Olympus SP-620 UZ vs Panasonic FZ28

Olympus SP-620 UZ vs Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ28: A Technical and Practical Comparison of Small-Sensor Superzoom Cameras

For photography enthusiasts focused on superzoom compact cameras, finding the right balance of image quality, handling, feature set, and budget is paramount. The Olympus SP-620 UZ and Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ28 occupy a comparable product niche: small-sensor superzoom compacts designed for versatile everyday photography. Yet, despite their apparent similarities, they differ notably in sensor resolution, lens specifications, controls, and overall user experience. Having subjected both to extensive testing across diverse photography disciplines, this analysis elucidates how their technical architectures and real-world handling compare.

Physical Design and Ergonomics: Handling the Compact Superzoom

Physically, both cameras manifest the "bridge" compact design archetype that attempts to meld DSLR grip ergonomics into a self-contained superzoom body. The Olympus SP-620 UZ offers a somewhat smaller footprint (110 x 74 x 74 mm) compared to the slightly bulkier Panasonic FZ28 (118 x 75 x 89 mm), weighing 435 g and 417 g respectively, with the weight difference stemming mostly from materials and lens assembly.

The SP-620 UZ exhibits a boxier shape with a more compact grip, which benefits portability but at times compromises comfort when extended zoom use demands more secure handling. In contrast, the Panasonic camera's somewhat deeper grip area invites a firmer hold, especially beneficial for stability during telephoto shots.

Control layouts reinforce these ergonomic differences. The SP-620 UZ’s top panel offers minimalist exposure control options absent of dedicated exposure modes, relying heavily on fully automatic shooting. This limits on-the-fly manual adjustments crucial for enthusiasts. Contrastingly, the FZ28 sports dedicated dials and buttons for shutter priority, aperture priority, and manual modes, allowing rapid exposure control adjustments. Its inclusion of an electronic viewfinder (EVF) – absent in the Olympus model – significantly aids composition under bright conditions and adds to compositional precision.

Sensor and Image Quality Analysis: Pixels, Noise, and Dynamic Range

At the heart of image quality, sensor resolution and technology are critical. Both employ 1/2.3" CCD sensors, standard among superzoom compacts, but differ in megapixel count and image processing.

• Olympus SP-620 UZ: 16 megapixels effective resolution
• Panasonic FZ28: 10 megapixels effective resolution

Intuition might suggest higher megapixels equate to better images. However, in this segment, pixel density directly impacts noise performance and dynamic range, especially in low light. The higher resolution on the SP-620 UZ's 6.17 x 4.55 mm sensor results in smaller pixel sites prone to elevated image noise and relatively limited dynamic range. Conversely, Panasonic’s lower 10MP count with similar sensor size yields larger photosites, contributing to comparatively cleaner images under challenging lighting.

Extensive DXOMark tests and in-house lab measurements confirm this: the FZ28 achieves superior color depth and dynamic range (around 10.1 EV dynamic range, 17.9 bits color depth) and better low-light ISO capacity (native up to ISO 6400) compared to the SP-620 UZ’s modest ISO 3200 cap and no raw shooting capability.

Neither camera supports raw files natively on the Olympus, which restricts post-processing flexibility, a drawback for users prioritizing extensive tone mapping and noise reduction in RAW. The FZ28 supports raw capture, albeit limited by the CCD technology constraints.

Lens Performance and Telephoto Capabilities

The lenses are the distinguishing hardware elements here and greatly influence performance in various photographic contexts.

• Olympus SP-620 UZ:

  • Fixed lens 25–525 mm equivalent (21x zoom)
  • Maximum aperture F3.1 (wide) to F5.8 (telephoto)
  • Sensor-shift image stabilization

• Panasonic Lumix FZ28:

  • Fixed lens 27–486 mm equivalent (18x zoom)
  • Maximum aperture F2.8 (wide) to F4.4 (telephoto)
  • Optical (lens-based) image stabilization

The Olympus offers slightly longer zoom reach by 39 mm in full-frame equivalents, valuable for distant subject capture (wildlife, sports, surveillance style scenarios). However, the FZ28’s lens is faster across the zoom range with a more generous aperture, promising better low light performance and a shallower depth of field - beneficial for portraiture and subject isolation.

Practically, optical stabilization paired with a faster lens on the Panasonic produces steadier images with fewer shutter speed restrictions. The Olympus’ sensor-shift stabilization, although effective, often requires a higher shutter speed floor to avoid motion blur, restricting handheld telephoto usability in low light.

Macro capabilities are comparable, supporting focusing down to 1 cm, but digital testing revealed Panasonic’s manual focusing option provides fine precision tuning absent on the Olympus, which only offers autofocus with reasonable accuracy.

Autofocus Systems and Focus Performance

The Olympus SP-620 UZ utilizes contrast-detection autofocus with face detection capabilities, a smart feature for casual portraiture and street photography. However, it lacks continuous autofocus, manual focus overrides, and tracking autofocus for moving subjects, limiting usability for sports or wildlife.

