5Dii weather issue: THE POLL!

OK, in light of the LL article on their Antartica trip, I know a lot of us are wondering if we'll have issues with our own 5Diis and others are now even more on the fence.

From reading this:
http://luminous-landscape.com …t=0&p=257920&#e​ntry257920

and this:

http://luminous-landscape.com …arctica-2009-worked.shtml

now they were in Antarctica, which does sound very dramatic, but it's summer there and their issue was in rain which obviously means it was above freezing. Obviously Antarctica and living on a boat/ship means they were very much on/around the ocean. My point with this thread is to share where you've been with your 5Dii that you think is worse, similar, or not as bad, and what issues you've had... Basically 23% of a sample is scaring the **** out of me considering what I do with my cameras, and I want a bigger sample.

so share where you're 5Dii has been, and vote in the poll if you own one.

Damn public polls!

Mine has been to AR, MO, KS, NE, TN, and the moon. It's gotten wet before and works just fine.

Sounds like you need a one series.....

My thoughts on this whole issue are that the fact 23% of 5Diis had issues while 0% of other DSLRs (while G9s also had issues) had issues obviously means the 5Dii has some sort of an issue. But was something different on this trip that caused this to happen?

For reading the LL thread about it, through 4 pages I've seen 3 owners admit to using rain covers on their cameras AND taking their cameras out of their bags as soon as they got back on this ship... So of the owners that posted in those 4 pages 100% used covers and 100% took their cameras out ASAP. That to me is interesting.

But how bad was the weather there really? It was above freezing AND it was a "light rain". Obviously they were out in a salty environment, but living in RI and taking my camera out on boats all the time, how worried should I be? I ski with my camera in much colder conditions than they were in, I live in RI, and I shoot in "damp" conditions if I must. I don't shoot in "rain" really, but I don't stop shooting if my camera might get a tad wet. I've shot my old 5D and new 5Dii in ~0F, in light rain, and in snow. I've taken them from very cold (skiing) to very warm (the lodge) w/ condensation issues, but nothing like the issue they had on this trip...

So fellow owners of 5Diis, what have you shot in so far? How did your body fair? Is this a very weird issue with a small sample of 5Diis (but obviously an issue) or is this just a very weird condition that led to this? Basically we know 23% of 5Diis failed on this trip, but with the 5Dii owner base PotN represents, what's our collective experience?

george m w wrote in post #7323739
Sounds like you need a one series.....

I DISLIKE 1 series bodies. They're very large and for what? A 1V style body would be perfect for me, but I don't need the bulk of the current digital 1 series for what I do as it slows me down and is unnecessary. So I've opted for 5 series and LOVE them for what they are, and they've been perfect for me thus far. But this is making me wonder about a 1 series again. Either as a supplement for when I'm on the boat/skiing, or as my primary/only body... But honestly beyond the sealing, the 5Dii is the perfect camera for me. So it'd be a shame to have to switch to something that doesn't perform as well otherwise just because of this issue.

And I owned my 5D for ~18 months, took it across oceans on boats, took it skiing in ~0F, had it condensed, had it out in light rain. All of which I considered fine for it. All of which it performed flawlessly though. That's all I want. I'm not trying to shoot a football game in the rain here. If the 5Dii has improved sealing and my 5D was perfect for me I really don't think I should need a 1 series.

Hi Ben,
Well, if you dislike one series, then I guess that answers that. It sounds like you'll pass on those bodies for the reasons you state. They are large, I won't argue, although I don't find my one series to be any 'larger' than my 20d+grip or my 50D+grip. Maybe a little heavier, but not much.
But your comment, "for what".....I was thinking from your original post, it sounds like you shoot in harsh conditions ? Fair enough....THAT is one of the things the one series is designed for, and excels at. When the going gets tough, I take my one series. I'm not trying to be a smart a$$....I'm really not....but I just fail to see why folks are making a big deal about equipment that may not perform under conditions it was not specifically designed for.
It's true that I have subjected my 20D and 50D to wet conditions, and they have worked okay....but had they failed, I would NOT be saying, "why did this fail?". I would be saying, "oops...probably should not have taken that out today".

Honestly, best of luck to you in the use of all your gear....I hope it all works well for you wherever you take it. But I think it's also reasonable to consider the "whole package" when approaching how one chooses gear for an assignment.

I voted for the imaginary "I don't have a 5D II and screw all you owners for having such a great camera."

I gotta say I appreciate your objectivity on your recent purchase even after all the autofocusing threads.

What George said.

Actually, the fact that a fraction of less than one percent of the total number of cameras produced failed in a non-controlled and admittedly chancy situation means utterly, totally, and absolutely nothing in any statistical sense.

The fact that it happened to people doing the same thing in the same situation is more statistically significant with regard to what they specifically did.

Salt water got on the camera (which sounds like a problem with the rain sleeve). Salt water got on the camera. Many people may not realize it, but salt water does not act like fresh water. For on thing, it has a lower surface tension, which means that it "seeps" and "creeps" more easily into crevices. Also, it dries more slowly because the salt residue holds moisture more than a clean surface would. A gasket that would suffice against fresh water will not necessarily suffice against salt water.

Canon said the camera was "better sealed" than before. "Better sealed" means "not fully sealed." Only "waterproof" means "fully sealed."

