Olympus SP-600 UZ vs Olympus XZ-1: A Definitive Hands-On Comparison for Photography Enthusiasts

When Olympus launched the SP-600 UZ in early 2010 and then followed with the XZ-1 a year later, the two cameras stood at very different crossroads of compact photography design - one pushing superzoom boundaries, the other championing fast optics and advanced control on a smaller sensor. Having tested both extensively in my studio and on location, I’m excited to share a thorough, no-nonsense comparison based on real-world use, measured performance, and practical insights.

Whether you’re a casual enthusiast looking for reach or a discerning shooter craving manual controls and image quality, this review will guide your choice. So, let’s dive in and unpack these Olympus compacts through the lenses of technical prowess, shooting versatility, and user experience.

First Impressions and Ergonomics: How the Cameras Feel in Hand

The physicality of a camera is often overlooked but plays a huge role in everyday usability. The SP-600 UZ is undeniably bulkier and heavier for a compact at 455 grams, with a thick body largely to accommodate its impressive 15× zoom lens. In contrast, the XZ-1’s compactness is a breath of fresh air - just 275 grams and significantly slimmer. This difference immediately affects portability and how discreetly you can carry and shoot.

The SP-600 UZ’s more boxy, robust form offers a decent grip but feels chunky after extended handheld use, especially for street or travel photography. The XZ-1 wins here, with more thoughtful ergonomics tailored for tighter shooting and quick access. The smaller size and lighter weight make it agile, a key benefit as I found during urban explorations and casual walk-arounds.

On top, you’ll notice a clear divergence in design philosophies:

The SP-600 UZ relies on a minimalist button layout emphasizing zoom controls and straightforward auto modes, fitting for less complex operation. The XZ-1, however, incorporates dedicated dials for shutter speed, aperture, and exposure compensation - a nod to enthusiasts who relish hands-on control without lugging a DSLR.

Practical takeaway: If you prioritize a travel-friendly, pocketable shooter with pro-level control options, the XZ-1 takes the cake. The SP-600 UZ suits those who want telephoto reach and don’t mind size for casual, point-and-shoot simplicity.

Sensor and Image Quality Deep Dive

At the heart of any camera’s image pipeline is its sensor. Despite both cameras being Olympus compacts with CCD technology, their sensors differ significantly in size and resolution, impacting quality, noise control, and overall fidelity.

The Olympus SP-600 UZ uses a 1/2.3" sensor measuring 6.08 x 4.56 mm, delivering 12 megapixels. The XZ-1 opts for the larger 1/1.63" sensor at 8.07 x 5.56 mm but with a slightly lower resolution of 10 megapixels. This is a classic trade-off: resolution versus pixel size, where the XZ-1’s bigger sensor elements excel in noise performance and dynamic range.

My lab testing and field shooting corroborate this: the XZ-1 clearly pulls ahead in image clarity and color depth, handling shadows and highlights with greater finesse, likely powered by its TruePic V processor and superior optics. Noise at ISO 400 and above is noticeably cleaner on the XZ-1, making it far better suited for low-light and night photography.

A practical note on ISO ranges: The SP-600 UZ tops out at ISO 1600, while the XZ-1 can push to ISO 6400. However, at higher ISOs, the SP-600 UZ’s images exhibit aggressive grain and loss of detail, whereas the XZ-1 keeps noise more under control and preserves textures. This is essential because for any of us shooting events, travel, or spontaneous moments where lighting is unpredictable, this difference dictates image usability.

Shooting Controls and Autofocus Performance

Zooms are great, but precision focusing and control elevate shooting to a near-art level.

The SP-600 UZ, with its 15× zoom covering 28-420 mm equivalent, impresses for reach - ideal for wildlife or distant subjects. However, the autofocus system is a basic contrast-detection type with 143 focus points, no phase detection, and no face or eye detection. This showed in my experience as moderate AF speed and hunting in low contrast or low light. It lacks manual focus override beyond a ring on the lens, so you’re mostly trusting the camera’s AF.

Conversely, the XZ-1 adopts a more refined approach for enthusiasts: 11 AF points featuring contrast-detection with face detection capability, live view AF, and manual focus with manual exposure modes. The lens zoom range is limited to 28-112 mm equivalent, but it’s coupled with a very bright f/1.8-2.5 lens. The AF is slower in burst shooting mode but more accurate for portraits and detailed macro work.

Continuous shooting rates: The SP-600 UZ boasts a 10 fps burst rate, which sounds impressive but is less useful because AF locks on a single frame only. The XZ-1 tops at 2 fps but offers manual control over exposure parameters, allowing more deliberate, quality-focused shooting.

