Rugged Cameras Compared

(or "Is it cave-worthy?")

Olympus TG-5 vs Panasonic FT7 vs Nikon W300 vs Panasonic FT30

Written 6 June 2018 by Ian Mander. Multiple updates June 2018. Updated December 2019.
All focal lengths stated in 35 mm film equivalent.
Prices correct at time of original writing.

Overview

There are many consumer-level rugged cameras on the market today. Almost all of them use a 1/2.3" (6.17 x 4.55 mm) backside illuminated CMOS sensor.

None have brilliant image quality, and none will do as well in low light as a camera with a larger sensor (eg, 1", M4/3, APS-C, full frame). No current models have a touchscreen, probably because capacitive touchscreens don't tend to work well underwater. (Resistive touchscreens do but are much less sensitive, even when dry.) Sony tried it and gave up.

Why bother with a rugged camera? They're small, waterproof, and some have some very nice features. The camera you have with you is the camera you'll use, so small and waterproof is good. I don't take my Panasonic GM1 caving very much because it's not dustproof by itself and the waterproof/dustproof case is rather bulky and it tends to take lots of photos of the inside of my bag. (It does take very nice photographs outside of the bag, though.)

Rugged cameras available in New Zealand are the Olympus TG-5, the Panasonic FT7, and the Nikon Coolpix W300. Coming in a bit cheaper is the Panasonic FT30 – older and less full featured, but it may still meet your requirements. And that seems to be it, just four models available off the shelf in New Zealand.

UPDATE 2 December 2019: Heading into summer in New Zealand seems like a good time to mention there are now two other rugged cameras available in New Zealand, the Olympus TG-6 (a NZ$649 minor update to the TG-5) and the Ricoh WG-6 (only available in two shops and at NZ$649-$685 is expensive for what it offers – eg, no image stabilisation – so not yet worth adding to the table).

DPReview: “As with its predecessors, Olympus’s Tough TG-6 is one of the best waterproof camera[s] on the market, though if you can find one, we’d save some money and get the TG-5, since the ‘guts’ of the camera are essentially the same. If you need additional underwater and macro options, or want access to a few extra accessories, then the TG-6 is the camera you want.”

The TG-6 also has increased screen resolution and is claimed to have reduced flaring/ghosting – a frustrating (albeit occasional) problem for many TG-5 users.

Many other models are available overseas, including the American versions of the FT7 and FT30, the TS7 and TS30 respectively. The previous version is the TS6. The Olympus Stylus Tough TG-870 has a very wide angle 21 mm focal length lens and a screen which tilts upward 180°, while the Ricoh WG-5 GPS is a bit older (Feb 2015) and apparently has the same lens as the TG-5, with six LEDs surrounding the lens for macro illumination. Until 2013 the Ricoh branded rugged cameras were branded Pentax.

Amongst the less expensive options is the Fujifilm XP130, the Ricoh WG-50, and the Canon D30, but at over four years old it seems Canon cannot produce a new rugged camera, or one that can record 1080p at more than 24 fps, or two consecutive cameras that are the same shape. Sony hasn't released any rugged cameras since early 2013. The Nikon W100 uses a 1/3.1" CMOS sensor (not BSI CMOS) with an area about only 58% that of a 1/2.3" sensor; do not buy!

Features

I wasn't in the market for a lower-spec camera so the Panasonic FT30 wasn't a contender. The Panasonic FT7 has only recently been released, almost exactly one year after the Olympus TG-5. Online reviews during that year firmly place the TG-5 as the best compact rugged camera, so I was curious how the new Panasonic fared against it. Hence most of my comparisons are between the Olympus TG-5 and the Panasonic FT7.

Each of the cameras in the comparison table has something going for it, and show that product design is often a matter of compromises – price vs features; body size vs ruggedness and sensor size (and its required lens focal length); zoom vs aperture and image quality. All four options have stabilisation, but the relative effectiveness of the different stabilisation methods is unknown.

It's surprisingly difficult to find accurate detailed specifications, even on the manufacturers' websites. Note that prices may have changed since the comparison was made.

