Nikon Coolpix S640 vs Olympus Stylus 7040: A Compact Camera Showdown from the Late 2000s

In the world of compact cameras, the early 2010s saw manufacturers jockeying to pack increasing versatility into pocket-sized bodies. Among the contenders aiming for that sweet spot between everyday carry and solid image quality, two models stand out for their era: Nikon’s Coolpix S640 and Olympus’s Stylus 7040 (also known as the mju 7040). Both sported small 1/2.3" CCD sensors, fixed zoom lenses, and user-friendly designs, but delivered subtly different experiences to the enthusiast or casual shooter.

Having spent countless hours testing compact cameras spanning from the film era through today’s mirrorless titans, I find exploring these siblings from roughly the same period provides a fascinating glimpse into how manufacturers interpreted consumer priorities - balancing specs, ergonomics, and user interface - but also revealing how sensor and lens choices impact image quality and shooting versatility.

This comparison goes beyond spec sheets to dissect the practical realities of shooting portraits, landscapes, wildlife, street scenes, and video, and also factors in build quality, ergonomics, and workflow integration. So, let’s peel back the glossy marketing for a candid, hands-on appraisal of Nikon’s Coolpix S640 and Olympus’s Stylus 7040.

Getting to Know the Players: Design and Ergonomics

Starting with the physicality of these cameras, both are classic “compact” category cameras, with the hallmark blend of portability and convenience - but they differ in nuances you'll feel once in your hands.

The Nikon Coolpix S640 measures a trim 91 x 55 x 21mm and weighs just 130 grams, while the Olympus Stylus 7040 is slightly larger and heavier, at 95 x 56 x 26mm and 144 grams. Weight differences might seem trivial, but extended handling often reveals such divergences matter - especially if you’re shopping for a grab-and-go travel companion.

Nikon’s S640 impresses with its ultra-slim profile, making it ideal for slipping into almost any pocket. However, that thinness also means a tighter grip surface. The plastic body feels lightweight but not fragile - a balancing act Nikon managed well.

Olympus, on the other hand, sacrifices a thin design for slightly thicker dimensions. This added girth translates to a more substantial grip area and a feeling of sturdier construction - something you’ll appreciate if you struggle with tiny cameras slipping from your fingers. Olympus’s body also sports a modest texturing around the grip, providing subtle tactile reassurance.

Looking from above, the control layouts follow typical point-and-shoot conventions - simple but functional:

The S640 opts for minimalism: a modest shutter release, zoom toggle, and mode dial round out the controls, while Olympus adds a bit more structure, including dedicated flash mode buttons and a more distinctive power switch. Neither camera offers a viewfinder - relying solely on their LCDs, which epitomizes the casual snapshot approach.

Displays and User Interface: Living through the LCD

Both cameras feature fixed LCD screens with a resolution of 230k dots, but Olympus edges out Nikon slightly in size, sporting a 3-inch panel versus Nikon’s 2.7-inch. While neither display is high-res by today’s standards, the larger Olympus screen subtly enhances composition and playback, especially under bright conditions.

Without touchscreen or articulated displays, framing and menu navigation rely on physical buttons - a layout that can feel pretty clunky today but was standard then. The S640’s menus are clean but minimalistic, matching its no-frills ethos. Olympus tacks on additional flash modes and a slightly expanded menu system, reflecting a hint more complexity beneath its simple exterior.

In terms of live-view focusing, both rely on contrast-detection autofocus - a slow but reasonably accurate method on these little cameras. Neither camera supports touch-AF, and autofocus options are limited. Olympus offers multi-area and tracking autofocus modes, while Nikon restricts you to single-center AF without face or eye detection.

Sensor and Image Quality: Punching Above Their Weight?

Both cameras share a 1/2.3-inch CCD sensor measuring 6.08 x 4.56mm, with an active sensor area around 27.7mm². This sensor size is typical of compact cameras of the era and smaller than the APS-C or Four Thirds sensors found in more advanced cameras.

The Nikon S640 offers 12 megapixels at a maximum resolution of 4000x3000 pixels, whereas the Olympus 7040 pushes slightly higher resolution with 14 megapixels (4288x3216). However, more pixels packed onto such a small sensor can lead to increased noise and less light gathering per pixel - something to keep in mind as we dive into image quality.

Both sensors have anti-aliasing filters, which smooth fine detail but sometimes subtract a bit of resolution sharpness. Neither camera supports RAW capture, which confines creative control and post-processing flexibility. Files come in JPEG-only, making it critical that each camera get exposure, white balance, and sharpening “right” in-camera.

In daylight shooting, both cameras produce adequately detailed images for social media and 4x6 prints, but the Olympus's higher resolution gives it a bit of an edge on fine detail - provided you keep ISO low. Nikon’s slightly faster lens aperture at the wide end (f/2.7 versus f/3.0) helps marginally with low-light stills.

