Rugged 7D -- Survived Antarctica

I bought the AquaTech camera raingear for my "big stuff" for shooting outdoors in the rain. I noticed the fellow who went to Antarctica also equipped his large telephoto lens with a similar rain cover. Snowy, freezing cold weather is actually not nearly as bad as rain....rain seeps into crevices....when it's so cold the water is snow, you can wipe or blow the snow off. There is almost no "moisture" whatsoever in extremely cold conditions--all the water is frozen!

A 200 f/2 or 300/2.8 or 400/2.8 lens costs more than most professional bodies; the AquaTech camera raingear costs less than a single speedlight flash. Manufacturers make all sorts of claims about the water resistance of professional cameras and lenses, and yet, professional sports and nature shooters quite often turn to camera raingear when it is raining.

$10,000 to $18,000 camera and lens combo...is it worth a $300 set of raingear for the investment, or is it better to rely on "seals" and "weatherproofing"?


Would you highly recommend the Aquatech Derrel? I am looking into some cold weather gear for shooting more this winter than in previous years. Although I haven't had any failures yet, like you said with such expensive gear it only makes sense. I was thinking the thicker "blanket" types might help the camera hold in some of the heat produced by the electronics. You have any experience with other brands other than the Aquatech?
 
My only brand has been the Aquatech brand, the SS-300. You need to buy the eyepiece in addition to the jacket...it will probably not keep in much heat as far as batteries/electronics go, but one thing I can tell you--it keeps your hands warm and out of the wind! For windsurfing photos where there's a lot of spray coming off of the whitecaps, most of the guys I see are using the Aquatech raingear.

I have been eyeing those neoprene lens covers as well..to me, those things look like a great way to preserve the finish on big glass,and also protect a little bit at least from the frozen hands syndrome in really cold weather. Neoprene is nice to the touch. Might bring another $500 on that "mint" canon big glass when it's time to trade it in on the next big gun...

I bought a closeout "Camera Armor" set for my wife's Nikon D40 as sort of an impact protector....that device was, well, kind of interesting as far as protecting the body from impact.

I wonder about using one of those miniature hand-warmer packets maybe slipped inside of something like Camera Armor. I had an old duck hunting seat cushion with those styrofoam beads inside--weight activated it and kept my butt warm in wintry weather; maybe the hand warmer packets would keep a camera battery warmer.
 
My only brand has been the Aquatech brand, the SS-300. You need to buy the eyepiece in addition to the jacket...it will probably not keep in much heat as far as batteries/electronics go, but one thing I can tell you--it keeps your hands warm and out of the wind! For windsurfing photos where there's a lot of spray coming off of the whitecaps, most of the guys I see are using the Aquatech raingear.

I have been eyeing those neoprene lens covers as well..to me, those things look like a great way to preserve the finish on big glass,and also protect a little bit at least from the frozen hands syndrome in really cold weather. Neoprene is nice to the touch. Might bring another $500 on that "mint" canon big glass when it's time to trade it in on the next big gun...

I bought a closeout "Camera Armor" set for my wife's Nikon D40 as sort of an impact protector....that device was, well, kind of interesting as far as protecting the body from impact.

I wonder about using one of those miniature hand-warmer packets maybe slipped inside of something like Camera Armor. I had an old duck hunting seat cushion with those styrofoam beads inside--weight activated it and kept my butt warm in wintry weather; maybe the hand warmer packets would keep a camera battery warmer.


Derrel,
Your comments about the Camera Armour are interesting. I bought a set (fortunately from Amazon Marketplace so I didn't pay full price) for my 30D. The only thing I found it good for was at attracting dust in the crevices and at getting in the way when I wanted to change lenses. I dumped it.
 
My only brand has been the Aquatech brand, the SS-300. You need to buy the eyepiece in addition to the jacket...it will probably not keep in much heat as far as batteries/electronics go, but one thing I can tell you--it keeps your hands warm and out of the wind! For windsurfing photos where there's a lot of spray coming off of the whitecaps, most of the guys I see are using the Aquatech raingear.

I have been eyeing those neoprene lens covers as well..to me, those things look like a great way to preserve the finish on big glass,and also protect a little bit at least from the frozen hands syndrome in really cold weather. Neoprene is nice to the touch. Might bring another $500 on that "mint" canon big glass when it's time to trade it in on the next big gun...

I bought a closeout "Camera Armor" set for my wife's Nikon D40 as sort of an impact protector....that device was, well, kind of interesting as far as protecting the body from impact.