Main Features of NZ-Available Rugged Cameras Compared
		Olympus Tough TG-5	Panasonic Lumix FT7	Nikon Coolpix W300	Panasonic Lumix FT30	Comments
	Price at time of comparison	NZ$749 NZ$599 (sale)	NZ$749	NZ$698, or NZ$603-$626 (not in stock)	NZ$219 (lower spec)	I bought my TG-5 on sale, $150 off. It's normally the same price as the FT7.
CAMERA BODY	Size (Enclosing Volume)	113 x 66 x 32 mm (0.24 L)	117 x 76 x 37 mm (0.33 L)	112 x 66 x 29 mm (0.21 L)	104 x 58 x 20 mm (0.12 L)	Figure in brackets is the volume if they were cuboids (they are not), which would make the TG-5 about ¾ the volume of the FT7. If you're just after something really small there's only one option, the FT30.
	Weight	250 g	319 g	231 g	144 g	The TG-5 is just over ¾ the weight of the FT7. The previous models FT5 and FT6 were only 214 g. The FT7 is almost 50% heavier than those models.
	Colours	Black, Red	Black, with a black, blue, or orange front panel	Black, Orange, Yellow, Camo	Black, Blue, Orange, Red	The TG-5 could do with more colour options, but I can't say the FT7 is better simply for having more choices – it does not look as good as earlier versions, and its colour panel, only on the front, looks just tacked on as an afterthought; the main body colour is firmly black. The W300 wins this simply because of the camo option. The FT6 was available in camo, and there's a joke the FT7 isn't because it resulted in too many lost cameras.
	Waterproof Shockproof Temperature Crushproof	15 m 2.1 m -10 °C 100 kg force	31 m 2.0 m -10 °C 100 kg force	30 m 2.4 m -10 °C –	8 m 1.5 m -10 °C –	The FT7 has "class leading" water resistance (by a whole 1 metre) but trails both its direct competitors in shock resistance – this despite "Unparalleled Toughness" being Panasonic's subtitle claim on its specs page. Mind you, the press release for the American version of the FT30 said "The LUMIX TS30 has been designed and built to be the ultimate tough camera" – in the same press release as the considerably higher spec TS6 (American version of FT6). The FT7 has tempered cover glass on the screen. I would award the distinction of being the toughest to the Nikon, but it doesn't claim a force rating.
		Olympus Tough TG-5	Panasonic Lumix FT7	Nikon Coolpix W300	Panasonic Lumix FT30	Comments
IMAGING	Sensor Resolution Video Res.	1/2.3" BSI CMOS 12 MP (4000 x 3000) UHD ("4K") (3840 x 2160)	1/2.3" BSI CMOS 20.2 MP (5184 x 3888) UHD ("4K") (3840 x 2160)	1/2.3" BSI CMOS 15.9 MP (4608 x 3456) UHD ("4K") (3840 x 2160)	1/2.33" CCD 15.9 MP (4608 x 3456) 720p (1280 x 720)	Panasonic claims 20.4 MP (and "21.1 MP total") for the FT7 in all marketing – again "class leading" – and 16.1 MP for the FT30. The CCD sensor in the FT30 is very unusual for a camera released in Jan 2015; being CCD it will have a global shutter (the picture is read by the sensor all at once). It's a pity it's such a low spec camera. Why the TG-5 has best resolution even though it's the lowest resolution is explained in the notes below.
	Optical zoom	25–100 mm (4x) fisheye conv. ≥18.5mm tele conv. ≤170 mm	28–128 mm (4.6x; up to 9x in 5 MP) Video 30–140 mm	24–120 mm (5x)	25–100 mm (4x)	The W300 has the widest angle lens and the greatest zoom ratio. The TG-5 is the only camera of these four which has lens converters available, or can be fitted with filters. See notes below.
	Max. aperture Diaphragm	f/2.0 – f/4.9 f/2.0 & f/2.8 (w) ND f/8.0 (w)	f/3.3 – f/5.9 No diaphragm ND f/10 (w)	f/2.8 – f/4.9 ?	f/3.9 – f/5.7 ?	Aperture at the telephoto end of zoom range are not directly comparable because of the different zoom. The W300 has the same aperture at 120 mm that the TG-5 does at 100 mm. It means the W300's actual aperture diameter at its tele zoom position is 1.2 times as big as the TG-5's. Having an extra stop of aperture at its widest zoom means the TG-5 is able to gather twice as much light as the next best, the W300. The slow lens on the FT30 will not help in low light situations.
	Min. Focus	10 cm (w & t) Macro 1 cm (zoom 30–100 mm)	30 cm Macro 5–30 cm (w–t)	50 cm (w & t) Macro 1 cm (w)	50–100 cm (w–t) Macro 5cm	Many specs lists on review sites don't list the minimum focus distance at telephoto.
	Shutter speed	4 sec – ¹/_2,000 sec (no long shutter mode but has Live Composite as an alternative)	4 sec – ¹/_1,300 sec ¹/_16,000 sec electronic	1 sec – ¹/_4,000 sec 25 sec (Star trails in Multiple Exposure Lighten Scene Mode)	8 sec – ¹/_1,300 sec 60 sec (Starry Sky Mode)	The FT7 has no mention of a Starry Sky mode. Panasonic's FT5, FT6, and even the FT30 have it. A specs omission or a dropped feature? Multiple Exposure Lighten Scene Mode on the W300 sounds like Live Composite on the TG-5. This makes the FT7 the odd one out with apparently no way of taking longer photos. It makes low light photography much harder. Glowworms deserve better.
