I was just four weeks in Ecuador including Galapagos. For snorkeling with sea turtles and sea lions because it takes just a waterproof camera. An underwater case is too heavy and too bulky, therefore joins for the duration of leave a waterproof Compact as a second camera to my D300. As a satisfied Nikon user I was happy of course that Nikon have just in time presented their first waterproof digital camera, the AW100. On paper this sounds ever quite well, especially for the Compact rather exceptional CMOS sensor. Less promising sounds the resolution, 16MP are for a compact with integrated optics in my eyes too much for me. That is the theory. Tests were 2 months ago still in short supply, so I had to try even the AW100 easy.
For safety's sake I thought I order my "second choice" with equal - the Panasonic FT3. So I can compare in peace at home and then have a holiday definitely a functioning secondary camera. Their predecessors FT2 had an acquaintance with the rafting there and the images have become quite useful. In addition, I am currently in everyday life often with a LX3 go and am very happy with the image quality and operation. Sure, the LX3 neither the FT3 nor the AW100 will come close, but the LX3 is not nunmal waterproof ...
- Compare Panasonic Lumix FT3 and Nikon AW100 -
The FT3 impressive at first glance. The metal case, with my copy in Orange, makes a clean impression and is processed by the indicated handle shape pretty well in hand. General believes the material mix. The AW100, however, seems to be made of some kind of plastic-Compount, it feels like the newer Nikon lenses. This affects not quite as high as the metal housing of the FT3, but is far from cheap feel. Again, give me the material mix directly a very valent feel only a tad behind the FT3. For this, however (just over 10% so) is also the weight balance, according to 20g less. So to sum it only once a stalemate. Nice detail in Nikon: a kind of "spacer" prevented at the back that the display scratched if you put the camera on the back on the table - but only if it is level.
With regard to handling both have their advantages and disadvantages: If you take the AW100 to the FT3 in the hand, you notice immediately that this tiny thickening at the right edge of the FT3 with only indicated grip already brings some and FT3 thereby noticeably better in the hand lies. However, the Nikon users need have no fear: the release button of the AW100 is roughened so that the Finge adheres well to it. With wet hands, the Nikon is due in rather rough plastic housing also significantly more stringent than the smooth metal of FT3. So a draw to stay with chess metaphors.
When you insert the batteries and memory cards I look at the same time the closure of "Luke" on. At first glance, the small Riegelchen to close the Panasonic does not act as if it could withstand along with the downright delicate-looking seal 12m water depth. After all, there is a further slide to lock in order to avoid accidental opening, but it leaves a certain doubt. This looks at the Nikon but already much better - at least from the outside. But it opens the door, turns out that the time-consuming rotary push mechanism also operated a tiny Riegelchen that pushes the flap to only slightly thicker gasket. Again doubts - which should be waterproof?!? But more on that later. For now, I have to content myself with a renewed tie - so we will not get.
With both cameras, the glass of the lens sits in a depression and is also protected without lens cap first time against mechanical damage. Unfortunately, the framing of this depression with two cameras from smooth, reflective material - Who's coming to such an idea? That's exactly when I would coat the lens hood of my SLR inside shiny. Depending on the position of the sun can cause reflections, which in turn leave ugly rings on the image by reflecting this inner edge. Hmph ...
So we turn the two baby one time. The menu of Nikon is the first major disappointment for me as D300 owners. I thought but to find everything exactly where I would expect it. This is unfortunately not the case. Obviously, the departments of compact and DSLR cameras are working with Nikon not together particularly closely. It is even worse - the AW100 the menu does not work even after prolonged use thought much. Constantly looking back options etc. Unlike the Panasonic - everything is exactly where I expect it as LX3 owners, and new features are at least logically integrated into the menu. Point for the FT3.
The mechanical contractor qualities of the two candidates can I compare poorly - at least I need one of the cameras so return yet. But I'm going snorkeling with one of the two cams anyway - because I want to then already be sure that they also withstand the. 10m are at Nikon, Panasonic even 12m, but so far I'm not going first, snorkeling, secondly, I do not trust that not even to the cameras. But 1-2m they should already provide. Since stänkern when Panasonic Lumix FT2 various reports on the net about leaks, I want to test this 1-2 m water depth in any case. For that reason alone to go to the swimming pool - NE The untapped rain drain pipe from the basement strikes me as just right.. Bottom closed watertight, the cameras fit side by side into wonderful. To avoid scratches, both wrapped in each one sock, then the tube is filled with water. Now we give about 400g digicams into the water and simmer for the entire hour. No, of course not simmer, just wait. In the meantime, I can continue to write something about this text ...
Before mountains the sunken treasure, I'm looking in the basement the Pümpel and press order from top neatly on the surface - to simulate greater depths or short-term pressure fluctuations by the swimming motion under water (what a happiness that I not watching) goes .Then's ans Potted, they are still alive? Switch on - yeah !. So far so good, but how do the hatches from? In both you can see that the water has come up to the seal, but no further. So: Passed. Although only 1m plus a little extra pressure but I think for my needs should be enough the.
