I am wanting to do a swim suit shoot at the local YMCA, but since the pool is indoors, it's really warm and humid inside. I will be using my XSi (too cheap to be weather sealed ), 70-200 f/2.8L IS (no filters), 50mm f/1.8 II, and the 580EX II.
Now, I think the XSi will handle the humidity just fine, but I am worried about lens changing. When I break that seal, am I in danger of anything? It's only like 20 feet away to a air condition controlled room with no humidity, but kind of a hassle if I have to keep walking away... What about my 50mm? Think that's ok?
What about after the shoot? Do I leave the camera out of the bag for proper ventilation to make sure no water molecules are still inside? Or is that just paranoid? Anyone with some experience please help, thanks!
Just because you have a lens on your camera, it does not mean that there is no possible way for air to get inside your camera/lens. Also, this is a situation where weather sealing doesn't make a difference.
I think you're being overly paranoid here. Just so long as your camera isn't cold when you bring it in there, it'll be fine. Seriously, we're talking about a camera here.... not the flux capacitor.
I used to be a competitive swimmer and can tell you the level of humidity varies greatly from pool to pool. There are some pools that I would suggest not using a non-sealed camera. In other pools, it would be just fine.
However, there are ways to reduce the risk even in the most humid of environments:
1. Place the cameras and lenses in a sealed container before entering the pool area. A Pelican case would be good. Sealed plastic bags would work.
2. Warm the gear prior to entry to the pool, or allow the gear to reach ambient temperature before opening the container. This prevents water vapor from condensing on the cold gear.
3. If possible, have your primary lens on the body at all times and don't change it in the humid environment. Although not sealed, it can limit entry of moisture.
4. When you are done, place the equipment back in a container with a dessicant to remove the moisture as quickly as possible.
Ben Horne wrote:
Just because you have a lens on your camera, it does not mean that there is no possible way for air to get inside your camera/lens. Also, this is a situation where weather sealing doesn't make a difference.
I think you're being overly paranoid here. Just so long as your camera isn't cold when you bring it in there, it'll be fine. Seriously, we're talking about a camera here.... not the flux capacitor.
I agree with most of this, but don't think the OP is being paranoid. Some pools stay at 100% humidity and are very warm. Even a slight temperature difference can result in water vapor condensing in large amounts. That will ruin a camera. Not to mention fog the lenses for an hour or two if you are not careful.
nathanlake wrote:
I used to be a competitive swimmer and can tell you the level of humidity varies greatly from pool to pool. There are some pools that I would suggest not using a non-sealed camera. In other pools, it would be just fine.
However, there are ways to reduce the risk even in the most humid of environments:
1. Place the cameras and lenses in a sealed container before entering the pool area. A Pelican case would be good. Sealed plastic bags would work.
2. Warm the gear prior to entry to the pool, or allow the gear to reach ambient temperature before opening the container. This prevents water vapor from condensing on the cold gear.
3. If possible, have your primary lens on the body at all times and don't change it in the humid environment. Although not sealed, it can limit entry of moisture.
4. When you are done, place the equipment back in a container with a dessicant to remove the moisture as quickly as possible. ...Show more →
Even a sealed camera is going to let air in. I have never understood that argument. Do you people think that weather sealed cameras are actually air tight? If they were, they would be submersible. If you place a weather sealed camera with a weather sealed lens under water, I guarantee you that you'll see a lot of bubbles pouring out of it.
I wouldn't worry about it. Prolonged exposure to high humidity leads to fungus but it takes months. If condensation is a problem, use the sealed bag approach.
Ah yes, with swimming season right around the corner I'm looking forward to the chlorine-enriched, high-humidity, indoor pools.
I've tried various techniques to minimize humidity problems. I've gone so far as to keep my bag on the front floor of the car with the heater blowing on it. I try to mount my lens prior to entering the pool area. As such I still get a bit of fogging on the front element and viewfinder but it usually clears up in 15-20 mins. If I need two lenses I normally use two bodies. For most indoor pools I can get away with my 70-200/2.8 and ISO 3200 or 6400. There is only one location that is so poorly lit that even my 135/2.0 and 85/1.8 requires ISO 6400.
One bit of advice. Keep a filter on your lens as chances are you WILL get splashed. The chlorinated water will etch water spots on the front element that are virtually impossible to remove. I also recommend wiping down your equipment with a damp rag once you get home.
Ben Horne wrote:
Even a sealed camera is going to let air in. I have never understood that argument. Do you people think that weather sealed cameras are actually air tight? If they were, they would be submersible. If you place a weather sealed camera with a weather sealed lens under water, I guarantee you that you'll see a lot of bubbles pouring out of it.
Yes, but the amount of air that actually enters a sealed camera is TINY. The vast majority of water-laden air will stay on the outside...even with a non-sealed camera?
