All Forum Comments
Comment by sergedaniel posted on Pentax k-1 Backscreen Issue at 18/11/2016 - 17:47
Even when I try to get us to focus on the point, it looks like we will still get some distraction here. It is the Backscreen that is affected and therefore questioning the effectiveness of the sealing of the camera would be, in common sense, redirected to this part of the camera.
Regards,
Regards,
Comment by sergedaniel posted on Pentax k-1 Backscreen Issue at 18/11/2016 - 17:42
My initial questions remain:
Is the Backscreen of The K-1 irrepairable of irreplaceable? Does the K-1 have to be trashed when the Backscreen is dead?
How efficient is the Weather Sealing on the Backscreen? Is the Backscreen the sensitive point of the camera?
These are the points that should have been discussed.
Is the Backscreen of The K-1 irrepairable of irreplaceable? Does the K-1 have to be trashed when the Backscreen is dead?
How efficient is the Weather Sealing on the Backscreen? Is the Backscreen the sensitive point of the camera?
These are the points that should have been discussed.
Comment by sergedaniel posted on Pentax k-1 Backscreen Issue at 18/11/2016 - 17:05
McGregNi wrote:
There is no reason to assume the camera can only handle a little spray from a rain shower .....but then again there's no reason to assume it can handle underwater submersion, which may involve some sustained pressure. The reality is probably somewhere between these two.
I would never automatically think that any complex electronic device can survive immersion, quite the opposite, unless it was a dedicated purpose built item for underwater.
You're not talking to Pentax here, so there's no argument between us. Here we are other users with a range of opinions, and that's ok to explore. But if you want some sort of therapeutic gain to be had from experiencing a kind of collective, community sense of outrage and verifying of your own attitudes to it, then you're probably in the wrong place .
If you read my first post properly you would understand that the camera was not used for underwater photography. It was an accidental quick dip while I still had a hold of the strap. So I do not know what kind of "sustained pressure" the camera would have been under at max 20cm.There is no reason to assume the camera can only handle a little spray from a rain shower .....but then again there's no reason to assume it can handle underwater submersion, which may involve some sustained pressure. The reality is probably somewhere between these two.
I would never automatically think that any complex electronic device can survive immersion, quite the opposite, unless it was a dedicated purpose built item for underwater.
You're not talking to Pentax here, so there's no argument between us. Here we are other users with a range of opinions, and that's ok to explore. But if you want some sort of therapeutic gain to be had from experiencing a kind of collective, community sense of outrage and verifying of your own attitudes to it, then you're probably in the wrong place .
And by the way, the only "therapeutic gain" that I would expect from such a Forum is surely the technical advice that other users have already suggested here. I do not know about yourself but as far as I am concerned I do not need any of your "therapeutic" allusions. It looks like you are projecting your own issues on Others.
As it is understandable, this is a forum where users debate about the good and the bad about their Pentax Equipment; their Experience using these equipment. And that is what I am doing. And if someone gets my point better than others, please allow me to thank them. This is called Courtesy... and has nothing to do with your allusions.
Regards,
Comment by sergedaniel posted on Pentax k-1 Backscreen Issue at 18/11/2016 - 15:16
Thank you so much LondonPhotoSara,
You even express the point better than me.
You even express the point better than me.
LondonPhotoSara wrote:
Coming back to the initial question:
As I understand it, the camera was not used underwater, but dipped for a moment, which is definitely different from how one would use a waterproof camera and would be similar to a rainshower in how it got wet. So how do these sealing points make the K-1 different from any other camera on the market that doesn't sell itself as weather resistant?
And then there are those specifications:
I would be curious to hear the answer from Pentax as to why the rear screen can't be replaced if the camera still functions. Surely one of those 87 sealings would mean the screen can be replaced?
Thank you so much LondonPhotoSaraComing back to the initial question:
Quote:
How functional is the sealing on the K-1? Pentax talk about 87 sealing points. But if this cannot resist what the lens (that is even older) stands how effective is such a sealing?
