brainiac wrote:
Could it be because the Nikon users were tending to use Nikon's superb zooms, the Canon users favouring primes, and lens changing was allowing damp air inside the Canons more than the Nikons? Either that or Canon 'weather sealing' sucks.
Possibly when I was down there 2 years ago I had 2 primes and 2 zooms, 2 bodies, Number 2 seems to be a pattern. I was constantly changing lens all the time, except the last day which due to the excessive, rain, sleet, snow, humidity, I opted to put the 70-200 on the 1V and the 400 5.6 on the 5D. Didn't change any lens at all. I guess this negates the thought as the 1V failed not the 5D. Then again maybe the 5D MKII is more senstitive to mositure inside. I know my 5D had been subjected to moisture in the past before going to Antarctica such that the top display was so moisture laden that it was hard to read the display but it kept on working. Granted the 24-70 took 2 hours to uncondense. I didn't take that lens to Antarctica
So the 5DMK2s performed about the same as the 1DSMK2s. The question is why?
As far as I can tell, the only difference in gasketing between the 5D1 and the 5D2 is a bit of foam around the lip of the battery chamber door (not the chamber opening in the body of the camera).
There is no gasket around that portion of the battery grip that mates to the battery chamber. Moreover, the door has a labyrinth-lip molding to enhance the effect of the gasket--the battery grip doesn't even have that. It's as though the body design team had a good idea that they failed to pass to the battery grip design team.
We can probably find some kind of self-adhesive, very thin gasketing material to use, or better, a gasket-making gel as is used in automobiles. But that is a design flaw that's pretty glaring.
This is kind of ironic. Bad-weather operation was a design hallmark for Canon's original F1 design. It was why, for instance, the MD motor drive had a removable battery chamber with an optional connection cord--so you could keep the batteries under your coat against your body. At some point, those designers who stressed bad-weather operation got eased out and replaced by a group that know nothing about it.
Kind of like toilet bowl design in the US when Congress mandated 1.6 gallon toilets. Toilet bowl design had been static for so long that people who knew the physics had long since left the companies. It took several years before companies relearned the old science.
I havent followed the whole thread here but I have read the one of the couple that lost their 5d II on Luminous Landscape. THese guys had the 2 5d II on raincovers yet they seemed to have "shutter corrosion" so here it is my guess. YOu are on boats probably wearing gloves. Most likely everything you touch on a boat has salt which together with some water we all know what it does. So you can have as many rain covers as you want that if the part that touch the shutter is wet and salty chances are that you will have a problem. Particularly if the camera is not too well-sealed. I havent used the Kata raincovers neither but it is my experience with others covers that they tend to produce water condensation, particularly on cold weather.
I dont think that there is need to call stupid to the people who lost their cameras either. A little bit of perspective and empathy never harm before starting to throw shit on people that you dont know and that they have lost a valuable item. Particularly when they use a camera rated for monsoon rains on the advertising.
So this year's 5DMK2s did as well as the 2007 1DsMK2s.
I brings up a question though. How many people have had a 1DsMK2 die due to water? I don't know of any unless someone submerged the camera. Has anyone lost one due to rain?
Outside of this trip has anyone killed a 5D or 5DMK2 due to rain? I shot with my 5D in the pouring rain with no issues. I usually threw a trash bag over the top but not protection much beyond that.
What is it about this trip that kills Canon cameras?
Hi Jerry, I was going to mention the 2007 trip too. Glad I read all the posts to see you beat me to it.
Regarding your 1 series question, all I can add is anecdotal experience of my own. Not from the Antarctic, but from other similar conditions (near freezing and raining/humid). In 2007 one of my 1DIII bodies failed twice during two different games at Lambeau Field (and the only two times during the entire 2007 NFL season). One game was somewhat above freezing and raining (in October). The second was a colder, somewhat drier day in December. The 1DIII failed with Err99 at some point early each day (don't remember the specifics). And each time the camera recovered hours later after warming up and drying near a fireplace (luckily I had my Mark IIN backups with me each time). There was a known issue early in the production cycle with the 1D3 experiencing Err99 lockups and I hadn't had it addressed (because it hadn't happened to me until then, which was several months into ownership). It was also prior to the AF fix, at which time I requested Canon to address the known Err99 issue. Since then the camera has worked more reliably but from time to time has acted up, even when inside under very favourable conditions inside. Recently the entire mirror box was replaced to address peculiar AF inconsistencies and hopefully it will resolve the Err99 problem. Interestingly, this problem has not occurred with my second 1DIII, but that camera was also about 25,000 later in the serial # range and purchased 5 months after the first (and problematic) 1DIII.
