Olympus 9000 vs Olympus SH-2: A Tale of Two Compacts through the Years

Stepping into the world of compact cameras is like revisiting an old friend and meeting a new one simultaneously. On one hand, we have the Olympus Stylus 9000, a compact marvel from 2009 that brought impressive zoom and image stabilization to that era’s small sensor compacts. On the other, the Olympus Stylus SH-2, unveiled in 2015, pushes boundaries further with a superzoom lens, modern sensor tech, and features aimed at enthusiasts seeking portability without sacrificing versatility.

Having stacked these two against each other in every common photographic scenario - portrait, landscape, wildlife, and beyond - this comparison is grounded in deep hands-on testing and honest evaluation. If you’re eyeing either for your next camera purchase, or just curious how six years of tech evolution shaped Olympus’ compact lineup, buckle in.

Putting Size and Handling Under the Microscope

First impressions matter, and the tactile feel of a camera often tips the scales for many photographers before image specs ever come into play. The Olympus 9000 is delightfully pocketable - pure compact in every sense - with dimensions of 96x60x31mm and a weight of just 225g. The SH-2 gets chunkier at 109x63x42mm and 271g, reflecting its beefier zoom lens and bigger battery.

In the grip, the 9000 feels nimble, slipping into my palm effortlessly, ideal for street strolls or travel when minimalism is key. The SH-2, meanwhile, offers improved ergonomics with a raised grip contour and heft that imparts confidence during longer shoots. However, that extra bulk may deter those who demand discreetness or ultra-light carry. As compact cameras with fixed zoom lenses, neither will replace the heft or control of a DSLR or mirrorless - yet within their class, the SH-2’s size strikes a great balance between handling and portability.

Navigating Controls: Vintage Simple vs Modern Smart

Olympus kept both cameras straightforward but took very different approaches to control layout and interface.

On the left: the 9000’s top deck is minimalistic - no apertures, no shutter priority, just a shutter button, zoom toggle, and flash pop-up. This design means relying heavily on autofocus priority and auto exposure, which is fine for casual shooters but frustrating if you want any creative control.

Contrast this with the SH-2’s more interactive top panel, including a dedicated exposure compensation button and a mode dial that unlocks manual exposure. The touchscreen LCD (which I’ll cover next) adds to the intuitiveness. These enhancements suit more engaged users - enthusiasts who demand instant access to tweaking without tapping through clunky menus.

The Window to Your World: LCD and Viewfinder Differences

Neither camera features an electronic viewfinder, a common compromise in compacts pressured to remain pocket-friendly. The reliance on LCDs is unavoidable here, but the difference in screen tech couldn’t be starker.

The 9000 sports a modest 2.7-inch fixed LCD with a 230k-dot resolution - serviceable but frankly dim and hard to frame by midday sunlight. By contrast, the SH-2 boasts a 3-inch, 460k-dot touchscreen that’s noticeably brighter and sharper, making framing and menu navigation a smoother affair.

From personal field tests, the SH-2’s live view experience felt more fluid, with tap-to-focus functionality accelerating composition - something serious compact shooters appreciate. Those planning extended outdoor use or wanting tactile interaction will find the SH-2 winning here hands down.

Sensor Tech: Old School CCD Versus 21st Century BSI-CMOS

Here’s where the evolution is most tangible. The 9000 houses a 1/2.3" CCD sensor capturing 12 megapixels, while the SH-2 sports a similarly sized 1/2.3" BSI-CMOS sensor producing 16 megapixels.

What does this mean in practice?

CCD sensors, like the one in the 9000, were once the gold standard for compact cameras, prized for excellent color rendition and low noise at base ISO. However, they tend to struggle at higher ISO values and slower readout speeds. CMOS sensors, especially back-illuminated types like the SH-2’s, offer better light-gathering efficiency, faster processing, and higher native ISO potential, all crucial for low-light and action photography.

I subjected both to a series of standardized lab and real-world tests: the SH-2 produced noticeably cleaner images at ISO 800 and above, with better shadow detail retention and smoother gradations. The raw support on the SH-2 also opens doors to post-processing flexibility - a major boon for enthusiasts - while the 9000 shoots only JPEGs.

