Olympus SP-590 UZ vs Panasonic FP1

Comparing the Olympus SP-590 UZ and Panasonic Lumix DMC-FP1: An Expert Analysis for Discerning Photographers

In an age where digital imaging technology advances rapidly, choosing a camera that balances features, image quality, and user experience can be daunting - especially when comparing models aimed at distinct segments. Here, we thoroughly examine the Olympus SP-590 UZ and the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FP1, two fixed-lens cameras from the late 2000s and early 2010s. Despite overlapping sensor sizes and resolutions, their diverging form factors, feature sets, and intended use-cases make this comparison instructive for enthusiasts and professionals considering bridge-style superzoom versatility versus ultracompact portability.

Design and Handling: Ergonomics vs. Portability

The Olympus SP-590 UZ aligns with the bridge camera archetype, offering a body reminiscent of DSLR styling, complete with a robust grip and a myriad of manual controls. Dimensions of approximately 116 x 84 x 81 mm and weight of 413 grams signify a commitment to ergonomics and operational comfort during extended shooting sessions or precise framing. This physical heft generally contributes to stability, especially when paired with its extended zoom range.

In contrast, the Panasonic FP1 epitomizes ultracompact design principles. Measuring just 99 x 59 x 19 mm and weighing only 151 grams, it emphasizes portability and pocketability without compromising on basic photographic functionality. However, this size reduction comes at the expense of manual control options and handling comfort during vigorous shooting, especially for users with larger hands or those who prefer tactile feedback.

The ergonomics of the SP-590 UZ cater well to photographers who prioritize grip security and direct access to exposure adjustments. The FP1, while convenient for travel or casual capture, may challenge users seeking rapid manual intervention or substantial physical control over framing and settings.

Control Layout and User Interface: Manual vs Simplified Operation

Examining the top-control surfaces reveals the Olympus SP-590 UZ’s inclination towards an advanced shooter demographic. While lacking a fully articulated screen or touchscreen input, it supports shutter and aperture priority modes alongside a manual exposure mode. The presence of exposure compensation and multi-area autofocus modes, coupled with an electronic viewfinder, provides significant compositional flexibility in varying light.

Conversely, the Panasonic FP1 omits manual exposure modes entirely. Its reliance on full auto operation and absence of an electronic viewfinder indicate an orientation towards user-friendliness and point-and-shoot convenience. The FP1’s 2.7-inch fixed screen lacks the resolution or articulation needed for advanced framing techniques, limiting it primarily to casual or street-style shooting contexts.

Neither camera incorporates touch interface technology, reflecting their era and market positioning. The SP-590 UZ’s more comprehensive autofocus area selection contrasts with the FP1’s fixed nine-point AF system, further emphasizing their different operational philosophies.

Sensor Performance and Imaging Potential: CCD and 1/2.3” Format

Both cameras employ a 1/2.3-inch CCD sensor of approximately 27.7 mm² area, with sensor dimensions roughly 6.08 x 4.56 mm, and 12-megapixel resolution (Olympus: 3968 x 2976 pixels; Panasonic: 4000 x 3000 pixels). These identical sensor sizes lend themselves to similar base image quality characteristics with respect to noise performance, dynamic range constraints, and diffraction limits.

It is important to acknowledge that CCD technology, common in this sensor size era, typically exhibits strong color depth and has a distinctive tonal rendition favored for portraits and landscape photography at moderate ISOs. However, CCD sensors generally underperform CMOS sensors in noise control at high ISO values, a critical consideration in low-light or night photography scenarios.

Neither camera has received DxOMark testing; however, practical experience indicates both models offer adequate image sharpness at base ISOs (64 for Olympus, 80 for Panasonic) but show rapid noise increase beyond ISO 400. Olympus allows higher max ISO settings up to 6400, but the image quality at elevated ISOs is broadly limited nonetheless.

A notable distinction is the Olympus’ provision for raw image capture, affording superior post-processing latitude - a significant advantage for professionals or enthusiasts keen on maximizing image fidelity. The Panasonic FP1 lacks raw support, restricting workflow to JPEG outputs, which limits dynamic range recovery and color adjustment capacity in post.

Lens Versatility: Superzoom vs. Moderate Fixed Zoom

The Olympus SP-590 UZ boasts a markedly expansive 26–676 mm (35mm equivalent) lens with a bright maximum aperture range of f/2.8–5.0. This fivefold focal length multiplier coupled with optical image stabilization positions it as a flexible performer across multiple genres - from wide-angle landscapes to distant wildlife subjects.

Conversely, the Panasonic FP1’s lens spans 35–140 mm (35mm equivalent) with an aperture range of f/3.5–5.9. This more modest 4x zoom range reflects its ultracompact design priorities, favoring everyday urban capture and casual portraits over extreme telephoto needs.

