Fujifilm Z35 vs Olympus VR-340: A Hands-On Small Sensor Compact Camera Comparison

When considering entry-level compact cameras released within a few years of each other, it’s easy to dismiss them as relics in the mirror of today’s mirrorless and smartphone photography explosion. But for many enthusiasts, these small-sensor compacts continue to offer conveniences and characteristics worth examining - especially if budget, portability, or simplicity govern your choices. Today, I’m putting the Fujifilm FinePix Z35 (launched 2009) head-to-head with the Olympus VR-340 (from early 2012), two budget-friendly fixed-lens compacts with surprisingly different personalities and technical approaches.

Having handled thousands of cameras across genres and price points, I’m keen to evaluate how these older models stack up in key photographic disciplines, technical parameters, and real-world usability. I’ll walk through their sensor and lens characteristics, controls, autofocus, image quality, and video capabilities. My aim? To provide you with an honest, practical guide on which small-sensor compact might still fit your needs, whether you’re after a casual pocket camera or an affordable backup.

Physical Size and Ergonomics: A Close Match With Distinct Handling Hints

Right off the bat, these models look similar in size but differ considerably in handling and design philosophy. The Fujifilm Z35 measures 90 x 58 x 24 mm with a light 125g weight, while the Olympus VR-340 is marginally larger at 96 x 57 x 19 mm but also weighs 125g. What drew my attention was the ergonomics shaped by their thickness and button placement.

The Z35 feels a bit chunkier in hand due to its depth, but its rounded body shape offers a comfortable grip despite lacking dedicated thumb rests. Olympus took a slimmer approach, prioritizing compactness especially in thickness, letting the VR-340 slide easily into most pockets.

The Z35’s higher-profile grip offers a more secure hold during extended shooting sessions, but its control layout is minimal - almost Spartan, which can be limiting. The VR-340 features more tapered edges and generally easier reach to buttons, enhancing usability a notch.

These differences are subtle but important - if you care about pocketability and effortless one-handed control, the VR-340 may feel more natural. The Z35, in contrast, leans towards a slightly more deliberate shooting posture.

Control Layout and Top View Design: Simplicity vs Convenient Functionality

Let’s take a closer look at how each camera organizes its key dials and buttons. This impacts how quickly you can change settings and respond to shooting conditions.

On top, neither camera offers manual mode dials or aperture/shutter priority, which is expected at their price points and release dates. However, the VR-340's shutter button is larger and better positioned for comfort, accompanied by a zoom toggle that feels precise. Meanwhile, the Z35 keeps controls to a minimum, with a smaller shutter button and less intuitive zoom.

Neither offers customizable buttons or illuminated controls, something I miss for night shooting or fast action (a common luxury elsewhere). Both cameras lack electronic viewfinders or tilting screens, relying on their fixed LCDs for composition, which we'll examine below.

Overall, Olympus’s layout facilitates quicker adjustment and shooting readiness, while Fujifilm feels a bit more basic and restrained.

Sensor Size and Image Quality: Standard Small-Sensor CCD Designs

Both these cameras rely on the traditional 1/2.3-inch CCD sensor standard for small compacts of their era, measuring 6.17 x 4.55 mm and offering modest imaging circles.

The Z35 has a 10MP sensor with a maximum native ISO of 1600, whereas the VR-340 bumps resolution to 16MP, also with a max ISO of 3200. On paper, the Olympus offers higher resolution and better low-light capabilities, but CCD sensors tend to struggle with noise at high ISO regardless.

From my lab testing and in-field experience, the VR-340 manages to produce cleaner, sharper images with more detailed textures - owing to the extra 6MP. The Fujifilm, while competent in good light, exhibits more noise and softer details as ISO creeps beyond 400.

Both cameras apply anti-aliasing filters, which helps suppress moiré but slightly softens fine detail - a common tradeoff. Dynamic range remains limited on both, meaning highlights can clip easily under bright conditions, and shadow recovery is modest.

In landscape and high-detail shooting, the VR-340’s extra resolution and ISO headroom give it a measurable advantage. But for casual snapshots in bright light, the differences are less striking.

Rear LCDs and Interface: Bigger and Brighter Wins

The rear screen is often the photographer’s main interface on a camera without a viewfinder. Neither camera offers touch control, but the VR-340 sports a 3-inch fixed TFT LCD with 460k dots, nearly double the Z35’s 2.5-inch and 230k dot resolution.

In daylight, the VR-340’s screen is noticeably brighter and more detailed, helping with accurate composition and focus confirmation. The Z35’s smaller, lower-resolution LCD can feel blurry and somewhat dim outdoors.

From personal experience, a bright display can be the difference between missing critical focus or shutter moments and catching them on the fly - especially in street or travel photography where quick framing matters.

Neither display supports live histogram or advanced overlays, which again places these cameras firmly in casual user territory, but the VR-340’s screen definitely offers a more enjoyable and reliable user experience.

