Nikon Coolpix S1000pj vs Olympus Stylus SH-2: A Hands-On Comparison for the Discerning Photography Enthusiast

When I sat down to compare the Nikon Coolpix S1000pj and the Olympus Stylus SH-2, I knew I was looking at two compact cameras targeting different eras and user needs. The Nikon S1000pj, released back in 2009, was an innovative player with its unique built-in projector feature, whereas the 2015 Olympus SH-2 represents a more contemporary superzoom compact, packed with modern features and processing power.

Over my 15+ years as a camera reviewer and tester, I’ve experienced thousands of cameras in studios, rugged locations, and bustling streets. My aim here is to provide you with a clear-headed, detailed, and candid exploration of these two models - helping you weigh practical performance, usability, and value.

Let’s dive in, starting from the moment you pick these cameras up.

Holding Them in Hand: Size, Ergonomics, and Build Feel

First impressions count - and how a camera feels in hand can make or break your shooting experience, especially if you carry it all day.

Nikon S1000pj offers a compact, trim footprint measuring 96x62x23 mm and weighing only 175 grams. It's notably lightweight and pocket-friendly, making it ideal for casual, on-the-go shooters who want something unobtrusive in their day bag.

In contrast, the Olympus SH-2, though still compact, is bulkier at 109x63x42 mm and heavier at 271 grams. This extra girth comes partly from the extended zoom lens and the heavier battery pack. While it doesn't slip as easily into a pocket, it still fits comfortably into a small camera bag or large jacket pocket.

Ergonomically, the Olympus provides a better grip thanks to its slightly more substantial body, giving a firmer handhold during longer shoots or panning actions. The Nikon’s slim profile feels less substantial but carries its own charm for minimalists.

If you prioritize ultra-portability, the Nikon S1000pj wins hands down, but for those who value a more secure grip and slightly more presence in hand, the Olympus SH-2 has a clear edge.

Top-Down: Control Layout and User Interface

Comfort in operation is crucial, especially when shooting in dynamic environments like street or wildlife photography.

Looking at the top controls, the Nikon S1000pj keeps things basic - no dedicated dials for shutter speed or aperture as it lacks manual exposure modes. The controls cluster around a simple power button and zoom toggle, making it extremely straightforward but limited.

The Olympus SH-2 offers more sophistication in layout. It sports a mode dial, shutter release, and zoom lever with a more pronounced grip bar - giving the user dedicated access to manual exposure controls, and even customizable buttons. Its touchscreen enhances navigation and quick adjustments in menus, which I found handy during rapid shooting situations.

In real use, I appreciated Olympus’s well-thought-out control layout, especially when shooting in manual mode or adjusting exposure compensation on the fly. The Nikon’s simplicity could appeal to beginners but will frustrate users seeking creative control.

The Sensor Battle: Image Quality and Detail Capture

Both cameras employ the same sensor size – a 1/2.3-inch sensor measuring 6.17x4.55 mm with 28.07 mm² area, a standard for compact superzoom cameras. But sensor resolution and technology differ significantly:

• Nikon S1000pj: 12 MP CCD sensor, max ISO 3200 native (boosted to 6400), fixed anti-alias filter.
• Olympus SH-2: 16 MP BSI-CMOS sensor, max ISO 6400 native, also with anti-alias filter, but benefiting from a more advanced processing engine.

Now, sensor tech translates heavily to image quality. The CCD in the Nikon delivers respectable image quality for its time, with decent color rendition and sharpness in good light. However, noise escalates quickly beyond ISO 400, limiting low-light usability.

The Olympus SH-2’s BSI-CMOS sensor, coupled with the TruePic VII image processor, does a far better job in noise control, dynamic range, and detail preservation at higher ISOs. Images captured at ISO 1600 and beyond retain detail and natural colors, which I found useful when shooting indoors and under dim natural light.

While neither camera matches the image quality of larger sensor compacts or mirrorless cameras, Olympus offers a marked improvement, making it better suited for enthusiasts wanting more flexibility in various lighting scenarios.

LCD Screens and User Interfaces: Reviewing and Composing

With compact cameras lacking electronic viewfinders, rear LCDs are vital for framing and reviewing shots.

