Weather sealing - lens:body interface

Lee Perrins

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Jan 23, 2018
Messages
56
Firstly apologies if this is in the wrong sub - I wasn't sure if I put it in a lens forum which one to put it in - my question is about 43rds lenses, but could also apply to m43rds lenses.

Anyway - to the question - how does weather sealing work with the lens:body interface? I previously had a Pentax with one of their 'WR' lens, and that has what I have heard referred to as an "ass gasket" - a very obvious red rubber ring on the lens mount that got squashed between camera and lens to form the seal.

Until recently I didn't have any sealed lenses for my E-M1 but I assumed they would also have a rubber seal. However, I now own a 50-200 SWD and an EC-14 (both 43rds obv) which are both said to be splash/dust resistant, but neither of which have any discernible rubber seal.

I guess my question is, are my seals missing (both items are secondhand) or is the fit supposed to be so good that no rubber seal is required? Do the m43 lenses have rubber seals? I know the MMF-3 adapter has a seal.

Thanks.
 

djtaylor7

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Mar 2, 2013
Messages
903
Location
Nelson, NZ
Real Name
David
Cannot help you with the the 43rds lenses, but my Pro m43 lenses do have a rubber sealing ring, although it is not an obvious ring which is squashed. One thing is that the sealing is not part of the m43 standard, so Panasonic and Olympus lenses may have differences in sealing, and the physical arrangement of the mount. If you search you will see a thread somewhere on this forum on the subject.
 

John King

Member of SOFA
Joined
Apr 20, 2020
Messages
3,292
Location
Beaumaris, Melbourne, Australia
Real Name
John ...
@Lee Perrins Lee, the sealed FTs lenses have a fine, black seal that is hard to see, but quite easy to feel (use the pad of your finger, not the nail to feel for it).

The only sealed FTs -> mFTs adapter is the Olympus MMF-3. It also has a hard to see sealing ring.
 
Joined
Nov 2, 2013
Messages
444
Location
Western North Carolina
Here's a quick snap of 50-200 and EC-14
PXL_20210625_121834227~2.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
PXL_20210625_122013767~2.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 

John M Flores

Super Moderator
Joined
Jan 7, 2011
Messages
3,343
Location
NJ
Firstly apologies if this is in the wrong sub - I wasn't sure if I put it in a lens forum which one to put it in - my question is about 43rds lenses, but could also apply to m43rds lenses.

Anyway - to the question - how does weather sealing work with the lens:body interface? I previously had a Pentax with one of their 'WR' lens, and that has what I have heard referred to as an "ass gasket" - a very obvious red rubber ring on the lens mount that got squashed between camera and lens to form the seal.

Until recently I didn't have any sealed lenses for my E-M1 but I assumed they would also have a rubber seal. However, I now own a 50-200 SWD and an EC-14 (both 43rds obv) which are both said to be splash/dust resistant, but neither of which have any discernible rubber seal.

I guess my question is, are my seals missing (both items are secondhand) or is the fit supposed to be so good that no rubber seal is required? Do the m43 lenses have rubber seals? I know the MMF-3 adapter has a seal.

Thanks.

FWIW, I've been as confident using my Lumix weather sealed gear in inclement weather as I was using Pentax weather sealed gear in inclement weather.
 

Lee Perrins

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Jan 23, 2018
Messages
56
Here's a quick snap of 50-200 and EC-14
That's really useful, thanks - I was looking too near the centre of the lens - on the MMF-3, which is the only thing I've noticed it on, and then only from images as I don't own one, the gasket is much more obvious and further 'inboard'

I'll check when I get in.

1624628196871.png
 
Joined
Nov 2, 2013
Messages
444
Location
Western North Carolina
That's really useful, thanks - I was looking too near the centre of the lens - on the MMF-3, which is the only thing I've noticed it on, and then only from images as I don't own one, the gasket is much more obvious and further 'inboard'

I'll check when I get in.

View attachment 895019
You're welcome. For what it's worth the m43 Olympus weather sealed lenses are non obvious like on the 50-200. That adapter makes it easier to see since it's got the extra material for the larger 4/3 mount but the sealing diameter is made for the smaller m43 mount.
 

Michael Meissner

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Sep 19, 2018
Messages
843
Location
Ayer, Massachusetts, USA
FWIW, I've been as confident using my Lumix weather sealed gear in inclement weather as I was using Pentax weather sealed gear in inclement weather.
While I have used my G85 in wet conditions (including going on the boat ride at Niagara Falls that drenches you for 10 minutes and attempting to record video using the Olympus 14-150mm mark II lens). But frankly compared to my Olympus gear, I don't trust it as much. If you delve into the manual, you will see starting with the E-m5 mark II, Olympus specifies that it complies with IEC standard publication 529 at the IPX1 level, while Panasonic has weasel words that basically say they don't guarantee it at any level if your camera gets splashed.

Granted, IPX1 is a fairly low bar in terms of splash resistance, but at least it is documented that the camera meets it. In the sales documentation, Olympus talks about actually testing the E-m1x and E-m1 mark III at the IPX4 level.

The only issue I've had with splash resistance, is the Panasonic 100-300mm mark II lens, which is also splash resistant. I got splashed with a salt water wave when I was using it on the G85, and the lens stopped working after I attempted to clean the camera/lens after getting splashed. Eventually, I was able to hit the lens on a table, and it knocked out the salt grain that must have gotten in the gears. My E-m1 mark I and Olympus 14-150mm mark II lens worked immediately after the incident, as did the G85 body.
 

John M Flores

Super Moderator
Joined
Jan 7, 2011
Messages
3,343
Location
NJ

John M Flores

Super Moderator
Joined
Jan 7, 2011
Messages
3,343
Location
NJ

It's even more impressive if you show actual photos taken in inclement conditions ;)

16193491351_13282e534b_b.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Square in Times Square
by John Flores, on Flickr

23944827493_976043cb76_b.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Running through downtown during Winter Storm Jonas
by John Flores, on Flickr

That first shot was with a weather-sealed body plus a non weather-sealed lens.
That second shot was with a non weather-sealed 360 camera (Ricoh Theta).
 

Dogbert62

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Sep 24, 2014
Messages
95
Location
Austin, TX
Real Name
Patrick
Looking at the base of WR and non-WR lenses, it looks like the base plate is standard. I wonder if you can “waterproof” the camera-lens interface by replacing the baseplate on a non-WR lens with a baseplate from a broken WR lens…

regards
Dogbert62
 
Joined
Jan 3, 2014
Messages
6,106
Location
Mars
Looking at the base of WR and non-WR lenses, it looks like the base plate is standard. I wonder if you can “waterproof” the camera-lens interface by replacing the baseplate on a non-WR lens with a baseplate from a broken WR lens…

regards
Dogbert62
Nope, the WR lenses have seals throughout the lens, not just at the base.
 

PaulZr

Mu-43 Rookie
Joined
Mar 25, 2017
Messages
17
Location
Wisconsin, US
FWIW, I've had my EM1-MII with the 300/F4 many times in long, rainy hikes, sealing seems to work great. No special care, just hanging from my OpTech strap.
 

Latest threads

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Forum GIFs powered by GIPHY: https://giphy.com/
Copyright © Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom