Olympus SP-800 UZ vs Panasonic Lumix DMC-FP1: A Hands-On Comparison of Two Compact Contenders

In the crowded realm of compact cameras, the search for the ideal combination of zoom versatility, image quality, and ease of use can be a challenge. Today, I take a deep dive into two subcompact cameras from early 2010: Olympus’s SP-800 UZ - a powerful small-sensor superzoom - and Panasonic’s Lumix DMC-FP1, an ultracompact fixed-lens point-and-shoot. Both cameras aim to deliver impressive photography capabilities at accessible price points, but they go about it in notably different ways.

Having spent hours shooting, testing, and comparing these two, this extensive review combines my personal experience and technical expertise to help you understand which of these cameras deserves a spot in your gear bag. We'll cover everything from ergonomics to sensor tech, all important photographic disciplines, and real-world usability - so photographers of varied styles and budgets can make confident decisions.

Size and Handling: Ergonomics vs. Pocketability

Right off the bat, you notice a stark contrast in size and handling. The Olympus SP-800 UZ is a solid, compact superzoom at 110x90x91mm and 455 grams, which feels substantial but comfortably manageable for enthusiasts. Its heft and rubberized grip imbue confidence when shooting, especially with long telephoto reach. The camera's physical form suggests it's meant to be held up to your eye for precise framing, despite lacking a viewfinder.

In contrast, the Panasonic FP1 is seriously pocketable - a true ultracompact at 99x59x19mm and just 151 grams. The slim design sacrifices some physical control, but it's ideal for street photographers or travelers who prefer lightweight carry and discretion. It's the kind of camera you can slip into a jacket pocket without noticing.

Ergonomically, the SP-800 UZ excels with pronounced, well-separated buttons and a robust build - better for longer shooting sessions. The FP1 uses minimal buttons and flat controls to keep the profile slim, but this leads to a more menu-driven interface that can interrupt workflow for power users.

Both cameras share a fixed type, non-touch LCD screen and lack any electronic viewfinder - something that might feel limiting especially under bright sunlight. However, Olympus includes a larger 3-inch screen, versus the FP1’s 2.7-inch panel, which slightly favors the Olympus in terms of composing and reviewing images.

Sensor and Image Quality: Parsing the Small Sensor Limits

At their core, both these cameras employ small 1/2.3" CCD sensors, the dominant form factor for compacts of their era. The Olympus SP-800 UZ’s sensor measures 6.17 x 4.55mm with a resolution of 14 megapixels, while the Panasonic FP1’s sensor is a hair smaller at 6.08 x 4.56mm, generating 12 megapixels.

On paper, the Olympus’s higher pixel count suggests finer detail rendering, but from my controlled tests and pixel-level zoom inspections, the difference in resolving power is marginal. The Olympus edges out in resolutions – for example, its max image output is 4288x3216 pixels versus 4000x3000 for the FP1. But both cameras have an anti-aliasing filter that slightly softens images to reduce moiré, meaning neither delivers razor-sharp raw detail.

Color fidelity and noise performance are comparable at base ISOs, with both cameras producing accurate skin tones and lifelike color rendition - though with the usual CCD tendencies toward a bit of warmth. The Olympus’s sensor and TruePic III processor help it maintain better noise control at ISO 3200, whereas the Panasonic’s Venus Engine IV processor allows ISO up to 6400 but with more pronounced noise. For practical purposes, shooting at or below ISO 400 is advisable on both to retain image clarity.

Neither supports RAW capture, which photographers accustomed to post-processing flexibility might find a disadvantage. They rely exclusively on JPEG output - and the in-camera processing quality is passable for casual use but limits editing latitude.

Autofocus and Shooting Performance: Speed vs. Zoom Range

One of the starkest operational differences lies in autofocus (AF) capabilities and continuous shooting.

The Olympus SP-800 UZ’s contrast-detection AF system offers 143 focus points with wide-area, multi-area, and centerweighted metering options, plus face detection (though no eye detection). This abundance of focus points means you can lock onto subjects fairly quickly - on par for its class in 2010 - and the camera supports AF tracking for moving targets. However, it lacks manual focus or exposure modes, limiting creative control.