For image quality: I had not really expected that the integrated optics of FT3 and AW100 come up to my LX3 or even D300. And just 16 highly integrated megapixels can be safe in such a small lens no great 1: expect 1 Crops. But when I look at the results after a brief comparison shoot I was pretty shocked. Both cameras disappoint. If you look at the images in actual size 1: 1 on, you have quite a both cameras pixel mud in front of him. On the one hand the compact optics seem to be overwhelmed by the very high-resolution sensors. On the other hand there is (especially for Nikon) clearly visible artifacts by the JPG compression. Reduced Full Frame on the window size of a 22 "monitor (1650x1020) Although they are no longer recognizable, but it really needs now no 16MP De facto you have the images of the AW100 in the ratio 1:. Consider 4 reduced by no more artifacts to recognize bring for both cameras This however is amply sufficient for Ausrucke to A4 The 16MP are just advertising and the "dumb" consumer masses due, really - 3 This brings us to a usable resolution of about 4MP: in the FT3 ranges 1..! Do not do anything.
After the first shock of the absolutely measured rather modest image quality but now must make a decision between AW100 and FT3 like - because one of the two goes back immediately, the other to accompany me on vacation snorkeling and comes after the virtual bay. After long back and forth I finally decided, the AW100 to keep Nikon for the duration of the holiday. The pictures are a bit sharper and the colors less exaggerated than in the tend to colorful performing FT3.
- Alternatives -
In addition to the Nikon AW100 and the Panasonic FT3 there are a number of other, more interesting compact cameras. Below is a short list of possible alternatives and why I decided against this and taken only the AW100 and the FT3 shortlisted. It was also told that I already have cameras from Nikon and Panasonic and know and possibly somewhat biased towards other manufacturers have since I do not even want to get used to a third manufacturer the system. Anyway, here is the list:
Sony Cybershot TX10 - according to various tests in the image quality probably a bit better than the FT3 (so far I could not compare to the AW100 find), but the slide in front of the lens appears to be susceptible to sand me on the beach. I've looked at the Sony in the store and the concern is simply too great that a grain of sand while snorkeling blocked the mechanism and the camera then turns to the rest of the holiday. General acts that Sony not as robust (is not shock-proof) and is also available from the Water-resistance rather than for the swimming pool made for the sea. In addition, the operation is done in large part via a touchscreen 'I do not want to have to operate under water - not even in the winter with gloves ...
Olympus Tough TG-810 - no reports of water seepage or leak found. From the robustness this camera is probably a league of its own (on youtube there's a video in which a Jeep rolled over the Cam !!). From the weight unfortunately. In addition, the image quality does not seem quite to be on top of.
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FT2 - not a bad camera, some say the picture quality is even better than the FT3. However, there's quite a lot of complaints about the FT2 leak to FT3 not (but may also be because the new FT3 is).
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FT10 - a bargain among outdoor cameras. But with just 2m water depth earned the FT10 for me the term "waterproof" does not really. This is more "splash-proof". For snorkeling in the sea separates them for me from hence.
Canon PowerShot D10 - An ugly, clumsy duckling, Canon has built there. If it were just about snorkeling would be the do not disturb yes and the loops are optional then certainly a great thing. But in between the D10 is just too big.
- Experience in the vacation -
The holiday is over, I am back at home and have not been copied an image on the computer - and write already in my review. Accordingly, I must supply later the subject image quality later.
What I now can write already - on holiday a Panasonic FT3 and Sony had in my tour group also depending TX10 represented, as well as "normal" in a Lumix DiCAPac Underwater Case - and all have kept close to the Raftig and snorkeling! However, there was in the water partly problems with fogged by condensation lens - clear where moisture from pure, can not get out.
Thus, the lens does not fog up when I jump from 30 degrees air temperature at the beach into the 18 degree cold water I always (already inside battery) along with several sachets of silica gel placed the AW100 at night with open door in a small, sealed zipper bags. Silica is in these small bags that come with most just about every electronic ordering. Simply gather a few of them [you can also silica multiple use (as soon as the content turns bluish or yellowish, they are saturated), the pouches (NOT in the microwave) needs to only about 100 ° in the oven to dry] and always in The night before the use underwater so that the inner workings of the camera a bit "dry" - then there is no more moisture in it, which could condense. If you then without the bag to open the valve closes and only after that the zip fastener opens the bag, can actually condense or misty nothing. Sure, they should never be in direct sunlight the camera before you enter the water, increasing the risk of otherwise naturally fogged lens that.
Really good enjoyed the GPS log function. Although I do not know whether (and how) I will now sync these log files with the RAW files of my D300, but the function replaces a separate GPS logger - and draws little power bearable. I could sign in 4 days and here and still make about 50 images in the time and the battery was still half full!
Also great: the video function. Again, not yet I have 1 video viewed on the computer, so no information about the picture quality. But by the operator establishes the video function is solved with a separate shutter button very good.
Oh, for robustness - me is 1x fallen from 1m height on stone floor the camera. Of which there are now 2 quirks in the housing, but the function is not impaired. Above all, the water resistance (here I had some concerns) continues to be fulfilled! So at least as regards robustness and water tightness has Nikon done everything right.
So, enough written - now I make myself times Copy and scour ans pictures so I can soon write something more to image quality and post a few examples ...