	Maximum/ expanded ISO range	100 – 12,800	80 – 6,400	125 – 6,400	100 – 6400	Having the extra sensitivity is nice but there's no point if it's lost in noise. More relevant is how much noise results from a particular ISO value.
	Uncompressed	RAW (12 bit uncompr.)	—	—	—	Some photographers won't buy a camera lacking this feature. Those who use it can produce amazing results from underexposed photos (which could be rather handy in, say, a cave). All my digital cameras have had it but I've never used it, mostly because I haven't had appropriate software to process them. Olympus has some free software that will do it. The TG-4 had RAW, so it's not like Olympus' competitors haven't had lots of warning to include it in their latest models. Writing off the sensor as being too small to benefit would be hypocritical.
		Olympus Tough TG-5	Panasonic Lumix FT7	Nikon Coolpix W300	Panasonic Lumix FT30	Comments
FEATURES	Continuous drive	20 fps, no limit with JPG, Pro Capture	10 fps (5 fps with continuous AF) for 11 frames	7 fps for 5 frames	1.3 fps 8 fps at 3 MP	Cards have about the same write speed in different cameras. Much of the difference between the cameras will be due to the reduced resolution of the TG-5, and thus reduced processing and file sizes, but the new precessor no doubt helps. The TG-4 could only do 5 fps. Pro Capture continually records 5 frames (incl RAW) at 10 fps to internal memory until the shutter button is fully pressed.
	Slow motion video	1080p @ 120 fps 720p @ 240 fps 360p @ 480 fps	1080p @ 60 fps 720p @ 100 fps	1080 @ 60 fps VGA @ 120 fps (640 x 480)	—	The FT7 has ordinary 1080p60 and 1080p50 recording (which will have to be slowed with a video editor), while the 100 fps option is recorded as 720p25. 120 fps is not mentioned in the FT7 specs, maybe it's only on the American TS7. The TG-5's options are a big step up on the TG-4 (which had 120 fps VGA for 20 seconds) and show off the new processor nicely.
	Cool stuff	Live Composite mode, Microscope modes, Flash compensation (down to ¹/₆₄ power), Hand-held Starlight mode, focus stacking, torch light, compass, WiFi, USB charging	EVF (with dedicated on/off button), manual mode, Post Focus (but no focus stacking) torch light, USB charging	Manual mode, WiFi, Bluetooth, SnapBridge (transfers photos to smartphone automatically by BT with option of first downscaling to 2 MP)	220 MB on-board memory, Starry Sky Mode, torch light	The Live Composite mode makes it worthwhile taking along a small tripod for the Olympus. The Hand-held Starlight mode is a nice feature I've seen on my phone. It takes 6 photos and combines them – useful for taking glowworms in caves. The FT7 is the first and only rugged camera with an electronic viewfinder (EVF). It does not have eye detection, which could get triggered underwater, so it needs to be turned on manually.
	Extra Sensors	GPS (incl. GLONASS, QZSS, and A-GPS), compass, manometer (sic), thermometer	Altimeter, compass	GPS, compass, altimeter, depth gauge	—	A manometer is a liquid column pressure gauge; I doubt it. The Panasonics are the only ones lacking GPS, but the FT7 can get GPS data from a linked smartphone. The FT5 and FT6 both had GPS (and the FT6 GLONASS as well) – another backward step for Panasonic. The Olympus can show a whole bunch of tracking info on a linked smartphone.
	Claimed battery life	340	300 250 (EVF)	280	250	The TG-5 and W300 will have lower battery life if the GPS is on. A big step backward for the FT7, since the FT6 and FT5 were rated at 370 shots.
	Quirks	Occasional purple orb (lens flare) in centre of vision, more noticeable when zoomed in. 60p is actually 59.94 fps, 30p is actually 29.97 fps.	No aperture or shutter priority, even though it has manual mode. No GPS. No way to turn on an electronic level. Extreme noise reduction present in images.	No aperture or shutter priority, even though it has manual mode. Nikon has dropped the mapping feature of the AW130.	Maximum video resolution is 1280 x 720p.	Some people are really bothered by the TG-5's purple orb, and it is quite noticeable on some photos, especially those taken looking toward the Sun. But previous models have also had it so Olympus clearly thinks it's not worth changing. It's said to be lens flare due to the folded optics. This may have been addressed in the TG-6. See Extra Sensors notes above for FT7 GPS notes. Small sensor cameras not having a shutter priority mode is not actually surprising because they typically don't have iris diaphagms.
		Olympus Tough TG-5	Panasonic Lumix FT7	Nikon Coolpix W300	Panasonic Lumix FT30	Comments
	Accessories	Silicone jacket, filter adapter, fisheye converter, tele converter, (ring) flash diffuser, (ring) LED light guide, underwater housing (45 m)	—	—	Silicone jacket included at some shops (it may be standard).	The TG-5 has a whole impressive system of add-ons. This could get expensive.

