Kodak Z980 vs Olympus SH-2: A Hands-On Comparison for Photography Enthusiasts

When diving into the realm of small sensor superzoom cameras, the choices are often a battleground between sheer zoom reach, image quality, and usability. Today, we’re pitting two noteworthy contenders against each other: the Kodak EasyShare Z980, a 2009 throwback with a whopping 24× zoom, and the 2015 Olympus Stylus SH-2, Garmin's seasoned rival with a sleek design and smart features. Having extensively tested both cameras in studio and real-world scenarios, I’m here to help you sift through the specs and hands-on experiences to see which one deserves a spot in your bag.

Let’s start by laying them side-by-side – and I mean literally.

Getting a Feel: Size, Grip, and Ergonomics

First impressions do matter. Pulling both cameras out of the bag is like holding two vastly different philosophies. The Kodak Z980 is bulky - even for a compact superzoom - with dimensions of 124 x 91 x 105 mm and weighing in around 445 grams (with batteries). It’s got a retro heft that might remind some of early point-and-shoot days, but with its sizable grip and physical controls, it’s surprisingly manageable. The AA batteries add to its substantial feel but give the convenience of easy replacements when you’re off-grid.

The Olympus SH-2, in comparison, is notably more svelte at 109 x 63 x 42 mm and a light 271 grams, thanks to its proprietary lithium-ion battery and more modern internal design. Its sleek body slides flat into your jacket pocket - which is a blessing for street photographers and travelers who hate lugging heavy gear.

One caveat: the Kodak’s fixed lens with a significant zoom barrel means bulkier handling, while the Olympus's more modest profile favors portability without compromising too much on reach.

The ergonomic controls reflect their eras - the Kodak relies on a traditional button-and-dial layout that’s a bit cramped on its smaller rear LCD space, whereas the Olympus embraces a cleaner interface with a touchscreen overlay, catering to more intuitive operation. But there’s no viewfinder on the Olympus, which could irk those who prefer composing via eye-level optics.

Sensor and Image Quality Insights: More Than Just Megapixels

Small sensor cameras don’t usually set hearts pounding like their full-frame brethren, but sensor specifications and image processing still make all the difference between a usable shot and a blurry mess.

Here we’re looking at the Kodak’s 1/2.3" CCD sensor with 12 megapixels, versus the Olympus’s similarly sized 1/2.3" BSI-CMOS sensor boasting 16 megapixels.

That CMOS sensor is a key advantage in the Olympus. Backside-illuminated (BSI) technology increases light-gathering efficiency, which translates into better low-light performance and less noise. The Kodak’s CCD sensor - while respectable for its time - is more prone to noise at higher ISOs and slower readout speeds.

From practical experience, the Olympus’s images display finer detail, smoother gradations, and less chroma noise, especially beyond ISO 400 - a sweet spot for both cameras. Kodak Z980 images tend to suffer from muddier fine detail and more aggressive in-camera noise reduction, which can soften edges.

Moreover, the Olympus’s sensor has the edge in dynamic range, helping in scenes with bright skies and shaded foregrounds - a frequent challenge in landscape work.

Screen and User Interface: Peering Into Your Shots

Both cameras sport a 3-inch rear screen, but the comparison ends there.

The Kodak’s 201k-dot fixed LCD feels lifeless and low-resolution by modern standards, making it a challenge to confidently assess image sharpness or exposure while shooting.

Olympus raises the bar with a vibrant 460k-dot touchscreen, offering clear previews and expanded control access. Touch focus and menu navigation make creative adjustments swifter and less fiddly.

Moreover, Kodak’s electronic viewfinder is a basic convenience, lacking detail and refresh rate - which pushes the user to rely on the rear LCD anyway. Olympus’s lack of a viewfinder is a downside but compensated by its brighter, higher-res screen.

Autofocus and Shooting Performance: The Race Behind the Lens

Speed and accuracy in autofocus (AF) can make or break your chances at the decisive moment, especially for wildlife, sports, or street photography.

The Kodak Z980 uses a contrast-detection AF system with 25 focus points but no continuous AF or tracking features. In practice, that means slower focus lock and a tendency to “hunt” in low-contrast or dim conditions. Forget about snapping off multiple frames quickly - the camera shoots at a paltry 1 fps, frustrating when trying to capture fleeting action.

Conversely, the Olympus SH-2 excels here with advanced autofocus, including face detection (a boon for portraits), continuous AF, and tracking AF that works well in daylight and moderately low-light scenarios. The SH-2’s burst rate of 11.5 fps offers photographers excellent opportunities for action sequences and wildlife.

From shooting birds on a drizzly afternoon to children darting across the playground, the SH-2’s quick reacquisition and predictive focus made all the difference - whereas the Z980 required patience and sometimes manual focus finesse.

Zoom and Lens Versatility: How Far Can You Go?

It wouldn’t be a superzoom face-off without talking focal reach.

Kodak’s 24× zoom (26-624 mm equivalent) remains impressive - allowing you to bring distant subjects dangerously close. Its bright aperture of F2.8 at the wide end gives better low-light capture, but by 624 mm, the aperture narrows to F5.0, a common tradeoff for superzooms.

Olympus offers a similar 24× zoom range (25-600 mm equivalent), marginally wider at the short end but slightly less reach by 24 mm at tele. Its maximum aperture starts at F3.0 and diminishes to a dimmer F6.9, making it less forgiving in gloom.

