Fujifilm S9200 vs Olympus SP-600 UZ: A Comprehensive Superzoom Camera Comparison

When evaluating superzoom cameras that offer bridge-style ergonomics but remain relatively affordable, the Fujifilm FinePix S9200 and the Olympus SP-600 UZ frequently emerge as contenders due to their versatile zoom ranges and user-friendly designs. Both models cater to enthusiasts seeking an all-in-one camera for diverse photographic scenarios - from wildlife and landscape to travel and casual video capture. However, given that the S9200 was introduced in early 2014 and the SP-600 UZ a few years prior in 2010, their underlying technologies and performance characteristics differ substantially.

Having extensively tested both cameras over multiple shooting sessions and analysis benchmarks, this detailed comparison dissects the practical differences, technical strengths, and limitations of each model to help you make an informed choice tailored to your photographic style and budget.

Designing the Experience: Ergonomics and Handling

Physically, these two cameras take distinctly different approaches despite sharing the superzoom compact/niche segment. The Fujifilm S9200 employs a convincingly SLR-inspired bridge body that prioritizes grip comfort and intuitive control layouts, while the Olympus SP-600 UZ embraces a more compact, pocket-friendly design at the expense of some handling finesse.

Size and Grip

Measured at roughly 123x87x116 mm and weighing 670 grams (with batteries), the S9200 feels substantial but balanced - especially for enthusiasts used to DSLRs. Its ergonomic handgrip and ridged thumb rest provide secure handling during extended shoots. By contrast, the Olympus SP-600 UZ is more diminutive at 110x90x91 mm and 455 grams, lending itself well to portability but offering less in terms of comfortable grip and button spacing.

Controls and Layout

The S9200’s SLR-like approach facilitates dedicated dials for aperture, shutter speed, and exposure compensation, enabling more tactile, deliberate exposure management. The SP-600 UZ, meanwhile, prioritizes simplicity, featuring fewer external controls - relying more heavily on menu navigation for adjustments, which can slow workflow in demanding shooting conditions.

For a clearer perspective, observe the top view comparison:

Notably, the S9200 includes an electronic viewfinder (albeit with a modest 0.2-inch, 201k-dot resolution and 97% frame coverage) that lets users compose images in bright sunlight without LCD glare issues. The SP-600 UZ omits a viewfinder entirely, relying solely on its 2.7-inch screen, which further cements the S9200’s advantage for outdoor use.

Visual Interface: Display and Viewfinder Quality

Both cameras sport fixed, non-touchscreen LCDs, with the S9200 featuring a slightly larger and higher resolution 3-inch 460k-dot TFT LCD versus the SP-600 UZ’s 2.7-inch 230k-dot screen.

While neither screen supports articulation, the S9200’s display is markedly more detailed, affording enhanced clarity when reviewing images, adjusting settings, or framing shots from awkward angles. The lack of touchscreen functionality on both models may seem limiting today but aligns with their production era norms.

The Olympus’s absence of a dedicated electronic or optical viewfinder constrains precise framing, especially under bright daylight or while tracking moving subjects. For photographers valuing compositional accuracy and subject tracking, the S9200’s electronic viewfinder, despite its moderate specs, remains a considerable asset.

Sensor and Image Quality: The Heart of the Camera

Both the Fujifilm S9200 and Olympus SP-600 UZ house small 1/2.3-inch sensors typical for compact superzooms, but their sensor technologies differ considerably.

Sensor Technology and Resolution

• Fujifilm S9200: 16-megapixel CMOS sensor (6.17 x 4.55mm)
• Olympus SP-600 UZ: 12-megapixel CCD sensor (6.08 x 4.56mm)

The S9200’s CMOS architecture benefits from increased readout speed and efficiency, crucial for video and burst shooting, while also providing a slight edge in low-light performance. The SP-600 UZ’s CCD sensor, common in cameras from its release period, often yields excellent color rendition but struggles with noise and dynamic range, especially at higher ISO settings.

Image Processing and Quality Outcomes

Although neither camera supports RAW capture, the S9200’s newer image processor (albeit not explicitly named) delivers sharper images with better noise suppression at ISO ranges up to 12800 (native max ISO). Conversely, the SP-600 UZ caps at ISO 1600, beyond which noise becomes prominent.

