Olympus Stylus 1s vs Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ300: A Battle of Small-Sensor Superzooms Explored

In the niche world of small-sensor superzoom cameras, two endurance runners from the mid-2010s still hold notable ground: the Olympus Stylus 1s and the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ300. Both pack impressive specs into SLR-style bridge bodies and promise a versatile “all-in-one” experience - but how do they perform under the hood and in the wild? Drawing from extensive hands-on tests and fieldwork, I’ll break down how these two cameras compare across technical merits, real-world usability, and photographic outcomes, ensuring you can decide which tool best matches your creative ambitions.

Handling and Build: Size, Weight, and Ergonomics in Your Hands

The Olympus 1s and Panasonic FZ300 share the bridge superzoom DNA, but their physical footprints and handling nuances differ markedly.

At first touch, the Olympus 1s is noticeably more compact and lighter at only 402 grams compared to the FZ300’s heftier 691 grams. Olympus strikes an elegant balance with its smaller, slightly more pocketable frame (116x87x57 mm) while retaining sufficient grip bulk. The FZ300, at 132x92x117 mm, offers more substantial heft that some photographers appreciate as a reassurance of build sturdiness, especially if shooting handheld for extended periods.

Looking from above, the control layouts also tell part of the ergonomic story.

Olympus follows a more minimalist approach with fewer physical dials but logical placements. The FZ300, however, is loaded with tactile, well-separated dials and buttons that professionals and enthusiasts love for rapid parameter tweaking. The fully articulated touchscreen on Panasonic adds flexibility for different shooting angles and compositions, something the Olympus’s tilting screen lacks.

Both cameras feature solid, bridge-style grips, but the FZ300’s weather sealing and ruggedized build make it a tougher companion in challenging environments (more on this shortly).

Sensor and Image Quality: The Heart of the Matter

The sensor is often a camera’s defining feature, affecting image quality, dynamic range, and noise performance. Both cameras utilize small sensors but differ in dimensions and technology.

The Olympus 1s uses a 1/1.7-inch BSI-CMOS sensor (7.44x5.58mm) with around 12 megapixels. Meanwhile, the Panasonic FZ300 sports a slightly smaller 1/2.3-inch CMOS sensor (6.17x4.55mm), also 12MP. The difference in sensor size means the Olympus offers a sensor area of about 41.5 mm² vs Panasonic’s 28 mm², a non-trivial 48% larger surface capturing photons.

That sensor size advantage plays to the Olympus’s favor on image quality, especially at wider apertures and medium ISO values, yielding less noise and richer tonal gradations. The back-illuminated design of the Olympus sensor also helps in light gathering efficiency.

Panasonic’s Venus Engine processor is efficient, but competing with the slightly larger, BSI sensor Olympus uses is a tall order. Still, the FZ300 performs admirably with clean images up to ISO 800 and manages ISO 1600 with reasonable noise control.

Lens and Optical Performance: Zoom Range Meets Aperture Consistency

Both cameras come with fixed lenses - a hallmark of bridge superzooms - fitted with extensive zooms and bright apertures.

• Olympus Stylus 1s: 28-300mm equivalent, constant f/2.8
• Panasonic Lumix FZ300: 25-600mm equivalent, constant f/2.8

Here, the Panasonic’s twice-as-long zoom range (24x) burns bright at f/2.8 across the entire telephoto stretch - remarkable for such a lens, making it ideal for wildlife and sports where reach matters. Olympus’s lens maxes at a 10.7x zoom, which still covers most general purposes but may feel limited in distant subjects.

The Olympus’s macro focusing distance is 5cm, respectable though not outstanding. The FZ300 shines with a very close 1cm macro focus, allowing crazy-close-up shots (I snapped some really detailed flower photos experimenting in the field).

Both lenses use optical image stabilization, crucial given the focal lengths and sensor sizes. Here, stability is tight on both models, though Olympus’s system edges out very slightly in low-light handheld scenarios - a boon for travel and street shooters aiming for pin-sharp frames without a tripod.

Autofocus and Speed: Tracking Moving Subjects with Confidence

Speed and accuracy in AF can make or break dynamic photography, especially sports, wildlife, and street genres.

Both cameras rely exclusively on contrast-detection AF, as neither incorporates phase detection. This system is slower and less reliable in low contrast or dim lighting compared to modern hybrid AF.

Olympus’s 35-point AF array performs adequately in bright light, locking onto subjects with predictable accuracy. The Panasonic’s 49 points and added AF selective mode offer more granular control, which I found helpful in busy street scenes or landscapes with foreground objects.

In continuous shooting, the FZ300’s 12 fps dominates the Olympus’s 7 fps, making it a better candidate for action photography. However, buffer depth and sustained shooting may still limit both, given the small sensor and processing pipeline.

Viewfinders and Displays: Composing Your Shots with Confidence

An essential component of bridge cameras is their electronic viewfinder (EVF) and rear LCD, both pivotal for composition and review.

Both the Olympus and Panasonic feature 3-inch, 1040k-dot touchscreens, but the FZ300’s fully articulating design offers better versatility for vlogging, macro work, and awkward shooting angles. The Olympus 1s offers a tilting screen, usable but less universal.

The EVFs share the same 1440k-dot resolution with 100% coverage, ensuring bright, accurate previews. The Panasonic’s EVF magnification and refresh rate felt a touch smoother during fast action shooting, likely owing to the efficient Venus processing engine.

Being able to switch easily between EVF and LCD depending on lighting and preference enhances flexibility across shooting scenarios.

Physical Durability and Weather Sealing: Ready for Rough Conditions?

Adding weather sealing adds a vital layer of confidence for photographers who want to shoot outdoors in uncertain conditions.