I wonder about using one of those miniature hand-warmer packets maybe slipped inside of something like Camera Armor. I had an old duck hunting seat cushion with those styrofoam beads inside--weight activated it and kept my butt warm in wintry weather; maybe the hand warmer packets would keep a camera battery warmer.

I have the neoprene lenscoat on my 600 f/4 IS and love it. Its never cold to the touch, and like you'd expect, there is not a single mark on the lens. I can highly recommend it. The only downfall I have found is that isn't cut for the drop in filter holder. But since the edge of neoprene won't fray, it can easily be cut to allow access to the filter holder.
 
Out of 77 photographers, 54 were shooting Canon? Wow!

This guy just doesn't quit. I love it. Your old sig had me rolling as well. :mrgreen:


Its all in fun, I could easily see myself shooting either system (Canon or Nikon). LOL Both are outstanding by anyones standards. What old sig? The Sony one?

Yup, the Sony one. :lol:

I'm still not sure if I should go with Nikon or Canon for a 600 f/4 lens. inTempus acts as if it's common knowledge that Canon's long primes are clearly superior, and if I can somehow verify that they are, it will be an easy choice to make.

However, all my Google searches came up empty. Except a few search results w/ links to articles that discussed previous incarnations of the Nikon 500mm and 600mm lenses.

I have the neoprene lenscoat on my 600 f/4 IS and love it. Its never cold to the touch, and like you'd expect, there is not a single mark on the lens. I can highly recommend it. The only downfall I have found is that isn't cut for the drop in filter holder. But since the edge of neoprene won't fray, it can easily be cut to allow access to the filter holder.

I've been thinking about getting one for my 200-400.

Wildlife Watching Supplies - Neoprene lens and hood camouflage camera covers

^ Are these the ones you and Derrel are talking about? Can you just order the lens coat and um... do it yourself? Or do they have to do it for you?
 
Last edited:
I'm still not sure if I should go with Nikon or Canon for a 600 f/4 lens. inTempus acts as if it's common knowledge that Canon's long primes are clearly superior, and if I can somehow verify that they are, it will be an easy choice to make.
If you're making a $8k+ purchasing decision based upon a single users post on a bulletin board, well, that's not exactly the most logical thing to do, Mr. Logic. Even more perplexing is why you would make a purchasing decision based strictly on other random users comments on other boards based on a Google search or because of a popularity contest.

Ideally you would head to a big name camera store and check both systems out. Get on Google and find specs to the lenses your looking to buy and find a few technical reviews. Compare performance and features and make an informed decision.

If you can't find a way to get the info you need in an unbiased manner or you're not able to make heads nor tails of detailed technical reviews, then head over to a board dedicated to the type of photography you're planning on doing and talk to owners of both brands. Ask your questions of them.

That seems to me to be the most logical approach.
 
Last edited:
inTempus acts as if it's common knowledge that Canon's long primes are clearly superior, and if I can somehow verify that they are, it will be an easy choice to make.
It's not just me, Derrel "acted" as though he knew the same thing but shared with us that Nikon has added new and improved lenses to their line up and my understanding was based on "PRIOR" generations of Canon lenses.

Since you're only trying to verify my comments and not Derrel's, that must mean you either didn't catch his comments or don't care to validate them and have focused on only mine for some odd reason.
 
If you're making a $8k+ purchasing decision based upon a single users post on a bulletin board, well, that's not exactly the most logical thing to do, Mr. Logic. Even more perplexing is why you would make a purchasing decision based strictly on other random users comments on other boards based on a Google search or because of a popularity contest.

No, that wouldn't be logical at all. Good thing I wasn't doing any of that, then. I wasn't about to make my decision on random user comments -- maybe I didn't make myself clear. But technical reviews of the most recent batch of Nikon super teles are hard to come by, as you may, or may not have noticed. See below.

If you can't find a way to get the info you need in an unbiased manner or you're not able to make heads nor tails of detailed technical reviews, then head over to a board dedicated to the type of photography you're planning on doing and talk to owners of both brands. Ask your questions of them.
Did that many months ago. IMO, you're not likely to get unbiased info then, either.

Get on Google and find specs to the lenses your looking to buy and find a few technical reviews. Compare performance and features and make an informed decision.
Done that.

Ideally you would head to a big name camera store and check both systems out.
Indeed... and I will. Guess that's pretty much the only thing left for me to do.



