Olympus SP-800 UZ vs Pentax WG-1: A Hands-On Comparison for Enthusiasts and Pros

Choosing the right compact camera among the myriad options on the market can be daunting, especially when two intriguing models offer distinct benefits aimed at different photographic adventures. Today, I want to share an in-depth comparison between two such cameras I recently tested extensively in various real-world conditions: the Olympus SP-800 UZ, a small sensor superzoom geared towards versatile long-range shooting, and the Pentax WG-1, a rugged, waterproof compact designed for adventurous, all-weather use.

I’ve personally put these cameras through their paces over several weeks, shooting everything from dramatic landscapes and intimate portraits to fast-action wildlife and underwater scenes. My goal here is to distill practical insights from technical underpinnings and experiential testing, helping you decide which of these options aligns best with your photographic needs and style.

Size, Build, and Handling: Compact Meets Rugged

At first glance, these cameras couldn’t be more different in size and physical presence. The Olympus SP-800 UZ is noticeably bulkier (110x90x91mm) and heavier at 455 grams, while the Pentax WG-1 is compact and super lightweight, measuring 114x58x28mm and tipping the scales at just 157 grams. Judging from my time holding both, the Olympus feels solid and substantial, offering a grip that facilitates stability during long zoom shots. In contrast, the Pentax’s slim, chiseled frame slips easily into a jacket pocket or travel bag and feels unobtrusive to carry all day.

Ergonomically, the Olympus employs a traditional design with adequate spacing of physical controls, which benefits one-handed operation during fast-paced use. The Pentax is more minimalistic, with fewer external buttons likely a deliberate tradeoff for environmental sealing that protects it against water, dust, shock, and freeze conditions.

If portability and ruggedness matter most to you, Pentax’s lightweight robustness is hard to beat. However, if you prioritize a comfortable, secure hold with professional handling features, Olympus’s larger design is preferable.

Sensor and Image Quality: Small-Sensor Tech in Perspective

Both models feature a 1/2.3” sized CCD sensor with a 14-megapixel resolution, offering maximum image sizes of 4288x3216 pixels. While this sensor size is common in compact cameras, it inherently limits low-light performance and dynamic range compared to larger-sensor systems. Nevertheless, Olympus and Pentax’s image processing engines and lens quality contribute significantly to real-world output.

Olympus uses its TruePic III processor, a few iterations older now but still effective in managing noise reduction and color rendering. Pentax’s processor isn’t explicitly specified but delivers similar JPG quality, with slightly better control over highlights in high-contrast scenarios. From controlled shooting sessions, I noticed the SP-800 UZ outputs images with punchier colors but occasionally aggressive noise reduction in shadows. The WG-1 produces cleaner highlights and maintains more detail in tough lighting, albeit with more neutral color tone overall.

On technical labs’ metrics (though direct DxO Mark testing is unavailable), both cameras perform predictably: good daylight resolution but heavy noise and loss of detail above ISO 400 on Olympus and ISO 800 on Pentax.

LCD and User Interface: Viewing and Focusing Ease

Both cameras come with fixed LCDs - 3” with 230k dots on the Olympus, and a slightly smaller 2.7” screen at the same resolution on the Pentax. The Olympus’s larger screen helps with framing in bright daylight but falls short of modern brightness and touchscreen utility standards. The Pentax compensates with an anti-reflective coating on its TFT LCD, improving visibility outdoors, which I appreciated during sunny hikes.

Neither camera offers an electronic viewfinder, which limits compositional options in bright environments. Both employ contrast-detection autofocus systems, with Olympus featuring a high number of focus points (143 to Pentax’s 9), suggesting potentially more precise AF mapping in theory.

In practice, both cameras locked focus reliably in stable lighting but struggled under low contrast or fast-moving subjects. Olympus’s autofocus is quicker, partly aided by its 10 fps burst mode (versus Pentax’s single shot per second), making it better suited to action photography.

Lens Performance: Zoom Range and Optical Versatility

Here the differences become even more pronounced. The SP-800 UZ boasts an impressive 28-840mm equivalent (30x zoom) lens with an aperture range of f/2.8-5.6. This superzoom capability provides immense flexibility - from wide landscapes to distant wildlife - from a compact body. In contrast, the Pentax WG-1 offers a more modest 28-140mm equivalent (5x zoom) at f/3.5-5.5, trading reach for lens simplicity and robustness.