Display and User Interface: Reviewing What You See

The experience of composing and reviewing images is shaped heavily by the LCD and viewfinder.

The SP-600 UZ sports a 2.7-inch fixed LCD with 230k dots resolution, offering limited brightness and color accuracy, which hampers evaluating exposure or color on the fly, especially outdoors. There is no electronic viewfinder (EVF) option, so bright sunlight can be an issue.

Meanwhile, the XZ-1 has a crisp 3-inch OLED screen with 614k dots, delivering much sharper playback visuals and better dynamic range for previewing images. Although it lacks an integrated EVF, an optional electronic viewfinder can be attached, a bonus for those shooting in bright light or preferring eye-level framing.

In practical travel and street scenarios, the XZ-1’s display shines (literally and figuratively), easing quick adjustments and review. The SP-600 UZ’s screen feels dated and diminishes its utility in tricky lighting conditions.

Real-World Shooting: Versatility Across Genres

This section reflects my hands-on experience with both cameras across various photography styles - portrait, landscape, wildlife, sports, street, macro, night, video, travel, and professional use.

Portrait Photography

Portraits demand accurate skin tone rendering, pleasing bokeh, and precise eye detection.

• SP-600 UZ: The superzoom lens’s variable aperture (f/3.5-5.4) limits shallow depth-of-field effects. Bokeh is relatively harsh, not flattering for close portraits. Autofocus lacks face or eye detection, so framing moving subjects requires patience.

• XZ-1: Its bright f/1.8-2.5 lens delivers much smoother background blur - a strong advantage for portraits. With face detection AF, keeping eyes sharp is easier. Skin tones are more natural and pleasing due to more sophisticated image processing.

Landscape Photography

Landscape work demands high resolution, excellent dynamic range, and weather reliability.

• SP-600 UZ: The 12MP sensor provides adequate detail, but dynamic range limitations and smaller sensor size reveal themselves in high contrast scenes, such as sunrise landscapes. Its lack of weather sealing is typical for this class - care is advisable outdoors.

• XZ-1: Superior dynamic range and vibrant colors from the larger sensor yield punchier, more textured landscapes. Its compact size helps when hiking or backpacking. Weather sealing is absent, but consistent image quality partially compensates.

Wildlife Photography

Wildlife requires fast autofocus, long reach, high burst rates, and adequate stabilization.

• SP-600 UZ: Its 420 mm max focal length offers incredible reach in a compact camera, great for casual wildlife shooting. Autofocus, though, is only moderately fast and hunting in low-light hurts success rates. No optical or sensor-shift stabilization reduces sharpness odds from handholding at long zoom.

• XZ-1: Limited zoom hampers telephoto work, but faster, more accurate AF and stabilization compensate a bit in close wildlife or bird portraits. For serious wildlife, neither replaces a DSLR system, but the SP-600 UZ suits beginners needing reach without complexity.

Sports Photography

Sports demand fast burst rates, tracking autofocus, and decent high ISO response.

• SP-600 UZ: The advertised 10 fps burst sounds promising but AF only locks for the first frame, making continuous tracking unreliable. Noise at higher ISOs restricts low-light indoor sports. No manual exposure controls limit creative options.

• XZ-1: At 2 fps continuous shooting, it’s slower but offers effective exposure control to artistically freeze motion with correct shutter speeds. The better ISO handling aids in dimmer arenas. AF tracking works reasonably, though not at high-end DSLR speeds.

Street Photography

Discretion, portability, and low-light performance count here.

Given its bulkiness, the SP-600 UZ is less stealthy for street work and visually intrusive. Its zoom lens allows spontaneous framing from distance but may draw unwanted attention.

The XZ-1’s smaller size and quieter operation make it ideal for street photographers who value a compact form and manual controls for creativity. It shines in low-light evening scenes thanks to its bright lens and clean ISO performance.

Macro Photography

Macro lovers look for 1:1 magnification, focusing precision, and stabilization.

Both cameras focus down to 1cm - great for close-up details. However, absence of focus stacking or bracketing features in either model requires fine tuning manually. The XZ-1’s stabilization aids handholding close shots, whereas the SP-600 UZ’s lack of any stabilization makes sharp close-ups more challenging without a tripod.

Night and Astro Photography

High ISO performance and specialized exposure features dominate this category.

The XZ-1, with ISO up to 6400 and cleaner noise handling, outperforms the SP-600 UZ’s limited ISO range and noisier output at higher sensitivity. Although neither offers extended long exposure modes or dedicated night scene presets, the XZ-1’s manual controls let you experiment with longer shutter speeds more confidently.

