The new Olympus SH-1 compact delivers style and performance for under $400

48 Comments

1. Any idea of the expected shipping date ?

2. Tilt screen would have made it a home run.

   That’s one thing the compact 1/2.3″ megazooms are missing (canon, nikon, olympus, pentax, sony).

   • Oly managed to put a F2.8 constant 1/1.7″ 28-300 in a small body (Stylus 1)
     I fully expect Oly to put a F2.8 constant 1/2.3″ 24-600 in a small body as SH1 next year.
     Add a tilt screen & fastest AF it woul be game, set, match in compact superzoom.

3. I ll buy this one even only jpeg
   its good enough for my need
   I know it will print beautifully up to 10 R

   after years of GAS
   and now fully going analog

   i reach the conclusion that gear is matter .. but your vision and skill is matter more

   Sincerely
   William Jusuf

4. “There is room in this world for many different types of photographers, but not a lot of room for photographers with a huge superiority complex.”

   Not so sure about that, Jayne. I hardly think there are borders or constraints. Who polices them? I’m about as far from a camera club type person as here to Alpha Centauri but I’ve seen one or two who definitely are the world’s greatest photographers and they’re thoroughly enjoying their status. You know, win competitions (“Patterns”, or “Character Portrait”, or “Bonny and Clyde”) and even get lovely trophies made of particle board and gilded plastic. Eventually they become “judges” and start awarding “acceptances” and then letters with lots of A’s and P’s – AAPIAAAP, PAAAPPA, AAPPAAPPAA, AAAAGH..

   Not sure what’s next, ascension perhaps.

   • James, I’m sure you’ll agree that in this world, there’s room for many types. Period. There must be, because they’re there, and there’s still some empty places left in the world. Not sure about less room for big egos either. My ego is pretty big and Holland is a small country, but I’m still here.

     I can’t see the “review” side of this post, but it’s a nice looking camera that will surely find some buyers. Doesn’t have a viewfinder? Doesn’t seem to bother a lot of people.

     • A viewfinder is essential in sunny climes; I’m sure more cameras without finders are sold in higher latitudes. Of course shooting during the very sunny hours is not a great idea, but sometimes..

       ( I hope I haven’t offended too many camera club types; are clubs still popular, I wonder.
       Wandering around with twenty others all in the same area does not seem like a lot a fun, but perhaps it’s the apre shoot that’s better.)

       I had you living in DK – my post some days ago is slightly wasted then. 🙂

5. Goodness there are some emotionally charged comments above! It seems to me that this may just be the camera you may choose to give to your Godchild on their 18th or 21st, or even to your own youngsters so you can keep your own kit by your side! Feel that some people have taken this review a little too seriously. There is room in this world for many different types of photographers, but not a lot of room for photographers with a huge superiority complex.

   • ROFL Jayne….. talk about a slap around the face with a big wet fish to bring us back to earth!!! 😉

     • Just looked up the abbreviation. I do hope I have not offended you ….. it was just how it stuck me! Please accept my apologies.

       • Offend me??? Never….. You’re ok by me…. we’re all grownups here 🙂

6. Looks interesting, but I’ll stick with my Sony RX100M2.

7. Unfortunately, Olympus and some other camera brands are dead. They will cease to exist in a few years. 90% of all photographs taken are done with a cell phone. It’s sad, but true. All cameras released over the past years, and in the near future, will be perceived as old school pretty soon.

   • Another doom and gloom prediction – these predictions have been going on for the past 5 years and Olympus just sells more and more bodies. The MASSES have been using cel phones for YEARS but cameras like the E-M1, E-P5, etc are aimed at ENTHUSIASTS, and there are TONS of us. Enthusiasts will NEVER settle for a phone as their #1 camera – so there will always be new tech and new cameras made. There will be a huge decrease in the P&S segment, then the DSLR segment but there will always be something for us to use and enjoy, just as there is still film and film cameras made today.