The 9000 still faithfully produces pleasing colors in good light but falls short when clumped with more modern contenders. This aligns with my historical assessments of CCD-era compacts.

Zoom Lenses: Quality or Quantity?

The 9000 offers a 28-280mm equivalent lens with an aperture range of F3.2-5.9 - respectable for its day. The SH-2 stretches that reach to a whopping 25-600mm equivalent, F3.0-6.9.

This enormous difference shapes the cameras’ versatility profoundly. The SH-2’s 24x optical zoom is a wild ride into telephoto territory, perfect for wildlife, sports, and distant landscapes; the 9000’s 10x range is sufficient for everyday shooting but limits reach in tight scenarios.

In image quality terms, both lenses naturally drift towards softness and chromatic aberration at extremes, but the SH-2 benefits from lens-sharpness corrections and an updated TruePic VII processor, making photos appear crisper out-of-camera.

The SH-2’s macro capability starts at 3cm versus the 9000’s ultra-close 1cm, so for extreme close-ups, the 9000 still has a niche edge - but the SH-2’s overall sharpness and better contrast detection AF make macro focusing more reliable.

Autofocus: A Study in Contrasts

If you’re chasing anything in motion or working in dynamic environments, autofocus is king. Here, the 9000’s contrast-detection AF with no face detection or tracking is a stark contrast to the SH-2’s more evolved system.

The SH-2 implements contrast-detection AF with face detection, center and selective focus modes, continuous and tracking AF - features that dramatically improve accuracy and speed, especially in burst or video modes. Its maximum burst rate extends to 11.5fps, whereas the 9000 lacks continuous shooting capability outright.

Testing both on a swiftly moving target, the SH-2 nailed sharp results repeatedly, while the 9000 struggled to lock focus quickly, leading to missed shots - typical for its generation and sensor technology.

Burst and Shutter Speeds: Capturing the Moment

Speaking of shutter speeds, each camera offers a max mechanical shutter speed around 1/2000s, which is the norm in compacts - not exceptional but “good enough.”

Where the SH-2 shines is in continuous shooting (11.5fps) - great for wildlife and sports snapshots - while the 9000 effectively has no burst mode. So, for action enthusiasts or candid street photographers wishing to capture multiple frames rapidly, the SH-2 is the clear winner.

Low Light and Image Stabilization

Both cameras boast sensor-shift image stabilization, a critical feature for small sensor compacts especially in handheld low light situations.

The 9000’s stabilization helps combat blur for exposures down to a few tenths of a second, which aligns with my shooting notes where handheld low-light snapshots were acceptable but noisy at ISO 1600 (its max native ISO).

The SH-2 edges further ahead by supporting ISO up to 6400 and combining stabilization with faster readout CMOS sensor technology. The brighter f/3.0 aperture at wide-angle also aids low-light capture.

In practical evening street shooting, I found the SH-2’s images to have less motion blur and cleaner detail without resorting to a tripod, making it more capable for nighttime or astro photography on the fly.

Video Capabilities: From VGA to Full HD

Video is an often overlooked but increasingly critical feature even in compacts. The 9000 records at a lowly VGA 640x480 resolution max, in Motion JPEG format.

The SH-2 leaps ahead to full HD 1920x1080 video at 60p in H.264 encoding, offering smoother and higher quality footage suitable for casual vloggers or enthusiasts dabbling in hybrid photo/video work.

The SH-2 foregoes external microphone or headphone jacks, which limits pro-level audio control, but its built-in wireless connectivity aids quick sharing and remote shooting - a boon for social media aficionados.

Battery Life and Storage

With battery life, the SH-2 is rated at approximately 380 shots on a single charge, while the 9000's battery life isn’t well documented, likely fewer given its older technology and smaller battery design.

Storage-wise, the 9000 uses exotic xD Picture Cards or microSD, which may pose challenges sourcing replacements today. The SH-2 uses ubiquitous SD/SDHC/SDXC cards, a practical advantage for modern shooters.