In controlled lab tests and real-world scenes, the S9200 produces cleaner images with more faithful color reproduction, especially in challenging lighting conditions. The SP-600 UZ, while competent under good light, exhibits more softness and diminished detail in shadows.

Zoom Range and Optics: Versatility in the Field

Key to any superzoom is the focal length accommodation and aperture characteristics since they define framing flexibility and low-light usability.

• Fujifilm S9200 lens: 24-1200mm equivalent with F2.9–6.5 aperture range, 50x optical zoom
• Olympus SP-600 UZ lens: 28-420mm equivalent with F3.5–5.4 aperture, 15x optical zoom

The extraordinary 50x zoom on the S9200 means photographers can nail extreme telephoto shots such as distant wildlife or sports action without carrying heavy lenses. However, beyond 600-700mm equivalent, resolution and sharpness naturally degrade, as is common in superzoom optics.

By comparison, the SP-600 UZ’s 15x zoom remains more conservative but offers a brighter lens on the telephoto end (up to f/5.4), which can facilitate quicker shutter speeds and better autofocus in moderate light.

Both cameras offer macro focusing down to approximately 1cm, making them surprisingly capable for close-up creative shots. However, the S9200’s optically stabilized lens significantly aids macro sharpness by compensating for handshake, a feature absent on Olympus’s model.

Autofocus and Shooting Performance

In real-world use, autofocus responsiveness and accuracy can make or break the shooting experience, especially for unpredictable subjects.

• The S9200 features contrast-detection AF with face detection and continuous autofocus options, although it lacks advanced phase detection or eye/animal tracking.
• The SP-600 UZ also uses contrast-detection AF with 143 focus points distributed for flexible subject tracking, but its single shot-only autofocus mode and lack of face detection limit ease for dynamic subjects.

Continuous burst shooting rates are similar - 10 frames per second on paper - but the S9200 benefits from better buffering due to its CMOS sensor and processor advantages.

Video Capabilities

Both cameras provide HD video recording, but the Fujifilm S9200 pulls ahead with superior options:

• S9200: Full HD 1080p video at 60i, plus 960p at 60fps options offer smooth and detailed footage.
• SP-600 UZ: Limited to 720p at 24 fps, less smooth for action and with less clarity.

Unfortunately, neither camera includes microphone inputs, headphone jacks, or in-body image stabilization optimized for video, which constrains professional video applications. However, the Fujifilm’s optical image stabilization does provide steadier handheld footage.

Battery, Storage, and Connectivity

• The S9200 runs on four AA batteries, offering about 500 shots per charge - exceptional for travel shooters who can easily swap batteries on the go.
• The Olympus SP-600 UZ uses proprietary rechargeable batteries with unspecified endurance (typically under 300 shots), which might inconvenience users without spare packs.

Both use standard SD/SDHC/SDXC cards (single slot), and USB 2.0 along with HDMI output for image transfer and display.

Neither camera features wireless connectivity such as Wi-Fi or Bluetooth, reflecting their older designs and limiting instant sharing workflows favored today.

Real-World Performance Across Photography Genres

To synthesize the cameras’ practical strengths and weaknesses across varying photographic disciplines, we reference a genre-specific performance assessment:

Portrait Photography

• Skin Tone Rendering and Bokeh: The S9200’s larger pixel count and optimized color processing yield more natural skin tones, with face detection aiding sharpness on key facial details. However, both cameras’ small sensors inhibit true depth-of-field control, meaning backgrounds rarely achieve creamy bokeh; the S9200’s lens aperture helps marginally.
• The SP-600 UZ lacks face detection, placing more manual emphasis on framing and focus.

Landscape Photography

• Resolution and Dynamic Range: The S9200’s 16MP advantage and CMOS sensor afford higher detail capture and better shadow recovery. Although neither camera challenges the dynamic range of larger-sensor systems, the SP-600 UZ’s CCD sensor typically underperforms in high-contrast scenes.
• Both lack weather sealing, limiting prolonged landscape use in rough conditions.

Wildlife and Sports

• Autofocus and Burst Rates: The S9200’s continuous autofocus and faster burst support, combined with the extraordinary 1200mm zoom, let you capture distant action more effectively. However, focus hunting is noticeable due to contrast-detection limitations.
• The SP-600 UZ’s narrower zoom and slower AF limit reach and reaction speed but offers decent precision in good light.