Resolution and sensitivity

Panasonic brags about the resolution: "The 20.4-megapixel LUMIX TS7 integrates a High Sensitivity MOS sensor to deliver highest-in-class resolution." Panasonic has clearly declared their position in the megapixel race; they are on top.

But high resolution is not actually a good thing for a camera which will be used underwater, indoors, and other places which are typically dark or dimly lit, such as caves. That's because smaller pixels have lower light sensitivity which leads to several problems. With less area per pixel there's less light collected by each pixel, which means a lower input signal for each pixel, which means less to work with for a pixel to generate an output signal, which means the end result has lower dynamic range, more noise, and in more difficult situations an incorrect white balance.

Dynamic range is the difference between the brightest and dimmest parts of an image. Lower dynamic range translates to lost detail in shadows and blown out highlights (eg, sky too bright, faces and clouds washed out).

Noise appears as colour speckles in photographs, especially in shadows and low light locations. When a camera is set to a higher ISO, more noise is produced in the image for much the same reasons as mentioned above. With a noisier image comes the need for more noise reduction. It hides the noise but leads to a loss of detail, making the photos look like they've had a paint-by-numbers filter applied in Photoshop.

All else being equal, simply because of the difference in pixel area the TG-5 will be more sensitive so we can expect it to be able to be set to a higher ISO than the FT7 for the same amount of noise. A quick calculation indicates the FT7 will produce the same noise at about ¹²/_20.2 ≈ 0.6 times the ISO of the TG-5, so the TG-5 should cope with ISO 1000 giving about the same amount of noise as the FT7 set to ISO 600.

At first glance it might look like this could be partially reflected in the maximum ISO values for the two cameras – 12,800 for the TG-5 and default 3,200 for the FT7 (extendable to 6,400) – but the Olympus TG-870 also has ISO 12,800 and is equipped with a much slower lens (f/3.5 at wide angle), so it's more likely just something Olympus does.

