This review REALLY highlights a frustration of mine, and one that has exsited since I bought my first rugged compact about 9-10 years ago (old 2mp Pentax shaped like a square box), which is: Why can't/won't any camera manufacturers make a rugged compact camera that is enthusiast grade? 4-5 years ago there were very few "high end" compact cameras. Now we have the Canon S100, G15, G1X, Lumix Lx7, Fuji X20, Oly XZ-2, etc... literally over a dozen compacts with manual control, good IQ, fast lenses (some), RAW, etc.

There are many many serious photographers who are also outdoor enthusiasts that I believe would flock to a camera of this class that was ruggedized. I know I would pay $600-800 for one.

Thanks for the comprehensive test, very helpful! I am still using my Canon D10 with good results, but thinking about an upgrade.
One aspect you have not mentioned at all in the test was how well the lens coating works on the different cameras. Just back from 2 weeks of sailing/beach this was the maior issue I encountered every single day: the lens is always dirty. Either you have finger prints with sun tan lotion, or dust/dirt, or remaining (salt)water drops on the lens. Did you test how easy the water "rolls off" the lens, how scratch-proof the lens is, etc? Are there any differences between camera models at all - different glass or coating?

PS: When will I get my polarizer filter which can be turned on/off on any such camera ;-)

I have a few mediocre point and shoot cameras that are not water proof, and yet I often reach for my Olympus TG1 even when shooting in dry everyday conditions because the image quality is superior, especially in low light.

Light is dim underwater, so a fast lens is essential there.

Durable waterproof cameras are also great if you have kids because you can let your kids take pictures without worrying about damage, and you can clean their fingerprints off the lens in the sink with soap in water! Also great for the beach because with no external moving parts, you can leave it in the sand.

Excellent review! I loved the picture examples.

I have the Olympus TG-2 & am amazed that DPreview omitted a v impt feature it has over all the other cameras, & perhaps any other camera in the world: an ultra macro mode that is unbelievable. It can take ultra macro shots of in excess of 14:1 ratio (to me it appears more like 25x magnification) in digital enhanced mode or 5:1 in optical mode. The digital enhanced mode is v good & really works well. It's truly a digital microscope camera. This blew me away & I admit this was the one feature that sold me on the camera.

Also not mentioned is the fact that you can use the on board LED lamp to not only focus assist, but to illuminate & capture the subject (stills or video), & this is a real plus if you have ever tried to shoot macro.

But the icing on the cake is that the TG-2 also can shoot using the Olympus wireless TTL flash system where the TG-2 acts as the commander for one or more remote slave flashes. This is a high end feature not found on compacts. Again great for macro shots!

I am sorry I am not really getting it. Olympus pluses and cons:
"Good for: Skiers/boarders/divers, low light shooters, GPS enthusiasts
Not good for: Frequent shooting in bright light"

I would guess that skiers/boarders are frequently in bright light due to snow they are skiing on...not only in sunny days.

Pentax has a strongest flash and its consideration - due to longer charging time. Well its a smallish compact, you cant have both. You can reach or you can have a slightly faster cadence. Its up to taste, but I guess I would rather go for 2,6m than to 0,8-1,4. (respect to Olympus with 2,0)

Great series DPR. Am looking for exactly this type of camera. Thanks.

Used Nikon and Canon as there the only brands I trust. Canon out preformed the Nikon for me. But as always each to there own.

i got the ts5 wifi working within seconds, i really dont get how people have problems with it...

My TS5 controls are just fine even underwater in a 2m deep pool. The screen is bright and easy to see even on a sunny beach.

I own two OLD Pentax cameras that I passed on to my children - a 6mpx W10 (still Pentax) and a 10mpx W60 (Hoya). Rain, pool or normal conditions - fairly Ok images. Given that both are compacts with massive shutter delay, but I have taken some wonderful images with both due to their unobtrusive and portable size. As I'm not in the pool all the time I currently carry around a Canon G11.
I have looked at the newer rugged options - evaluated, read reports, even went hands-on in stores. With this last step is where the wheels come off for the new cameras. Operation is a pain, reliability is terrible, buttons are low quality and don't respond (before we even leave the store). My $$ stay firmly in my wallet. In another headline a few days back, CIPA were noting a massive drop in sales. Well, if you make bad quality nobody will buy. Word gets around.
Eg: the "Leica" Lumix T5 .. junk. Horrid unresponsive 'controls'. Review score was way high if you ask me. And so it goes on...

I have an old Pentax tough camera that I bought for a trip to Hawaii a number of years ago. Pictures are not that great, but I can take them underwater. I can take pictures while kayaking in the ocean where the camera is certain to get wet. I can throw it in my pocket and go places that a larger or less resistant camera wouldn't survive. Works just fine for me.

Would I use it for pictures that need great quality? No. Then, that's not what I bought it for. It works great for what I did buy it for. When this one wears out, I'll get another tough camera. Because sometimes the world is a tough place for a camera to be.

It is a tough job to build a camera that is equally able to take underwater and dry-land photos, mainly because of the flat ports which are added lens elements that can't be avoided. This reduces the quality of the wide end of its zoom, and is also a reason the zoom range of such cameras is usually short.
To have a camera which performs well in both mediums, its port would have to be built as a part of the optical system, and not merely as a water-resistant window.
Current amphibious cameras are a compromise.
Any manufacturer who envisions a properly built amphibious camera should offer a body that is strong enough for usual diving depths, (-50m), and also a range of lenses for various conditions and purposes. It would be way better than those semi-solutions they offer now. These "tough" models can get wet - but not a single one is good enough to dive with, excepting sub-surface work, and some risky apnea.
Instead, they are pocketable. Which really isn't important - to a photographer.

