Olympus TG-4 vs. Olympus XZ-2 iHS: A Deep Dive Into Two Unique Compact Cameras

When Olympus releases a compact camera, it often carries the promise of specialized features wrapped in thoughtful design. The Olympus Tough TG-4 and Olympus XZ-2 iHS, though sharing the same brand lineage, come from very different creative philosophies and target users. Choosing between them can be challenging unless you fully understand how each performs in real-world photography scenarios.

Having tested thousands of cameras over the last 15 years, I’m here to guide you through a comprehensive comparison celebrating their unique strengths, limitations, and who they truly suit best.

A Tale of Two Olympuses: Introduction and Context

Before we plunge into the intricate details, let's set the stage:

• Olympus TG-4: Launched in 2015, the TG-4 is a rugged waterproof compact camera designed to brave harsh environments, making it ideal for adventure enthusiasts who want to capture moments underwater or in challenging conditions without lugging heavy gear.

• Olympus XZ-2 iHS: Released in late 2012, the XZ-2 iHS targets enthusiasts looking for a small sensor compact with manual controls, faster lenses, and image quality closer to premium compact cameras. It caters to those who want creative flexibility and sharper images without swapping lenses.

Both cameras feature fixed lenses with modest zoom ranges but differ significantly in sensor size, ergonomics, and feature sets, which influences their performance across photography disciplines.

Let’s dive deeper, starting with how these cameras feel and fit in your hands.

Handling and Ergonomics: How They Feel in the Real World

Physical size and ergonomics comparison between the Olympus TG-4 (left) and XZ-2 iHS (right).

When I first picked up the TG-4 and XZ-2 side-by-side, the differences in bulk and build were immediately apparent. The TG-4 is compact and blocky, measuring 112 x 66 x 31 mm and weighing just 247 grams. It’s designed to be rugged yet unobtrusive – the kind of camera you'd want clipped to your gear on a dive or trekking expedition.

The XZ-2 iHS is slightly wider and taller at 113 x 65 x 48 mm and noticeably heavier at 346 grams, reflecting its premium small-sensor compact ambitions. It feels more substantial, with a clamshell grip that lends stability for manual focusing and handling its wider aperture lens.

The TG-4 offers a fixed, non-articulating 3-inch screen, which while bright and clear, lacks the tilting flexibility of the XZ-2's 3-inch touchscreen. I often missed that tilt when shooting low or high angles with the TG-4.

More tactile control lies in the XZ-2 iHS, which features dedicated dials for manual exposure, aperture, and shutter priority modes. The TG-4, in contrast, leans on a simplified interface with aperture priority only and no manual shutter priority, reflecting its appeal to users prioritizing ease of use over granular control.

This brings us to the top-side controls…

Top view design and control layout comparison.

The XZ-2 iHS sports a traditional mode dial and multiple function buttons enabling faster access to settings - a nod to enthusiasts who love to tweak on the fly. The TG-4 keeps it simple, with fewer physical controls so you can focus on shooting - even underwater or gloved hands won’t struggle.

Both lack dedicated viewfinders, although the XZ-2 had an optional electronic viewfinder accessory for critical framing, while the TG-4 forgoes this altogether, relying on its LCD and rugged simplicity.

The Heart of It: Sensor and Image Quality

Sensor specifications and image quality discussion.

Image quality is paramount, and here the differences start to show on paper and in practice.

• TG-4 Sensor: 1/2.3" BSI-CMOS, 16MP resolution - a common sensor size for rugged compacts, offering modest image quality in good light but struggling beyond ISO 800.

• XZ-2 iHS Sensor: Larger 1/1.7" CMOS sensor at 12MP - physically about 50% larger in area than the TG-4’s sensor, contributing to better noise performance and dynamic range despite the slightly lower resolution.

A larger sensor generally means better handling of low light, smoother gradients, and higher detail retention – something I observed firsthand during side-by-side landscape and indoor shoots.

DxOMark scores (though their testing doesn’t cover the TG-4) give the XZ-2 an overall 49 points, highlighting its superior color depth and dynamic range compared to typical compact sensors. In contrast, the TG-4 sits closer to run-of-the-mill waterproof compacts in this area but shines through its ruggedness.

The TG-4 features an anti-aliasing filter which helps reduce moiré, but the XZ-2’s comparatively cleaner sensor allows for sharper, more detailed images, especially when coupled with its brighter lens.

Screens and Viewfinding: Interactive Feedback

LCD screen and interface comparison.

Screen real estate and usability can make or break the shooting experience.

• The TG-4’s 3-inch, 460k-dot fixed screen is plenty bright, even outdoors, and easy to see underwater or in bright sunlight, essential for action or dive photography.

• The XZ-2 iHS’s 3-inch, 920k-dot tilting touchscreen offers enhanced detail and flexibility in composing tricky shots. The touch interface adds intuitive focus point selection, something missing on the TG-4.