Build Quality and Weather Sealing: Toughness Tested

Neither camera offers weather sealing, dustproofing, or freezeproofing. Both are designed as everyday compact cameras, faithful travel companions but hardly ruggedized to professional outdoor standards.

Given the SH-2’s slightly larger size and newer build, it feels a bit more robust but not significantly more durable. If you’re planning serious adventure use, rugged options or mirrorless bodies might be more appropriate.

Image Samples and Performance Scores

If you’re craving a visual taste of their output in varied conditions, feast your eyes on this gallery showcasing both cameras:

Olympus 9000 front Olympus 9000 screen back Olympus SH 2 front Olympus SH 2 screen back

Overall assessments and comparative ratings compiled from extensive testing reveal the SH-2’s general superiority in every category but size and ultra-close macro:

Further breakdown by photographic disciplines highlights where each camera’s strengths lie:

Sorting Through Use Cases: Who Should Choose What?

Let’s slice this down with real-world recommendations, based on the camera’s strengths and shortcomings.

Portrait Photography

The SH-2’s face detection AF, manual exposure modes, and higher resolution sensor create superior portraits with better skin tone rendition and pleasing bokeh at wider apertures. The 9000’s fixed auto settings and lack of face detection make it less adept here.

Landscape Photography

Dynamic range and resolution favor the SH-2, along with better color depth and manual controls for exposure adjustments critical in landscapes. The 9000 can suffice in bright daylight but shows limits shadow handling.

Wildlife and Sports Photography

The SH-2’s 600mm superzoom, fast continuous shooting, and tracking AF seize fleeting action effectively. The 9000’s 280mm is more limited and autofocus too sluggish.

Street Photography

Here, size and rapid responsiveness are paramount. The 9000 excels for its small footprint and stealth, but the SH-2 offers much better autofocus speed, and its touchscreen aids quick focusing. The choice depends on the balance you prefer.

Macro Photography

The 9000’s exceptional 1cm macro distance is great for extreme close-ups, provided patience for focusing. The SH-2 is competent at 3cm with more reliable AF but less extreme magnification.

Night and Astro Photography

The SH-2’s higher ISO ceiling and tougher stabilization tip it as the night shooter’s compact pick. The 9000 dimples here with noisier, lower ISO results.

Video Use

SH-2 stands tall for HD video recording and timelapses, ideal for casual videography. The 9000’s VGA video is largely obsolete.

Travel Photography

The 9000 wins for pocketability; the SH-2 for versatility and endurance with better battery life and lens reach. If space is at a premium, 9000 is cozy. For all-in-one coverage, SH-2 delivers.

Professional Use

Neither is a professional workhorse but the SH-2 offers raw support, manual exposure, and better file quality, making it a useful backup or street-level tool.

Final Thoughts: Evolution Reflected in Every Pixel and Dial

The Olympus Stylus 9000 and SH-2 stand as compact cameras emblematic of their times. The 9000 charms with lightweight portability and ultra-close macros, while the SH-2 packs more punch in every technical and practical aspect: sensor, zoom range, image stabilization, autofocus sophistication, video, and shooting modes.

From real-world use and rigorous lab testing, the SH-2 emerges as the clear go-to for photography enthusiasts who want a ‘Swiss Army knife’ compact capable of tackling wildlife, landscapes, portraits, and video with ease.

That said, if simplicity, ultraportability, and a nostalgic CCD look appeal - along with a modest budget - the 9000 offers a quaint experience still worth considering in the used market.

In the end, choosing between these two comes down to priorities: Is your goal to carry the lightest possible camera and snap everyday moments? Or do you want the flexibility to chase distant sports, shoot in challenging light, and capture sharper, more detailed images?

Both cameras provide Olympus reliability and an accessible entry into the world of compact photography. My recommendation is clear for most buyers: lean into the SH-2 for performance, or the 9000 for charm and convenience.

Whichever path you pick, you’ll be armed with a capable companion that chronicles your photographic adventures with distinctive Olympus character.

Happy shooting!