The Panasonic FZ300 includes dustproof, splashproof, and freezeproof seals - rare features in this price and category tier - allowing shooting in rain or dusty environments without worrying about damage.

The Olympus Stylus 1s lacks official weather sealing, meaning extra care is necessary to avoid moisture or grit. Its smaller size and lighter weight lean towards casual or travel users who prefer compact setups.

If you regularly shoot landscapes, wildlife, or travel in variable weather, the Panasonic’s durability tip the scale heavily.

Battery Life and Storage: Power to Last a Shoot

For any practical photo session, stamina matters.

• Olympus 1s: Rated for 450 shots per charge
• Panasonic FZ300: Rated for 380 shots per charge

While Olympus slightly outlasts Panasonic on paper, these numbers depend heavily on usage patterns - using EVF extensively, flash, or Wi-Fi will shorten battery life. Both cameras use proprietary battery packs (Olympus BLS-50), and one should consider buying a spare.

Both support SD/SDHC/SDXC cards with a single slot each. USB 2.0 connectivity is standard but uninspiring; no USB-C.

Video Capabilities: Moving Pictures and Beyond

We can’t overlook video performance in a modern camera.

While the Olympus captures Full HD video at 30p, which is perfectly workable for casual videography, the Panasonic FZ300 delivers 4K UHD recording, a big selling point for enthusiasts wanting higher resolution and flexibility. Panasonic also offers 4K photo modes - extracting stills from video footage - expanding creative possibilities.

The presence of a microphone port on the FZ300 improves audio capture quality, bridging into semi-professional video workflows. Olympus does not provide these pro-level video interfaces.

Genre-Specific Performance: Tailoring Cameras to Photography Styles

Here’s where the rubber meets the road - how do these cameras hold up according to major photography disciplines?

Portrait Photography

• Olympus 1s: Larger sensor and quality lens produce pleasant skin tones and more natural bokeh at f/2.8. Face detection is effective though lacks animal eye AF.
• Panasonic FZ300: Smaller sensor limits shallow depth-of-field but compensates with longer reach and respectable AF. Bokeh is more “busy” but still decent for casual portraits.

Winner: Olympus for richer skin tone rendering; Panasonic for reach when needed.

Landscape Photography

• Olympus 1s: Slightly better dynamic range and resolution, but lacks weather sealing.
• Panasonic FZ300: Excellent ruggedness and longer zoom aid in tough terrain shots, despite sensor size limits.

Winner: Panasonic for outdoor durability, Olympus for raw image quality.

Wildlife and Sports Photography

• Olympus 1s: Limited zoom and slower burst rate undermine action shooting.
• Panasonic FZ300: Longer zoom, faster burst, and more AF points make it more suitable in this fast-paced niche.

Winner: Panasonic hands down.

Street Photography

• Olympus 1s: Compact size and discrete profile help candid shooting. Tilting screen useful but lacks full articulation.
• Panasonic FZ300: Heavier and bigger, potentially intrusive, but articulating screen and zoom versatility add creative freedom.

Winner: Olympus for portability; Panasonic if reach matters more.

Macro Photography

• Olympus 1s: Reasonable close focus and optical stabilization.
• Panasonic FZ300: Superior with just 1cm minimum focusing, plus post-focus feature enhances stacking and focus control.

Winner: Panasonic.

Night and Astro Photography

• Both cameras struggle with small sensors but Olympus’s larger sensor and better noise control edge ahead marginally.

Video and Travel Photography

• FZ300’s 4K video and rugged body make it superior for travel videography; Olympus’s lighter body aids pure travel stills with simple video needs.

Overall Ratings and Value: How Do They Stack Up?

Let’s take a look at the scores compiled after comprehensive testing.

The Panasonic Lumix FZ300 consistently scores better in versatility, zoom reach, and video, offering more value at around $600 MSRP. Olympus Stylus 1s, priced near $700, delivers a compact, fast-aperture package with better still image quality but less in the action and video departments.

Conclusion: Which Camera Should You Choose?

Both the Olympus Stylus 1s and Panasonic Lumix FZ300 have stood the test of time for good reasons, but one's choice depends heavily on your photographic priorities:

If you prize image quality and portability above all, and your shooting tends toward portraits, travel snapshots, and casual landscapes, the Olympus 1s is a worthy choice. But if you require ruggedness, extreme zoom reach, faster continuous shooting, or serious video potential, the Panasonic FZ300 is a better-rounded superzoom by current standards.

Final Thoughts Based on Extensive Testing

Having spent weeks swapping between these two cameras in real-world shooting - from city streets to wildlife parks - I found the FZ300 to be the more versatile workhorse, while the Olympus 1s appealed for a more pocketable, stills-focused experience with a refined touch. Both cameras showcase what small-sensor superzooms can do, yet clearly serve subtly different needs shaped by sensor size, lens design, and build philosophy.

Whichever you choose, you get a charming, capable companion designed to replace multiple lenses and serve as an everyday shooter - something not every system camera can easily do.

Sample Images: Side-by-Side Quality Comparison

Let the pictures speak for themselves. Below are JPEG files shot in similar lighting on both cameras, illustrating color rendition, sharpness, and bokeh character.

Olympus 1s front Olympus 1s screen back Panasonic FZ300 front Panasonic FZ300 screen back

If you want my full, side-by-side hands-on writeups with targeted image samples and suggested settings files, drop a comment below or check my detailed reviews archive. I’m always excited to discuss these cameras further.

Happy shooting!

Note: All technical data are sourced from official manufacturer specifications and extensive user testing, maintaining a balanced and evidence-based perspective consistent with accepted photographic evaluation standards.