But it’s not just about numbers. The Olympus lens’s optical stabilization combined with sensor-shift stabilization maintains sharpness hand-held even at max zoom (to my surprise). Kodak’s stabilization helps but is less refined, sometimes producing inconsistent results, especially when zoomed in beyond 400 mm.

Both lenses are fixed, limiting adaptability but designed to cover a broad shooting spectrum from wide-angle landscapes to distant wildlife.

Battery Life and Storage: Shooting All Day without a Break?

Kodak Z980 runs on 4 AA batteries, which are ubiquitous and easy to replace globally - a practical plus for travel. The downside? Bulkier camera body and variable battery life depending on alkalines or NiMH rechargeables.

Olympus SH-2 relies on the proprietary LI-92B lithium-ion battery, delivering a rating of about 380 shots per full charge. In my experience, that’s sufficient for casual shooting sessions, but you’ll want a spare if you intend to do a full-day outing or time-lapse.

Both use SD/SDHC cards, with Olympus supporting SDXC, future-proofing storage needs a bit better.

Build Quality and Weather Sealing: Ready for the Elements?

Neither camera claims weather sealing, dustproofing, or rugged physical protection. The Kodak’s plastic-heavy design feels solid but not toughened for harsh environments. Olympus matches this with a similarly unsealed body but a higher-quality finish that resists fingerprints and scratches better.

For adventurers or outdoor photographers, neither camera is your bulletproof companion - consider more specialized gear if that’s a priority.

Video Capabilities: Beyond Stills

Video is a bonus feature on both cameras, but the Olympus SH-2 clearly takes the lead.

Kodak Z980 outputs 720p HD video at 30 fps, encoded as Motion JPEG - resulting in large files and limited editing flexibility. The Olympus steps up to 1080p Full HD video at 60 fps, encoded by H.264 for better compression and quality, which is significant if you want smooth motion for casual video.

Neither camera offers microphone or headphone jacks, so expect the built-in mics to capture audio with some ambient noise. Olympus’s in-camera stabilization also benefits video smoothness, while Kodak’s is less effective.

An added Olympus perk is timelapse recording, missing in the Kodak - great for astro or landscape photographers wanting to capture motion over time without external accessories.

Specialty Photography Uses: Portraits, Macro, and Night Scenes

• Portraits: Olympus’s face detection autofocus proved reliable and fast-easy for nailing skin tones with its richer image processing pipeline. Kodak can manage but struggles with accurate focus on eyes and soft backgrounds due to limited AF sophistication and sensor noise beyond base ISO.

• Macro Photography: Kodak’s minimum macro focus distance is 10 cm, while Olympus dives closer to an impressive 3 cm. This difference lets Olympus users explore detailed close-ups with more crispness and less need for extensions or adapters.

• Night and Astro Photography: For low light, Olympus’s BSI-CMOS sensor and higher ISO capabilities (starting at ISO 125) outperform Kodak’s CCD which starts at ISO 64 but introduces a lot more noise above ISO 400. Olympus’s longer shutter speed limits and stabilization make night scenes and star trails more feasible, albeit limited when compared to DSLRs or mirrorless.

Real-World Photography Samples: Which Look Wins?

I compiled some sample images from both during a late summer shooting trip.

Kodak Z980 screen back Olympus SH 2 front Olympus SH 2 screen back

Notice how Olympus renders sharper details and better preserves dynamic range. Kodak’s shots have a nostalgic softness but sometimes lose contrast and color saturation in midtones.

Scoring Their Performance: Numbers Don’t Lie (Or Do They)?

While DXO Mark hasn't tested these cameras, I conducted proprietary scoring across crucial parameters based on my evaluation metrics.

Olympus SH-2 comfortably outpaces Kodak Z980 on autofocus, image quality, burst speed, and video. Kodak holds its own on zoom reach and battery convenience but trails on most practical usability fronts.

Let’s drill down with genre-specific insights:

Who Should Buy What?

• If you are a budget-conscious casual shooter or collector craving long zoom reach and easy battery swaps, the Kodak Z980 might still find a place. It caters well to daylight shooting with manual controls for enthusiasts willing to piece together decent results.

• For the enthusiast who wants a sleek, reliable superzoom for versatile photography - be it street, wildlife, travel, or family portraits - the Olympus SH-2 is the better choice. The improved sensor, faster AF, and 1080p video punch above its weight class.

• The Olympus also suits those who prize portability and enhanced manual controls with touchscreen interfaces, while Kodak has the charm of manual exposure modes and a vintage feel.

Final Thoughts: Lessons from My Lens Mount

Neither camera competes with mirrorless or DSLRs in pure image quality, but their compactness, affordability, and zoom range make them relevant for specific niches. The Kodak Z980 feels like a relic from the last decade’s heyday in superzooms, an honorable workhorse with quirks. The Olympus SH-2 embraces a more modern sensibility, blending better tech and usability for higher satisfaction.

For those who often ask, “Do I really need more pixels or faster AF?” - the Olympus gives a firm “Yes.” The Z980 can still serve as a reliable point-and-shoot in good light, but Olympus caters to those wanting a camera that keeps pace with fleeting subjects and varying shooting conditions.

If I had to pick just one based on overall versatility and enjoyment, the Olympus SH-2 would be my go-to pocket power zoom any day.

I hope this deep dive helps clarify your decision. Remember, a camera is not just its specs - handheld feel, image style, and personal shooting habits count for a great deal. Now, which zoom adventure will you embark on next?