Pentax always highlight the camera as being 'Dustproof' and 'weather-resistant' on their websites. But it seems that the 87 sealing points are merely marketing jargon, if all the camera can handle is a little spray from a rain shower. Even my old 5D MKII can take that.How functional is the sealing on the K-1? Pentax talk about 87 sealing points. But if this cannot resist what the lens (that is even older) stands how effective is such a sealing?
As I understand it, the camera was not used underwater, but dipped for a moment, which is definitely different from how one would use a waterproof camera and would be similar to a rainshower in how it got wet. So how do these sealing points make the K-1 different from any other camera on the market that doesn't sell itself as weather resistant?
And then there are those specifications:
Quote:
87 Sealings protecting camera against Dust, Rain and Spraywater. Camera is not water protected.
This sounds like they are trying to protect themselves against any warranty claims while letting bloggers and youtubers sell their product for them by submerging the camera in mud, water and sand and showing off how they still work afterwards.87 Sealings protecting camera against Dust, Rain and Spraywater. Camera is not water protected.
I would be curious to hear the answer from Pentax as to why the rear screen can't be replaced if the camera still functions. Surely one of those 87 sealings would mean the screen can be replaced?
Comment by sergedaniel posted on Pentax k-1 Backscreen Issue at 18/11/2016 - 14:18
McGregNi wrote:
Absolutely, gosh, if I ever got a K1 I think I would be so careful and worried about it that I wouldn't ever take it out of the camera bag, perhaps just occasionally to place it on a very soft bed to have a look at it and perhaps give a gentle wipe with a non abrasive cloth on the body surface.
Tongue back out of cheek now .... I can't understand your confusion over that quote you gave above .... It clearly states that the camera is dust, rain and splash proof, and not waterproof (ie 'not waterprotected').
I accept that some marketing might convey a mixed message to some people not familiar, but a little research should clarify the construction and limitations of the camera body. For the price the K1 offers an extraordinary level of strength, solidity and protection from the elements.
Hi McGregNi,Absolutely, gosh, if I ever got a K1 I think I would be so careful and worried about it that I wouldn't ever take it out of the camera bag, perhaps just occasionally to place it on a very soft bed to have a look at it and perhaps give a gentle wipe with a non abrasive cloth on the body surface.
Tongue back out of cheek now .... I can't understand your confusion over that quote you gave above .... It clearly states that the camera is dust, rain and splash proof, and not waterproof (ie 'not waterprotected').
I accept that some marketing might convey a mixed message to some people not familiar, but a little research should clarify the construction and limitations of the camera body. For the price the K1 offers an extraordinary level of strength, solidity and protection from the elements.
I am surprised you underestand the Pentax quote so easily.
"Dust and Water protected: 87 Sealings protecting camera against Dust, Rain and Spraywater. Camera is not water protected."
To me it is very ambiguous. The Camera is water protected and the camera is not water protected.
What's the water that the camera is not protected against? if not water protected, what kind of Rain are Pentax talking about. is it the rain of castamere or "une pluie de météorites"?
Regards
Comment by sergedaniel posted on Pentax k-1 Backscreen Issue at 18/11/2016 - 12:34
davidstorm wrote:
My take on this is the same as Mike P's. Pentax have never advertised their cameras as waterproof, so if any part of it got submerged, which it appears it did, this is completely different to taking it out in the rain. Good luck with your Pentax case, please let us know how you get on.
Regards
David
Hi David, I would like to know what you understand by this sentence on Pentax UK's Page :My take on this is the same as Mike P's. Pentax have never advertised their cameras as waterproof, so if any part of it got submerged, which it appears it did, this is completely different to taking it out in the rain. Good luck with your Pentax case, please let us know how you get on.
Regards
David
"Temperature: -10°C ~ 40°C (14°F ~104°F)
Humidity: 85% or less (no condensation)
Dust and Water protected: 87 Sealings protecting camera against Dust, Rain and Spraywater. Camera is not water protected."
