Olympus XZ-1 vs Panasonic FH22

A Tale of Two Compacts: Olympus XZ-1 Versus Panasonic Lumix FH22
Which Small Sensor Camera Suits Your Photography Style?

Choosing between compact cameras can feel like navigating a maze - especially when models like the Olympus XZ-1 and Panasonic Lumix FH22 each promise to deliver impressive photo quality and handy features wrapped into pocket-sized bodies. Having spent years assessing cameras across genres and budgets, I’m here to walk you through a detailed comparison, not just specs sheets, but real-world performance for photographers who want to get the most bang for their buck.

We’ll explore how these two contenders stack up across disciplines like portrait, landscape, wildlife, and even video, paying close attention to sensor tech, ergonomics, autofocus, and more. Along the way, I’ll share insights gleaned from hands-on experience and controlled testing that shine light on what these cameras truly offer. Grab your favorite brew - with nearly 2500 words ahead, there’s plenty to cover.

Let’s start where every camera story begins... with the body and design.

Getting a Feel: Size, Build, and Handling

First impressions count, and when you hold both cameras, the Olympus XZ-1 feels more substantial without being bulky. It measures 111x65x42 mm and tips the scales at 275 grams, whereas the Panasonic FH22 is more of a featherweight at 100x57x27 mm and just 170 grams. If you’re travelling light or prefer discretion, the Panasonic’s slim profile makes for easy pocket portability. But that extra heft on the XZ-1 translates to a more confident grip and sturdier feel in hand.

Looking closely, the Olympus has a robust metal body and a pleasing matte finish that resists fingerprints - important if you're shooting outdoors. The Panasonic, mostly plastic, is pleasantly sleek but less substantial overall. Neither camera offers environmental sealing, so rain or dust is off-limits in either case.

The Olympus layout puts a pricier, photographer-friendly spin on the experience, with nicely spaced buttons and an aperture ring on the lens for manual control. The Panasonic keeps it simple, catering more to the casual snapper with minimal physical controls.

On top, the Olympus XZ-1 adds a clearly labelled mode dial and a customizable function button, whereas the FH22 has just the basics - mostly general automatic modes and scene presets.

For me, the ergonomics feel like the XZ-1 invites you to take creative control. That said, if your priority is pocketability and fast snap shooting, the FH22 could win you over by sheer convenience.

Sensor Size and Image Quality - The Heart of the Matter

Image quality begins and ends with the sensor, and these two cameras tell very different stories here. The Olympus XZ-1 boasts a 1/1.63” CCD sensor measuring 8.07x5.56 mm, giving a sensor area of roughly 44.87 mm². The Panasonic FH22 uses a smaller 1/2.3” CCD sensor, 6.08x4.56 mm, which is about 27.72 mm². That’s roughly 60% the size of Olympus’s sensor, which translates directly to better light gathering and improved dynamic range at base ISO for the XZ-1.

In resolution terms, the FH22 claims more pixels with 14 megapixels versus Olympus’s 10 MP, but pixel count here is a bit of a red herring. More megapixels crammed into a smaller sensor often mean smaller photosites and, consequently, higher noise, especially in low light.

DXOMark data backs this up: The Olympus scores 34 overall, with color depth at 18.8 bits and dynamic range shining at 10.4 EV. The Panasonic hasn’t been officially tested on DXO, but sensor size and type suggest lower performance in these categories.

In practical terms, the Olympus XZ-1’s sensor provides richer color gradations and better tonal separation in shadows and highlights. Landscape photographers, in particular, will appreciate this advantage when capturing scenes with complex light, such as dawn or dusk.

The Lens: Brightness, Zoom Range, and Macro Capabilities

There’s more to lenses than just focal length. Olympus equips the XZ-1 with a sharp, fast 4x zoom lens covering 28–112 mm (35mm equivalent) with an exceptionally bright aperture range of f/1.8 to f/2.5. This kind of aperture on a compact camera is a standout, enabling better results in low light and smooth, creamy bokeh effects - important for portraits or artistic close-ups.

On the other hand, the Panasonic FH22 features an 8x zoom lens spanning 28–224 mm, which doubles the telephoto reach of the Olympus lens but with much slower apertures of f/3.3 to f/5.9. That slower maximum aperture makes creating background blur and shooting in dim conditions more challenging without bumping ISO.

For macro enthusiasts, the Olympus allows a minimum focusing distance of just 1 cm, exceptional for capturing extreme close-ups of textures or small insects. The Panasonic’s macro limit is roughly 5 cm - still respectable, but less flexible for detailed macro work.

This difference tips the scales depending on your shooting preferences. If you want a versatile telephoto reach for casual zoom shots, the Panasonic FH22’s lens might appeal. For creative control and low-light prowess, the Olympus XZ-1 shines brighter.

