Olympus SH-3 vs Panasonic FH3: Compact Camera Showdown for the Practical Photographer

Choosing a compact camera can feel a bit like trying to find a needle in a haystack, especially when models come from distinguished brands like Olympus and Panasonic. Today, I dive into a thorough comparison between the Olympus Stylus SH-3 (2016) and the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FH3 (2010). Both belong to the small sensor compact category but with very different chops inside. After spending hours testing each, from city streets to backyard wildlife and low-light scenarios, I’ll share insights that only solid hands-on experience can reveal.

Let’s unravel how these two compact shooters stack up mechanically, optically, and practically. Buckle in for a deep dive - your next travel buddy or casual shoot companion might just be here.

The Tale of Two Bodies: Size, Build, and Feel

First impressions matter. How these cameras fit in your hand, slip into a pocket, or operate under pressure can dictate how often you actually use them.

Looking at their physical data:

• Olympus SH-3: 109 × 63 × 42 mm, 271 g weight
• Panasonic FH3: 98 × 55 × 24 mm, 165 g weight

The Panasonic FH3 is noticeably slimmer and lighter, a true pocket rocket if you want minimalism. The Olympus, while more substantial, offers a firmer grip thanks to its thicker, boxier design. This extra heft translates to more stable shooting, especially when zooming into telephoto extremes.

Ergonomics extend beyond just size; button placement and control comprehension are key. Peeking at the top controls shows the Olympus comes with a logical layout targeting enthusiasts: a mode dial, dedicated video record button, and physical zoom rocker that feels clicky and precise. The Panasonic’s design favors simplicity - fewer buttons, no mode dial, but that makes quick adjustments a bit more laborious.

While the FH3’s ultra-portability is a tempting win for street photography or casual use, if you prefer a more assured grip and faster access to manual exposure tweaks, the SH-3’s design resonates more with committed shooters.

Sensor and Image Quality: More Than Megapixels

Both shooters rely on 1/2.3-inch sensors, quite small compared to APS-C or Micro Four Thirds, but that’s typical in superzoom/compact categories. The Olympus packs a 16MP BSI-CMOS sensor, whereas the Panasonic has a 14MP CCD sensor. That’s a generation gap right there.

The Olympus’s back-illuminated CMOS sensor is a newer tech offering better light gathering and cleaner images, especially in low light. In everyday testing, the SH-3 produces images with less noise and greater dynamic range than the older CCD in the FH3. This advantage is noticeable beyond the specs:

• Dynamic range: Shadows hold more detail on SH-3 shots, critical for landscape photographers battling harsh lighting.
• Color depth: The Olympus renders richer, more natural colors. The Panasonic’s output tends to be a bit muted in comparison.
• High ISO performance: The SH-3’s clean images up to ISO 1600 make night and indoor shooting feasible.

While neither is going to rival high-end cameras, the Olympus clearly outpaces the FH3 on image quality due to its sensor technology, even if the resolution difference isn’t huge. Pair that with its RAW support (absent in the Panasonic), and the SH-3 is a better candidate if you enjoy post-processing.

Zoom and Lens Versatility: Stretching Your View

A key distinction here is in the zoom range. The Olympus SH-3 sports a monster 25-600 mm equivalent (24x zoom) lens, while the Panasonic FH3 settles for 28-140 mm (5x zoom).

This dramatic difference is crucial. Test shooting shows:

• The Olympus’s extensive reach brings wildlife and sports photographers closer to action without lugging big glass.
• The tradeoff: the SH-3’s longer telephoto lens has a slower maximum aperture (F3.0-6.9), affecting performance in low light at the long end.
• The Panasonic’s lens opens a bit wider at wide end (F2.8) and is sharper at shorter focal lengths, but the short zoom limits versatility.

The SH-3 offers more creative latitude, from wide landscapes to detailed telephoto snaps, while the FH3 stays in a more modest zoom territory. Couple this with the Olympus’s inclusion of sensor-shift image stabilization that’s effective throughout the zoom range, and you have a camera better equipped to reduce camera shake under challenging conditions.

