Nikon S32 vs Olympus SH-3
90 Imaging
36 Features
23 Overall
30
![Nikon Coolpix S32 front Nikon Coolpix S32 front](https://pxlmag.com/db/images/cameras/gallery/medium/Nikon-Coolpix-S32/Nikon-S32-front.jpg)
![Olympus Stylus SH-3 front Olympus Stylus SH-3 front](https://pxlmag.com/db/images/cameras/gallery/medium/Olympus-Stylus-SH-3/Olympus-SH-3-front.jpg)
88 Imaging
41 Features
51 Overall
45
Nikon S32 vs Olympus SH-3 Key Specs
(Full Review)
- 13MP - 1/3" Sensor
- 2.7" Fixed Screen
- ISO 125 - 1600
- Digital Image Stabilization
- 1920 x 1080 video
- 30-90mm (F3.3-5.9) lens
- 175g - 108 x 66 x 40mm
- Released February 2014
(Full Review)
- 16MP - 1/2.3" Sensor
- 3" Fixed Display
- ISO 125 - 6400
- Sensor-shift Image Stabilization
- 3840 x 2160 video
- 25-600mm (F3.0-6.9) lens
- 271g - 109 x 63 x 42mm
- Released February 2016
- Old Model is Olympus SH-2
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/No-Surprise-Pentax-17-Pre-Orders-218x150.jpg)
Nikon S32 vs Olympus SH-3 Overview
Lets look more closely at the Nikon S32 vs Olympus SH-3, former is a Waterproof while the other is a Small Sensor Superzoom by rivals Nikon and Olympus. The image resolution of the S32 (13MP) and the SH-3 (16MP) is fairly similar but the S32 (1/3") and SH-3 (1/2.3") offer different sensor sizing.
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/LP3_cut_13f_0212-218x150.jpg)
The S32 was launched 24 months earlier than the SH-3 making them a generation away from one another. Both of these cameras have the same body design (Compact).
Before diving right into a complete comparison, here is a concise summation of how the S32 scores vs the SH-3 in the way of portability, imaging, features and an overall score.
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/snapchat-218x150.jpg)
Nikon S32 vs Olympus SH-3 Gallery
Here is a sample of the gallery pictures for Nikon Coolpix S32 & Olympus Stylus SH-3. The complete galleries are available at Nikon S32 Gallery & Olympus SH-3 Gallery.
Reasons to pick Nikon S32 over the Olympus SH-3
S32 | SH-3 |
---|
Reasons to pick Olympus SH-3 over the Nikon S32
SH-3 | S32 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Released | February 2016 | ![]() | February 2014 | More modern by 24 months |
Display dimensions | 3" | ![]() | 2.7" | Larger display (+0.3") |
Display resolution | 460k | ![]() | 230k | Sharper display (+230k dot) |
Touch friendly display | ![]() | Easily navigate |
Common features in the Nikon S32 and Olympus SH-3
S32 | SH-3 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Manual focus | ![]() | Lack of manual focus | ||
Display type | Fixed | ![]() | Fixed | Fixed display |
Selfie screen | ![]() | Neither contains selfie screen |
Nikon S32 vs Olympus SH-3 Physical Comparison
For anybody who is planning to carry around your camera often, you should factor its weight and size. The Nikon S32 has got outer dimensions of 108mm x 66mm x 40mm (4.3" x 2.6" x 1.6") and a weight of 175 grams (0.39 lbs) and the Olympus SH-3 has specifications of 109mm x 63mm x 42mm (4.3" x 2.5" x 1.7") along with a weight of 271 grams (0.60 lbs).
Check out the Nikon S32 vs Olympus SH-3 in our completely new Camera & Lens Size Comparison Tool.![Camera Size Comparison with Lenses Camera Size Comparison with Lenses](https://pxlmag.com/db/assets/camera-size-comparison-animation.gif)
Do not forget, the weight of an ILC will change dependant on the lens you are utilising at that moment. The following is a front view dimensions comparison of the S32 against the SH-3.
![Nikon S32 vs Olympus SH-3 size comparison Nikon S32 vs Olympus SH-3 size comparison](https://pxlmag.com/db/images/camera-compare/Nikon-Coolpix-S32-vs-Olympus-Stylus-SH-3-size-comparison.jpg)
Factoring in dimensions and weight, the portability rating of the S32 and SH-3 is 90 and 88 respectively.
![Nikon S32 vs Olympus SH-3 top view buttons comparison Nikon S32 vs Olympus SH-3 top view buttons comparison](https://pxlmag.com/db/images/camera-compare/Nikon-Coolpix-S32-vs-Olympus-Stylus-SH-3-top-view-buttons-comparison.jpg)
Nikon S32 vs Olympus SH-3 Sensor Comparison
Typically, its difficult to picture the contrast between sensor sizes just by reviewing specs. The picture underneath will help provide you a far better sense of the sensor dimensions in the S32 and SH-3.
All in all, both of those cameras provide different megapixels and different sensor sizes. The S32 due to its tinier sensor is going to make achieving shallow depth of field harder and the Olympus SH-3 will offer you extra detail utilizing its extra 3 Megapixels. Greater resolution will help you crop images more aggressively. The more aged S32 is going to be behind with regard to sensor innovation.