No company I know of sells an indoor camera. The claim of the camera maker should be taken into consideration. If the finder/LCD can only be seen indoors that should disqualify the camera from consideration, any camera. If the camera which claims to be an underwater camera cannot be controlled or even an image framed in the LCD underwater it should be disqualified from consideration as an underwater camera. I don't think 2 or 3 point differences cut it in this consideration. Don't rate them as overall cameras, but as what they are marketed as: tough, outdoor, underwater cameras. How in the world can a camera with an unusable OLED as the only way to see what you are taking outdoors be rated the number one outdoor camera?

My wife and I have lived on a sailboat full time for 4 years, so a "Tough" waterproof camera is a must. We have the older Olympus TG-820, although the image quality and underwater colors are quite good for for this style of camera the "tough" part of it didn't match up.
Even though we rinsed it off after each use I regret to say that the zoom in and zoom out "toggle switch" stopped working after a few swims.
It was still under warranty but that doesn't do you any good when you are already on your journey into Mexico. Hopefully Olympus will help us out when we get back.
To see some of the image quality taken with it, visit our site: http://roadslesstraveled.us

The best thing about Jeff Keller joining the staff at Dpreview is that Dpreview is now doing a much better job at reviewing more modest cameras.

Dcresourse.com always did a great job testing the cameras that were overlooked by everyone else. By adding Jeff to the staff here, Dpreview has become a better website.

Reading through the comments below, I see some questioning the point of these cameras. Personally, the tough cameras are some of my favourite cameras.

When I go to the beach, or canoeing, or a water park, or skiing, or if it rains, or if I just want to travel light especially on vacation I'll usually put my dSLR away and take my waterproof camera in my pocket just in case I want to take a picture.

If I capture a handful of memorable moments for the family album, I'm thrilled!

IMHO even if you have a nice dSLR or m4/3 or superzoom . . . having a tough camera might give you the chance to capture a few more precious memories for the family photo album. For me . . . its worth it! :)

PS. Nice article. As for the timing . . . It's always summer somewhere!

These are all special use and supplemental cameras which should be viewed that way. If you have a nice DSLR (perhaps weather resistant) or a nice MILC, how much do you really want to spend on another camera for use in environments that are risky enough that you wouldn't use your better camera? Sure, there might be a handful of people who want high IQ but it's quite small compared to those who want both affordability and peace of mind around using any camera where it *could* be damaged.

Maybe the better way to rank these cameras is around various types of special uses. Which are the best underwater? Which are the best for rock climbing, etc? Almost every one of these cameras will be purchased with one of those special needs in mind.

Why is there no rugged XZ-1? Why is there no rugged S110? Why no rugged LX7, or GR or anything with decent image quality? I really don't understand this camera not existing. Surely there are enough photographers looking for something they can take somewhere there is water around, or their camera might get knocked, or the environment is otherwise not camera friendly but where they want to be able to get quality shots?

Is a quality lens inherently and inevitably breakable? And if yes, why doesn't someone just come out and SAY THAT?

Next up Superzoom roundup. Care to do it DPR?

DP - please get these reviews out sooner next time. If I want a tough camera like this I probably want it for summer holidays & so I have already bought one before your review comes out.

How many more times needs this be said?

It makes no sense to compare 35mm-equivalent focals and not compare 35mm-equivalent apertures. Sensor size is not even mentioned in the table, so it is impossible to draw own conclusions. Even if all cameras share one size, this should have been said.

Wouldn't it be a bolder editorial stance to not give awards when basically none of the cameras seem to take good pictures and all have fitness for purpose flaws - displays that cannot be viewed outdoors, poor battery life, badly thought out controls etc?

Against these, I would probably opt for a water proof cellphone.

"We round up the best rugged cameras of 2013" - and you picked the one with the lowest build quality as the winner?

Anyone who buys any of these cameras from any of the links on this page must really hate money.

These are poor choices. I'm sorry but the quality leaves little but for the novice consumer. At some point Canon or Nikon will get serious in this space. I like to shoot Kitesurfing and it would be a GREAT pleasure at under $1,500 to have a quality camera with good IQ I could take in the water as I shoot at times up to my neck to get a great perspective. The KEY word here is IQ. I don't need GPS, a can opener or wi-fi. I JUST WANT IQ and DR.... It seems that Canon and Nikon are leaving the market open for some new 4K cameras coming out of China. Make fun of LG if you want but they are about hit Nikon, Canon and Sony in the chest. Fluff cameras like the 70D and such will be the rope that hung them. For under $1,500 I should have a Point and Shoot camera I can throw in my bag that can take the elements. As good as a H4D-60 or Leica S NO!! But how about the IQ of a stripped down camera devoted to IQ and sans all the FLUFF. Enough DR to deal with PP issues in PS. IMHO ;)

I'm glad to see there's no "gold award".
even silver is pushing it.

I own a TS3 - the last roundup's recommendation - and I'm far from being pleased with the picture quality... and they're still doing the stupid megapixel race, making the photosites even smaller and lowering IQ... it's like they're desperate and don't know what to do anymore.

It's a pity though, that you have to choose between low light, bright light, underwater, etc... I mean... it sounds like: here's a list of features, now choose one. you only get one. that's it.

I think it's about time Sony introduced a UW100 (Under-Water RX100)

From this lineup, Lumix and Nikon are about the only ones you would not be ashamed of being seen as a user.

There rest are just Comedy Central.

.