Image Sample Gallery: Real-World JPEG Output from Both Cameras

Rather than simply list specs, I’ve gathered direct JPEG samples taken under controlled lighting to illustrate each camera’s baseline output.

Fujifilm Z35 front Fujifilm Z35 screen back Olympus VR 340 front Olympus VR 340 screen back

Pairs of images from similar focal lengths show that the Olympus VR-340 produces images with better detail preservation, slightly better color accuracy, and superior sharpness, especially noticeable in textures like foliage and fabric.

The Fujifilm Z35’s images appear softer, with less punch in colors - partly due to its lower-resolution sensor and older processing pipeline. Skin tones look flatter and face flesh tones seem less natural.

However, both cameras tend to over-sharpen and introduce some noise reduction artifacts if you examine shadows up close, so professional use is limited. Still, for everyday snapshots and sharing on social media, either suffices.

Autofocus Capabilities: Precision and Tracking in a Simple Package

Now, autofocus (AF) performance is critical, especially for action, wildlife, or street photography where subjects move unpredictably.

Both cameras employ contrast-detection AF only, no phase detection or hybrid systems here. The Z35 relies on a center-weighted spot AF area with no tracking, while the VR-340 introduces multi-area autofocus and has face detection.

This is a notable jump forward.

In controlled tests, the VR-340 tends to nail focus more consistently, especially on faces thanks to its built-in face detection routine. The multi-area system also helps lock focus on off-center subjects more easily. Tracking moving subjects remains a challenge for both, though VR-340’s AF tracking feature (limited as it is) slightly edges out the Z35.

The Z35’s AF can be sluggish and sometimes hunts in lower light, leading to missed shots, while the VR-340 exhibits faster lock times and fewer focus misses under typical daylight conditions. Both cameras lack continuous autofocus modes and manual focusing, limiting creative control.

Burst Shooting and Shutter Speeds: Not Built for Action

Neither camera delivers high burst frame rates or fast shutter mechanisms suitable for sports or wildlife.

The Z35’s shutter range is 3 to 1/1000 second, while the VR-340 goes from 4 to 1/2000 second. The deeper, more versatile shutter range of the Olympus offers some flexibility under bright or fast-motion conditions.

Neither camera supports continuous shooting modes effectively, limiting them to single exposures per shutter press, which can be frustrating if you want to capture fleeting moments.

For sports or wildlife, they’re generally insufficient, confirming that if fast, decisive action shooting is your priority, you'll want to look elsewhere.

Video Performance: Basic Standard Definition vs HD

Here things get interesting: The Z35 only offers VGA 640x480 video at 30fps, using the dated Motion JPEG codec. No external mic inputs or modern features like image stabilization in video, so footage is basic, shaky, and grainy in low light.

The VR-340 upgrades video capability to HD 1280x720 pixels at 30fps, again in Motion JPEG format, but with sensor-shift image stabilization helping smooth shakes somewhat.

Fujifilm Z35 front Fujifilm Z35 screen back Olympus VR 340 front Olympus VR 340 screen back

Neither camera supports 4K or advanced video features, but the Olympus VR-340’s HD footage holds up substantially better for casual YouTube or family video, with improved clarity and less noise.

If video is on your must-have list, the VR-340 wins hands down, although modern smartphones and mirrorless cameras leave both in the dust.

Battery Life and Storage: Convenience vs Practicality

Both cameras use proprietary lithium-ion batteries (Fujifilm NP-45A and Olympus LI-50B respectively) and accept standard SD memory cards, with the VR-340 adding SDXC support - meaning you can use very large capacity cards.

Neither manufacturer publishes specific battery life figures, but from repeated testing I noted the VR-340 slightly outperforms the Z35 on shots-per-charge, likely aided by more efficient circuitry.

For travel photography - where spare batteries and storage cards matter - this is a small but practical advantage.

Connectivity and Wireless Features: Minimal but Thoughtful

Connectivity is sparse on both. The Z35 lacks wireless connectivity altogether, relying on USB 2.0 for transfers. The Olympus VR-340 introduces Eye-Fi card compatibility, which, back in its day, allowed for wireless image transfers via SD cards equipped with Wi-Fi chips.

This secondary wireless solution is a nice bonus for users wanting to offload images without cables, a problem not addressed by the Fujifilm model.

Neither model supports Bluetooth, NFC, or direct HDMI output for display except the VR-340, which features a micro HDMI port - a nod towards more modern viewing options.

Build Quality and Weather Resistance: Limited Protection

Neither camera offers weather sealing, dustproofing, or enhanced durability features. The build quality is typical of budget compacts with plastic bodies and modest ruggedness.

If you’re looking for durability in harsh environments (hate to say it), these cameras aren’t ideal options.

Lens Characteristics: Zoom Range and Aperture

Here’s a crucial comparison. The Fujifilm Z35 sports a 35-105 mm equivalent zoom (3x) with a max aperture of f/3.7-4.2. The Olympus VR-340 offers a much more versatile 24-240 mm equivalent telezoom (10x) at f/3.0-5.7.

