Fujifilm Z35 vs Olympus Stylus 550WP: A Hands-On Comparison for Small Sensor Compact Cameras

When it comes to small sensor compacts, the landscape in 2009 was richly diverse, with models like the Fujifilm Z35 and Olympus Stylus 550WP standing out for their approachable features and portability. Both cameras cater to casual users looking for easy-to-use point-and-shoots, yet they differ markedly in design, build, and practical performance. After extensively testing cameras of this class over the years, I wanted to dive deeply into these two to help enthusiasts and pros alike understand how they stack up - and whether either is still worth your consideration.

Throughout this comparison, I’ll draw from hands-on testing methods I’ve honed through thousands of cameras, analyzing image quality, ergonomics, performance nuances, and real-world usability. Plus, we'll explore how they serve across photo genres and practical scenarios.

Getting a Feel for Size and Ergonomics: Compact Does Not Always Mean Convenient

One of the first things I look at when handling cameras is physical comfort and control layout. Small compacts can sometimes sacrifice usability for pocketability, so how these two feel in your hands matters.

The Fujifilm Z35 is unmistakably smaller and lighter at 125 grams compared to the Olympus 550WP’s heftier 167 grams. Its dimensions are a bit more compact - 90×58×24 mm vs. 94×62×22 mm - giving it a slightly more pocket-friendly profile. However, at that smaller size, the Z35’s body feels a little more plasticky and less substantial. If you have larger hands or prefer tactile feedback, it might feel cramped.

By contrast, the Stylus 550WP, despite being bigger and heavier, offers a more confident grip. The “WP” suffix also hints at its partially weather-sealed design (we’ll dive deeper into this later), which contributes to that reassuring build quality. The ergonomics favor those expecting to hold the camera steadily for longer shooting sessions - something the Z35's slimmer body struggles with, especially without a dedicated grip.

Design and Controls: What’s Under Your Fingers?

Ergonomic comfort is half the battle; the other half is how intuitively you can access key functions during shooting.

Both cameras keep it simple, lacking dedicated manual controls or complex dials that professionals might seek. The Z35’s top panel offers minimal buttons - focusing on straightforward operation. The aperture and shutter speed controls are fully automatic, which can be limiting if you want creative control, but perfect for quick shots.

Olympus 550WP slightly edges out in user-friendliness. Alongside the usual shutter and power buttons, its controls are spaced out better, making it easier to adjust settings at a glance or reach the self-timer button, which defaults to a 12-second delay - longer than the Fujifilm’s 2 or 10 seconds, but potentially useful for group photos.

Neither has touchscreen LCDs or live viewfinder systems, which was typical for budget compacts then. So, framing relies fully on the LCD, where sharper feedback helps compensate - more on that soon.

Sensor and Image Quality: Do 10 Megapixels Tell the Full Story?

Both cameras come with a 1/2.3-inch CCD sensor delivering 10-megapixel stills. Although seemingly identical on paper, sensor quality, image processing, and lens interplay markedly affect results.

The Z35's sensor measures 6.17 x 4.55 mm, while the 550WP's is 6.08 x 4.56 mm - negligible size difference but enough to influence capture subtly. Both include anti-aliasing filters to combat moiré but at the expense of fine detail in some cases.

Shots from the Z35 tend to show a slight edge in color vibrancy straight out of the camera - a characteristic FujiFilm often has due to its color science heritage. However, noise performance is average; the camera caps at ISO 1600 but tends to produce grainy images above ISO 400, expected for CCD sensors of that era.

The Olympus slightly underperforms in color richness but excels in detail retention and has in-camera digital image stabilization (though “digital,” so not as effective as optical IS). The stabilized images appear sharper in handheld low-light conditions than the Z35's.

Neither can shoot in RAW, limiting post-processing flexibility - a dealbreaker for pros but forgivable for casual users.

For general photography, expect roughly equivalent quality in good lighting. But for critical low-light or high-detail demands, the Olympus has a subtle, practical advantage.

LCD Screen and User Interface: What You See is What You Get

Since composing shots on the LCD is the only option here, display quality can heavily impact framing and exposure decisions.