Neither has built-in electronic viewfinders, although the XZ-2 supports an optional EVF accessory (not included), eventually lending it more precise framing utility for professionals.

Autofocus and Shooting Speed: Keeping Up With the Moment

The autofocus performance is quite polarizing between these two.

• The TG-4 uses a 25-point contrast-detection AF system with face detection and tracking capabilities, and offers continuous AF - essential under unpredictable outdoor shooting conditions. It also supports focus bracketing and stacking, boosting macro and close-up photography capabilities.

• The XZ-2 iHS features 35 AF points (contrast detection only), with face detection and tracking but lacks continuous AF for video or fast action. It’s built more around deliberate, manual shooting rather than rapid capture.

Continuous shooting with the TG-4 clocks in at 5 fps, impressive for a compact of this class and useful in wildlife or casual action photography. The XZ-2 doesn’t advertise a burst mode, and in my experience defaults to slower continuous shooting, reinforcing its niche as a thoughtful, controlled shooter.

Build Quality and Weather Sealing: Ready for Anything?

Here’s where the TG-4 dramatically differentiates itself.

• The TG-4 is waterproof to 15m (50 feet), freezeproof down to –10°C, dustproof, shockproof from drops up to 2.1m (7 feet), and crushproof up to 100kgf. It’s a camera built to survive abuse and still come out producing images.

• The XZ-2 iHS, by contrast, offers no weather sealing or ruggedization. It is a stylish compact, better suited to street, travel, and controlled environments where you can baby your gear.

For the serious outdoors photographer or anyone capturing images in tough environments, this difference will be a clincher.

Lens and Aperture: The Optics Behind the Images

Both cameras use fixed lenses with 4x optical zoom ranges, but their character differs markedly.

• The TG-4 lens covers 25-100mm equivalent, with a bright f/2.0 aperture at the wide end closing to f/4.9 at full telephoto. It’s well suited for underwater and macro, capable of focusing as close as 1 cm - ideal for close-up nature or insect shots.

• The XZ-2 iHS features a 28-112mm equivalent lens with an impressively bright f/1.8-2.5 aperture, allowing more light in and shallower depth of field effects - a boon for portraits and low-light shooting. Its macro focus range also starts at 1 cm.

In practical terms, the XZ-2’s faster lens creates softer backgrounds and cleaner bokeh, elevating portrait and street photography where subject isolation matters. The TG-4’s lens is optimized more for versatility and rugged use than artistic blur.

Portrait and Bokeh Performance: Making Your Subjects Pop

For portrait enthusiasts, lens aperture and autofocus face detection really matter.

Both cameras support face detection AF, but:

• The XZ-2 iHS excels here thanks to its brighter f/1.8-2.5 lens enabling better subject-background separation, richer skin tone rendering due to the larger sensor, and higher image quality.

• The TG-4 can produce decent portraits but its smaller sensor and narrower aperture limit shallow depth of field effects and bokeh smoothness. It’s more about candid shots in adventurous contexts than studio-grade portraits.

If you crave creamy bokeh or to make your subjects ‘pop’, the XZ-2’s optical characteristics are a strong advantage.

Landscape and Travel Photography: Capturing the Great Outdoors

Landscape shooters demand good resolution, dynamic range, and sometimes weather tolerance.

• The XZ-2 iHS with a 1/1.7” sensor and 12MP resolution offers richer tonal gradation, extended dynamic range (DxO’s sensor DR rated at 11.3), and the tilting screen aids composing creative compositions in tricky light.

• The TG-4’s 16MP is higher resolution but from a smaller sensor, producing noisier images especially in shadows or low light. However, its waterproof, dustproof, and shockproof casing allows you to get shots where others dare not - on wet hikes, snowfields, or below water surfaces.

For urban or park travel, the XZ-2 is arguably more versatile in artistic image quality. But toss the TG-4 in your adventure pack if you want a camera that won’t break when you fall in a stream or face a sandstorm.

Wildlife and Sports: Autofocus, Speed, and Reach

Wildlife and sports photography demand fast, accurate autofocus and high shooting rates.

• The TG-4 shines due to its 5 fps continuous shooting and 25 AF points with tracking, suitable for capturing fast-moving subjects like birds or kids racing around.

• The XZ-2 iHS lacks rapid burst capability and continuous AF, making it less suitable for fast action. Its longer zoom (28-112mm) extends reach modestly but can’t match interchangeable-lens cameras for serious wildlife.

Neither is a dedicated sports shooter, but if you want a rugged, pocketable camera that can handle some outdoor action shots, the TG-4 is the better fit.

Macro and Close-Up: Tiny Worlds Explored

Both cameras impress with 1 cm macro focusing, yet their approaches differ.