The following is the link to the quote: http://www.ricoh-imaging.co.uk/en/digital-slr/specifications/group/6/PENTAX-K-1-DSLR.html
Regards
Comment by sergedaniel posted on Pentax k-1 Backscreen Issue at 17/11/2016 - 21:13
Thank you all for the Replies.
That's the amount that JPSERVICE SOLUTIONS wanted for a replacement camera: £1,491.60. I bought the camera three months ago for £1,599. So I asked them to send it back.
By the way, I also contacted Pentax UK for them to look into the case. They gave me a Case Number. I am now waiting for their reply.
Anyway, it is really difficult to believe that a camera that is advertised the way the K-1 is, fails a simple dip in the water.
That's the amount that JPSERVICE SOLUTIONS wanted for a replacement camera: £1,491.60. I bought the camera three months ago for £1,599. So I asked them to send it back.
By the way, I also contacted Pentax UK for them to look into the case. They gave me a Case Number. I am now waiting for their reply.
Anyway, it is really difficult to believe that a camera that is advertised the way the K-1 is, fails a simple dip in the water.
Comment by sergedaniel posted on Pentax k-1 Backscreen Issue at 17/11/2016 - 20:20
JohnX As I wrote, "the camera/lens simply took a bath" if I am allowed to use your own words.
Comment by sergedaniel posted on Pentax k-1 Backscreen Issue at 17/11/2016 - 17:44
JohnX wrote:
Please expand on exactly what happened to the camera.
If this happened because you were clumsy and the camera took a knock and fell into water, etc, then it's down to you. See if you're covered by your household insurance.
If the camera/lens simply took a bath, that could be a different issue.
The retailer from whom you bought the K-1 is responsible to sort things for you under the Consumer Rights Act. See what they have to say.
Under the same Act you may have redress against Ricoh Pentax and their advertising.
Ricoh say 'When an AW- or WR-series lens is mounted,* the K-1 and its lens forms a remarkable digital imaging system totally resistant to demanding environmental factors.'. link Look under the heading 'Dependable dustproof, weather-resistant construction'.
I don't know about you, but as a lay-man I think '...totally resistant to demanding environmental factors' means the camera when fitted with a WR lenses should be water-tight.
[/u]
Please expand on exactly what happened to the camera.
If this happened because you were clumsy and the camera took a knock and fell into water, etc, then it's down to you. See if you're covered by your household insurance.
If the camera/lens simply took a bath, that could be a different issue.
The retailer from whom you bought the K-1 is responsible to sort things for you under the Consumer Rights Act. See what they have to say.
Under the same Act you may have redress against Ricoh Pentax and their advertising.
Ricoh say 'When an AW- or WR-series lens is mounted,* the K-1 and its lens forms a remarkable digital imaging system totally resistant to demanding environmental factors.'. link Look under the heading 'Dependable dustproof, weather-resistant construction'.
I don't know about you, but as a lay-man I think '...totally resistant to demanding environmental factors' means the camera when fitted with a WR lenses should be water-tight.
[/u]
Comment by sergedaniel posted on Pentax k-1 Backscreen Issue at 17/11/2016 - 17:42
To be honest I reckon the camera's weather sealing has done you proud as you are still able to take photos with the camera. It doesn't sound as if it is totally bricked. I'm wondering if in your accident the rear screen got bumped somehow, it might be just a broken wire or dislodged connector but how could we know? Can you post a photo of the camera, showing in particular the backscreen? It may help, it may not!
As outsiders it sounds for sure the back screen could be replaced if need be but we're not Pentax technicians and we've not seen the camera so all the replies are really stabs in the dark. It could be you're lucky only the back screen has stopped functioning. I'd still look to make a claim on the insurance for it if you can, though if there's no obvious physical damage it might just need time to dry out.
I will try to send a picture of the Backscreen tomorrow.
BTW there was no shock involved. Even JPServices Solutions did not mention shock on the Camera. It is all about "FLUID" in the Camera