Autofocus and Speed: Catching the Decisive Moment

In practical shooting, autofocus (AF) and burst speeds reveal how these cameras behave with moving subjects or tricky lighting.

• Olympus SH-3: Contrast-detection autofocus with face detection, touch AF, continuous AF, and AF tracking. Continuous shooting up to 11.5 fps.
• Panasonic FH3: Contrast-detection only, no face detection, no continuous AF, continuous shooting max 6 fps.

My shooting sessions found the SH-3’s autofocus significantly faster and more reliable, locking focus in most of the situations without hunting excessively. Face detection improves portrait and street photography by keeping human subjects sharp.

The Panasonic’s AF came across as sluggish, sometimes missing focus, especially in lower light. While 6 fps burst might seem adequate, lack of continuous AF during bursts hampers success with fast-moving subjects. The SH-3’s 11.5 fps with continuous AF gives it an edge for sports and wildlife snapshots.

Display and Interface: Seeing Your Shot

Both cameras rely on fixed LCD screens with no electronic viewfinder (EVF), which is typical for this category.

• SH-3 has a 3-inch touchscreen with 460k dots; the Panasonic FH3 has a 2.7-inch non-touchscreen with 230k dots.
• The Olympus’s touchscreen adds responsive touch AF, quick menu navigation, and easier manual focus adjustments.
• The Panasonic’s screen is dimmer and less detailed, harder to review images outdoors.

In direct sun or complex lighting, the brighter, larger, and touch-enabled screen on the SH-3 proved a major usability plus. For photographers who adjust settings often or hunt focus points, this makes a real difference.

Practical Shooting Disciplines: How They Perform in the Field

Let’s break down their aptitude across popular photography genres.

Portrait Photography

• SH-3: Works well with its eye and face detection AF, smoother skin tones, pleasing bokeh at wider focal lengths, though the small sensor limits ultimate background blur. Exposure is consistent, and the macro focus down to 3 cm helps detail eyes and expressions.
• FH3: Lacks face detection, struggles with accurate exposure in mixed lighting, and produces flatter bokeh due to sensor and lens constraints.

Verdict: SH-3’s autofocus tech and detail resolution give it a clear advantage for portraits.

Landscape Photography

• SH-3: Higher resolution and dynamic range capture more subtle tonal gradations in skies and foliage. Its wide-angle 25mm equivalent lets you fit expansive scenes. Unfortunately, the lack of weather sealing limits rugged use.
• FH3: Wider angle starts at 28mm equivalent and lower resolution lose some fine detail, but the smaller size is handy on light hikes.

Both lack environmental sealing and RAW support on the FH3 hinders post-processing flexibility, so Olympus wins if you prioritize image quality, Panasonic if weight matters.

Wildlife and Sports

• SH-3: Impressive 24x zoom and rapid continuous AF make it surprisingly capable for casual wildlife. Burst speed of 11.5 fps further enables capturing action.
• FH3: Limited zoom and modest 6 fps, no continuous AF; misses fast-moving subjects.

If you occasionally want to shoot animals or sports but don’t want to invest in large lenses, the SH-3 is a better compact compromise.

Street Photography

• FH3: Lightweight, slim profile, and quiet operation make this model less obtrusive for street candid shots. Its slower AF is less ideal when spontaneous moments arise.
• SH-3: Larger footprint and louder zoom can draw attention, but touchscreen AF helps when accuracy counts.

For discreet shooting, the Panasonic is somewhat preferable.

Macro Photography

• SH-3: Focuses down to 3 cm, sharpness is decent due to better stabilization and touch manual focus available.
• FH3: Macro minimum distance is 5 cm, and with less refined AF, capturing razor-sharp detail is trickier.

The Olympus is clearly superior here if you enjoy close-ups of flora and small objects.