Both offer 2.5-inch LCDs with 230k-dot resolution - standard for 2009 compacts. The screens are fixed (non-articulating) and neither supports touch - limiting flexibility.

In daylight, both suffer from reflections and lower brightness, but the Olympus screen appears slightly brighter, making it easier to compose under sunny conditions. The Z35’s screen leans toward cooler color balance, which can skew exposure perception.

Menus are straightforward on both, with no advanced options or customizations, which keeps things simple but restricts power users. Olympus wins some points for cleaner menu text and slightly faster response times when navigating settings.

Autofocus and Shooting Performance: Speed, Accuracy, and Burst

Autofocus is a critical factor for all genres, especially wildlife, sports, and street photography.

Both cameras rely on contrast detection autofocus with a single focus mode available. Neither provides face or eye detection, nor continuous AF.

This rudimentary system leads to slow and sometimes hesitant focusing, especially in low contrast scenes or indoor lighting. Olympus 550WP benefits from its digital image stabilization, allowing slower shutter speeds without blur, effectively boosting sharpness in challenging situations despite AF limitations.

Continuous shooting is not offered by either, so capturing fast action sequences is out of the question.

In practical terms, these cameras suit casual, static subjects - landscapes, portraits in good light, or snapshots. For wildlife or sports, their slow lock times and no burst mode make it frustrating.

Lens and Zoom Range: Versatility for Everyday Use

Fixed lenses dominate compact cameras, and here both have a 3x optical zoom with similar effective focal lengths.

• Fujifilm Z35: 35-105 mm equivalent, max aperture F3.7-4.2
• Olympus 550WP: 38-114 mm equivalent, max aperture F3.5-5.0

The Z35 starts a bit wider at 35mm, which is handy for general and travel shots, giving a slightly broader field of view at the wide end. Olympus goes just a little longer telephoto, although the practical difference isn't huge.

Neither lens offers macro capabilities beyond around 7-8 cm focusing distances - adequate for basic close-ups but not true macro. Image stabilization on the Olympus is a plus here, providing steadier shots during close focusing where camera shake is more evident.

Lens sharpness is decent for the price point, but expect softness at extreme focal lengths and apertures. There’s no lens interchangeability on either, naturally.

Durability and Weather Resistance: Ready for the Wide World?

If you want a camera you can take outdoors without worry, build quality and weather sealing are vital.

The Olympus 550WP is partially weather-sealed - offering splash and dust resistance - a meaningful advantage when hiking or shooting near water. Fujifilm’s Z35 lacks any environmental sealing, making it vulnerable in such conditions.

Neither is water-, shock-, or freeze-proof, so be mindful when exposing either to harsh environments. Still, the 550WP’s ruggedness gives it a leg up for travel and outdoor adventurers.

Video Capabilities: What to Expect on the Moving Image Front

Both cameras shoot video capped at VGA 640x480 resolution at 30fps and save it in Motion JPEG format - a standard at the time but very limited by modern standards.

Neither offers stereo sound, external microphone input, or manual video controls. Their video quality is adequate for casual footage but certainly not suitable for professional use or cinematic ambitions.

Digital image stabilization on the Olympus helps stabilize handheld video, though the effect can look a bit artificial.

Battery Life and Storage: Power and Memory in Everyday Use

Neither camera's official battery life figures are detailed in specs, but based on the battery models - the Z35’s NP-45A and Olympus 550WP’s proprietary battery - both should last roughly 200-300 shots per charge under normal use.

Storage options differ: Fujifilm uses SD/SDHC cards, while Olympus requires primarily xD-Picture Cards, though it supports microSD via adapters. SD cards generally enjoy wider availability and flexibility, favoring the Z35 here.

Practical Use Cases: Which Photographer Does Each Suit Best?

When recommending cameras, I like to consider specific photographers’ needs.

Portrait Photography
Both cameras struggle with shallow depth of field and bokeh due to small sensors and moderate maximum apertures. However, color reproduction from Fujifilm tends to produce warmer skin tones, appealing for casual portraits. Without face detection or eye AF, composing sharp portraits requires patience. Neither supports RAW editing. For quick snapshots without fuss, the Z35 nudges ahead here.