• The TG-4 doubles down on macro with focus bracketing and stacking support, letting you create sharp images with extended depth of field - a big plus for nature macro photography.

• The XZ-2 iHS has a fast lens aiding low-light macro shots but lacks focus bracketing and stacking, meaning you rely on shallow DOF or stopping down aperture for depth.

For bug shooters and close-up enthusiasts, the TG-4’s macro suites and stacking are major bonuses.

Night and Astro Photography: Low-Light Capabilities Examined

Shooting stars or nightscapes tests sensor and ISO performance.

• The XZ-2 iHS, with a larger sensor and max ISO boosted to 12,800, provides cleaner images at higher sensitivities and more dynamic range to retain night detail.

• The TG-4 max ISO clocks at 6,400 and shows noticeable noise past ISO 800. However, its bright f/2.0 aperture lens and sensor-shift stabilization help in handheld night shots.

If you focus heavily on night or astro photography with a compact, the XZ-2 is a more capable partner, though both cameras have limitations compared to mirrorless or DSLR counterparts in this niche.

Video Features and Recording Quality

Both cameras offer Full HD video at 30 fps, but…

• The XZ-2 iHS records MPEG-4 and H.264 formats, includes a microphone input for external audio, and slightly wider aperture helps low-light video.

• The TG-4 records H.264 and Motion JPEG but lacks microphone input or 4K capabilities.

Neither camera specializes in video. If you shoot occasional Full HD clips, the XZ-2 has the edge given external microphone support, but don’t expect professional-level video.

Battery Life and Storage

• The TG-4 uses a LI-92B battery providing about 380 shots per charge, slightly better than the XZ-2’s Li-90B at around 340 shots.

• Both support SD/SDHC/SDXC cards in a single slot.

In travel conditions, the TG-4's longer battery life and rugged body mean fewer worries about recharging or environmental hazards.

Connectivity and Extras

The TG-4 comes with built-in GPS and wireless connectivity for geotagging and remote operation, fitting for explorers.

The XZ-2 relies on Eye-Fi card compatibility for wireless transfer, a less integrated solution.

Neither has Bluetooth or NFC, consistent with their release periods.

Summary of Strengths and Weaknesses

Olympus TG 4 front Olympus TG 4 screen back Olympus XZ 2 iHS front Olympus XZ 2 iHS screen back

What These Cameras Mean Across Photography Styles

Here’s a distilled guide based on real testing and experience - how they stack up for key photographic genres:

• Portraits: XZ-2 iHS takes the lead with better lens speed and sensor size for skin tones and bokeh.
• Landscape: XZ-2 for dynamic range and detail; TG-4 if ruggedness outweighs pure image quality.
• Wildlife: TG-4 for autofocus speed and burst, though both are limited as telephoto options.
• Sports: TG-4 again better due to faster shooting and AF tracking.
• Street: XZ-2’s discreet control and image quality suit urban shooters; TG-4 can be bulky.
• Macro: TG-4’s focus stacking and bracketing is unmatched.
• Night/Astro: XZ-2’s cleaner high ISO performance prevails.
• Video: XZ-2 wins with mic input and better format options.
• Travel: Balanced; TG-4’s ruggedness vs XZ-2’s image quality.
• Professional Use: XZ-2’s manual controls and RAW support appeal more, though neither replaces dedicated pro bodies.

Final Verdict and Recommendations

Choosing between the Olympus TG-4 and Olympus XZ-2 iHS boils down to your shooting environment and priorities:

• Choose the Olympus TG-4 if…
  You’re an outdoor explorer, diver, or field photographer needing a compact, rugged camera that can endure punishment and environmental extremes while delivering decent image quality and good autofocus speed. The TG-4 is a fantastic “take anywhere” camera for adventure seekers and macro lovers who also appreciate focus stacking.

• Choose the Olympus XZ-2 iHS if…
  You want a compact camera that offers a brighter lens, better sensor image quality, and manual exposure control for creative expression. It excels in portraits, landscapes, and street photography where image quality and control trump ruggedness. It’s ideal if you mostly shoot in stable environments and want video capabilities with external audio support.

Final Thoughts

Having closely tested both, I can say Olympus crafted two distinctly focused tools: the TG-4 rides the rugged wave, perfect for scrappy environments and macro detail; the XZ-2 iHS seduces image purists with its brighter lens, manual controls, and richer sensor.

If you value rock-solid durability and macro precision on the go, the TG-4 is hard to beat at its price. But if you need better image fidelity, slower aperture, and manual control in a still fairly compact form, the XZ-2 delivers a satisfying blend of quality and usability.

Hope this detailed comparison helps you zero in on the right Olympus to capture your next adventure or artistic endeavor. Happy shooting!

If you want to explore my full hands-on video reviews and sample galleries for both cameras, just let me know - I love sharing the nitty-gritty from real-world testing!