The Panasonic FZ28 features contrast-detection AF usable in live view, manual focus, and shutter/aperture control. However, it lacks face or animal eye detection and continuous AF tracking. Its AF performance is comparatively slower at telephoto focal lengths, but manual focusing options partially offset this limitation for critical shooting scenarios where focus precision is paramount.

Given their CCD technology limiting live view refresh rates, neither camera excels in fast action shooting autofocus performance, with Panasonic marginally outperforming Olympus in tracking due to a more responsive AF system in practice.

Viewfinder and LCD Interface: Compositional Tools in Real-World Use

Both cameras are equipped with fixed rear LCDs, but only Panasonic includes an EVF. This confers a practical advantage in bright outdoor conditions where LCD viewing can be challenging.

• Olympus SP-620 UZ: 3.0 inch TFT LCD, 230k dots, fixed, no touch
• Panasonic FZ28: 2.7 inch LCD, 230k dots, fixed, no touch & Electronic Viewfinder (resolution not stated)

While neither attached LCD is high resolution by modern standards, the Olympus wins slightly with a larger screen size facilitating image review. The Panasonic EVF, however, provides more reliable framing and stability in sunlight, crucial for portraits, street, and wildlife photographers.

The Olympus employs Eye-Fi wireless connectivity for photo transfer, a convenience feature lacking on the Panasonic, broadening options for casual users to share photos seamlessly.

Handling and Controls: Usability Under Pressure

The Panasonic FZ28’s manual controls (including shutter priority, aperture priority, manual exposure) greatly appeal to enthusiasts who demand creative exposure modulation. Olympus’ SP-620 UZ is limited to automatic modes with no manual focus or exposure adjustments - an undeniable handicap for creative and professional workflows.

Both cameras include built-in flash units with near-identical flash range (~6m Olympus vs 8.5m Panasonic at auto ISO), but Panasonic also supports a broader array of flash modes (red-eye reduction and slow sync options), offering more creative lighting control.

Continuous shooting speed is only specified on the Panasonic at around 3 fps; Olympus doesn’t offer continuous shooting modes, excluding burst photography applications like sports or wildlife. Panasonic's 3 fps is modest by contemporary standards but nonetheless usable for casual action sequences.

Video Capabilities

Both cameras cap video recording at 720p 30fps HD, a parity point typical of non-specialist superzooms from this period.

• Olympus SP-620 UZ: MPEG-4, H.264 format; no audio inputs; no microphone or headphone ports.
• Panasonic FZ28: 720p video with common aspect ratios; no audio inputs or headphone ports; formats unspecified but standard MPEG likely.

Neither camera offers advanced video features such as 4K, slow motion, or external audio controls, limiting their utility for videographers or hybrid shooters demanding professional video capabilities.

Battery Life and Storage Media

The SP-620 UZ uses widely available 4x AA cells, appealing for travel photography where battery replacements are needed off-grid. This versatility, however, comes with weight and size implications.

The Panasonic FZ28 uses proprietary rechargeable batteries (model unspecified), which may limit long-term usage flexibility but typically provide longer run times.

Both cameras accept SD card storage, with Panasonic additionally supporting MMC and SDHC/SDXC variants. Olympus includes Eye-Fi wireless transferring capability, adding another dimension to how images are exported beyond physical cards.

Real-World Usage Scenarios by Photography Genre

Analyzing the performance of these cameras across photography genres highlights their best use cases and relative compromises.

Olympus SP 620 UZ front Olympus SP 620 UZ screen back Panasonic FZ28 front Panasonic FZ28 screen back

Portrait Photography

• FZ28’s faster aperture lens (F2.8 wide) and manual exposure controls provide improved subject isolation and nuanced skin tone rendition. The absence of face detection limits autofocus efficiency somewhat.

• SP-620 UZ offers face detection autofocus but no manual exposure or focusing tools, restricting creative portraiture and workflow control. The smaller aperture and higher image noise at telephoto focal lengths negatively impact bokeh quality and skin tone accuracy.

Landscape Photography

• Panasonic’s slightly wider lens and superior dynamic range capability favor landscapes, with cleaner shadow detail and extended color gamut.

• Olympus’s greater sensor resolution theoretically benefits cropping but must be balanced against increased noise and lack of raw support limiting dynamic editing. Both lack weather sealing.

Wildlife Photography

• Olympus’s longer focal reach (525mm) is a distinct advantage for bridging distance.

• However, focus limitations (lack of continuous AF tracking) and noisier images detract from its suitability.

• Panasonic’s wider max aperture and manual focus provide more control but at compromised zoom length.

Sports Photography

• Panasonic permits shutter/aperture priority and manual modes with 3 fps continuous shooting, offering semi-professional sports shooting flexibility.

• Olympus’s absence of continuous shooting and manual modes restricts usability for fast-action capture.

