on the kit and just rinsed it off with a bottle of water and continued shooting and washed it off and dried it later, again, no issues.

However, if never trust an external zoom like the 100-400 in this situations. If i got caught out in the rain and the barrel extended, I'd never trust the zoom ring to retract the barrel with moisture on it. Make sure to dry the extended barrel before pulling back to 100mm.

Good distinction.

 

[Winston Churchill (Sir)]

Sorry, I should have specified FRESH water. When I said "type of water" I was imagining specific scenarios. Heavy rain, melting snow, accidental drops, boating, etc. Not the make up of the water (salt vs fresh). I apologize.

I do not mess with salt water ever. Even if that stuff doesn't get into anything.. it still wreaks havoc.

My insurance covers gear no matter the issue. Fungus, accidental drops, water submersion, theft. If you have insurance that doesn't cover fungus, you should probably get different insurance.

Regards Fungus: As per my insurance:
There needs to be an event that triggers the damage - and with Fungus this event can not be pinpointed. You have no way of telling when the event accurred. And you can't claim 6 months or 6 years after the (undetermined) event.

Visible fungus growth can take years to show -

If you have written confirmation that your insurance company will cover fungus growth - please be kind enough to let us see that wording on your policy contract so we can take it up with our insurance companies.

 

[ssheipel]

I recently shot with the Z9 and 600tc on a 'scattered showers' weather day and one of those 'showers' lasted an hour and at times of a hard, hard downpour. I don't flaunt the weatherproofing however. I had a plastic bag over the camera kit while walking, but while shooting the gear was uncovered. In torrential downpours I get the gear under my own rain coat -- 'cause remembering to bring the lens rain coat would be too easy I have also, unknowingly when shooting while using the LCD and holding the camera and lens by the lens foot as a handle mistakenly had the camera 'dipped' in marsh water above the lower 'seam' of the battery door -- the water line nicely defined by a line of scum. And far too often I have quickly dipped the very bottom surface of the camera in 'clean' lake water to wash duck sh*t mud from the bottom of the camera. Those latter two things I truly should avoid, but I'll never be Morton Hilmer in how I simply see the gear as another tool, but I do expect the gear to handle tough conditions.

All to say, lens/cam rain coats are definitely worth it, most definitely if the rain is constant and expected -- but I truly always am kms away from the fancy lens rain coat(s) which is why there is always rain, shine, snow (I've shot in very heavy snow fall with the gear uncovered, as well) or no, a plastic bag in a pocket which becomes my $0.02 rain cover.

Also, I did gasp with 'gotta not have that again' when after the recent downpour when trying to capture the rain falling while shooting some ducks, when I was patting the camera dry after the rain stopped I pulled the LCD from the camera and a small stream of water ran out... I'd like to avoid that

 

[nmerc_photos]

Regards Fungus: As per my insurance:
There needs to be an event that triggers the damage - and with Fungus this event can not be pinpointed. You have no way of telling when the event accurred. And you can't claim 6 months or 6 years after the (undetermined) event.

Visible fungus growth can take years to show -

If you have written confirmation that your insurance company will cover fungus growth - please be kind enough to let us see that wording on your policy contract so we can take it up with our insurance companies.

My insurance is personal property, not photography specific so that could be your issue. Nothing physically mentions fungus, it isn't listed in any exclusions, and there's no wording to suggest it wouldn't be covered.

My policy is no questions asked replacement. Doesn't matter what happens to the equipment, if it's rendered out of service - they will either pay to repair or replace it, whichever is cheaper.

If you want I can post the entire policy for you to review since there's not one specific instance related to fungus.

Insurance is just a numbers game, so there's no real reason to exclude something like fungus. It's easy to assign a probability to the risk and chance of payout, and cover that in premiums.

 

[PhotoLover]

I have a Nikonos, a Nikon camera that was designed for underwater use. I know what we had to do to protect the camera and it was excruciating.

Waterproofing requires the use of O rings. Each time we opened the camera to reload film there was an elaborate process we had to follow in order to protect the camera. Even so little as a tiny hair across an O ring could cause a leak and the camera became a catastrophic loss. The O ring had to be inspected carefully each time we loaded film. Similar things have to happen with underwater camera housings. One mistake and the camera is toast.

The Nikonos is a fixed lens and the only opening is the door for the film compartment.

The Z series cameras have interchangeable lenses. The bayonet mount may have a gasket but it is nowhere near equivalent to the kind of seal used on a waterproof camera or underwater housing; If water gets between the lens and camera it enters the highly sensitive sensor area. No way that can be good.

These are tough cameras but they are not immune to water. OK for mist or light rain but I would not risk immersion or unprotected in heavy rain.

How useful is shooting in strong rain. We have enough problems with atmospheric diffraction in daylight what does a sheet of rain do to image quality.

I think you are right, the weather-sealing in a regular camera like the Z8 or Z9 is nowhere at the level of the Nikonos, but the latter are designed to be waterproof at what, 150 feet or more? Several atmospheres. Thus the sealing has to handle water under pressure, which is a much bigger challenge.

 

[EricKlees]

My insurance is personal property, not photography specific so that could be your issue. Nothing physically mentions fungus, it isn't listed in any exclusions, and there's no wording to suggest it wouldn't be covered.

My policy is no questions asked replacement. Doesn't matter what happens to the equipment, if it's rendered out of service - they will either pay to repair or replace it, whichever is cheaper.

If you want I can post the entire policy for you to review since there's not one specific instance related to fungus.

Insurance is just a numbers game, so there's no real reason to exclude something like fungus. It's easy to assign a probability to the risk and chance of payout, and cover that in premiums.

Personal items policy is replacement but generally with a items policy with placed like State Farm, Nationwise, Allstate and the like only give you the cheapest used price they currently find.

I use Inland Marine. You can't get them direct, you have to get them throw existing companies like i listed above. This is one that has policies specific to cameras. The policies take you receipts and invoices on anything you want to cover. Memory cards, bags, battery banks etc... They pay out when you paid on the invoice where it's now off 5 years from now, not current used priced to replace.. it's also not bad, I'm inquiring about 16,000 in gear for just under $16 a month

If you've added your gear to your homeowners policy, you also won't get full paid reimbursement if they need to replace your gear

 

[nmerc_photos]

Personal items policy is replacement but generally with a items policy with placed like State Farm, Nationwise, Allstate and the like only give you the cheapest used price they currently find.

I use Inland Marine. You can't get them direct, you have to get them throw existing companies like i listed above. This is one that has policies specific to cameras. The policies take you receipts and invoices on anything you want to cover. Memory cards, bags, battery banks etc... They pay out when you paid on the invoice where it's now off 5 years from now, not current used priced to replace.. it's also not bad, I'm inquiring about 16,000 in gear for just under $16 a month

If you've added your gear to your homeowners policy, you also won't get full paid reimbursement if they need to replace your gear

Yep I use Inland Marine as well. My cost to insure $55K in gear is $100/mo.

There is a good thread already on BCG that discusses different insurance options.

TLDR of this thread is that Nikon's weather sealing is extremely good, but only be comfortable using equipment you can afford to lose. I would take more precaution if I was on a destination trip than I would in my backyard. But at the end of the day, you should also always have insurance to make sure you never have to pay for costs out of pocket.

 

[John Navitsky]

also, Morten talked about after-care in another video, and I think it's complementary, not redundant, to the other one i posted. care talk starts at 14:45 in this video