lens look like can't use lens filter,correct?
Jefftan: anyone notice even with the 10 mm lens weight 470 gram twice as heavy as TG-2. with zoom weight 530 gram also the terrible 220 shot battery life. can't be put in shirt pocket
The $370 230 gram tiny TG-2 is not obslete at all
AW1 is a nice try but lots need to improve, it need to be smaller and lighter, have F2 lens, with IS and at least 300 shot battery life. I would keep using my TG-2 for now
My TG-2 fit in shirt pocket and if one don't pixel peep may not be that much different than AW1 between ISO 100-400. Also the lens is at least 1 stop faster than AW1
it is fair to say that TG-2 is still very useful for its size and weight. If you own one you know IQ is good enough between ISO 100-400 which cover many circumstances with its F2 lens.
no 10mm single kit option is stupid as this is what me and many others will use for weight reason
now cost $1000
I am surprised no one mention weight and size in all these comments
anyone notice even with the 10 mm lens weight 470 gram twice as heavy as TG-2. with zoom weight 530 gram also the terrible 220 shot battery life. can't be put in shirt pocket
no image-stabilized AW lenses, Battery Life (CIPA) 220 ,2 significant negative
it has ISO 100 unike NEX-3N.
dpreview please correct above with 16-50mm kit lens not 18-55mm
Jefftan: get a TG-2 or WG-3it is that simple
nice pic, no PP? just out of camera?
SRT3lkt: TX5 was the best.
I like my TX5wish I can buy it againnot this junk
get a TG-2 or WG-3it is that simple
Jefftan: How is DXO lens correction compare to Lightroom?DXO always stress that its lens correction base on testing many lens is unique
but isn't Adobe also got lens correction?What's the difference?
I try it on my NEX-5N RAW but color is not as natural as out of camera JPEGdo you have color profile for different camera?
How is DXO lens correction compare to Lightroom?DXO always stress that its lens correction base on testing many lens is unique
How good is DXO as a RAW developer?I try it on my NEX-5N RAW buy top me color is not as natural as out of camera JPEG
Dpreview is not helping people by not emphasizing the slow lens of all these camera except TG-2 and WG-3
Giving similar score to these slow lens camera as TG-2,WG-3 is really not doing any good to the photographic community
They should get a much lower score to let everyone know that these are outdated and obsolete
Can BSI actually worsen low ISO IQ?I think that is possibleI would got a GR or Coolpix A and left the zoom to my TG-2 which is less than 10% of my pic
jaygeephoto: Taken with my WG-3 last month:http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/post-your-photos/229906-sports-sailing-rhode-island.html#post2438258
Is lack of an aperture mode as in TG-2 a problem?the image in your sample has F9.5 which would suffer from diffractionor maybe not because it is probably using an ND filter
JohnEwing: Small, toughened cameras such as this are not as good for diving as pure UW jobs or DSLRs in housings, but they're great for sports where you might be getting sweaty, caught in downpours or knocked about, where getting the image counts for more than pixel-peeping.
The trouble from the manufacturer's point of view is that, for this purpose, 2- or 4-year-old models are just as good as the latest offerings. On a 1200 km Audax, such tomfoolery as WiFi and glacially slow GPS is useless.
Get a used or new old-stock Panny TS3/FT3 or even an TS1/FT1 and you'll not be missing out by much in comparison.
you are probably rightMy Panasonic TS1 is still working and believe it or not, at base ISO it may be better than all current waterproof camera because it has a CCD sensor not CMOS
If people understood CCD got fantastic color at base ISO