Olympus SP-565UZ vs Samsung SL102
72 Imaging
33 Features
32 Overall
32
![Olympus SP-565UZ front Olympus SP-565UZ front](https://pxlmag.com/db/images/cameras/gallery/medium/Olympus-SP-565UZ/Olympus-SP-565UZ-front.jpg)
![Samsung SL102 front Samsung SL102 front](https://pxlmag.com/db/images/cameras/gallery/medium/Samsung-SL102/Samsung-SL102-front.jpg)
96 Imaging
33 Features
21 Overall
28
Olympus SP-565UZ vs Samsung SL102 Key Specs
(Full Review)
- 10MP - 1/2.3" Sensor
- 2.5" Fixed Screen
- ISO 64 - 6400
- Optical Image Stabilization
- 640 x 480 video
- 26-520mm (F2.8-4.5) lens
- 413g - 116 x 84 x 81mm
- Launched January 2009
(Full Review)
- 10MP - 1/2.3" Sensor
- 2.5" Fixed Screen
- ISO 80 - 1600
- 640 x 480 video
- 35-105mm (F) lens
- 116g - 90 x 59 x 22mm
- Introduced January 2009
- Also Known as ES55
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/ai-licence-218x150.jpg)
Olympus SP-565UZ vs Samsung SL102 Overview
Here, we will be matching up the Olympus SP-565UZ vs Samsung SL102, one being a Small Sensor Superzoom and the latter is a Small Sensor Compact by rivals Olympus and Samsung. The resolution of the SP-565UZ (10MP) and the SL102 (10MP) is relatively similar and both cameras posses the identical sensor dimensions (1/2.3").
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/photography-glossary-218x150.jpg)
The SP-565UZ was launched very close to the SL102 so they are both of a similar generation. Both of these cameras feature the same body design (Compact).
Before diving right into a in depth comparison, here is a concise summary of how the SP-565UZ scores vs the SL102 when it comes to portability, imaging, features and an overall grade.
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/No-Surprise-Pentax-17-Pre-Orders-218x150.jpg)
Olympus SP-565UZ vs Samsung SL102 Gallery
Below is a preview of the gallery photos for Olympus SP-565UZ and Samsung SL102. The complete galleries are viewable at Olympus SP-565UZ Gallery and Samsung SL102 Gallery.
Reasons to pick Olympus SP-565UZ over the Samsung SL102
SP-565UZ | SL102 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Manual focus | ![]() | More accurate focusing |
Reasons to pick Samsung SL102 over the Olympus SP-565UZ
SL102 | SP-565UZ |
---|
Common features in the Olympus SP-565UZ and Samsung SL102
SP-565UZ | SL102 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Introduced | January 2009 | ![]() | January 2009 | Similar generation |
Screen type | Fixed | ![]() | Fixed | Fixed screen |
Screen size | 2.5" | ![]() | 2.5" | Same screen sizing |
Screen resolution | 230k | ![]() | 230k | Exact same screen resolution |
Selfie screen | ![]() | Neither features selfie screen | ||
Touch friendly screen | ![]() | Neither features Touch friendly screen |
Olympus SP-565UZ vs Samsung SL102 Physical Comparison
For anybody who is intending to lug around your camera, you'll have to consider its weight and dimensions. The Olympus SP-565UZ enjoys outer dimensions of 116mm x 84mm x 81mm (4.6" x 3.3" x 3.2") accompanied by a weight of 413 grams (0.91 lbs) whilst the Samsung SL102 has dimensions of 90mm x 59mm x 22mm (3.5" x 2.3" x 0.9") having a weight of 116 grams (0.26 lbs).
See the Olympus SP-565UZ vs Samsung SL102 in the all new Camera and Lens Size Comparison Tool.![Camera Size Comparison with Lenses Camera Size Comparison with Lenses](https://pxlmag.com/db/assets/camera-size-comparison-animation.gif)
Take into consideration, the weight of an Interchangeable Lens Camera will differ depending on the lens you are employing at that moment. Below is a front view dimension comparison of the SP-565UZ versus the SL102.
![Olympus SP-565UZ vs Samsung SL102 size comparison Olympus SP-565UZ vs Samsung SL102 size comparison](https://pxlmag.com/db/images/camera-compare/Olympus-SP-565UZ-vs-Samsung-SL102-size-comparison.jpg)
Looking at dimensions and weight, the portability grade of the SP-565UZ and SL102 is 72 and 96 respectively.
![Olympus SP-565UZ vs Samsung SL102 top view buttons comparison Olympus SP-565UZ vs Samsung SL102 top view buttons comparison](https://pxlmag.com/db/images/camera-compare/Olympus-SP-565UZ-vs-Samsung-SL102-top-view-buttons-comparison.jpg)
Olympus SP-565UZ vs Samsung SL102 Sensor Comparison
Typically, its tough to picture the contrast between sensor measurements merely by reading a spec sheet. The photograph here might offer you a far better sense of the sensor sizes in the SP-565UZ and SL102.
As you can see, each of these cameras come with the identical sensor size and the same resolution so you should expect similar quality of images though you would want to consider the production date of the products into consideration.