The Panasonic FP1’s AF system is simpler with just 9 focus points and no tracking, which slows acquisition on moving subjects. Contrast AF is generally reliable for stationary objects but struggles under low light or quick movement. Its continuous shooting speed is capped at 6 fps, modest compared to Olympus’s 10 fps burst mode.

Putting this to the test in my wildlife and sports simulations showed that the Olympus maintains focus on moderately fast-moving birds and athletes better due to more AF points and tracking. The Panasonic is better suited for still life or casual outdoor scenes.

Zoom and Lens Performance: Telephoto Triumph vs. Balanced Compact

The Olympus’s standout feature is its 28-840mm (30x) zoom range with an aperture of F2.8-5.6 - a massive telephoto reach rare for such a compact. This versatility lets you tackle everything from landscapes to distant wildlife without additional glass, making it a true superzoom.

The Panasonic’s lens spans 35-140mm (4x zoom) at a somewhat slower F3.5-5.9. While nice for everyday snapshots and portraits, it doesn’t compare to Olympus’s powerful telephoto extension.

In sharpness tests, the Olympus lens delivers reasonably crisp center images wide open, though softness increases slightly at full zoom - common given the extreme focal length. The Panasonic’s shorter zoom maintains consistent sharpness across focal lengths but naturally can’t approach the reach needed for wildlife or sports photography.

At the macro level, Olympus impresses with a close focusing distance of 1 cm, enabling strong close-up shots, whereas the Panasonic starts at 10 cm minimum, limiting extreme macro work.

Practical Photography Disciplines: Who Does What Best?

Let’s analyze how each camera performs in key photographic genres and real-world use cases based on ergonomics, sensor capabilities, lens, and autofocus.

Portraits: Rendering Skin and Backgrounds

Portraiture depends on pleasing skin tones and selective focus. Both cameras achieve acceptable skin tone accuracy but neither offers eye-detection AF or manual aperture control to finesse depth of field.

The Olympus’s faster F2.8 wide aperture gives it an edge producing softer backgrounds (bokeh) at 28mm, useful for subject isolation. The Panasonic’s slower lens means more depth of field, resulting in flatter portraits.

Landscapes: Dynamic Range and Resolution

Neither camera boasts outstanding dynamic range typical of larger sensors, but their small sensors still capture respectable detail in well-lit conditions.

Olympus’s higher resolution slightly benefits landscapes by allowing more cropping or larger prints. Neither camera is weather sealed, so use caution outdoors.

Wildlife and Sports: Autofocus and Burst Speed

Here, Olympus clearly wins with its long zoom and 10 fps continuous shooting paired with better AF tracking. The Panasonic’s limitations (shorter zoom, slower AF, 6 fps burst) reduce viability for action shots.

Street and Travel: Discretion and Portability

Panasonic FP1’s petite form and light weight make it ideal for street or travel shooters prioritizing discretion and ease of carry. Olympus, while not bulky, stands out more and feels heavier.

Battery life isn’t officially stated for either, but I found the FP1 lasting longer through casual use, while Olympus’s extra zooming and processing drains more power.

Macro: Close Focus and Stabilization

Olympus’s 1cm macro range plus sensor-shift image stabilization facilitate sharper handheld macro photos. Panasonic’s Optical IS compensates somewhat, but the longer minimum focus limits extreme macro.

Night and Astro: High ISO and Exposure Controls

Both cameras are challenged by small sensors in low light, with visible noise at ISOs above 400. Olympus’s max ISO 3200 is useful but grainy, Panasonic pushes to ISO 6400 but with drastic noise.

Neither camera offers bulb mode or complex exposure controls limiting astro photographers. However, Olympus’s timelapse feature provides some creative low-light options (absent on Panasonic).

Video: Recording Capabilities

Both shoot HD 720p at 30 fps; Olympus uses efficient H.264 compression, Panasonic relies on Motion JPEG - resulting in larger files and slightly lower quality video. Neither supports external microphones.

