Weatherproofing - Lifespan

For those that have asked - I did not claim on my insurance as I did not want it to affect the NCD and I don't see why an insurer should pick up the bill for a camera that I believe was being used in conditions Pentax claim it can withstand. Pentax should pay - not the insurer.

Just been advised by Johnson's that Pentax are insistent that they will not provide a body gratis. A discounted refurb is their best offer.

They have known for months that I am prepared to complain to the Advertising Standards Authority, so I am now finalising my formal complaint (which I have been preparing for this moment). Let's see what happens. They had their chance - guess they are OK with this going to the ASA. At least they are confident of the weather sealing - I'm not.

Just a few queries I have in this... Yes Ive tried to sit on the fence...lol

When you say you were informed the door seals are showing signs of "Corrosion" is that different to wear and tear ? Rubber in its usual forms, has a working temp of something like -25 to 200 degrees. So in my thoughts using it even in a tropical jungle would have no effect on its operation. Hence the Pentax advertising. You state your K3 has had a minor door repair which suggests there could be damage or wear to the seals.

So I feel Johnsons have a major role to play in these cases. As to who is liable. As the official repairer. Pentax should let them police these cases and back their decisions. Its for them to detect the cause of the ingress. Or indeed what has caused it or any corrosion.. Their decision to say if a unit meets what is at best a ropey weatherproof standard. If its wear and tear then I think Pentax are not liable and have shown a degree of sympathy in offering a reduced cost replacement.

If the windows leak on your car after four years. You don't get a replacement car for free






.

Apologies if this thread is getting confusing. The OP is the one who who had the four year old K3 with the corrosion. My experience with a K3ii which was 18 months old and in mint condition is the camera that got damaged by water ingress and is the one over which Pentax have offered a discounted refurbished model.

Ah Sorry probably my error... But I still stand by my point that Johnsons should play judge and jury in these cases. In my experience it isn't so much the moisture getting in. But when it has it has nowhere to evaporate to as its still sealed more or less..

I do have some sympathy with tigershoot here. We have all seen the various advertising images showing the weather resistant cameras being used in wet conditions, with water droplets or snow all over the camera and lens. Yet the manual for my K-1 says "avoid contact with water". I imagine the K3ii has the same warning.

I personally would never use my K-1 in the rain unless I was using a camera protection device to keep the water off camera and lens.

I have not been to Victoria Falls but I imagine that 15 minutes exposure would have made the camera very wet from constant spray. I think this would have been asking for trouble even with a brand new camera. Yet there is the dichotomy of the advertising. I think tigershoot has a good case with the ASA.

I often like to shoot on the coast especially when it’s windy and there’s plenty of spray. Even on a calm day it’s surprising how often I need to clean a salty film from my filters, and sand gets everywhere. I have also on occasion been caught out in the rain. In such conditions I never change lenses until I am in the car or shelter, keep a microfibre cloth in the bag to regularly wipe over the camera and lens body, avoid the use of a remote to keep the seal in place, and finally bring the affected body and lenses with the zoom fully extended into a warm and dry room as soon as I can for a few hours.