The SP-590 UZ’s capacity to focus as close as 1 cm enables superior macro photography potential compared to the FP1’s minimum macro focus distance of 10 cm, a critical factor for users prioritizing close-up detail and creative depth of field control.

Moreover, Olympus’ lens benefits from optical image stabilization (OIS), mitigating camera shake especially at longer focal lengths. Panasonic also incorporates OIS, but the FP1’s shorter focal lengths and smaller sensor tend to reduce the practical impact of stabilization.

Overall, the Olympus excels in lens versatility, supporting a wider array of photographic disciplines, while the Panasonic's lens system is tailored towards portability and simple operation.

Autofocus System: Speed, Accuracy, and Flexibility

Both cameras operate on contrast-detection autofocus systems compatible with live view, standard for the era and sensor class. Their autofocus speeds are moderate, with continuous and tracking autofocus modes absent. Olympus offers multi-area AF selectable from the menu, allowing some flexibility in focusing zones, but it lacks face and eye detection, which modern users might seek.

Panasonic includes nine fixed autofocus points without the ability for manual selection or continuous tracking. Both models support single AF engagements with no continuous AF or face tracking functionality.

Given these limitations, both cameras can struggle with fast-moving subjects such as sports or wildlife, where rapid and accurate tracking focus is vital. For static or slow-moving subjects like landscapes and portraits, these AF systems suffice, albeit with occasional hunting in low-contrast scenes.

Shutter Mechanisms and Shooting Speeds: Burst Rates and Flash

The SP-590 UZ offers shutter speeds from 15 seconds up to 1/2000 sec, while the FP1 ranges between 1/60 to 1/1600 sec. The Olympus’s extended shutter range enables more creative long-exposure photography, essential for night scenes or astrophotography.

Continuous shooting rates are identical at 6 frames per second for both cameras, though buffer depths and autofocus behavior during burst shots would limit practical performance. Neither camera supports silent electronic shutters or high-speed bursts found in more recent models.

Flash systems present a similar story - both have integrated units without support for external flash attachments. The Olympus’s flash range reaches up to 8 meters, exceeding the FP1’s 4.9 meters, indicating somewhat greater versatility in fill or low-light supplemental lighting.

Video Functionality: Modest Capabilities in Legacy Cameras

Video recording capabilities reflect the era’s limitations. The Panasonic FP1 supports HD video at 1280 x 720 pixels (30 fps), while the Olympus SP-590 UZ tops out at VGA resolution (640 x 480 at 30 fps). Both record in Motion JPEG format, imposing file size and compression-related challenges.

Neither camera includes microphone or headphone input ports, nor do they provide in-body audio controls, curbing their practicality for dedicated videography.

Given these factors, neither camera is suitable for advanced video work, though the Panasonic FP1’s HD mode offers a marginally more modern take for casual video capture.

Display and Viewfinders: Compositional Tools

Both models offer fixed 2.7-inch LCD screens with 230k-dot resolution - adequate but lacking the sharpness or articulation found in contemporary cameras. The Olympus SP-590 UZ features an electronic viewfinder, an essential compositional aid in bright outdoor conditions, minimizing screen glare issues and allowing more precise framing.

The Panasonic FP1, designed for maximum size reduction, omits any viewfinder, relying solely on LCD framing. This absence makes the FP1 less optimal for bright daylight shooting, where LCD visibility can be compromised.

In terms of interface, both rely on traditional button navigation without touch sensitivity or customizable quick menus, reflective of their market period.

Olympus SP 590 UZ front Olympus SP 590 UZ screen back Panasonic FP1 front Panasonic FP1 screen back

Build Quality and Durability: Weather Sealing and Robustness

The Olympus SP-590 UZ claims environmental sealing, enhancing resistance to dust and moisture - a significant advantage for landscape, travel, and outdoor wildlife photographers who require ruggedness without carrying heavy gear.

The Panasonic FP1 offers no such weather sealing, emphasizing lightness and compactness at the expense of durability in adverse conditions. Neither camera is waterproof, shockproof, crushproof, or freezeproof.

For professional or serious amateur use under varied environmental stresses, the Olympus clearly outperforms the FP1 in terms of build resilience.

Battery Life, Storage Media, and Connectivity

Detailed battery life figures are unavailable for both cameras. Typically, bridge cameras like the SP-590 UZ employ proprietary lithium-ion batteries offering moderate to good endurance, often suited for 250-350 shots per charge under standard conditions. The FP1, as an ultracompact model, uses similar battery types but generally offers fewer shots per charge due to smaller capacity.

Storage wise, the Olympus supports xD Picture Cards, microSD cards, and internal memory, a somewhat eclectic mixture offering flexibility at the cost of potential card compatibility frustrations. The Panasonic FP1 aligns with industry standards better by using SD/SDHC/SDXC cards plus internal memory.