Viewing and Composing - Screens and Viewfinders

Both cameras rely heavily on their rear LCD screens for composition. The Olympus XZ-1 comes with a 3-inch OLED fixed screen boasting 614k dots. It’s crisp with vibrant colors and excellent contrast, making it easier to assess focus and exposure in daylight.

In contrast, the Panasonic FH22 sports a 3-inch LCD, but with just 230k dots resolution and no OLED tech. Colors appear washed out under bright outdoor light, making composition and reviewing shots a bit more challenging.

Neither camera includes an integrated electronic viewfinder (EVF), though Olympus offered an optional accessory EVF for the XZ-1 that plugs into the hot shoe. If you often shoot in bright environments, having a viewfinder can help stability and framing.

User interfaces differ as well. The FH22 includes a touchscreen interface, which is somewhat unusual for cameras in this category and era. It can aid rapid focus point selection and menu navigation but lacks tactile buttons that some prefer for confident, eyes-on-the-scene operation.

The Olympus favors physical controls over touchscreen input, catering to those who want direct feedback with knobs and dials.

Autofocus Systems - Speed, Accuracy, and Tracking

Autofocus performance is often where you notice a camera’s latency and hunting in the field. The Olympus XZ-1 employs 11 contrast-detection AF points and includes face detection, a notable plus in 2011. It also supports AF tracking, albeit relatively basic by modern standards.

The Panasonic FH22 is more minimal with just 9 contrast-detect AF points and no face detection or tracking features. It does, however, support touchscreen AF selection, which can speed up focusing on select subjects.

In practice, the Olympus autofocus gives more consistent, reliable results, particularly in portrait and candid shooting situations where eye detection and face recognition really help nail sharp focus on eyes.

Neither camera supports phase-detection AF, continuous autofocus during video, or advanced subject recognition, but given their vintage, this is expected.

Burst Shooting and Shutter Speeds

If you shoot fast action, burst rate and shutter range impact your experience. The Panasonic FH22 can capture up to 5 frames per second in continuous shooting mode, which outpaces the Olympus XZ-1’s modest 2 fps.

That said, shutter speed ranges tell a different story. The Olympus offers a 60-second long exposure to 1/2000 sec maximum shutter speed, versus the Panasonic’s range of 60 seconds to 1/1600 sec.

The longer shutter speed on Olympus is helpful for night or astro shooters wanting to capture star trails without external triggers. Faster maximum shutter speeds help freeze fast-moving action more cleanly.

Image Stabilization - Sensor-Shift vs. Optical

Both cameras incorporate image stabilization, although they use different methods. The Olympus XZ-1 features sensor-shift stabilization, moving the CCD sensor to compensate for camera shake, which generally provides effective correction across focal lengths and is beneficial for low-light hand-held shots.

The Panasonic FH22 relies on optical image stabilization, built within the lens assembly, tuned for telephoto reach.

In my testing, the Olympus sensor-shift delivers slightly steadier results on wide-angle and macro shots, while Panasonic’s optical stabilization shows its strengths when zoomed in at maximum focal lengths during daylight.

Video Capabilities - HD, Formats, and Usability

Video on both cameras is fairly basic by today’s standards (and even for their release period). Both support 720p HD recording at 30 fps in Motion JPEG format - uncompressed, heavy on storage.

No 1080p or 4K support here, and no external microphone inputs or headphone jacks. Neither includes advanced video features such as slow-motion modes or zebra patterns for exposure aid.

The Olympus XZ-1 offers a simple video interface with manual exposure control during recording, which enthusiasts will appreciate. The Panasonic video mode is more consumer-oriented, with limited control but touchscreen focus.

If video quality is a priority beyond casual clips, neither camera competes with modern mirrorless or dedicated camcorders - but for quick HD recordings, either does the job.

Battery Life and Storage - How Long and How Much?

Battery endurance favors the Olympus XZ-1 here, rated at approximately 320 shots per charge with its proprietary Li-50B battery. In contrast, Panasonic’s FH22 details are sparse, and real-world tests suggest shorter life, which can be a concern on extended trips.

Both cameras accept SD, SDHC, and SDXC memory cards, with just a single slot each. The Panasonic adds internal storage, but it's quite limited, best kept as a small fallback.

USB 2.0 ports are available on both for transfers, but no Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, or GPS - common omissions on compacts of that generation, limiting connectivity.

Real-World Photography Applications: Where Each Camera Excels

Portraits:
The Olympus XZ-1 is the clear victor. Its fast f/1.8 lens and face detection provide creamy backgrounds and accurate skin tones. Eye-catching sharpness matched with subtle bokeh makes portraits come alive. Panasonic’s slower lens hampers low-light portraits and bokeh quality.

Landscapes:
Here, the Olympus sensor size and dynamic range shine, capturing wider tonal range and detail in shadows and highlights. The wider lens aperture helps in darker situations (morning/evening shoots). Meanwhile, Panasonic’s advantage is the longer zoom to isolate distant landscape features, but at a cost to image quality fidelity.

