Frosty, the Camera!

trooper!

Es cámara es como un rifle…apuntando a inocentes

Interesting photo. Hope you got some good shots of the meteor shower.

Love this

cela me ferait mal au cœur de geler un appareil de ce prix… Mais le sujet en vaut peut-être la peine. C'est là qu'on reconnait les passionnés aventureux des amateurs hésitants.

So how do you handle the frost on the lens? Do you set and forget it, using only the shots before the frost coats the lens?

+Carl Chapel  I was counting on the dew point to be low and not be reached until close to dawn the following morning (as is typical in this very dry climate).  I could see 2/3 charge registering on the batteries (in a 2-battery holder), so I was pretty confident that I'd get at least a couple of hundred frames but that the camera wouldn't shoot all night.  I just wanted to see if I could catch a few meteors in spite of the moonlight.  Sure enough, the camera shot until 1:15 am, then shut down.  I caught at least 3 decent meteors, probably a few smaller ones as well, and none of the shots showed any signs of fog or mist.

When I got up at 4 am the frost was only on the clear protective filter in front of the lens, not on the surface of the lens itself.  I mainly shot with warm cameras/lenses at that point, and only for a short while before the approaching dawn ended the night shooting.

I spent the night shooting the Perseid Meteors with my 12 year old daughter sitting in lawn chairs wrapped in blankets due to unseasonal cold only to find out that after about 45 min. of shooting dew coated my lens wrecking my shots. We saw dozens of meteors and had at least 12 really good ones go through the sky where the camera was aimed. I ended up with 1 usable meteor photo so at least I had that. I planned to shoot the Geminid but snow storms have blocked the night sky so I have to wait till next year now. I have some chemical hand warmers and was going to wrap my lens with a towel and the warmers thinking the heat would keep the lens clear, perhaps they would keep your lens from frosting over?

+Jeff Sullivan, Very understandable my situation was a little different and since it was my first time I never thought about the dew. Boy was I bummed when I realized I had sat there freezing thinking I had awesome shots and found out they were wrecked!

+Cory Smart I would have been thrilled to have it heat up 17 degrees this morning to have it be as warm as the 26 when we arrived at Bodie (and it briefly snowed on us).  Even with gloves on it got to the point this morning where I could not feel the buttons on my camera or use my fingers they were so cold.  Fortunately I had a hand warmer in the form of a large cup of coffee in the house.

Before the Ice melt down I guess you take care of your devices ^^ with water doesn't works very well lol.

열정이 대단하네..

thats art

+Dennis Sulz Actually, I thought it all through very thoroughly, considering the temperature, dew point, age, condition and value of the camera.  The specified operating range of the 5D Mark II goes down to 32 degrees F, and Canon is conservative in those specifications.  The camera was operating when temperatures were within the recommended range. 

Electronics run more efficiently in the cold, batteries hold charge better but deplete faster.  The main risk would be to mechanical parts and any motors used, hopefully minimized by having the camera in manual mode and with manual focus.  The main risk would be to the shutter curtain itself and the assembly which moves it, but those have lasted 233% of their rated life already, so I should expect those to fail at any time.  

I do want to sell the camera, but the shutter has has over 330,000 shutter activations on it vs. a projected lifespan of 150,000, so no one in their right mind would buy it.   With a market value close to zero until the shutter  is replaced, there is effectively no downside risk.  If the shutter breaks, I get to replace the shutter curtain and then the shutter should be good for another 150,000 (or 330,000) pictures… it will have value again.

The last shutter curtain I had replaced was one of 4 parts broken on 2 cameras I sent for repair, and the bill with 2 day turnaround was $366, $183 per camera or a little over $80 average per part.  So the shutter curtain alone with shipping may be about $100-150, so I know what the financial risk is.

I could fix the shutter before it's broken, but what if the old shutter would pass 400,000, but a new one might fail early at 50,000?  There's no clear right answer, but the prudent financial course is to get the full life out of the old shutter, since it has proven to be very reliable.  That also gives me a camera that I can use in conditions which are close to the ends of the operating range.  With a newer camera I'd be concerned that cold might make the shutter curtain more stiff and brittle, but this shutter has a track record of reliability and once again it operated just fine for 500+ exposures.

Full frame sensors are known for running hot, and when exposing sequences of night exposures where the shutter open 30 seconds out of every 31 seconds I've seen extreme noise appear in photos when ambient temperatures as low as 80 degrees, 24 degrees within the operating range.  It's pretty clear that the operating range is specified for normal operating conditions: relatively short exposures with relatively little sensor heating.  Running in the boundary case with the camera shutter open nearly constantly, the sensor is effectively acting as an internal heater.  The cool outdoor temperatures would help keep the sensor cool, which reduces noise (but also prevents damage).  

So to sum up the considerations, I have a camera which had a market value of zero operating within its specified range, with some risk of a failed shutter, which if it occurred would cost under $150 and after replaced would increase the value of the camera to perhaps $800-1000.  So a failed shutter would be profitable in the amount of $650-850.

Consider that I'm not simply doing this for fun, I'm capturing images that are converted to a time-lapse video.  My most recent sale, also taken during a meteor shower, yielded $650 for being included in this BBC special which aired a couple of weeks ago: http://youtu.be/cygpEFw19v0?t=23m37s
The Geminid meteor shower is the most intense meteor shower of the year.  If I don't shoot it, I make $0.  

I live a few hours from what's often the hottest place in the country, Death Valley, and I considered going there like I did last year for the Geminids, but temperatures dropped into the teens and twenties there, so it wasn't worth the $500+ in travel expenses (an additional hurdle which would need to be recouped through the resulting photography).

Business almost always involves considering trade-offs, making an investment and taking calculated risks which deliver revenue, while considering the opportunity cost of inaction, of not taking those risks.  Photography is no exception.

All things considered, I have a camera I can feel comfortable having deliver revenue for me in relatively cold temperatures and not have to  take the additional risk of having to lose my main camera body for a week or so if I have to send it in for service.  Normally I shoot at night using at least 2 camera bodies, but I shot with one because I agree with your basic premise that if the camera has high value (less age and a lower shutter count) the additional revenue it might generate is less likely to exceed any potential risk.

Yes there was some risk, but the $$$ considerations were thought through very thoroughly.  The considerations would be different with a different camera, and a different photographer with a different relationship to revenue potential from the specific subject being shot.

Beautiful