I may be wrong. My three 4 DA* lenses have a rubbery seal at the lens mount that is black, and doesn't seem to stick out as far as the red seals do on the later lenses labeled WR. Perhaps Pentax was waiting to see how many defective lenses were returned before making a big deal about it with transparent drawing showing the umpteen sealing rings in their construction.
I probably was fooled by the changes in the nomenclature, and I assumed construction, of the DA 18-55, which attained WR status after I already had my non-WR version. I was able to later sell that one and obtain a WR with a newer body. Though I criticize others, it does nothing to improve my own mind, or my own photography. On Dec 28, 2013, at 18:23 , Matthew Hunt wrote: > On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 9:11 PM, Joseph McAllister <[email protected]> wrote: > >> It's only WR if it says so on the bezel. >> >> Those who, like me, purchased 2008 versions of the 16-50, 50-135 & 60-250 >> have no more water resistance than our FA and F lenses. > > The February 2007 press release says: "The smc PENTAX-DA* series > features a tightly sealed, weather-resistant and dust-resistant > construction to enhance durability for use in the rain or at the dusty > locations." Joseph McAllister Too much gear, not much time -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