Of course some air (and water vapor) will get in, but the idea is to minimize it.
Thanks for all the help! I think I am just gonna shoot primarily with the 70-200, and only change out the lens outside the humidity. This is a no-window indoor pool, and the lighting is not the best, so I will have to do some custom WB.
Thanks MSC for the photos, but this is a modeling/swim suit shoot, not actual sports event. I don't think I want to try the sports shoot from what you described... ha ha!
As Nathan said the bigger issue is the temperature of your gear. If you take a cold lens and camera into that environment that is when you have the problem with condensation.
I guess I must be lucky because I have shot heaps of swimming and never had a problem with moisture and humidity at pools. That's not to say you shouldn't be careful but the most important issue is, as most people have said, making sure that the gear is at approximately the same temperature as the inside of the pool complex.
Worst case scenario is when you get off an aircraft in a high humidity environment. The gear is cold and becomes instantly unusable. Okay, a pool presents basically the same problem but not as extreme.
I should also point out that I have never had any long term effects, like fungus, either.
I think you'll be fine at the pool. I'm a guard, and no one's running a pool at high enough humidities to do camera damage. People shoot in rainforests all the time, the humidity there is 98-100 all the time. Pools are closer to 80-90. They run quite dry because of massive ventilation requirements. YOu just notice it more if the pool hasn't superchlorinated lately.
Watch out for the heat difference though, I assumer you won't be shooting outside for a long time and then inside for a long time? otherwise you'll be fine
I have many thousands of images where I am in the rain or snow, as well as thousands where I am in the pool taking photos with the 1D2/1Ds2 and 70-200 f2.8IS and 300 f2.8IS (as well as other lenses), and I have never had a problem with any of them.
4honor wrote:
Thanks for all the help! I think I am just gonna shoot primarily with the 70-200, and only change out the lens outside the humidity.
Unless you have a long time for lens changes this sounds like a bad idea. You will be taking the camera in and out of the hot humid environment - a recipe for condensation. I'd say once all your gear is acclimatised you'd be better off keeping so.
A little off topic but undoubtedly the most hostile environment I've ever used any camera in is salt water. Shooting in the Negev Desert was a dream compared to salt water. Covering the Sydney - Hobart finish is almost always a test of skill just to keep the lens clean. You wipe it and it goes smeary. Then the boat takes a greenie over the bow and everyone gets wet. You wipe it with a clean piece of lens tissue and it stays clean for about 5 seconds then you have to wipe it again. After a while you'd swear the lens was fogging due to internal condensation but what actually seems to happen is that there is some sort of filmy salt deposit on the glass which is very hard to remove. You're struggling to stay upright, knowing full-well that the 8.5 kilogram camera on your shoulder is overbalancing you and trying to tip you over the side of the boat You can't kneel down because you're too close to the spray and you can't sit down because there's nowhere to sit. You're trying to focus and expose with one hand (almost an impossibility for anyone with smaller hands than mine) and hang on with the other. After 15 minutes, you're knackered.
All this while being bounced around like a pea in a drum and without an underwater housing. Just a PortaBrace and a bit of plastic.
Ben Horne wrote:
...Even a sealed camera is going to let air in. I have never understood that argument. Do you people think that weather sealed cameras are actually air tight? If they were, they would be submersible. If you place a weather sealed camera with a weather sealed lens under water, I guarantee you that you'll see a lot of bubbles pouring out of it.
No, we don't think they're air tight. We think they're weather tight.
Weather tight means that they can handle rain and wind, things that occur at normal atmospheric pressure. It does not mean that they can handle immersion, let alone submersion; but no one has ever suggested that they could. That's the realm of underwater cameras.
Non-sealed bodies and lenses will let in more moisture-laden air than sealed bodies and lenses. That's a simple fact. It's also a fact that keeping gear at or above ambient temperature can reduce the rate of condensation of the moisture that does get in.
(BTW, your assertion that air tight cameras are always submersible is incorrect. As both a certified watchmaker and a SCUBA diver I can state this with considerable confidence. Since water molecules are smaller than nitrogen, oxygen, and carbon dioxide molecules, many devices that are "air" tight would not be water tight under pressure.)
nathanlake wrote:
Yes, but the amount of air that actually enters a sealed camera is TINY. The vast majority of water-laden air will stay on the outside...even with a non-sealed camera?
Of course some air (and water vapor) will get in, but the idea is to minimize it.
nature equalizes everything in time. depending on the body/lens and sealing it may just take longer. the temp and relative humidity differential will drive the change and it will reach equalibrium no matter what. that of course disallows a nikonos of course.
), 70-200 f/2.8L IS (no filters), 50mm f/1.8 II, and the 580EX II.