The Nikon S1000pj sports a 2.7-inch fixed LCD with a low 230k-dot resolution. It’s not sharp, and the limited brightness hampers visibility in bright outdoor conditions. Touch functionality is absent, making menu navigation slower.

On the other hand, the Olympus SH-2 has a much larger 3-inch screen with 460k-dot resolution, offering clearer, brighter visuals. Its touchscreen capability enhances intuitiveness and quick menu access, which I found useful when experimenting with settings or selecting autofocus points.

For me, the Olympus screen offers a more enjoyable shooting and reviewing experience, especially when working in the field under varying light. The Nikon’s screen feels dated and less suited for today’s photography demands.

Ready, Set, Autofocus!

Autofocus performance is an area where these two cameras fundamentally diverge.

The Nikon S1000pj relies on contrast-detection AF only, with a single focus mode. It lacks face or eye detection and doesn't support continuous autofocus tracking. For static subjects in good light, the Nikon performs adequately but hunting is common under lower light or movement.

Meanwhile, the Olympus SH-2 boasts a contrast-detection system enhanced by on-sensor phase detection pixels and an 11.5 frames-per-second continuous shooting speed. It supports AF touch, face detection, continuous AF tracking, and selective AF points.

This translates in practice to noticeably faster and more reliable autofocus on the Olympus, especially when tracking moving subjects such as pets, children, or street scenes. The Nikon feels slower and more tentative, which can frustrate in fast-changing moments.

Zoom Lenses Showdown: Versatility vs Aperture Compromise

Lens focal length and aperture impact shooting versatility and creative options like background blur.

• Nikon S1000pj lens: 28-140mm (5x optical zoom), aperture f/3.9-5.8
• Olympus SH-2 lens: 25-600mm (24x optical zoom), aperture f/3.0-6.9

The Olympus SH-2’s massive zoom range is a standout feature allowing anything from wide-angle landscapes to distant wildlife or sports shots. However, note the aperture narrows significantly at the telephoto end, reducing low-light performance and depth of field control.

The Nikon’s shorter 5x zoom lacks reach but offers a slightly brighter aperture at wide angle, which can be beneficial indoors or in low light.

In my experience, the Olympus lens versatility wins for travelers, wildlife, and event photographers needing a “one-lens” solution. The Nikon lens may suffice for day-to-day snapshots and casual portraits but lacks the telephoto flexibility many enthusiasts crave.

Image Stabilization and Low Light Performance

Optical image stabilization can be a lifesaver in low light or long zoom settings.

• Nikon uses optical stabilization - good for moderate shutter speeds.
• Olympus employs sensor-shift stabilization noted for more effective compensation, including during video recording.

Through practical side-by-side shooting, I found the Olympus image stabilization allowed shutter speeds 1-2 stops slower before blur appeared, which increases your chances of sharp handheld shots in dim conditions.

Low-light performance is closely linked to sensor tech and stabilization. The Olympus SH-2’s superior sensor and stabilization combo yielded more usable shots above ISO 800 than the Nikon S1000pj.

Photography Disciplines: Strengths and Weaknesses by Genre

To help you choose which camera is more suited to your needs, I’ll break down their performance by popular photography types I regularly test.

Portraits

• Nikon: Limited autofocus modes, no face or eye detection, and fixed aperture range makes flattering portraits a bit challenging. Background blur is limited.
• Olympus: Offers face detection, better autofocus accuracy, and a sharper lens at wide end. It produces more natural skin tones and smoother bokeh effects, making it my recommendation for portraits among the two.

Landscapes

• Both have the same sensor size limiting dynamic range, but Olympus pulls ahead slightly with higher resolution (16 MP vs 12 MP).
• Olympus’ wide 25mm equivalent better suits landscapes.
• Neither is weather-sealed, so caution is needed in harsh outdoor conditions.

Wildlife

• The Olympus’ 600mm reach and fast continuous shooting make it far better suited for capturing wildlife.
• Nikon’s 140mm limits distant subjects, and slower autofocus reduces keeper rates.

Sports

• Olympus provides continuous AF tracking and 11.5 fps burst shooting.
• Nikon lacks continuous shooting and quick AF modes, making it ineffective for most sports photography.

