Pelican 1520 Experience

[kenw]

fwiw, almost anything that is nonporous meets the definition under noun ("n"), #1. It can be taken to mean the plastic case MATERIAL won't absorb water, and they would be right....it won't. It also meets the definition of the 1st adjective ("adj"). The case MATERIAL itself is certainly impervious. The innards? maybe not? That's covered under another definition, #2.

They don't have to meet ALL the definitions, just one, and in a way that they interpret it. I COULD say my watch and my laptop are waterproof with those definitions. Doesn't mean they will work when wet or keep water OUT of the interior, and it isn't the meaning we would normally ascribe here, but you get my point: you can let it mean virtually anything you want.

notice also that the ad posted above also uses the words water-tight, yet another poorly defined word/phrase.

a better statement would be "Water tight to x atmospheres (of pressure) at xx temp for xx hours." that you can test and verify.

Yea, I'm being picky. Word definitions and the interpretation of them are something I've dealt with a lot over the years. It's why I use photographs nowdays to explain how to build things. Words are too subjective.

[CaptainTom]

Doesn't the tenet that the term is defined by what the average reader believes have a play here.??

[kenw]

Originally Posted by CaptainTom

Doesn't the tenet that the term is defined by what the average reader believes have a play here.??

define "average"....(sorry)

unfortunately, that probably has to be decided by lawyers......

[luis_relampago]

Ken,

You sound more like a pelican sales rep. trying to explain their misconception of the word "waterproof" witch for a majority of people means no water will penetrate the case. I think one of their main sales point is the word "waterproof" and that is misleading advertisement. I know I will not be buying a pelican case soon.

[kenw]

nope, so selling here, just 30 years of writing and interpreting technical "words".

I had a pelican and got rid of it for many reasons, one being that I could tell by looking that it wasn't waterproof enough and in my definition. the other and main reason was that it had become too small for my stuff and still wouldn't fit "in an overhead bin".....

however, i will note that a former employer used them by the truckload for toting very sensitive oil field gear all over the world in all sorts of dismal conditions. They are waterproof by almost anyone's definition. Evidently there's more than one grade of pelican case. These were nothing like what I've seen used for cameras and such, and make the one I had look like a toy. I can't imagine what they cost.....but the stuff we put in one of them was worth over $100k.

[ldelacruz]

Such a shame. I have always thought they were water proof.

[CaptainTom]

The Pelican cases have always been the icon for indestructible and waterproof for carrying camera equipment.

I guess I'm going to start looking at the competitors.

[kenw]

the true icon was the old Zero/Halliburton metal cases. Not sure they're still around, and they certainly don't have any affiliation with Halliburton anymore, but if old man Halliburton was ever involved it was one tough case. Heavy and expensive, yes. Wimpy never.

[tropicdiver]

I actually was planning on buying a Pelican 1510, but after reading this thread, no more. I went to the Hardigg site and much to my surprise, I see that Pelican bought them the first of the year.

I am still very interested in Hardigg, because it appears it is still manufactured at their plant and reading their specifications, it sounds like a world class case that isn't that much more expensive than a Pelican 1510 and it rolls and is carry on approved (model iM2500 Storm Case).

My question is, which works better? The padded dividers or the foam cells that you can remove the foam you need for a snug fit. I have enough gear that I normally carry with me on trips, that I am not worried about the flexibility of changing the padded dividers to suit what I need. I will carry 1 body, 2 telephotos and 2 wides. So, which is better? Foam or padded dividers?

Thanks!

[Daniel Bates]

We (the Army) use Pelicans for just about everything. I trust them.

[cajun angel]

I have 2 Pelicans and dearly love em! I use one on my atv and the other for when I'm travelling - both are used for storing my extra gear at times too.

[texxter]

Originally Posted by tropicdiver

My question is, which works better? The padded dividers or the foam cells that you can remove the foam you need for a snug fit. I have enough gear that I normally carry with me on trips, that I am not worried about the flexibility of changing the padded dividers to suit what I need. I will carry 1 body, 2 telephotos and 2 wides. So, which is better? Foam or padded dividers?

I have a 1510 with the dividers for all my portable flash gear and I love it. The foam may be fine for cameras and lenses, but I find the dividers better for miscellaneous gear, and they are reconfigurable. The 1510 a great case.

[dminton]

http://boardingarea.com/blogs/flying...ts-a-carry-on/

http://boardingarea.com/blogs/flying...er-it-i-would/

http://boardingarea.com/blogs/flying...house-i-would/

[Joe N]

I am not trying to defend Pelican's ads but watertight probably means impervious to rain or water splashes but does not mean submersible. In a lawsuit their lawyers could probably prove some industry standard that would release Pelican from water damaged equipment. To me it verges on being false advertising but their ads probably do meet some legal definition that is obscure to us.

Don't rely on Ziplock bags either because they are not submersible. I had a small first aid kit with me in a kayak and the kit was double bagged in Ziplocks but after rolling over both bags were full of water. There are dry bags that kayakers/canoers/rafters use that are completely waterproof. They come in various sizes and there is probably a size available that will hold almost any size backpack or camera case. I don't know if anyone makes a truly waterproof or submersible camera case but if you need to keep your equipment dry a dry bag is an option. It may be a little awkward but if there is a chance your equipment might get submersed a dry bag is an option.

[auto]

Originally Posted by Joe N

I am not trying to defend Pelican's ads but watertight probably means impervious to rain or water splashes but does not mean submersible. In a lawsuit their lawyers could probably prove some industry standard that would release Pelican from water damaged equipment. To me it verges on being false advertising but their ads probably do meet some legal definition that is obscure to us.

Don't rely on Ziplock bags either because they are not submersible. I had a small first aid kit with me in a kayak and the kit was double bagged in Ziplocks but after rolling over both bags were full of water. There are dry bags that kayakers/canoers/rafters use that are completely waterproof. They come in various sizes and there is probably a size available that will hold almost any size backpack or camera case. I don't know if anyone makes a truly waterproof or submersible camera case but if you need to keep your equipment dry a dry bag is an option. It may be a little awkward but if there is a chance your equipment might get submersed a dry bag is an option.

I concur with your assessment. Now for the bad news, the 40D finally died, sent it back to Canon, you guessed total rebuild. The price they wanted, it was cheaper to buy a refurb from Adorama. I have several rolltop bags I will be employing this year. I still use Pelican for gun travel on airlines, but there are better solutions when it comes to boating as I just made $700 assumption that was wrong.