It's not just me, Derrel "acted" as though he knew the same thing but shared with us that Nikon has added new and improved lenses to their line up and my understanding was based on "PRIOR" generations of Canon lenses.

Since you're only trying to verify my comments and not Derrel's, that must mean you either didn't catch his comments or don't care to validate them and have focused on only mine for some odd reason.
I didn't catch his comments. Still haven't. I'll go look for them now.
 
But technical reviews of the most recent batch of Nikon super teles are hard to come by, as you may, or may not have noticed.
That means you either have to wait for them, go on specs from the manufacturers website alone, or just flip a coin and pick one if you can't wait. Either way, do you think one will drastically out perform the other?

I've found a couple user reviews for a few lenses on Amazon.com. Again, I wouldn't put too much weight in owners opinions - as you apparently agree. People tend to justify their purchases, especially when spending $6k-$8k on something. Plus you have the whole partisan brand loyalist thing to consider.

Did that many months ago. IMO, you're not likely to get unbiased info then, either.
That's why I left it as a last resort.

Indeed... and I will. Guess that's pretty much the only thing left for me to do.
There ya go. Let us know what you find out.

I didn't catch his comments. Still haven't. I'll go look for them now.
His comments are in the same thread that you're referencing regarding my comments I believe.
 
Either way, do you think one will drastically out perform the other?

No. Not really. But a test -- the only relevant test that I know of -- in a photography magazine made me question that somewhat. At least, for a minute. The 500 f/4 VR didn't do as well as expected (in terms of IQ). But I'm not about to make a purchasing decision based on just one test. Especially because in that same magazine the Nikkor 14-24 f/2.8 tested rather poorly (the 500 f/4 tested much better)

His comments are in the same thread that you're referencing regarding my comments I believe.

Yup, I found it. Thanks. I own the 200-400 f/4 VR, the "world leader in long zooms," as Derrel puts it. It is very sharp, focuses very fast, but is not as good in the corners as I had hoped for. But I'm not about to sell it, either.

People tend to justify their purchases, especially when spending $6k-$8k on something. Plus you have the whole partisan brand loyalist thing to consider.
Indeed. Unless there's something very wrong with a $8,000 lens, you are likely to get oohs and aahs. Many of them justified, no doubt... but not necessarily believable, either.

There ya go. Let us know what you find out.
Will do.
 
What it all comes down to between Canon and Nikon is hair splitting. Outside of a couple of outstanding lenses, both are so damn close no one could tell the difference in a final print.

And when I say outstanding lenses, one of them happens to be nikons 14-24. Awesome lens! I may get one for my Canon system. But I do love my 85L f/1.2....absolutely love it. Could a customer ever tell me what lens or even what brand of camera I was shooting with? Not a f-ing chance.......
 
Mr. Logic, and anybody else who's still reading this!

Nikon | Imaging Products | AF-S VR Nikkor 200mm f/2G IF-ED
This is the MTF graph for the 200mm f/2 which I own, and which is I would say without reservation THE single best lens I have ever used. Ever. It has a superb MTF function,and the quality of the lens performance at f/2 exceeds the performance of the 70-200 VR, first version at f/2.8. It focuses faster and more reliably, and the resolution and contrast are flat out amazing. Look at the MTF graph.

Nikon | Imaging Products | AF-S NIKKOR 600mm f/4G ED VR
This is the MTF graph for the 600 VR; it is nearly "off the charts". It is almost not possible to make a better lens. Its optical performance is actually higher than the 200mm f/2; being two full f/stops slower AND priced very high also makes that possible to do. At a very high price, it is possible to manufacture a lens that has very few, if any, design constraints or optical limitations imposed upon it by end-user price limitations.

Nikkor Lens Assessment by Thom Hogan
Looking in the section under Exotics are some good comments on the lens in question, plus practical considerations among six exotic Nikkors. He rates the 600/4 VR's optical performance as stellar.

Look at Nikon Imaging's MTF graphs for the 200-400VR you own and you can see the loss of edge quality, especially at the short end; then, compare the MTF graphs of the 200-400 with those of the 200 VR and the 600 VR, and I think it'll be clear--the new Nikon 600VR is a superb lens. One that would probably survive a trip to Antarctica!:lol:
 
MTF's don't mean crap when a human being cannot tell the difference.......Its like spending all day viewing at 100% in photoshop, taking pictures of brick walls, taking photos of newspaper pages taped to the wall.....all of it is plain rubbish. I honestly don't see how anyone can actually enjoy photography any more.
 

Most reactions

Back
Top