Jefftan: the whole design concept is wrong. It is too bulky, no IS, weak O-ring seal, low battery life
What is needed is a tough version of Coolpix A, Ricoh GR and RX1R (with IS and wireless charging of battery)that is what the camera market neededeasily sold for $1000 and more
this is a failed first attempt. hopefully more to come
Olympus TG-2 which I own is an underappreciated camera. It is great up to ISO 400There is a trick that I use to get shot at ISO 400 handheld when ISO 800/1600 is required. Use the continuous shooting mode at ISO 400, take about 10 shots and usually at least 1 will be sharp. Best tough camera at the moment
I have an AW1 and have compared the images from it to those from a compact camera with a small sensor and there's a huge difference - the AW1's images are much cleaner.
Also, I think that the reason Jeff had such poor battery life is that he left the GPS & WiFi on. I used mine on the same beach in Maui and was able to shoot all day and still had charge left. I never needed to change the battery during the day.
The leaking is a very serious problem - mine may also have leaked because it fogged when put in cold water after a few days, although it kept working. That's something Nikon will have to address and they have mine for repair now.
I bought the AW1 for beach/pool/snorkeling use because, after reading the reviews of the current crop of ruggedized compact cameras, I was disappointed in their IQ - none are better than my old Canon D10. The AW1 is significantly better than that - even its JPG output is much better and RAW gives even higher IQ.
Binone: Hi Jeff:You and I were on Maui with an AW1 at about the same time. I agree with your comments and the pros & cons. The first day I was in the water with it - also at Kaanapali - I really couldn't see much on the LCD. I had the camera set to the center focus area and a lot of shots were out of focus. So, the next time, I set it to automatic focus, but it was worse. That day was very sunny and I think that it focused on bubbles & specs in the water. So, I changed it back to center focus, and also found the LCD brightness setting and got better results, although I never saw a turtle -great shot.
Unfortunately, after 4 days I noticed that the glass cover over the front of the lens would immediately fog when I put the camera in the water. This didn't happen the first few days I was there, so obviously moisture entered the camera, but it kept working. Like you, I was very careful with it. It's now at Nikon's service center. I hope that the solution is simple.
I was at Black Rock. It's funny, but we both took the exact same shot of the Alaska Airlines wing on the way there. I'm now using m4/3 equipment (E-M1 & E-M5) for the majority of my photography, but just wanted something better than my old Canon D10 for family vacations on/near the water. The AW1's images are dramatically cleaner than the D10's. But in several years of use, the D10 never leaked. The O-ring was greased and the lens installed when I first opened the box, and the lens was never removed, so there's no way something got on the O ring. I never went below 6-8 feet, so it wasn't pressure. However, it is possible that humid air entered the camera when I opened the battery door and then later, when the camera went from the 85+ degree air, to the 78 degree water, the moisture condensed on the lens cover. I had no problem with battery life, however, but left GPS & WiFi off. I shot all day and still had charge left at night.
Hi Jeff:You and I were on Maui with an AW1 at about the same time. I agree with your comments and the pros & cons. The first day I was in the water with it - also at Kaanapali - I really couldn't see much on the LCD. I had the camera set to the center focus area and a lot of shots were out of focus. So, the next time, I set it to automatic focus, but it was worse. That day was very sunny and I think that it focused on bubbles & specs in the water. So, I changed it back to center focus, and also found the LCD brightness setting and got better results, although I never saw a turtle -great shot.
When you purchase a limited edition of any art - be it photograph or painting, unless it's the original, it will have a number: x of y, where "y" is the total number of prints, or lithographs, etc. that are going to be produced. The value of any one is very much dependent on how many are produced. I have to agree with the collector here. The artist, in effect, increased y and that results in a decrease in the value of any one of the copies.
My other issue is: Holy Crap!!! I'd have thrown that shot away. Like another poster wrote - where's my kid's old bike.. If I had exhibited that photo at a club where I have competed, at a minimum, I'd have been criticized for the little bit of a car that's on the right. I see a lot of photos that are truly remarkable works of art. But, $250k for this??? I must be getting old.
acidic: Umm, who wants to go hiking with all that gear. Back problems inevitable. I'm an avid hiker, and I find that my S95 can do everything all that gear can do, all while fitting in my shirt pocket.
Flash: built inSuper wide angle: stitch functionTelephoto: ever heard of cropping?Second body: my S95 hasn't needed a backup yetTripod (not pictured): image stabilization
Good luck with your chiropractor.
Like another poster wrote, you're sacrificing IQ - even if you're being sarcastic. I recently took a vacation where I would be doing a lot of hiking and I'm a senior citizen with back problems. I left the 5D2 and "L" glass home and brought a NEX-7 & Zeis lens, plus the kit lens. I didn't even feel the weight (only about a pound) and IQ is about as good as the 5D2, even in low light. Now, whenever I pick up the 5D2 it feels like a sack of bricks. I'm sold on the mirrorless system with one exception - when I'm shooting an event where the subjects are moving fast, the Sony simply isn't up to the task - auto focus is poor. So, I've got to use the 5D2. I just make sure that I don't have to carry it too far. And, I don't need an expensive backpack.