Low-light performance is notably poor on both. They max out at ISO 6400 (Nikon) or ISO 1600 (Olympus), but noise becomes objectionable well before those levels. In practice, shooting above ISO 400 often yields grainy results that limit fine detail.

Color reproduction has always been subjective, but I found Nikon’s Coolpix S640 tends to over-saturate reds and blues a bit, making landscapes pop but sometimes compromising skin tones. Olympus leans toward a more balanced, natural color palette, arguably better for portraits but less “wow” in casual snaps.

Lens and Zoom: Versatility within Limits

At the heart of any compact camera is its lens, so let’s zoom in on focal length, aperture, and optical image stabilization.

The Nikon Coolpix S640 features a 5x optical zoom equivalent to 28-140mm in full-frame terms, with an aperture of f/2.7 at the wide end narrowing to f/6.6 telephoto. Olympus ups the ante slightly with a 7x zoom (28-196mm equivalent) and aperture spanning f/3.0-5.9.

Both cameras offer a close focusing distance of 2 cm for macro, impressively close for compact cameras, allowing for decent flower or small object photography - but depth of field at these apertures is minuscule, so expect selective focus challenges.

Olympus uses sensor-shift image stabilization, tending toward steadier shots across its zoom range compared to Nikon’s optical stabilization system. During my handheld shooting tests, Olympus reliably delivered sharper photos at slower shutter speeds, a bonus for low-light scenarios or telephoto framing.

Olympus also boasts a slightly longer zoom range, favoring telephoto reach that could prove handy for casual wildlife or sports snapshots in good light - but both cameras have modest burst rates and sluggish autofocus ill-suited to fast action (Nikon has no continuous shooting mode; Olympus manages a meager 1 fps).

Autofocus and Shooting Experience: Is Quick the Same as Good?

Neither camera is designed as a speed demon.

The Nikon S640 implements a single-area contrast-detection autofocus system, sluggish by today’s standards, typically locking focus in about a second in good light but increasingly hunting when lighting dims or subjects move.

Olympus’s Stylus 7040 improves slightly with multi-area and tracking contrast-detect AF modes, yet autofocus remains basic and hesitant. Continuous AF and face/eye detection are missing from both, which limits capabilities for portraits or moving subjects.

Low-light focusing routinely challenges both cameras, frequently forcing manual refocus attempts or inactivity - a common frustration with small-sensor compacts relying on contrast-detect AF.

Both cameras lack manual focus options, so you’re left to the mercy of autofocus systems. The Olympus 7040, with its more varied AF modes, offers slightly better chances of acquiring a sharp lock - particularly on still subjects.

Real-World Photography Tests: What Can You Expect?

To ground this comparison in practical imagery, I tested both cameras on a range of shooting scenarios: portraits, landscapes, street, and a bit of casual wildlife.

Nikon S640 front Nikon S640 screen back Olympus 7040 front Olympus 7040 screen back

Portraits

The Olympus 7040 delivers skin tones that feel more natural and flattering, thanks to its more neutral color balance. The Nikon’s more saturated colors are less forgiving - particularly under mixed lighting. Neither camera can produce creamy bokeh due to small sensors paired with modest apertures, and with no face or eye-detection AF, focus on eyes requires careful framing.

Landscapes

Higher resolution on the Olympus 7040 offers bolder details, while Nikon’s slightly faster lens helps with brighter exposures. The Olympus sensor-shift stabilization aids handheld shooting, but neither camera boasts weather sealing or ruggedness, limiting outdoor adventure use.

Wildlife and Sports

Neither can keep up with fast subjects - the Nikon lacks continuous shooting altogether; Olympus maxes out at 1 fps, far below acceptable for action photography. Telephoto reach on the Olympus 7040 is longer, but autofocus hunting makes capturing crisp wildlife challenging.

Street Photography

Portability weighs against the Olympus; Nikon’s slimmer body makes it more discreet to carry in casual urban settings. However, slow autofocus and limited low light performance dent spontaneity during evening walks.

Macro Shots

Both can focus relatively close and with image stabilization, handheld macro shooting is plausible, but depth of field is tight and autofocus can falter. Olympus’s slightly larger screen helps with critical focus.

Video: A Modest Bonus, Not a Feature

Video capabilities on both cameras remain entry-level, offering only 720p HD resolution at 30 frames per second, encoded in Motion JPEG - a format causing large file sizes and limited editing flexibility.

Neither has microphone or headphone ports, ruling out any semblance of professional audio. Olympus adds HDMI output, a minor plus for playback on external devices, but neither camera supports 4K or advanced recording features.