Night and Astro Photography

• SH-3: Better ISO performance and a lowest shutter speed up to 30 seconds allow longer exposures and less noise in night scenes.
• FH3: Shutter limited to 60 seconds, higher noise. No RAW support limits editing capacity.

The Olympus offers more practical features for night photographers dabbling in long exposures.

Video Capabilities

• SH-3: Can shoot 4K UHD at 15 fps, Full HD 60p; stabilization and touch focus improve usability.
• FH3: Limited to 720p HD, 30 fps max, no stabilization during video.

If video is a significant factor, SH-3 leads by a mile, even though neither is a dedicated video camera.

Travel Photography

• SH-3: Versatile zoom range, better image quality, longer battery life (380 shots), but heavier and bigger.
• FH3: Small, light, ultra-portable, but limited zoom and image quality.

Travel photographers balancing weight vs. capabilities must weigh their priorities.

Professional Use

Neither camera suits professional workflows with their limited sensor sizes and lack of high-end file formats - though SH-3’s RAW support and manual exposure do give hobbyist pros more creative control. Neither has environmental sealing or robust body durability.

Inner Workings: Build Quality, Battery, and Connectivity

• Build: Both are plastic-bodied compacts with no weather sealing or ruggedization, so treat with care.
• Battery: SH-3 uses a rechargeable Lithium-Ion pack with about 380 shots per charge - solid for a compact zoom. Panasonic battery life data is sparse but likely less.
• Storage: Both accept SD, SDHC, SDXC cards, with single card slot.
• Connectivity: Olympus has built-in Wi-Fi (no Bluetooth or NFC), HDMI output, and USB 2.0. Panasonic has no wireless; USB 2.0 but lacks HDMI.

The SH-3’s connectivity suite and stronger battery life are nice conveniences.

Price and Value: What Does Your Investment Buy?

• Olympus SH-3: Around $579 (new or recent used market)
• Panasonic FH3: Roughly $160

That’s a substantial price gap, reflecting the Olympus’s advanced features and sensor tech versus Panasonic’s budget status.

Olympus SH 3 front Olympus SH 3 screen back Panasonic FH3 screen back

Looking at real-world image samples, the SH-3’s photos are noticeably sharper with more vibrant, accurate colors and less noise - especially as light recedes or zoom extends.

Overall Performance Ratings

An expert evaluation necessitates rating core components:

Genre-Specific Ratings: Which Camera Shines Where?

• Portrait: SH-3 strong, FH3 weak
• Landscape: SH-3 better detail and dynamic range
• Wildlife & Sports: SH-3 much stronger due to zoom and AF
• Street: FH3 favored for portability
• Macro: SH-3 clear advantage
• Night/Astro: SH-3 better ISO and shutter control
• Video: SH-3 capable, FH3 minimal
• Travel: Both viable depending on priority
• Professional: Neither is ideal but SH-3 offers more control

Final Thoughts: Which to Choose and Why?

If you want superzoom versatility, better overall image quality, more advanced autofocus, and video options, the Olympus SH-3 is the clear choice. Its compromises - size, weight, and price - come with genuine performance gains, especially for enthusiasts who want a capable “do-it-all” compact.

Conversely, if budget and ultra-portability take priority, and your photography is casual with straightforward subjects, the Panasonic FH3 delivers decent snapshots in a small, lightweight body - just don’t expect speed, high image quality, or flexibility.

My Recommendation in a Nutshell

• For the serious enthusiast or travel photographer who wants one camera to cover everything from wildlife zooms to portraits - the Olympus SH-3 is worth the investment.
• For beginners, casual shooters, or those needing a super light, simple point-and-shoot - the Panasonic FH3 remains a valid choice on a tight budget.

Neither replaces a dedicated DSLR or mirrorless system, but each fills different niches in the compact zoom category. Just remember, choosing a camera is about how it fits your style - so handle both if you can, then go shoot.

I hope this detailed comparison helps you take confident steps toward your next camera purchase. If you want to see live shooting tests or sample file downloads, drop me a message - I enjoy sharing my field-tested insights. Until then, happy shooting!

end