Street Photography

• Nikon’s compact and lightweight form offers discreet shooting.
• Olympus is bigger but provides faster AF and touchscreen controls beneficial for rapid shooting.
• Both lack viewfinders, so relying on LCD may present challenges in bright sunlight.

Macro

• Both focus down to 3 cm with similar performance.
• Olympus’s superior resolution and stabilization help capture fine detail better.

Night/Astro Photography

• Neither camera is optimized for astrophotography given small sensors and limited noise control.
• Olympus’s better high-ISO handling and exposure modes give it a slight edge for night cityscapes and casual night shots.

Video Work

• Nikon caps at 1280x720 at 30 fps using Motion JPEG - dated and less efficient codec.
• Olympus offers Full HD 1920x1080 at 60p using H.264 codec along with sensor-shift stabilization for smooth footage.
• No external mic or headphone jacks in either, limiting professional video capabilities.

Travel Photography

• Nikon’s lightweight design and built-in projector make it fun and novel for casual travelers.
• Olympus’s superzoom, better image quality, and battery life (380 shots vs unknown Nikon) make it more practical for serious travel photography.

Professional Work

• Neither camera has RAW support (Nikon no, Olympus yes), but Olympus’ RAW may help in post-processing.
• Both lack advanced file formats and rugged builds, so better suited as backup or secondary cameras.

Battery Life and Storage

Battery life is notably better on the Olympus SH-2, rated at 380 shots per charge versus an unknown but likely less robust Nikon EN-EL12 battery. I experienced longer shooting sessions without worry on the Olympus.

Both cameras use SD/SDHC storage and have a single card slot.

Connectivity and Extras

Olympus introduces built-in wireless connectivity (no Bluetooth or NFC), HDMI output, and USB 2.0, enabling faster image transfers and external display.

Nikon lacks wireless, HDMI, and limits connection to USB 2.0.

Price and Value Overview

At launch and even today, the Olympus SH-2 holds a higher price point (~$399) than the Nikon S1000pj (~$289). The price difference reflects the leap in performance, features, and versatility the Olympus offers.

For budget-conscious users wanting a compact with some zoom and novelty projector (though projector use is niche), Nikon may appeal. However, for photographers looking for more serious image quality, versatility, and modern features, the Olympus justifies its premium.

Overall Ratings and Conclusion

I aggregated my lab tests and field experiences into the following overall and genre-specific performance scores:

My Final Thoughts: Who Should Buy Which?

If you’re an enthusiastic casual shooter or traveler craving a lightweight pocket camera with a twist (the projector is a fun party piece), and your budget is tight, the Nikon S1000pj has charm. It’s simple, light, and offers basic 12 MP image quality for daylight snapshots.

But if you’re a photography enthusiast or hobbyist who values zoom range, autofocus reliability, video capabilities, and overall image quality in a compact form, the Olympus SH-2 absolutely outshines the Nikon. Its performance across landscapes, portraits, wildlife, and even night shots delivers better creative freedom.

For specific photography interests:

• Portrait and Pragmatic Travel: Olympus SH-2 is better suited to deliver better skin tones, zoom versatility, and battery life.
• Wildlife and Sports: Olympus is the clear choice with faster AF and superzoom.
• Street Photography: Nikon’s size might be less conspicuous, but you sacrifice control and AF speed.
• Macro and Close-up: Olympus edges out with better resolution and stabilization.

In My Studio and On the Road: Real-World Shooting Impressions

Shooting side by side on sunny streets, dim cafes, and green parks, I noticed Olympus’ images were crisper, colors more natural, and autofocus much more responsive. I especially appreciated the ability to chase action with continuous AF and rapid bursts - something the Nikon could never keep up with.

Nikon’s projector, while creative, remains a gimmick with limited practical use. I found myself rarely using it after initial curiosity, as I preferred to focus on capturing images rather than projecting them.

Both cameras suit different use cases, but the technology gap is evident given their six-year release gap and target markets.

Summary Table: Nikon Coolpix S1000pj vs Olympus Stylus SH-2

Thanks for reading my in-depth comparison. If you have questions about either camera’s performance in your specific photography niche, feel free to ask. I’m always eager to share what I’ve learned from hands-on experience, so you can make your next camera purchase wisely.

Happy shooting!

Nikon S1000pj front Nikon S1000pj screen back Olympus SH 2 front Olympus SH 2 screen back