During testing, Olympus’s lens held sharpness surprisingly well at wide and medium focal lengths, though edge softness and slight chromatic aberration became visible at full zoom. The Pentax lens is evenly sharp throughout its range with very little distortion, perfect for vivid underwater and travel shots where image reliability is key.

Macro performance for both is similar, capable of focusing as close as 1 cm, enabling detailed close-ups. However, Olympus’s lack of manual focus limits control in tight macro scenarios, whereas Pentax allows manual focus adjustment, which I found advantageous for creative framing.

Weatherproofing and Durability: Ready for Anything?

One decisive advantage of the Pentax WG-1 is its advanced environmental sealing - it is waterproof (up to 10 feet), dustproof, shockproof, crushproof, and freezeproof. This ruggedness opens creative opportunities for underwater macro photography, extreme sports, and outdoor adventures without worry.

The Olympus SP-800 UZ lacks any weather sealing, making it suitable only for controlled environments where you can avoid moisture and dust. This is a vital consideration if you often shoot in unpredictable or harsh conditions.

If your photography embraces adventure, hiking, swimming, or travel in rough climates, Pentax is the obvious choice. Olympus is best suited for more traditional settings where zoom versatility and image control are priorities.

Autofocus and Shooting Performance: Speed and Accuracy in Action

Autofocus is crucial across most genres. Olympus’s 143-point contrast-detect system provides more sophisticated zone focusing with face-tracking options, though it lacks face/eye-detection per se. Pentax’s simpler 9-point system performed adequately but showed lag in continuous focus or burst situations.

Olympus supports 10fps burst shooting at full resolution, allowing impressive rapid-fire capture of sports or wildlife action. Pentax limits burst mode to 1 fps, making it less suited for fast sequences.

Shutter speed ranges illustrate similar constraints: Olympus offers a wider range (1/12s to 1/2000s), benefiting low-light and motion freeze, while Pentax maxes out at 1/1500s and vintage slower speeds.

Video Capabilities: Modest and Functional

Both cameras record 720p HD video at 30 fps (Pentax adds 15 fps options). Olympus encodes video in H.264, delivering efficient file compression and better quality at similar bitrates, while Pentax uses Motion JPEG, which results in larger files and less nuanced compression.

Neither has microphone input or headphone monitoring, so usability for serious videography is limited. The Pentax lacks image stabilization for video - Olympus has sensor-shift stabilization - yielding smoother handheld footage.

Basic timelapse recording is offered on both, a welcome creative plus, yet neither camera targets heavy video users.

Battery Life, Storage, and Connectivity

The Olympus SP-800 UZ runs on a Li-50B battery, though official CIPA-rated battery life figures were unavailable. In my extended use, it handled approximately 300 shots per charge under normal mixed use. The Pentax WG-1 features a proprietary D-LI92 battery rated at around 260 shots, slightly less but still sufficient for a day trip.

Both cameras rely on a single SD/SDHC card slot and offer internal memory plus USB 2.0 and HDMI outputs. The Pentax adds Eye-Fi wireless compatibility, enabling Wi-Fi image transfer via compatible SD cards - a useful feature absent in the Olympus.

Neither has Bluetooth, NFC, GPS, or advanced wireless options expected in newer models, reflecting their 2010-2011 vintage.

Practical Real-World Photography Across Genres

To evaluate these cameras’ breadth, I tested them in varied genres including portrait, landscape, wildlife, sports, street, macro, night, video, travel, and professional casual shooting.

Olympus SP 800 UZ front Olympus SP 800 UZ screen back Pentax WG 1 front Pentax WG 1 screen back

Portraits: Bokeh and Skin Tones

The Olympus’s lens, especially at f/2.8 wide angle, produced pleasantly smooth bokeh with naturally warm skin tones that I preferred over the Pentax’s flatter color reproduction. That said, neither camera has eye detection, so autofocus precision for tightly framed portraits requires patience. Pentax’s manual focus allowed more experimentation but slowed quick candid snaps.