Street Photography

• Portability and Discretion: The Olympus SP-600 UZ wins here for smaller size, lighter weight, and lower-profile design. The absence of an electronic viewfinder can be a downside for framing discretion.
• The S9200’s bulk and louder zoom motor may draw more attention.

Macro Photography

• Both cameras excel at close focusing (to ~1cm), but the S9200’s optical image stabilization is highly valuable for static handheld macro shots, whereas the SP-600 UZ lacks stabilization.

Night and Astro Photography

• Small sensors restrict all performance in this domain. The S9200 fares better due to a higher max ISO (12800 vs 1600) and superior noise reduction, though grain and softness increase at beyond ISO 800.
• Neither camera offers bulb mode or advanced astro-specific exposure modes.

Travel Photography

• The S9200’s extensive zoom range and long battery life are assets for varied shooting without carrying extra lenses or worrying about battery depletion.
• The SP-600 UZ brings compactness to this genre but trades versatility and endurance.

Professional Use and Workflow

• Neither supports RAW files, limiting post-processing flexibility, especially for professional-grade image refinement.
• Solid JPEG quality on the S9200 may suffice for social media, event documentation, and casual commercial use.
• The Olympus, being older and less feature-rich, is better suited for beginners or casual users.

Build Quality and Durability

Both units lack weather sealing, dustproofing, or shock resistance. Their plastic-heavy construction keeps costs down but reduces robustness. Between the two, the Fujifilm’s slightly heftier body instills more confidence for rougher conditions, though neither is recommended for demanding environmental use.

Lens Ecosystem and Compatibility

Neither camera offers interchangeable lenses - their fixed superzoom optics define the user experience entirely. Hence, the decision pivotally rests on choosing zoom range and aperture trade-offs between the two.

Summary of Subjective Impressions and Measured Scores

The collective evaluation places the cameras on an overall performance scale thusly:

In terms of pure performance metrics, the mapping correlates well with real-world shooting sessions, underscoring the S9200 as the more versatile and capable model while the SP-600 UZ remains an entry-level budget alternative.

Sample imagery comparisons elucidate these points further:

Fujifilm S9200 front Fujifilm S9200 screen back Olympus SP 600 UZ front Olympus SP 600 UZ screen back

Note the S9200’s sharper detail resolution and more balanced colors, particularly in challenging lighting.

Final Recommendations: Who Should Choose Which?

• Choose the Fujifilm FinePix S9200 if:

  • You require an extended zoom range (up to 1200mm equivalent) for wildlife, sports, or distant landscapes.
  • You value a larger, higher-resolution display and an electronic viewfinder for precise composition.
  • You want decent video in full HD with multiple frame rate options.
  • Battery life is critical on your travels, and AA battery availability is an advantage.
  • You prefer greater manual control, including shutter and aperture priority modes.

• Choose the Olympus SP-600 UZ if:

  • You prioritize a lightweight, compact camera with decent zoom for casual everyday photography.
  • Your budget constraints outweigh the need for advanced features and extended zoom.
  • You largely shoot in good lighting where the CCD sensor produces pleasing color.
  • You do not require video beyond HD 720p or advanced manual controls.
  • Portability and ease of transport are top priorities for casual travel.

Closing Thoughts: Balancing Expectations and Usage

Neither the Fujifilm S9200 nor Olympus SP-600 UZ matches the image quality or workflow flexibility of newer mirrorless or DSLR models with larger sensors and RAW support, but both serve particular niches where extensive zoom and compact simplicity intersect.

The S9200’s more modern sensor, superior zoom, and better ergonomics give it the edge for serious enthusiasts wanting a budget-conscious telephoto solution. The SP-600 UZ remains a useful choice for those prioritizing size and simplicity, though its aging technology and poorer low-light performance confine users to limited shooting environments.

By matching these cameras’ strengths against your own shooting style, subject preferences, and budget, you can confidently invest in the model best aligned with your photographic ambitions.

This analysis is based on firsthand hands-on testing, detailed specifications review, and side-by-side evaluations under diverse conditions, ensuring an authoritative resource for your camera purchasing decision.