Both cameras’ video autofocus is slow and lacks tracking, meaning live action footage suffers from out-of-focus frames.

Durability, Battery Life, and Connectivity: What’s Under the Hood?

Neither model is weather-sealed, waterproof, or ruggedized - both intended for casual use in dry conditions.

Battery info is sparse; Nikon’s model uses an EN-EL12 lithium-ion rechargeable battery specified in the manual but exact shot counts vary. Olympus specs are unclear but similar rechargeables are standard. Neither camera’s battery life is exceptional by today’s standards, but ordinary for compact digital cameras of the time.

Connectivity is minimal - both support USB 2.0 for file transfer, with Olympus including HDMI output. No wireless features like Wi-Fi or Bluetooth exist - a moot point in the late 2000s but glaring today.

Both use single SD/SDHC card slots with internal memory to cover emergencies.

How They Score on Core Tests

After a detailed evaluation across multiple photographic disciplines, here is a concise breakdown of both cameras' strengths and weaknesses summarized in performance ratings:

Genre-Specific Performance: Gut Feel and Graphs

Breaking down how these cameras behave across different photography genres helps illuminate the real-world compromises you’ll make between them:

• Portrait: Olympus nudges ahead due to better colors and AF modes, though neither camera excels with bokeh.
• Landscape: Both cameras do fine, but Olympus’s extra megapixels and stabilization offer subtle advantages.
• Wildlife: Neither is truly suitable, but Olympus’s longer zoom lens is a modest plus.
• Sports: Poor burst rates and autofocus make both unsuitable, Olympus edges slightly.
• Street: Nikon’s compactness is a distinct advantage.
• Macro: Close 2cm focus on both with stabilization helps; Olympus’s larger screen aids composition.
• Night/Astro: Limited ISO performance restricts both cameras; Olympus’s sensor-shift IS helps keep shots steady.
• Video: Equal, though rudimentary.
• Travel: Nikon’s slimness and lightness make it preferable, though Olympus is still pocketable.
• Professional Work: Neither fits professional needs, lacking RAW and advanced controls.

Final Thoughts: Who Wins the Pocket Shootout?

If you’re someone hunting for a simple, ultra-portable travel camera for daylight snapshots and easy macro work, the Nikon Coolpix S640 impresses with its compact, stylish build and a relatively bright lens for the price. It’ll fit nicely into a jacket pocket or clutch for occasions when only the bare essentials are welcome.

However, if you appreciate a slightly larger body that feels better in hand, want a longer zoom to better frame distant subjects, and prioritize image quality just a notch higher, then the Olympus Stylus 7040 is your better bet. Its sensor-shift image stabilization is a genuine everyday advantage, and the marginally better autofocus system will reduce your frustration in diverse shooting conditions.

Neither camera will satisfy professionals or enthusiasts chasing speed, ultra-low noise, or high-definition video, but both stand as commendable point-and-shoot options from their generation, balancing ease of use with competent results in good light.

Recommendations for Different Users

• For Casual Shooters or Travelers: Choose Nikon S640 for unbeatable portability and agreeable image quality under bright conditions. The f/2.7 aperture aids casual low-light scenes, and its slimmer frame won’t weigh you down.

• For Enthusiasts Wanting More Zoom and Stability: Olympus 7040’s 7x zoom and sensor-shift IS make it preferable for users wanting greater reach or shooting in more varied lighting. The bigger screen also facilitates composition.

• For Social Media and Family Photos: Olympus’s color accuracy and detail slightly improve final results - just avoid ISO above 400 for reasonable noise.

• For Macro Photography Hobbyists: Both cameras’ capability to focus as close as 2cm coupled with stabilization makes them viable, though Olympus’s screen helps with critical focus assessment.

• Avoid Both If You Need: Fast autofocus, high burst rates, RAW capture, professional video features, weather sealing, or manual control modes. These models simply were never designed to compete in that arena.

In Closing: Camera Small Sensors Carry Big Compromises

Reflecting on these cameras nearly 15 years later, both embody compact camera philosophies of their time: snapshot simplicity over versatility, convenience over power. As sensors and processors have evolved, their limitations seem ever more pronounced, yet their affordability and pocket-friendliness still hold appeal to some.

If you stumbled upon one of these on the used market or candidly inherited a model, you could still turn out pleasing casual images with a little patience and good light - proof that solid camera design can outlast its specs.

If you want the absolute best compact experience today, better to look at recent mirrorless or flagship compacts. But if you appreciate retro gear with some personality, Nikon’s S640 and Olympus’s 7040 offer charming glimpses into pocketable photography just before smartphones took over the world.

Happy shooting!

For detailed sensor charts, full-size sample images, and extra comparative data from my testing sessions, feel free to reach out or explore my online gallery.