Based on past experience, I've had other 1D series cameras fail in similar cold and damp conditions, but only very occasionally. It has also happened to me with an original EOS-1 back in the film days.
IMO, while the 1 series cameras are better protected and intended to function in adverse conditions, there is no guarantee they will. The conditions in which the Antarctic photographers worked appears to be the conditions in which I've had the most problems with my cameras... so I guess I will draw my own conclusions from this (to always bring back up equipment).
As for other "failures" during the 2007 LL trip, I thought this one was quite painful:
"One person was shooting film, with a Mamiya 7 II, but since his luggage was lost on the way to Argentina he only had 3 rolls of film for the entire trip."
That would so suck (but then, who packs all their film in their luggage?!?!?)
Challenger space shuttle was destroyed thanks to the frozen ruber seal. The same thing could happen with 5d2 seals and 1ds seals the year before. Simple as that.
...so you care a lot, then? Or did you mean that you could NOT care less? I know understatement is a dying art, but is the expression 'not less' really too hard for people to grasp these days? BTW, I know that it's annoying of me to persistently make this point. Good. Think of it as revenge ;-)
milanissimo wrote:
Challenger space shuttle was destroyed thanks to the frozen ruber seal. The same thing could happen with 5d2 seals and 1ds seals the year before. Simple as that.
But not the Nikon seals. Maybe it is time for Canon to look at different material for their seals.
Will Patterson wrote:
I would never have it out in those EXTREME conditions, nor would I ever ever shoot with it in the rain.
If you do, sorry, but you're an idiot. Get a 1D if you want to shoot in the rain.
This is like taking your Geo Metro off roading and then bitching about it when it gets stuck.
Unfortunately, the previous year it was the 1D's that were dying. Maybe the better suggestion would be to take a Nikon if you want to shoot in the rain.
Like most paranoia i end up having about my camera gear it all stems from reading threads on forums.
Just think if you hadn't opened this thread then your 5D2 would still be the apple of your eye.
Ah well, it's always good to make you question your photographic kit just because something happened to someone else.
My opinion is even if 1000 5d2's had failed due to rain, i'd carry on using mine until it failed. At the end of the day if it's still working you have nothing to be worried about. If your using it within the parameters that are safe for it to be used in then you have nothing to worry about. If it goes wrong, you get it fixed, until then you use it, take nice pictures and stop worrying what happened to other cameras.
chez wrote:
Unfortunately, the previous year it was the 1D's that were dying. Maybe the better suggestion would be to take a Nikon if you want to shoot in the rain.
Operator error. I know the Nikon's hate the cold, I remember a big thread about pro photog's shooting a green bay packers game and their Nikons kept quitting, but the 1D's never failed them the whole game where the Nikon would only last 15 minutes or so in the cold.
chris78cpr wrote:
Like most paranoia i end up having about my camera gear it all stems from reading threads on forums.
Just think if you hadn't opened this thread then your 5D2 would still be the apple of your eye.
Ah well, it's always good to make you question your photographic kit just because something happened to someone else.
My opinion is even if 1000 5d2's had failed due to rain, i'd carry on using mine until it failed. At the end of the day if it's still working you have nothing to be worried about. If your using it within the parameters that are safe for it to be used in then you have nothing to worry about. If it goes wrong, you get it fixed, until then you use it, take nice pictures and stop worrying what happened to other cameras.
Operator error. I know the Nikon's hate the cold, I remember a big thread about pro photog's shooting a green bay packers game and their Nikons kept quitting, but the 1D's never failed them the whole game where the Nikon would only last 15 minutes or so in the cold.
chris78cpr wrote:
Like most paranoia i end up having about my camera gear it all stems from reading threads on forums.
Just think if you hadn't opened this thread then your 5D2 would still be the apple of your eye.
Ah well, it's always good to make you question your photographic kit just because something happened to someone else.
My opinion is even if 1000 5d2's had failed due to rain, i'd carry on using mine until it failed. At the end of the day if it's still working you have nothing to be worried about. If your using it within the parameters that are safe for it to be used in then you have nothing to worry about. If it goes wrong, you get it fixed, until then you use it, take nice pictures and stop worrying what happened to other cameras.