Wildlife:
The Panasonic FH22’s 8x zoom reaches 224mm equivalent, valuable for distant subjects, plus a faster burst rate (5 fps). But the smaller sensor restricts detail and low-light capability. The Olympus’s faster lens can help in dim forest or dawn settings, but limited zoom is a constraint.

Sports:
Fast action benefits from burst rate and autofocus. Panasonic’s 5 fps edge and longer focal length favor quick, distant subjects, but Olympus’s less impressive 2 fps and shorter zoom limit sports photography. However, better autofocus tracking on the Olympus is a point in its favor for achieving better sharpness on moving subjects nearer to you.

Street Photography:
I prefer the Panasonic FH22 here for its smaller size, lower weight, and discreet styling. Fast reaction with touchscreen focus points can help candid shooting. Olympus’s larger size and bulk make it more conspicuous, though better image quality is an allure.

Macro:
Olympus’s remarkably close 1 cm macro focusing beat Panasonic’s 5 cm minimum distance hands down. This, combined with the bright f/1.8 aperture and sensor-shift stabilization, makes the XZ-1 a great choice for detail-driven macro work.

Night & Astrophotography:
Long exposure up to 60 seconds on Olympus adds creative flexibility. The larger sensor and lower noise also tip the scales toward the XZ-1 for astrophotographers or night shooters. Panasonic’s smaller sensor and shorter shutterspeed range place it at a disadvantage.

Video:
Both are basic, but Olympus's manual exposure controls mean it edges out Panasonic when you want some creative control. Neither cameras provide audio jacks or high-resolution output.

Travel:
If you want the lightest, smallest companion to slip into your pocket, the Panasonic FH22 wins. But if image quality and artistic versatility are priorities on your trip, Olympus XZ-1’s bigger sensor and brighter lens are worth the slightly larger footprint.

Professional Use:
Neither camera is ideally suited for professional workflows due to limited RAW/no Raw support (Panasonic), modest sensors, and lack of robust build. Olympus’s RAW support makes it more suitable for post-processing, but both cameras are best as enthusiast-level second bodies or lightweight alternatives.

Summarizing Performance Scores & Genre Strengths

Below I’ve gathered overall performance ratings and genre-specific scores to distill these insights visually:

You’ll notice Olympus XZ-1 consistently outperforms on image quality dependent genres like portrait and landscape, while Panasonic FH22 scores higher on portability and zoom flexibility. Sports and wildlife are a mixed bag due to burst and zoom trade-offs.

Which One Is Right for You? My Personal Recommendations

• If you prize image quality above all and have an interest in portraits, macro, or low light: The Olympus XZ-1 is the better tool. Its sensor size, lens brightness, and robust ergonomics create a more satisfying photographic experience, despite the higher price (approx. $567).

• If you want maximum zoom, faster continuous shooting, a lighter camera for casual use, and a budget under $200: The Panasonic FH22 is an excellent choice. Its longer zoom and lightweight design wins for travel, street, and sports snapshots, though at the expense of image quality and creative controls.

• For hybrid users who want pride of ownership with manual controls and faster lens but still maintain some ease of use: Olympus XZ-1’s physical dials and stabilizer make it a small powerhouse, accepting a learning curve for returns.

• For beginners or those on a tight budget looking to upgrade from smartphone photography: The Panasonic FH22 delivers decent results with simple automation and technology like touch AF for ease of shooting.

Final Thoughts: Practical Wisdom from Years Behind the Lens

Compact cameras like these remind us that the smallest sensor doesn’t always equal a worse photo - context is everything. What really matters is how a camera’s components collaborate to serve your unique style, environment, and workflow.

The Olympus XZ-1 feels like a camera made with the serious enthusiast in mind, providing tactile control, stellar low-light performance, and versatile optics. The Panasonic FH22 is a straightforward, easy-to-carry shooter, better suited to casual photography or as a lightweight backup.

As with any camera, testing them yourself is invaluable - carry them, try autofocus speeds, snap some shots in conditions you’ll likely encounter. Pay attention to ergonomics and interface style since these impact creative enjoyment.

Photography gear is a long term investment; I’ve found it pays off to prioritize what moves your creative needle, not just the spec sheet.

Bonus: Gallery for Visual Context

Look at some sample shots from both cameras under identical conditions to get a tangible sense of image quality differences:

Olympus XZ 1 front Olympus XZ 1 screen back Panasonic FH22 front Panasonic FH22 screen back

Notice the color fidelity, noise levels, and sharpness that set the Olympus apart, though the Panasonic still surprises with respectable detail in daylight.

Thank you for joining me on this deep dive into two intriguing compact cameras. I hope this comparison arms you with insights and confidence for your next purchase. Whatever you choose, here’s to captivating images and joyful shooting journeys ahead!