Image stabilization works in video on both, but Olympus’s sensor-shift system is often more effective in smoothing handheld footage.

User Interface and Controls: How Intuitive Are They?

Neither camera offers touchscreen capabilities. Olympus provides more tactile buttons for quick access and dedicated zoom controls - the hands-on experience feels fluid once you get used to no manual exposure modes.

The FP1 simplifies controls but heavily relies on menus, which can disrupt fast shooting. Both lack viewfinders, which might challenge photographers outdoors in direct sunlight or fast-action conditions.

Built Quality and Durability: Compact Design Trade-offs

Both cameras lack weather sealing, freezeproofing, or impact resistance - common in their category and price point. Olympus’s thicker body and textured grip impart an impression of sturdiness, whereas Panasonic’s slender design feels delicate but well made.

Connectivity and Storage: What’s on Offer?

Neither camera provides wireless features like Wi-Fi or Bluetooth. The Olympus includes a mini-HDMI port for playback on TVs, while Panasonic omits this option.

Both use SD/SDHC cards (Panasonic also supports SDXC), and the USB 2.0 interface is standard, allowing image transfer to computers without hassle.

Olympus SP 800 UZ front Olympus SP 800 UZ screen back Panasonic FP1 front Panasonic FP1 screen back

Image Samples: Real-World Output

Looking at side-by-side samples, Olympus’s images reveal greater detail in distant landscapes and telephoto wildlife shots, thanks to lens reach and higher pixel density. Color is vibrant and skin tones pleasant.

Panasonic FP1’s images are generally softer but exhibit less chromatic aberration and lens distortion due to simpler optics and shorter zoom. Its colors lean toward neutrality, pleasant for casual snapshots.

The Verdict - Scores and Value Assessment

Summarizing through objective scoring metrics combined with my subjective use impressions:

Who Should Choose Which?

Olympus SP-800 UZ: A compelling choice for photographers who desire extensive zoom reach without the bulk of a DSLR system - ideal for wildlife, sports, and casual telephoto work. Its higher resolution, faster burst, and robust AF make it suitable for enthusiasts wanting a versatile all-in-one zoom camera that covers a variety of genres reasonably well.

Recommended if:

• You need long reach (especially wildlife, sports)
• Prefer more tactile controls and rugged feel
• Want faster continuous shooting
• Value image stabilization and macro capabilities

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FP1: Perfect for urban explorers, street photographers, and travelers prioritizing light weight and stealth. Its stylish, slim design and decent image quality make it a superb carry-everywhere solution for everyday snapshots, portraits, and landscape work where extreme zoom isn’t critical.

Recommended if:

• Portability and pocketability top your priorities
• You shoot mostly static subjects or casual snapshots
• You want a sleek, low-profile point-and-shoot
• Battery longevity matters more than zoom range

Closing Thoughts: Balancing Practicality with Performance

While both the Olympus SP-800 UZ and Panasonic FP1 are over a decade old, they exemplify design philosophies that still resonate today: the Olympus pushing superzoom boundaries in a compact shell, the Panasonic streamlining ultracompact convenience. Understanding their strengths and compromises can help you appreciate what small-sensor compacts offer - and what they leave on the cutting room floor in the age of mirrorless and smartphone photography.

For photography enthusiasts seeking superzoom versatility out of the box, the Olympus SP-800 UZ’s combination of focal range, autofocus sophistication, and image stabilization places it ahead. Those who value inconspicuous handling and minimalist design without sacrificing too much image quality will find the Panasonic FP1 a worthy ambassador of ultraportable cameras.

Remember, neither camera supports RAW capture or advanced manual controls, so learning to work with JPEGs and trust the autofocus system will be essential for getting the most satisfying shots.

Ultimately, the choice depends on where your photography passions lie and how much portability you can compromise for zoom reach. Having put both through their paces, I hope this detailed comparison helps you pick the small sensor compact camera that matches your style and needs.

Happy shooting!