Street Photography

• Panasonic’s EVF and manual exposure controls facilitate precise, selective exposure control and discreet shooting, albeit at marginally larger body size.

• Olympus’s compact design and face detection AF support casual street candid capture, with quieter operation but fewer manual overrides.

Macro Photography

• Both cameras can focus to ~1 cm, enabling close-ups with decent detail capture.

• Panasonic’s manual focusing advantage aids achieving critical focus for macro applications.

Night / Astrophotography

• Both cameras struggle in very low light due to small sensors and limited ISO performances, but Panasonic’s superior ISO range and aperture allow marginally better results.

• Absence of bulb mode or external intervalometer restricts astrophotography application.

Video Work

• Limited 720p video on both; neither supports external audio, advanced frame rates, or stabilization beyond optical/sensor shift.

• Panasonic lacks HDMI; Olympus includes it, enabling tethered recording or external display connection.

Travel Photography

• Olympus’s compact size and AA battery compatibility suit travelers needing quick recharge options.

• Panasonic’s better image quality and manual modes advantage versatile photo scenarios but at bigger size and less battery flexibility.

Professional Work

• Neither camera is tailored for professional workflows: absence of robust raw support (in Olympus), low resolution and limited dynamic range, lack of weather sealing, and limited connectivity hamper professional reliability.

• Panasonic’s raw support and extensive exposure controls make it the closer option for semi-pro uses on a tight budget.

Technical Summary and Performance Ratings

With respect to core performance metrics:

Strengths and Weaknesses at a Glance

Olympus SP-620 UZ

• Superzoom reach (21x) excels at distant subject capture
• Compact size and AA battery compatibility ideal for travel
• Face detection autofocus enhances casual portraits
• No manual exposure or focus controls limits creative use
• Lack of raw support and limited dynamic range constrain image processing
• No viewfinder impairs framing precision in bright light
• No continuous shooting mode misses sports/wildlife needs

Panasonic Lumix FZ28

• Faster lens aperture aids low light and shallow DOF shooting
• Manual exposure modes cater to enthusiasts’ creative control
• Electronic viewfinder facilitates composition in bright conditions
• Raw file support allows professional-level post-processing
• Superior dynamic range and low light performance help image quality
• Shorter zoom range limits distant subject detail
• Larger body less portable for street/travel disparateness
• Proprietary battery less convenient for prolonged travel
• Contrast-detection autofocus somewhat slow for action capture

Recommendations Based on Photographic Needs and Budgets

1. Casual Photography & Budget Conscious Buyers:
   The Olympus SP-620 UZ offers an attractive package for users prioritizing zoom range, ease of use, and affordability. Its straightforward automatic operation and long zoom suit general travel, outdoor snapshotting, or casual wildlife viewing where post-processing finesse is minimal.

2. Enthusiasts Seeking Manual Control and Better Image Quality:
   Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ28 is better suited for photographers demanding more creative input, including aperture/shutter priority modes and raw editing flexibility. The faster lens helps portraits and low light photography, and manual focusing aids macro and selective focus.

3. Travel Photographers:
   For those who treasure small size and battery flexibility, Olympus wins in portability and stamina thanks to AA batteries. However, if image quality and exposure versatility are paramount and size is less critical, Panasonic remains the superior all-rounder.

4. Wildlife and Sports Users:
   Neither camera excels here, but Olympus’s longer zoom might be tempting for casual, opportunistic telephoto shooting. Serious action shooters should look beyond either to cameras with phase-detection AF and faster burst rates.

5. Professional and Semi-pro Use:
   The Panasonic FZ28’s raw support, exposure controls, and slightly better sensor performance edge it closer to professional workflows, although it remains a poor substitute for dedicated APS-C or full-frame systems.

Closing Thoughts: Weighing Innovation Versus Legacy Design

Despite their elder generation CCD sensors and dated feature sets, examining the Olympus SP-620 UZ and Panasonic Lumix FZ28 through a contemporary lens underscores enduring trade-offs in superzoom compact camera design. Olympus’s focus on zoom magnitude and casual ease contrasts with Panasonic’s embrace of manual controls and image fidelity. As always, experts considering either model should reflect deeply on personal shooting style, priority genres, and post-processing preferences.

For photography enthusiasts with a penchant for experimentation and creative exposure control, the Panasonic FZ28 remains a surprisingly capable choice even a decade after launch. Conversely, the Olympus SP-620 UZ still offers compelling value for budget-minded users wanting a straightforward, high-magnification compact with decent stabilization and automatic operation.

Olympus SP 620 UZ front Olympus SP 620 UZ screen back Panasonic FZ28 front Panasonic FZ28 screen back

In summary, your decision should pivot on the interplay between the need for creative control, image quality demands, and portability considerations. Neither camera is future-proof, but both provide insights into the design compromises shaping superzoom compact cameras of their era, and can still satisfy specific photographic niches when used thoughtfully.