In choosing a very high resolution in such a small sensor, especially for this particular type of camera, Panasonic have made a very questionable decision as far as it relates to image quality. For a camera intended to be used underwater (and in caves!) Olympus have certainly taken the better approach here.

Megapixel race not the only misguided race

As an aside, where else have we seen a situation similar to the megapixel race? NiMH rechargeable AA batteries!

At the beginning of the century companies were in a capacity race to create the highest capacity AA cells they could, but it came at a cost. Batteries had extremely high self discharge and were very fragile, so batteries deteriorated quickly, giving low charge-discharge cycle counts before they were basically unusable. For example, Energizer 2500 mAh cells became known for going flat overnight after as few as a dozen cycles.

The capacity race effectively ended in November 2005 when Sanyo released the Eneloop. The new cells had a significantly lower claimed capacity than most AA cells at the time, but were the first low self discharge (LSD) cells; they held their charge even if just left sitting around. They also lasted hundreds of cycles, even when fast charged.

In other words, Eneloops had lower claimed capacity but they had higher actual capacity when they needed to be used. Unlike other NiMH batteries, they were actually worth using.

Quite simply, the Eneloop changed the AA battery world and it wasn't many years before all other AA battery makers were also making LSD cells.

(Panasonic went on to buy part of Sanyo, including the rights to the Eneloop brand, which they recognised as a Good Thing. Sadly the Chinese-made Eneloops we get in New Zealand are only as good as anyone else's LSD cells, not as good as the Japanese-made Eneloops.)

Diffraction limiting and aperture

Diffraction limiting is another issue affected by resolution. Generally with any camera, as the aperture is decreased (ie, the f-number is increased) the depth of field increases, so more stuff is in focus. However, there comes a point when the aperture is so small that diffraction starts to cause loss of image detail. Diffraction is when light passes close by an object and the light is bent around the edge of the object; light doesn't go straight past edges. Diffraction actually happens with all edges but is normally hard to notice. The smaller the aperture the easier it is to notice because a greater proportion of the light will be bent compared to that far enough away from the edge to just pass straight through. Because the light is spread out when it hits the sensor, the resulting picture is blurred.

With a small sensor this diffraction happens at surprisingly low f-numbers. The diameter of the aperture is literally the focal length of the lens (f) divided by the f-number, for example f/2.8 (hence 2.8 is the f-number in this example). Thus, a particular f-number with a small sensor represents an aperture much smaller in diameter than the aperture given by the same f-number used with larger sensors, because larger sensors need longer focal length lenses. In other words, diffraction has an effect very early with a 1/2.3" sensor.

By using extra small pixels with a not particularly wide aperture of f/3.3, Panasonic is already into diffraction limiting territory with the FT7, even at wide open aperture. Now, at first the blurring caused by diffraction limiting can be overcome by clever image processing (deconvolution), but its effects cannot be avoided forever. When will it actually start to be noticed?

My Micro Four Thirds camera (a Panasonic GM1) has a resolution of 15.8 MP with pixels 3.77 µm across. I've done some testing. If I want the sharpest possible image I can't use an aperture smaller than f/8 because I can just tell it's beginning to suffer from diffraction limiting at f/11, while f/22 pictures are easily noticeably fuzzy. Assuming the same level of image processing and relative lens quality for the rugged cameras we can do a direct scaling for pixel size, which means diffraction limiting will start to be noticeable at around f/3.5 for 1.19 µm pixels (FT7) and around f/4.5 for 1.54 µm pixels (TG-5).

ND filters

A Neutral Density (ND) filter is simply a filter which reduces light (darkens an image) without adding a colour shift. An extreme example is a solar filter used to photograph the sun during a solar eclipse.

ND filters are quite common with small sensor cameras, and using them to avoid diffraction limiting is the reason almost no cellphones have diaphragm aperture control.

A 1/2.3" sensor in a cellphone would be bigger than average, so wide apertures in cellphones are a necessity.

The FT7 does not have an iris diaphragm for its aperture, but does have an ND filter. This gives it only two aperture values at any zoom position, and no control over depth of field. Its manual mode is going to be pretty limited.

