From: "Frantisek Vlcek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Hi, > I have a few questions to ask before leaving. I just returned from > outside (-10celsius) where I photographed some dusk landscapes lit > by multicoloured fireworks (I didn't plan on the fireworks, but > they lit indirectly the landscape very nicely). With the LX on > auto, and M lenses (the "new" M75-150/4 proved itself nicely). > > I used a small canvas "camera" bag, which isn't sealed. So upon > returning home, the LX and lenses got lot of condensation... > > I was pretty confident that the LX can take it without any problems > (is that so? it was dripping with moisture, but metered and motored > fine), but what about the M lenses? Much of the important, moisture sensitivity parts of the LX are sealed, but it's never good to allow condensation on any fine instrument. The moisture must, of course, be removed as soon as possible to prevent growth of airborn, opportunistic organisms - especially on the LX shutter and inside the lenses. This can be done by placing the equipment in a flow of warm, dry air - warmer than the room but not hot. One way to prevent serious condensation from taking plave is to carry Ziploc bags with you. Place the camera and lenses in the Ziploc bags and seal them BEFORE you enter any heated area (your home for example). Do not remove them until they (and all their internal parts) have reached (near) room temperature. > I kept the zoom in a sealed > case, but a M 2/35 was on the body and was "dripping" too (no fog > inside though). How well are the M lenses sealed? Lenses cannot be completely sealed because they must allow a free exchange of air when focusing. > Should I worry? > How about shooting in rain? Again, the LX can cope with it, but the > lenses? On some reportages, I shot in rain because there was no > other option, and it wasn't raining much. But still I would like to > hear some of the experts opinions. There are companies that sell special "bags" for shooting in the rain. Can't think of a specific one right now, but I've seen them advertised in both magazines and on the web. I've never used them, so I cannot attest to their performance. > And now the sad story (extreme example of above theme) > > Yesterday I saw my friend, a Pentax collector (he had big problems > with several LXes, even AFTER sending them to Pentax Belgium for > repair). He has an eye on K2DMD plus MD motor for his collection. > He was persuading one person to sell him both, partly in exchange > for a modern AF SLR. But the K2DMD can grow on you, sentimentally > (mine certainly did). Yesterday I saw the K2DMD in his shop! "You > must be certainly glad that you finally persuaded the person. It's > more pride of your collection that your LX". Sadly he brought the > camera to me, and said "Lahovice". That's one of the suburbs of > Prague that got about 4 meters of water during the summer > catastrophal floods. Opening the camera revealed completely rusted > inside, the film rails were partly eaten away, etc - ruined, a wreck. > Just the brass outside survived well. He then told me, that the > person owning the K2DMD came to him three months after the flood, > with the K2DMD and wanting him to get it repaired... while all the > time it had been stored with water inside. He has a Vivitar S1 zoom > which still has water inside the optics, there is about two cups of > water sloshing happilly inside, even after so much time. It's a > great pity because if restored immediately, the camera could have > been saved, maybe. Now, after so much time in water, it's a wreck > (there are sadder parts to this story, as anybody who has been > flooded knows. It's nothing wonderful). There is also a brighter > (although cynical) side to this story: with the demise of this > K2DMD, all our working nice K2DMDs just got somewhat rarer and > more pricey... That truely is a sad story.