And, most importantly, with the ionic content, it conducts electricity much better. Salt was the culprit, indeed.

jacobsen1 wrote in post #7323797
I DISLIKE 1 series bodies. They're very large and for what? A 1V style body would be perfect for me, but I don't need the bulk of the current digital 1 series for what I do as it slows me down and is unnecessary. So I've opted for 5 series and LOVE them for what they are, and they've been perfect for me thus far. But this is making me wonder about a 1 series again. Either as a supplement for when I'm on the boat/skiing, or as my primary/only body... But honestly beyond the sealing, the 5Dii is the perfect camera for me. So it'd be a shame to have to switch to something that doesn't perform as well otherwise just because of this issue.

I know how you feel about the 1-series. I reach for my 5D still by default, but like you said, I needed the 'something else' to make up for a deficiency of the 5D (in my case though, mainly AF at f/8). I do think that the 1DIII is a better camera, but it's less fun to use since it's so bulky. So really, I do think that a 1-series and a 5D/5DII are fantastic complements for each other.

Also, they haven't heard that much from Canon yet about the cause of the LL failures right? It could just be a statistical anomaly. Or have they confirmed salt water as the culprit? I don't have a 5DII so I can't vote, but those are my two cents. It'd be a shame if such a great camera were prone to failure in inclement weather, but it seems to be mostly speculation right now.

TheHoff wrote in post #7324080
I gotta say I appreciate your objectivity on your recent purchase even after all the autofocusing threads.

+1

george m w wrote in post #7324028
Hi Ben,
Well, if you dislike one series, then I guess that answers that. It sounds like you'll pass on those bodies for the reasons you state. They are large, I won't argue, although I don't find my one series to be any 'larger' than my 20d+grip or my 50D+grip. Maybe a little heavier, but not much.
But your comment, "for what".....I was thinking from your original post, it sounds like you shoot in harsh conditions ? Fair enough....THAT is one of the things the one series is designed for, and excels at.

oh, don't get me wrong, I undertand what comes with them, I'm more saying/asking where's the modern digital 1V with an optional grip? That's the 1 series I want. I'll gladly pay for sealing, but I DO NOT WANT the grip. Adding it for FPS would be great, but otherwise no thanks.

I shoot gripless, so my 5Dii is smaller than a 1 series by a fair amount. Plus it's 2 batteries (all I typically need) are more than enough, and much easier to carry than an extra 1 series battery... I've owned a 1Nrs, 1Dii and 1D (in that order). They're GREAT bodies, just overkill for a lot of what I do, and too big/heavy/bulky for me most of the time. I shoot ~90% where I need ZERO sealing, and the 10% where I could use it a 5D has been fine in the past, so I just want that same level. Them "improving it" would be great, but to see this many failures on one trip is a bit alarming.

RDKirk wrote in post #7324179
Canon said the camera was "better sealed" than before. "Better sealed" means "not fully sealed." Only "waterproof" means "fully sealed."

right, but no 5Ds nor x0Ds had issues on this trip. That's my point with this. If anything but 1 series failed, fine, you took the wrong body out in bad weather, that's your issue. But the fact these shooters had crop bodies or old 5Ds as backups, and other shooters were using those bodies on the same trip (as well as several D700 shooters) tells me it's this very specific body canon has recently "improved". NOT canon's lesser bodies in general.

It's also interesting the 2007 trip saw 1Ds mark II issues since a lot of FF canon buyers are getting those now over the 5Dii....

TheHoff wrote in post #7324080
I gotta say I appreciate your objectivity on your recent purchase even after all the autofocusing threads.

are you being serious, or busting my chops?

my posts on the AF issues are just an attempt to make sure potential buyers are seeing both sides to that issue. My point here is to bring to light how big an issue the 5Dii might have with it's sealing and or improved sealing. I'm NOT one of the people here who will just tell you how awesome whatever I use is because it's not. The 5Dii has it's share of issues, mostly firmware fixable IMHO, but this sealing issue could be very big for a lot of people and it's not something easily fixed if it is a wide spread issue.

my thoughts personally have always been to have a backup body... In the past my thinking was a just in case plan for WHATEVER reasons. I was planning on getting a 1Dii 'N' for this to compliment my 5Dii. That body was my choice simply for the FPS upgrade, nothing else. But I've also realized when I have a 5D/5Dii in my bag, I NEVER use whatever my backup is, I ALWAYS go for the smaller FF option... Now I'm wondering if a 1DsII and 1DiiN is a better combo even with my dislike for that body size. But I really like the high ISOs that come with the 5Dii. A 5D/1DiiN combo is also an option, but beyond the sealing the 5Dii is a better body for me. Basically, how big an issue is this sealing? Will I see it in my usage (below their suggested temp range, skiing with it [going from very cold to very warm instantly, but in a bag] and salty RI air)? My 5D NEVER had an issue with any of this in 18 months of usage, so if the 5Dii is up to that I'm fine with it. But if not, I'll be rethinking my body lineup AGAIN.

What you don't know is specifically how the cameras were handled. We know they're not waterproof. That means the specifics of how non-waterproof cameras were handled in a salt-water environment makes all the difference in the world.

What we do know is that all of the 5D2 bodies were handled by the same people and those bodies failed. Your statement carries an implicit presumption that all the cameras experienced precisely the same handling, which is not true.

Although I never anticipate seeing myself shoot in those kinda conditions anytime soon but if it were to happen today, I without a doubt would opt for the D700.