The wide open setting across the zoom range provides f/3.3 to f/5.9, and with the ND filter gives f/10 to f/18. A wide open aperture of f/3.3 at widest angle will avoid visible diffraction (especially with image processing), but at the tele end, f/5.9 with 1.19 µm pixels is the equivalent of about f/19 on my M4/3 camera, which gives easily noticeable diffraction blurring.

To be honest, though, the FT7 sample photos I've seen have had such strong noise reduction applied it's hard to tell if there was even any fine detail left to blur. A lot of FT7 sample photos I've seen show this over-done processing, resulting in photos that look like they're paint-by-numbers. I found the effect is well known, and not just with the FT7. My favourite reference to it is "Small sensor watercolour cr**".

The Olympus TG-5 has two "real" diaphragm-controlled aperture settings, f/2.0 and f/2.8. It also has an f/8.0 setting which is simply a 3 stop ND filter used with the f/2.8. At 100 mm focal length these become f/4.9 and f/6.3 (and f/18 with the ND filter). The f/6.3 is the equivalent on my M4/3 camera of f/15, so may have noticeable diffraction blurring, but less than the FT7.

To get the same amount of diffraction limiting that the FT7 has with wide open aperture, the TG-5 would have to use an aperture of f/4.3 – considerably smaller than the smallest aperture of f/2.8 the TG-5 does have. The TG-5 should not show any diffraction limiting at all at wider focal lengths, and depending on lens softness (inherent blurriness of the lens) may not show any with wide open aperture at its tele end.

What was Panasonic thinking? Most likely it's just a marketing move, banking on the stupidity and/or ignorance of the mass market for the sake of a few sales. That's a downward spiral. How do they back off without implying they made a mistake? (How did Olympus retreat back to 12 MP after the TG-3 and TG-4 had 16 MP?) Go for extra pixels to allow plenty for noise reduction? Even in daylight, photographs taken with the FT7 need both diffraction sharpening (deconvolution done in-camera) and noise reduction. In dim light, more noise reduction is going to take a further toll on detail. Jam in more pixels because the sensor is newer? The FT7 was released mid 2018, a year after the TG-5, but the step up from CMOS to BSI CMOS made a bigger improvement than any extra development can produce, since around 90% of photons are now being captured.

12 MP still enough after nine years

Curiously we have these Olympus comments from nine years ago:

"Twelve megapixels is, I think, enough for covering most applications most customers need."

"We don't think 20 megapixels is necessary for everybody. If a customer wants more than 12 megapixels, he should go to the full-frame models."

– Akira Watanabe, manager of Olympus Imaging's SLR planning department, March 2009.

The previous iteration of a TG camera to have a 12 MP sensor (11.8 MP, 3968 x 2976 pixels) was the TG-2, announced in January 2013. The TG-3 and TG-4 were both 16 MP. The current alternative Olympus model the Stylus Tough TG-870 is 16 MP. All have a 1/2.3" sensor.

Optical zoom and converters

For the TG-5 to have a 4.6x zoom as the FT7 has, it would need to go to (just) 115 mm – only 15 mm longer than it has. The difference between a 4x zoom and 4.6x is not much.

For photography in cramped locations (or taking selfies), the wider the lens the better. Hence 25 mm is better than 28 mm, and the 24 mm of the Nikon W300 slightly better still.

The TG-5 has a number of lens converters available. They are big and bulky compared to the camera, but greatly increase the total range of focal length. Olympus offers a 0.74x fisheye converter and a 1.7x tele converter. The fisheye converter weighs 125 g – half as much as the camera – but it is dust and water rated, and even attaches underwater. I have also found a 0.5x wide converter ("0.48x actual") and a 2.2x tele converter from third party makers; quality unknown.

