Watertight setup for lanscapes in the rain

Discussion in 'Film Camera Forum' started by norman shearer, Feb 18, 2012.

  1. norman shearer

    norman shearer SC Veteran

    Just bought a Canon EOS 1N HS off Ebay with a view to having a camera suitable for landscapes in bad weather. Trouble is I have no EOS lenses left. I have C/Y, OM and M42 adapters for EOS but am guessing any legacy glass I put on this camera will be a weak point when it comes to shooting in the rain? Would I be right in thinking I'd need a Canon L lens for a watertight system? If so, what would you go for. I don't want to spend too much.

    On a different note, what b&w film would you use? It needs to be C41 process so I can just stick it in Asda for developing..
     
  2. Luckypenguin

    Luckypenguin SC Hall of Famer

    Dec 24, 2010
    Brisbane, Australia
    Nic
    I can't think of any non-L lenses that are weathersealed. The lenses I would choose for landscapes would be the 24-105 f4L IS or the 17-40 f4L. These are both more reasonably priced than their f2.8 equivalents and are excellent lenses in their own right, and are relatively new designs. There are some older L-series lenses dating back to the late eighties and early nineties but I don't know much about them. If I recall correctly the 17-40mm isn't fully weathersealed as it is. I think it needs a filter attached to seal the front element of the lens which moves slightly in and out when zooming. The 24-105 is a fully weathersealed lens. Neither of the two are particularly cheap lenses, although the 17-40 should be a couple of hundred dollars less. I don't know what focal length range you were considering but the two lenses cover what I would consider to be a good range for landscapes.
     
  3. norman shearer

    norman shearer SC Veteran

    The 17-40L was my first thought too then I read about those that had it and moved to primes in order to get better corner performance etc. Yet so many great landscapes are done with the 2 lenses you mention. I suppose many give too much credence to MTF tables etc when really they should be more concerned about technique and timing. I did have the 24-70 F2.8L MKII but at the time I lacked the skills to get the best from it and sold it on. I think I'll monitor E-bay for a while and see if I can get a 17-40L on the cheap - in the meantime I can get acquainted with the camera using wide legacy primes. Thanks Nic
     
  4. Luckypenguin

    Luckypenguin SC Hall of Famer

    Dec 24, 2010
    Brisbane, Australia
    Nic
    Looking at the charts in my EF Lens Work book, the 14, 24, and 35mm L-series prime do appear to offer better full-frame corner sharpness (when stopped down) than the 17-40 and 24-105, but if there is one thing that makes L-series zooms look well priced it is L-series primes :eek:
     
  5. Isoterica

    Isoterica SC Hall of Famer

    Dec 6, 2011
    How about just using camera rain gear? Get whatever lens you like and then use rain gear.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. norman shearer

    norman shearer SC Veteran

    I know. Great fast primes but hard to justify that kinda money..

    True up to a point but with it being an EOS body I should get a decent EOS lens to take advantage of autofocus. Got me thinking now though. I have several large fishing umbrellas that might be useful on wet days..
     
  7. Crsnydertx

    Crsnydertx SC Top Veteran

    758
    Jan 21, 2011
    Houston, TX
    Chuck
    Minor detail on 17-40L: it requires a filter to be in place to complete the weather seal. No big deal; you may have decided to use one in any case.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Isoterica

    Isoterica SC Hall of Famer

    Dec 6, 2011
    You're right you still need the lens.. but not having to pay for a really expensive L lens because you have good rain gear might help to begin with. If you like what you are doing you can always upgrade. And umbrellas.. I think of those big dome shapes ones you can get clear plastic so you still have the same light. Or a raincoat for your camera and lens.
     
    • Like Like x 1