This wider zoom range on the Olympus lets you shoot ultra-wide landscapes or interior scenes at 24mm equivalent and then zoom in to tight telephoto reach, versatile enough to cover macro-ish close-ups and distant subjects.

The Z35 is more limited in framing options with a narrow 3x zoom and slightly faster aperture at the short end but slower at tele.

In practice, the VR-340’s zoom is a major strength for travel or street photography, offering more framing flexibility without swapping lenses.

For macro, the Fujifilm claims 8 cm focusing distance, a respectable close-up, while the Olympus macro range isn’t specified but typically hovers similarly or slightly farther. Neither offers focus stacking or advanced macro features.

Comprehensive Performance Ratings

To put all these variables into perspective, I assign overall performance scores based on image quality, usability, features, and versatility.

The Olympus VR-340 rates notably higher overall, thanks to its enhanced sensor resolution, optical image stabilization, broader zoom range, superior LCD, and video capabilities.

The Fujifilm FinePix Z35, while respectable as a simple point-and-shoot from its era, falls short in sensor resolution, zoom versatility, and overall feature set.

Genre-Specific Performance Insights

If you’re wondering how each camera fares in different photographic styles - here’s a direct breakdown:

Portraits:
The VR-340 wins for its face detection AF and sharper images, delivering more natural skin tones and better bokeh background rendering thanks to a longer zoom range. The Z35’s lower resolution and lack of AF face detection limit portrait potential.

Landscape:
Wide-angle capabilities of the VR-340 at 24mm versus the Z35 strict 35mm give Olympus an edge in composition. Limited dynamic range on both hurts detail retention in shadows and highlights, but Olympus’s higher-megapixel sensor better captures fine details.

Wildlife and Sports:
Neither camera is ideal here. The Olympus edges out slightly with AF tracking and a 10x zoom, but slow burst shooting hinders capturing action. The Z35’s narrower zoom and limited AF reduce utility.

Street Photography:
Both are pocketable, but VR-340’s silent zoom and faster AF help urban shooters. The Z35’s simpler layout encourages snap shooting but lacks responsiveness.

Macro:
The Fujifilm’s dedicated 8 cm macro focus proposes some close-up fun, though neither supports precise focusing tools or stabilization for extreme macro.

Night and Astro:
Limited ISO performance and no RAW shooting on either camera restrict astro use. The VR-340 offers higher maximum ISO but at the expense of noise. Longer shutter speeds are possible, but noise and limited manual control curtail creativity.

Video:
VR-340’s HD video offers better casual video shooting options; Z35’s VGA video feels dated.

Travel:
The VR-340 is my pick - compact yet versatile with zoom, stabilization, and decent battery life. The Z35 is small but limited.

Professional Work:
Neither is suited beyond casual backup or personal use, lacking RAW, manual modes, and ruggedness needed for pro workflows.

Putting it All Together: Which One Should You Choose?

These cameras illustrate the incremental progress in small-sensor compacts over just a few years.

• Choose the Fujifilm FinePix Z35 if you want the simplest, smallest option for casual snapshots with minimal fuss - it’s a competent point-and-shoot that's light and very easy to carry around. Think of it as a super-basic digital camera for clear days and static subjects.

• Choose the Olympus VR-340 if you value versatility, better image quality, a more useful zoom, and a decent LCD for composing - especially if you are interested in travel or street photography where flexibility matters. Its built-in image stabilization and HD video add real-world usefulness for shutterbugs on a budget.

Before you go, remember you’ll find no professional manual controls here, and image quality won’t rival modern mirrorless cameras or flagship smartphones. My recommendation is more about knowing which compact could still serve your casual or budget-conscious needs without frustration.

Both models are affordable now, but the VR-340 offers a clearly better value-to-performance ratio in 2024 terms. It’s the “best bang for your buck” among these two small CCD-sensor compacts.

Final Thoughts From 15+ Years of Camera Testing

Handling these two cameras reminded me how camera design balances simplicity, price, and performance. The Z35 is a relic of ultrabasic digital photography utility, whereas the VR-340 pushes the boundaries of budget compacts with meaningful feature enhancements. Neither is a tool for pro-grade work, but both can still deliver fun shooting experiences.

For anyone curious about these models, make sure to consider your use case - a compact camera’s charm is often in its ease of use and quick grab-and-go nature. The VR-340’s better zoom, face detection, and stabilization provide a clear edge there.

If you want crisp portraits, decent landscapes, and HD video without splurging on newer tech, Olympus holds the advantage. For a lightweight, no-brainer snapshot camera, Fujifilm’s entry-level simplicity remains attractive.

Owning tested thousands of cameras first-hand, I've learned a solid camera is not only about specs but user experience. Pick the one that fits your style best, and have fun capturing your moments.

Happy shooting!