Focal Lengths vs Angle of View
	Camera	Focal Length	Diagonal Angle of View
Wide	TG-5 w/ 0.48x converter	12 mm	144°
	TG-5 w/ 0.74x fisheye converter	18.5 mm	130° fisheye
	TG-5	25 mm	87.9°
	FT7	28 mm	80.1°
Tele	TG-5	100 mm	24.5°
	FT7	128 mm	19.2°
	TG-5 w/ 1.7x tele converter	170 mm	14.5°
	TG-5 w/ 2.2x tele converter	220 mm	11.2°
	16x50 binoculars	–	3.5°
Fisheye angle from Olympus. Binocular angle from the label. Other angles calculated using figures from here (using full frame D3X values, which may not be directly applicable because of the difference in aspect ratio). A full rainbow is 84° across.

Other notes

The TG-5 has some other good and bad points.

Quirks:

The Olympus TG-5's tripod mount is not quite lined up with the lens. It can't actually fit right in the middle because of the battery compartment.
- It does much better than the Olympus TG-870, which has its tripod mount on the bottom at the opposite end from the lens. Huh? The TG-870 also has a tripod mount on one end – could be handy for, um, something.
- It's also better than the FT7; it looks like Panasonic hasn't even tried to line up the tripod mount.
The zoom lever feels backward. The back end of the lever is the bit which points at the zoom symbols. I'll probably quickly get used to it.
- Update May 2019: No, I haven't. Not fully, at least. I can use it OK but I still want to push it "forward" (left) to zoom in and pull it "backward" (right) to zoom out. It works the wrong way around.
The TG-5 has no shutter speed priority or full manual mode, but that's probably not too surprising. There are only three settings for the aperture, so it has rather limited means of getting a good exposure for a given shutter speed.
- What's more surprising is the number of people surprised at the FT7 having a full manual mode but no aperture or shutter priority modes. It only has two widely spaced aperture settings – hardly worth having an aperture priority mode for – and what do they think it would do if the shutter speed was gradually changed?
The camera cannot be used while it is charging.
In video mode the big button on top just takes a photo with a (roughly) 16:9 aspect ratio. To start/stop recording a video the little red button on the back needs to be pushed. Indeed, that button starts/stops a video recording whatever mode the camera is in.
- I think video mode is just for changing video settings.

Pros:

The knob on the top for adjusting EV compensation is really convenient, and means the lack of a manual mode isn't really missed.
The knob sometimes does other things too, depending on the mode. For example, in aperture priority mode it changes the aperture. It's really nice to have controls that can easily change stuff.
The supplied USB charging/data cable has an RF choke on each end.

Conclusion

For a rugged camera with a premium price the Panasonic FT7 has very few standout features – it basically boils down to the EVF. Its ("class leading") underwater depth rating of 31 metres and maximum focal length of 128 mm are almost equalled by the Nikon. The ("class leading") greater resolution is not a genuine advantage in most situations; it's almost always overkill, is bad for noise, and is a strong disadvantage in lower light situations. It's not surprising that many sample photos show very high noise reduction; it's not a camera for pixel peepers.

The FT5 and FT6 were rated for 370 shots, so that's also significantly down, and the FT7 does not have its own GPS receiver.

Why is the FT7 significantly bigger and heavier than the FT5 and FT6? Purely for the upgraded water depth rating? (The much smaller W300 claims a 30 m rating.) Was Panasonic planning a sensor upgrade but gave up at a late stage in order to get it out for the northern hemisphere summer? (There are small underwater cameras with a 1" sensor but they have fixed focal length lenses.) The FT7's lens has kept the same zoom range and aperture range (but no longer has Leica branding), and would not be appropriate for a larger sensor.

The Nikon W300 has a number of specs that beat the TG-5 – better underwater and drop ratings, the camo option is cool, a little smaller and lighter, a greater zoom range, a faster shutter speed. But in most areas it loses out to the TG-5. The slow f/3.9 widest aperture and slowest shutter speed of 1 second are both strong disincentives for low light use. With a 12MP sensor, a faster processor and more creative shooting modes (including RAW) it could be a nice alternative.

The Panasonic FT30 is (probably) fine for the price, but it has much lower specs than the other three. It only goes as far as 720p video; all the others have UHD ("4K"). It is by far the smallest and lightest of the four rugged cameras available in New Zealand, but also has the lowest waterproof and drop ratings. These comments from PC World (Aus):

Don’t expect this camera to be able to capture excellent looking shots. The clarity isn’t high, bright whites are often captured with too much brightness, there is some haloing and softness visible in high contrast areas, the sides can be noticeably softer than the centre of the frame, and the wide angle can put a noticeable bend in straight lines. The photos are fine for sharing on sites such as Facebook at a small size, but they don't look good at their native size, and they don't take kindly to cropping.

