I am going to New Zealand for a month early next year and will be doing some adventurous activities where my DSLR will not be suitable (i.e Kayaking on Milford Sound etc) but still definitely plan to take DSLR.
So I thought I would like a good quality waterproof camera to use while Kayaking, on the water, and around the farm etc. I don't know that I will necessarily use it underwater, but I more like the idea of it being rugged and can handle being dropped, getting dusty and potentially dropped in water. BUT I still want good quality images (but I expect that they will be no where near my SLR) so for this reason was looking at the Nikon AW100 and Panasonic FT3.
Today I went to Michaels in the city to have a feel of both and ask for opinions, etc. The guy I was talking to suggested that since I don't want to use it underwater and still wanting a decent level of quality, that I shouldn't go down the waterproof route, but suggested Canon S95 or Nikon P300. For image quality and can get a hard casing to protect it.
Am I going to be hugely disappointed with image quality in the waterproof ones??
He is also suggested the Olympus Pen EPL-1 as it is around the same price at the moment, and image quality is going to be even better - he thinks at least on par with my pentax. If this was the case, I would sell my pentax gear as I really don't shoot all that much anymore and if the Olympus is going to produce what the pentax does, then I may as well go with the smaller camera.
Basically, after all that, I think that if the quality of images in the waterproof ones is passable, then I will do that. I am not expecting huge things out of these but do expect that I will be happy with the images.
Would love some peoples thoughts - especially on quality of image in waterproof cameras.
Thanks in advance!!