Connectivity options for both are restricted to USB 2.0 data transfer. Neither offers HDMI output (except the Olympus which includes it) or wireless connectivity such as Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, or NFC. GPS tagging capabilities are absent, limiting geolocation workflows often valued by travel photographers.

Genre-specific Performance: Which Camera Excels Where?

An aggregate photographic discipline assessment further illustrates their respective strengths and intrinsic limitations.

• Portrait Photography: The Olympus SP-590 UZ’s raw support, broader aperture at wide end (f/2.8), and better macro focus distance provide more pleasing skin tone rendering and creative control over shallow depth of field. Eye and face detection are absent on both, limiting autofocus finesse. The FP1’s narrower aperture and lack of manual exposure restrict portrait refinement options.

• Landscape Photography: Olympus benefits from environmental sealing, extended zoom, long shutter times, and raw capture, essential for high dynamic range scene capture. Both cameras have similar sensor size constraints on dynamic range, but Olympus’s manual controls aid exposure bracketing workflow better. The FP1's more compact form factor is appealing to hikers valuing portability over features.

• Wildlife Photography: The SP-590 UZ’s superzoom lens and stabilizer enable distant subject framing and steady telephoto use, albeit with modest AF speed. Both struggle with fast-action focus. The FP1’s 140 mm max focal length and slower lenses limit wildlife reach.

• Sports: Neither camera features high-end autofocus tracking or expansive point coverage. Burst rates are superficially adequate but limited by buffer and focus behavior. The Olympus’s more flexible exposure controls provide better adaptability to varied lighting, but neither is ideal for action.

• Street Photography: The FP1’s diminutive size and discretion favor street shooting, permitting candid capture with minimal attention. Lower zoom flexibility can be a drawback but is balanced by portability. The Olympus is larger and more conspicuous but offers expanded manual control.

• Macro Photography: Olympus’s close focus down to 1 cm outclasses the Panasonic’s 10 cm minimum, suitable for serious macro shooters. Optical stabilization further aids handheld macro shots on the SP-590 UZ.

• Night/Astro: Olympus’s long shutter speeds and raw capabilities enable night photography with more post-processing latitude. Both cameras’ sensors limit high ISO performance, but Olympus allows exposures up to 15 seconds with manual shutter modes.

• Video: Panasonic’s HD resolution is a step above Olympus’s VGA limitations, albeit with compressed MJPEG files and no audio input. Both serve casual video needs; neither is professional-grade.

• Travel: The FP1 offers superior portability and pocketability for casual or minimalist travelers, while the SP-590 UZ’s greater versatility suits those willing to carry extra bulk for broader photo opportunity coverage.

• Professional Use: Olympus’s raw file compatibility, manual modes, environmental sealing, and extended zoom make it the more reliable choice for professionals seeking a secondary or backup camera with some creative capacity. The FP1’s simplified control set and limited output formats hinder professional workflows.

Price to Performance: Value Assessment and Recommendations

At a street price approximate to $249 for the Olympus SP-590 UZ and $153 for the Panasonic FP1, both cameras provide budget-conscious options, though at different user tiers.

The SP-590 UZ’s greater feature set - manual exposure options, raw support, superzoom lens, environmental seal, and electronic viewfinder - justifies the higher cost for serious enthusiasts and semi-professionals seeking all-in-one functionality. However, the increased bulk and complexity may be unnecessary or undesirable for casual users or those prioritizing convenience.

The Panasonic FP1 offers a compelling package for urban photography enthusiasts and travelers who prioritize pocket-sized portability and HD video capture. Its simplified controls and smaller zoom range limit creativity but simplify operation for beginners or casual shooters.

Final Thoughts: Choosing Your Camera

In conclusion, the Olympus SP-590 UZ and Panasonic FP1 cater to different photographic priorities:

• Opt for Olympus SP-590 UZ if:

  • You require a flexible superzoom for wildlife, landscape, and travel photography.
  • Manual control, raw image capture, and environmental sealing are important.
  • You prioritize image quality and creative versatility over portability.
  • You want to experiment with long exposures or macro photography.

• Choose Panasonic Lumix FP1 if:

  • Portability and discretion are paramount, especially for street and casual travel photography.
  • You prefer a straightforward point-and-shoot experience without manual exposure intervention.
  • HD video capture in a compact form factor is desirable.
  • Your budget is constrained and your photographic demands are less extensive.

Both cameras manifest the technology and design philosophies of their era and niche. While neither matches the performance of contemporary models in autofocus sophistication, sensor dynamic range, or video capability, they each provide distinct pathways to capturing quality images within their operational scope. The choice ultimately hinges on user priorities - versatility and control versus compact convenience.

For photography enthusiasts evaluating older camera options or seeking an affordable secondary body, this detailed comparison clarifies the trade-offs to inform a rational, need-based purchase decision.