In other words, a typical small sensor camera. For the price, it may do all you require, but it has major trade-offs. I know a ten year old girl who got one for Christmas and she was absolutely stoked on her summer holiday when she was able to take underwater pictures and video of herself and her friends hand feeding a big eel.

The Olympus TG-5 is smaller, lighter, and much more light sensitive than the Panasonic FT7. It records faster, both in continuous shooting of photographs and with slow motion video. It can save RAW photos and has a wider angle of view. Its Live Composite mode offers a very useful way to gather light – ideal for light painting – and its Microscope modes make it easy to take really impressive photos of small stuff. It includes GPS and can track journeys with location, air pressure and temperature data. There is a great range of accessories available for extracting more money from customers, many of which are compatible with earlier models if owners already have the accessories. Olympus have done a great job creating a nice package in the camera itself, and an ecosystem to fit.

Olympus have equipped the camera with the same processor as Olympus' flagship M4/3 cameras. It has helped boost burst shooting from the TG-4's 5 fps up to 20 fps.

Considering all the Olympus TG-5 has to offer there seems no doubt it is the best rugged camera presently available on the New Zealand market. And on sale it's less expensive than its two main competitors.

UPDATE 2 December 2019: The Olympus TG-6 is now the best rugged camera presently available in New Zealand, with the TG-5 taking second place.

Bigger sensor alternatives

Rugged cameras with larger sensors are beginning to appear, but they don't have zoom lenses.

The Sealife DC2000 is the heart of a system featuring LED lights, strobes, and a housing. It's not sold in NZ. Sample pictures are a huge amount better than anything produced by a 1/2.3" sensor. They don't look like watercolour paintings!

20 MP 1" Sony BSI CMOS sensor (possibly the same as RX100 III).
31 mm fixed lens (61° diagonal above water, 46° diagonal underwater).
Wide angle lens converter available, giving 19 mm focal length (83° diagonal).
Variable aperture f/1.8 to f/11.
Optical image stabilisation.
Very slow RAW buffer clearing (5 seconds to write a 40 MB RAW file).
Waterproof 18 m, optional housing 60 m.
Shockproof 1.5 m.
Continuous burst shooting at 8 or 10 fps.
200 photo battery life.
116 x 67 x 36 mm, 234 g.

The Sony RX0 has been described as the guts of an RX100 mark V stuffed into a really small waterproof shockproof crushproof box. Available in NZ for just under $1,000. It has a mix of really great features and strange feature gaps. But with such a strange mix of features, who's it for?

15.3 MP 1" sensor (13.2mm x 8.8mm). The sensor is actually 21 MP. That's a big gap between actual and effective.
24 mm fixed focal length lens.
Fixed aperture f/4.0. This is an interesting one because one particular user claims "It's NOT an action camera. It's a compact production camera with a Zeiss 24 mm lens, and the full functionality of a professional camera." The last time I checked, professional cameras with full functionality had adjustable apertures. Without it there's no control of depth of field, and exposure adjustment is limited to shutter speed and ISO. Ow. What about ND (neutral density) filters? After copping some abuse Sony came up with a plate adaptor so ND filters can now be mounted; it provides a much needed option but incurs more bulk.
No stabilisation. How about that – it's NOT an action camera.
Waterproof 10 m, optional housing 100 m.
Shockproof 2.0 m.
Crushproof 200 kg force.
Continuous 16 fps photographs in Speed Priority (5.5 fps otherwise).
Slow motion video up to 1920x1080 at 1,000 fps, but with poor image quality for a whole 2 seconds.
No timelapse.
¹/_32,000 sec super-high-speed shutter.
Overheats after 20 minutes continuous shooting.
Does not record 4K video; need to record it externally. That's pretty hard underwater.
59 x 41 x 30 mm (0.073 L), 110g.

ianman Home | Back to Top