Video Capabilities

Both cameras record HD video capped at 720p.

• SP-600 UZ: Records 1280x720 at 24fps using H.264 codecs. The lack of stabilization and limited manual exposure reduces video quality somewhat, with autofocus hunting visible during zooming.

• XZ-1: Also shoots 720p but at 30fps with Motion JPEG format, making file sizes larger. Sensor-shift stabilizer improves handheld video smoothness, but no microphone input limits sound quality capture.

Travel Photography

A travel camera needs versatility, good battery life, and portability.

The XZ-1 is clearly more travel-friendly, weighing 40% less and fitting comfortably in coat pockets. Its better battery life (rated ~320 shots per charge) compared to the unspecified and generally weaker stamina of the SP-600 UZ, plus the faster lens and superior image quality, make it my recommended travel companion.

Professional Workflow Integration

Neither camera is designed as a pro workhorse, but there are notable differences.

The SP-600 UZ does not support RAW capture, locking users to compressed JPEGs, which restricts post-processing flexibility.

The XZ-1 supports RAW (ORF format), vital for professional editing workflows, giving it a strong advantage for serious enthusiasts and some pros who want a compact secondary body with creative control.

Build Quality and Weather Resistance

Both cameras lack any environmental sealing, waterproofing, or rugged protection. Build quality is solid but conventional plastic and metal parts with no claims of durability under harsh conditions. For outdoor use in challenging weather, additional protective gear is recommended irrespective of choice.

Battery Life and Storage Options

• SP-600 UZ: Battery specifications are vague, but expect modest performance. Storage is via SD/SDHC cards and internal memory.

• XZ-1: Uses the Li-50B battery pack with an estimated 320 shots per charge, respectable for the class. Supports SD/SDHC/SDXC cards for ample storage.

Quicker battery swaps and longer life add to the XZ-1’s practical appeal.

Connectivity and Wireless Features

Both cameras offer minimal connectivity: USB 2.0 and HDMI output. No wireless, Bluetooth, NFC, or GPS is included, limiting modern sharing or geo-tagging features.

Value and Pricing: Which Offers More for Your Money?

At launch, the SP-600 UZ retailed around $189, making it an affordable superzoom compact, while the XZ-1 was a premium model at $567.

Considering image quality, features, lens speed, and RAW support, the XZ-1 justifies its premium for advanced users. The SP-600 UZ, while limited, still holds appeal as a budget model for zoom lovers needing simple point-and-shoot capabilities.

How They Score in Different Photography Types

• Portrait: XZ-1 leads thanks to better bokeh and face detect AF
• Landscape: XZ-1 again outperforms with superior detail and dynamic range
• Wildlife: SP-600 UZ excels with extended zoom, despite AF trade-offs
• Sports: Neither excels, but SP-600 UZ’s burst is only nominally better
• Street: XZ-1 preferred for discretion and optics
• Macro: Tie, both offer 1cm focusing but no advanced stacking
• Night/Astro: XZ-1 for better ISO and manual control
• Video: Marginal edge to XZ-1 for stabilization
• Travel: XZ-1 favored due to size, weight, and battery
• Professional use: XZ-1 only due to RAW support

Sample Images and Image Quality Observations

Olympus SP 600 UZ front Olympus SP 600 UZ screen back Olympus XZ 1 front Olympus XZ 1 screen back

Displayed above are side-by-side samples taken under similar conditions from both cameras. Notice the sharper details, more natural color rendition, and reduced noise in XZ-1 shots. The SP-600 UZ images, while good in bright light, begin showing softness and grain at higher zoom and ISO.

Final Thoughts: Which Olympus Compact Suits You?

Having thoroughly tested and compared the Olympus SP-600 UZ and Olympus XZ-1 across technical and practical dimensions, my recommendations are:

• Choose the SP-600 UZ if: You want an affordable compact with long reach zoom for casual wildlife and landscape photography and are willing to accept limitations in image quality, controls, and bulk.

• Choose the XZ-1 if: You demand superior image quality, manual control, RAW support, better low-light ability, and travel-friendly size - even if that comes at a higher price and shorter zoom range.

Through extensive use, I can affirm that the XZ-1 feels like a mature, enthusiast-focused compact, while the SP-600 UZ feels more entry-level but still capable, especially for long zoom needs.

-

I hope this detailed breakdown helps clarify what each model offers. Feel free to reach out with any specific use case questions, or if you want sample RAW files or shooting settings guides for either camera. My goal is to equip you with real-world insights so you can select the perfect Olympus compact companion tailored to your photographic journey.

Happy shooting!