![Nikon S32 vs Olympus SH-3 sensor size comparison Nikon S32 vs Olympus SH-3 sensor size comparison](https://pxlmag.com/db/images/sensor-compare/Nikon-Coolpix-S32-vs-Olympus-Stylus-SH-3-sensor-size-comparison.png)
Nikon S32 vs Olympus SH-3 Screen and ViewFinder
![Nikon S32 vs Olympus SH-3 Screen and Viewfinder comparison Nikon S32 vs Olympus SH-3 Screen and Viewfinder comparison](https://pxlmag.com/db/images/camera-compare/Nikon-Coolpix-S32-vs-Olympus-Stylus-SH-3-screen-back-comparison.jpg)
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/iphone-optical-stabilization-218x150.jpg)
Photography Type Scores
Portrait Comparison
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/photography-glossary-218x150.jpg)
Street Comparison
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/ai-licence-218x150.jpg)
Sports Comparison
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Approach-to-AI-Generated-Content-218x150.jpg)
Travel Comparison
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/tiktok-218x150.jpg)
Landscape Comparison
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/maxresdefault-218x150.jpg)
Vlogging Comparison
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/samsung-evo-microsd-cards-featur-218x150.jpg)
Nikon S32 vs Olympus SH-3 Specifications
Nikon Coolpix S32 | Olympus Stylus SH-3 | |
---|---|---|
General Information | ||
Company | Nikon | Olympus |
Model | Nikon Coolpix S32 | Olympus Stylus SH-3 |
Category | Waterproof | Small Sensor Superzoom |
Released | 2014-02-07 | 2016-02-08 |
Body design | Compact | Compact |
Sensor Information | ||
Processor | - | TruePic VII |
Sensor type | CCD | BSI-CMOS |
Sensor size | 1/3" | 1/2.3" |
Sensor dimensions | 4.8 x 3.6mm | 6.17 x 4.55mm |
Sensor surface area | 17.3mm² | 28.1mm² |
Sensor resolution | 13 megapixels | 16 megapixels |
Anti aliasing filter | ||
Aspect ratio | - | 1:1, 4:3, 3:2 and 16:9 |
Max resolution | 4160 x 3120 | 4608 x 3456 |
Max native ISO | 1600 | 6400 |
Lowest native ISO | 125 | 125 |
RAW files | ||
Autofocusing | ||
Focus manually | ||
Autofocus touch | ||
Continuous autofocus | ||
Single autofocus | ||
Autofocus tracking | ||
Autofocus selectice | ||
Center weighted autofocus | ||
Autofocus multi area | ||
Live view autofocus | ||
Face detection focus | ||
Contract detection focus | ||
Phase detection focus | ||
Cross focus points | - | - |
Lens | ||
Lens mounting type | fixed lens | fixed lens |
Lens focal range | 30-90mm (3.0x) | 25-600mm (24.0x) |
Highest aperture | f/3.3-5.9 | f/3.0-6.9 |
Macro focus distance | 5cm | 3cm |
Focal length multiplier | 7.5 | 5.8 |
Screen | ||
Range of screen | Fixed Type | Fixed Type |
Screen diagonal | 2.7 inches | 3 inches |
Resolution of screen | 230k dot | 460k dot |
Selfie friendly | ||
Liveview | ||
Touch friendly | ||
Screen technology | TFT LCD with anti-reflection coating | - |
Viewfinder Information | ||
Viewfinder type | None | None |
Features | ||
Min shutter speed | 4 seconds | 30 seconds |
Max shutter speed | 1/2000 seconds | 1/2000 seconds |
Continuous shutter speed | 5.0fps | 11.5fps |
Shutter priority | ||
Aperture priority | ||
Expose Manually | ||
Exposure compensation | - | Yes |
Set white balance | ||
Image stabilization | ||
Integrated flash | ||
Flash range | 3.10 m | 8.30 m (at ISO 3200) |
Flash modes | - | Auto, redeye reduction, fill-in, off |
Hot shoe | ||
Auto exposure bracketing | ||
White balance bracketing | ||
Exposure | ||
Multisegment | ||
Average | ||
Spot | ||
Partial | ||
AF area | ||
Center weighted | ||
Video features | ||
Supported video resolutions | 1920x1080 (30p), VGA 640x480 (30p, 15p) | 3840 x 2160 (15 fps), 1920 x 1080 (60p, 30p), 1280 x 720 (30p), 640 x 480 (30 fps) |
Max video resolution | 1920x1080 | 3840x2160 |
Video data format | MPEG-4, H.264 | H.264 |
Mic input | ||
Headphone input | ||
Connectivity | ||
Wireless | None | Built-In |
Bluetooth | ||
NFC | ||
HDMI | ||
USB | USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/sec) | USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/sec) |
GPS | None | None |
Physical | ||
Environmental seal | ||
Water proof | ||
Dust proof | ||
Shock proof | ||
Crush proof | ||
Freeze proof | ||
Weight | 175 gr (0.39 lb) | 271 gr (0.60 lb) |
Physical dimensions | 108 x 66 x 40mm (4.3" x 2.6" x 1.6") | 109 x 63 x 42mm (4.3" x 2.5" x 1.7") |
DXO scores | ||
DXO Overall score | not tested | not tested |
DXO Color Depth score | not tested | not tested |
DXO Dynamic range score | not tested | not tested |
DXO Low light score | not tested | not tested |
Other | ||
Battery life | 220 photos | 380 photos |
Battery format | Battery Pack | Battery Pack |
Battery model | EN-EL19 | LI-92B |
Self timer | Yes (Approx. 10 seconds ) | Yes (2 or 12 sec, custom) |
Time lapse feature | ||
Storage media | SD / SDHC/SDXC | SD, SDHC, SDXC, Internal Memory |
Storage slots | 1 | 1 |
Cost at release | $180 | $579 |