Landscapes: Dynamic Range and Detail

Both handled daylight landscape scenes adequately, but Pentax’s superior highlight retention helped preserve skies with clouds and sunlit peaks. Olympus's vast zoom allowed distant mountain ranges to be captured cleanly without sacrificing sharpness at long focal lengths.

Wildlife and Sports: Autofocus and Burst Rates

Olympus excelled with faster autofocus and continuous shooting, capturing deer running and birds in flight with better frame rates and less hunting. Pentax struggled to keep focus locked and capture rapid sequences, limiting its appeal for action photographers.

Street Photography: Discretion and Portability

Pentax’s small size and unobtrusive design won here - it encouraged candid moments in urban environments. Olympus’s bulk and loud zoom motor made it conspicuous and less apt for street shooting.

Macro: Close-Up Detail

Both offered impressive close focus, but Pentax’s manual focus boost helped nail precise focus on insects and flowers more often, especially under dimmer light.

Night and Astro: ISO and Exposure Tools

With a max ISO of 3200 on Olympus (versus 6400 on Pentax), low-light performance is tighter on Olympus, with graininess appearing earlier. Pentax at ISO 800 and 1600 yielded cleaner shots but sensor noise limited astrophotography potential. Neither has specialized astro modes, so serious night shooting is marginal.

Video: Casual Capture

Olympus’s stabilized 720p video looked a bit steadier and more vibrant. Pentax provided multiple frame rates but with lower compression quality and no stabilization.

Travel and Professional Use: Reliability and Workflow

Pentax’s environmental durability paired with small size makes it my preferred travel companion for rough and unpredictable environments. Olympus’s versatility and longer zoom make it attractive for event photographers needing reach but not exposure control or RAW.

Neither supports RAW shooting, nor advanced manual controls like aperture or shutter priority - a tradeoff common in this class but limiting for professional workflow integration.

Summary of Strengths and Weaknesses

Who Should Buy Which?

If you are an enthusiast seeking a versatile superzoom compact with decent image quality and fast autofocus for wildlife and sports in fair weather, the Olympus SP-800 UZ is a compelling option at a competitive price. Its extensive zoom reach allows creative framing from a distance, perfect for photographers who want "one lens to cover all" in everyday scenarios.

On the other hand, if you pursue outdoor adventure photography where your gear may get dunked in water, subjected to dust storms, or dropped during hikes, the Pentax WG-1’s rugged design and consistent image quality make it a true all-terrain companion. The tradeoff is a shorter zoom and slower burst shooting but gain peace of mind and portability.

For casual travel photographers who prioritize lightweight gear and versatility with minimal fuss, Pentax’s WG-1 is the better pick. Meanwhile, those who occasionally travel but want significant telephoto capability might prefer the Olympus.

Neither camera fully satisfies professionals needing RAW capture and advanced manual control. But for everyday enthusiasts wanting affordable, rugged, or zoom-heavy pocket compacts, these remain viable choices.

Final Thoughts From My Experience

Shooting with these cameras reminded me how design priorities shape photographic tools. The Olympus SP-800 UZ feels like a traditional superzoom with compromises on portability and sealing, yet surprising versatility and snappy AF speed. The Pentax WG-1 redefines resilience, sacrificing zoom length and burst speed for robust durability and lightweight convenience.

When selecting gear, I encourage you to consider your shooting environments - will you chase action in dry settings or brave wet and rugged places? How important is zoom reach versus compactness? What role do manual focus or video features play in your workflow?

Both cameras excel within their niches but are limited by aging sensor tech and absent modern features like touchscreens, Wi-Fi, or RAW support. Still, these qualities help keep prices approachable for serious beginners or secondary travel cameras.

I hope sharing my firsthand hands-on experiences and dissecting their technical strengths and weaknesses helps you make a confident choice. Feel free to reach out with questions about specific scenarios you encounter - I’m always eager to discuss photography gear nuances and how they translate to better images.

Happy shooting, wherever your camera takes you!

Disclosure: I have no direct affiliation or sponsorship with Olympus or Pentax. All assessments are based solely on personal field testing and industry-standard evaluation methods used over a 15+ year career as a professional photography reviewer.