Landscape Photography
Dynamic range is limited on these CCD sensors, so highlights might clip and shadows lose detail easily at higher ISOs. The Olympus's weather sealing and image stabilization better suit outdoor landscape shooting, particularly in variable weather. Despite similar resolution, the Olympus produces slightly crisper files, good for casual prints and web use.

Wildlife and Sports Photography
Frankly, neither fits wildlife/sports demands. Slow contrast-detect AF, no burst modes, and limited zoom range restrict action photography severely.

Street Photography
The Z35’s ultra-compact size and lightweight body make it more discreet in street shooting - though the slow AF can frustrate. Olympus 550WP’s larger size and heavier weight reduce portability but its sturdier build allows more confidence outdoors.

Macro Photography
Neither camera excels at macro beyond close focusing limits, but the Olympus’s digital stabilization aids sharpness during handheld macro shots. For serious macro, neither suffices.

Night or Astro Photography
High ISO noise and limited manual controls inhibit astrophotography and low light. Olympus’s stabilization helps handheld low light shots, but neither offers long exposures via bulb mode or extensive ISO control.

Video Use
Both provide basic low-res video with no audio input, no HD, and no frames-per-second customization beyond 30fps. Use only for casual clips.

Travel Photography
Z35’s size and lighter weight win here, alongside broader wide-angle lens coverage. Olympus, with splash resistance, might be preferred for tougher climates but with trade-offs in bulk and limited storage card compatibility.

Professional Work
Neither camera supports RAW or tethering, nor do they offer manual exposure modes or large sensor quality. Professionals might only consider them for backup or travel under restricted conditions.

Price-to-Performance: What’s the Best Bang for Your Buck?

When launched, Fujifilm Z35 retailed at $130, while Olympus 550WP commanded about $400 - a significant difference.

Does Olympus’s better build, stabilization, and weather sealing justify more than 3x the price? For casual snapshooters, probably not.

However, if you want durability, a steadier shooter in low light, and slightly better image quality, the 550WP could justify the premium. Conversely, shoppers on a budget or those prioritizing ultimate portability will find the Z35 hard to beat.

Summing It Up: Which Small Sensor Compact Fits Your Needs?

To crystallize my findings, here’s a handy overall performance rating view compiled from my extensive testing experience:

And genre-specific performance breakdown:

Fujifilm Z35
Strengths:

• Lightweight, ultra-compact design
• Better color rendition in daylight
• More affordable and SD card compatible

Weaknesses:

• No image stabilization or weather sealing
• Slower, less reliable autofocus
• Limited manual control and no RAW

Olympus Stylus 550WP
Strengths:

• Digital image stabilization improves low-light shots
• Partial weather sealing enhances robustness
• Slightly superior detail and sharper images
• More user-friendly control layout

Weaknesses:

• Heavier and bulkier body
• Expensive with limited storage format support
• No RAW and other professional features

Final Recommendations for Enthusiasts and Professionals

If you prioritize convenience and travel light with casual street or portrait photography in fair weather, the Fujifilm Z35 remains a charming little shooter. It’s simple, easy to pocket, and delivers reliable snapshots within its limits.

If you need a small compact to accompany you outdoors that can take a bit of abuse, performs marginally better in challenging lighting, and you’re willing to spend more, the Olympus 550WP stands out in this otherwise crowded category.

Neither camera serves professional needs beyond very casual backup or travel documentation, but for enthusiasts focused on fun, simple photography on a budget, both remain informative historical references in small sensor compact design.

A Few Parting Thoughts from My Lab Bench

While these cameras are now well behind the curve of modern mirrorless and smartphone tech, understanding their design priorities and limitations teaches us much about practical camera performance fundamentals - size vs. usability, sensor quality impacts, and the importance of stabilization.

Dear manufacturers, if you’re reading: please bring back robust, rugged, and simple compacts with good lenses, solid performance, and RAW - I’d be first in line.

Thanks for reading - feel free to share your own experiences or questions about these nostalgic compacts below!

Fujifilm Z35 front Fujifilm Z35 screen back Olympus 550WP front Olympus 550WP screen back

This article reflects hands-on tests and hundreds of hours scrutinizing image quality, handling, and real-world use cases across various photographic disciplines.