
Summertime
is beach time and a camera like the FT3 is perfect for sandy and wet
environments. Two years ago I got Panasonics first rugged camera the
FT1. A fun camera to bring everywhere. This year their third version,
FT3, came and since I've sold my FT1 half a year ago it was time to get
another one. It's very similar in features but one added thing is full
HD video and GPS. You can geotag places in both stills and video.
When
you're used to shoot with a full frame DSLR any compact camera will
look like rubbish. So does this camera. Often it's just a cold, flat and
noisy image when compared to a DSLR. Even my AF101 takes nicer stills
but in much lower resolution. This camera isn't about image quality. No,
it's a camera you put in the pocket or in your swim trunks and snap away
anywhere.
You can bring it as deep as 12m or drop it from 2m
onto concrete and it will survive. It even has a compass, height about
sea level and a GPS function that can be a fun gadget. I imagine
this camera can be used in production also to be mounted i.e outside a
car with a suction cup to get some extreme shots, or go underwater where it really belongs.
In the
extensive array of scene settings I'm glad they kept the "anamorphic"
mode. It's not a pure anamorphic function but works just like one.

When you shoot video there's full auto focus, auto exposure and auto pretty much anything. 1080i50 so you have to de-interlace to get 25p. Since it has a CCD sensor no rolling shutter but you do get streaks of lights pointed directly into the lens. This does not show in stills only in video. Audio is in 48khz/192kbps and in mono. Bitrate for video is 17mbps in full HD mode. You can even record in motion JPEG.
Compared to FT1 there's only one door (two on the FT1) to access the SDHC/SDXC card, battery and USB/video ports. Much less risk to get any water inside then. To zoom there's two round buttons on the back, FT1 had a slider on top of the camera and time will tell if the backside is better or worse. The screen has the same low resolution but scaling is better so it looks sharp even when scaled down.
Despite having bad image quality compared to my 5DmkII you can get decent pictures if you tweak them in something like Lightroom. There's no RAW only JPEG images are stored. Pixel peepers better forget to peep because on a pixel level it looks awful but zoom out and it's okay. I find images straight of the camera to lack any sort of contrast and colours so you have to do something afterwards to make them look good. Shallow DOF? Forget it, this small sensor makes everything in focus even when you zoom in. But if you use the excellent macro and go near there's some shallowness at least...