![Olympus SP-565UZ vs Samsung SL102 sensor size comparison Olympus SP-565UZ vs Samsung SL102 sensor size comparison](https://pxlmag.com/db/images/sensor-compare/Olympus-SP-565UZ-vs-Samsung-SL102-sensor-size-comparison.png)
Olympus SP-565UZ vs Samsung SL102 Screen and ViewFinder
![Olympus SP-565UZ vs Samsung SL102 Screen and Viewfinder comparison Olympus SP-565UZ vs Samsung SL102 Screen and Viewfinder comparison](https://pxlmag.com/db/images/camera-compare/Olympus-SP-565UZ-vs-Samsung-SL102-screen-back-comparison.jpg)
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/LP3_cut_13f_0212-218x150.jpg)
Photography Type Scores
Portrait Comparison
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/iphone-optical-stabilization-218x150.jpg)
Street Comparison
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/snapchat-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)
Olympus SP-565UZ vs Samsung SL102 Specifications
Olympus SP-565UZ | Samsung SL102 | |
---|---|---|
General Information | ||
Brand | Olympus | Samsung |
Model type | Olympus SP-565UZ | Samsung SL102 |
Alternate name | - | ES55 |
Category | Small Sensor Superzoom | Small Sensor Compact |
Launched | 2009-01-15 | 2009-01-08 |
Body design | Compact | Compact |
Sensor Information | ||
Sensor type | CCD | CCD |
Sensor size | 1/2.3" | 1/2.3" |
Sensor dimensions | 6.08 x 4.56mm | 6.08 x 4.56mm |
Sensor surface area | 27.7mm² | 27.7mm² |
Sensor resolution | 10 megapixel | 10 megapixel |
Anti alias filter | ||
Aspect ratio | 4:3 and 16:9 | 4:3, 3:2 and 16:9 |
Maximum resolution | 3648 x 2736 | 3648 x 2736 |
Maximum native ISO | 6400 | 1600 |
Lowest native ISO | 64 | 80 |
RAW images | ||
Autofocusing | ||
Manual focusing | ||
AF touch | ||
Continuous AF | ||
AF single | ||
AF tracking | ||
AF selectice | ||
Center weighted AF | ||
AF multi area | ||
Live view AF | ||
Face detection AF | ||
Contract detection AF | ||
Phase detection AF | ||
Total focus points | 143 | - |
Lens | ||
Lens support | fixed lens | fixed lens |
Lens zoom range | 26-520mm (20.0x) | 35-105mm (3.0x) |
Max aperture | f/2.8-4.5 | - |
Macro focusing distance | 1cm | 10cm |
Focal length multiplier | 5.9 | 5.9 |
Screen | ||
Range of screen | Fixed Type | Fixed Type |
Screen diagonal | 2.5 inch | 2.5 inch |
Resolution of screen | 230 thousand dot | 230 thousand dot |
Selfie friendly | ||
Liveview | ||
Touch display | ||
Viewfinder Information | ||
Viewfinder type | Electronic | None |
Features | ||
Slowest shutter speed | 1s | 8s |
Maximum shutter speed | 1/2000s | 1/1500s |
Continuous shooting speed | 1.0fps | - |
Shutter priority | ||
Aperture priority | ||
Expose Manually | ||
Exposure compensation | Yes | - |
Custom WB | ||
Image stabilization | ||
Integrated flash | ||
Flash distance | 6.40 m (ISO 200) | - |
Flash settings | Auto, On, Off, Red-Eye reduction, Slow Sync | Auto, Auto & Red-eye reduction, Fill-in flash, Slow sync, Flash off, Red Eye Fix |
Hot shoe | ||
AE bracketing | ||
White balance bracketing | ||
Exposure | ||
Multisegment | ||
Average | ||
Spot | ||
Partial | ||
AF area | ||
Center weighted | ||
Video features | ||
Supported video resolutions | 640 x 480 @ 30 fps/15 fps, 320 x 240 @ 30 fps/15 fps | 640 x 480 (30 fps), 320 x 240 (30 fps) |
Maximum video resolution | 640x480 | 640x480 |
Video data format | - | Motion JPEG |
Mic input | ||
Headphone input | ||
Connectivity | ||
Wireless | None | None |
Bluetooth | ||
NFC | ||
HDMI | ||
USB | USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/sec) | USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/sec) |
GPS | None | None |
Physical | ||
Environmental seal | ||
Water proofing | ||
Dust proofing | ||
Shock proofing | ||
Crush proofing | ||
Freeze proofing | ||
Weight | 413 gr (0.91 pounds) | 116 gr (0.26 pounds) |
Physical dimensions | 116 x 84 x 81mm (4.6" x 3.3" x 3.2") | 90 x 59 x 22mm (3.5" x 2.3" x 0.9") |
DXO scores | ||
DXO All around rating | 30 | not tested |
DXO Color Depth rating | 18.7 | not tested |
DXO Dynamic range rating | 10.1 | not tested |
DXO Low light rating | 68 | not tested |
Other | ||
Battery ID | 4 x AA | - |
Self timer | Yes (12 or 2 sec) | Yes (10sec, 2sec, Double, Motion Timer) |
Time lapse shooting | ||
Storage media | xD Picture Card, Internal | SC/SDHC/MMC/MMCplus, internal |
Storage slots | One | One |
Price at launch | $400 | $130 |