8. A review of the latest Tough series Olympus camera would be cool. A change of pace but I always wondered how decent those little go anywhere cameras are.

   Best regards
   Huss

   • Huss-that Dp Rvw site has done a couple of those kinds of reports and generally concluded that the “tough” cameras, as a group, have interesting features, but as a group have pretty sucky IQ compared to other small sensor cameras. So, unless you really need the ruggedness/waterproofness, just about anything else in the same price range gives better results.

9. Pretty camera! Looks more premium than it seems to strive for. I wish it had a larger sensor and 10x zoom instead. But hey, there is the Stylus for that.

10. This would be a ‘I’ll buy it and see if I like it” camera for sure, except no EVF. Deal killer for me. Ticks all the other boxes, too, for a go-anywhere, load to FB, quick video (especially with the IBIS), but no finder means no buy.

    • +1

11. Yet another high-end compact. Too bad Nikon, Sony, Panasonic, Fuji, Canon, etc. don’t make high-end compacts.

    • “The compact camera is dead. Long live the smartphone.” 😉

      This may be the last serious compact camera Olympus designs.

      • I expect that there are few models coming after this in couple years if smartphones don’t start implementing a cameras like this to their body (a la Smartcamera from Samsung).

12. So grateful for this advertorial…

    • Yep, this article is fishy. Steve, are you on the Olympus payroll?

      • It is a press release with pre-typed info on the camera. Why would I be on the payroll because I post a press release AND state that it is a big bang for the buck (which it is). It is a compact camera, much like an advanced P&S. The audience for this is the P&S crowd. Silly accusation and silly remark.

        • It’s not a silly accusation- it’s a legitimate question. The Olympus text is given the title “Info”, and is only referred to as a press release now in the comments section in response to the “silly accusation”.

          • It’s called an “advertorial” (funny word really), and it usually has the caption “Advertorial”. 😉

        • Steve, Why are you posting a press release for a camera that you are not going to review?

          • Who said I was not going to review it? I did not say that. Why do you care if I post a press release? I post press releases for anything that looks like a good value or camera and have been doing so for years.

          • Thanks for this, I am waiting to read a review of this camera because the information of this camera brought an idea to suggest this camera to people who want better than their Nokia Lumia can produce but still want some fancy features (that 11.5FPS is dreamy for many dancers) in compact package. That IBIS in the body again is something what….

            So again, I know I can wait Steve to mention in the future this camera in one way or a another so I have demand to come more often to this site and talk about this camera too.

13. Three things: 1 – What is the aperture of the lens? 2 – Is there full manual control in video mode? 3 – Will there be a hack that allows RAW shooting?

14. Bigger news is the firmware release version 1.3 that eliminates shutter shock in the OMD-EM1

    If only Sony would do the same for their A7r

    Best regards
    Huss

15. Nice Camera, except for the lens and the sensor.

16. Small olympus (and other) sensors just can’t measure up to m4/3 or aps-c. I tried the Stylus 1 and was really disappointed in the image quality.

17. Why would anyone make a camera in this day and age that does not shoot *.RAW format?

    • Because there are actually people out there who are not into photography but just want to take photos to post on social media? Just a hunch.

    • Because they are going to try to get the consumer to believe that RAW is no longer needed as they believe that their JPEG engines are good enough. I am under the impression that another well regarded company will be doing the same to all but their “professional” cameras….. This move in itself tells us that RAW is still a feature which is needed as JPEG alone may may not be good enough for all situations. However, this fact is not known by the majority…. nor is RAW understood by the majority. These companies are only risking loosing a small percentage of customers by not including RAW as an option. Talk to the majority and they will tell you that that they would never use RAW as it involves extra work processing the files, and that they are happy with whatever results they get from their camera without using RAW. And looking at it from another perspective. ….. it may also boost sales of their “professional” range of cameras from those who require RAW as an option. Smart move by the camera companies??? In a way yes… but those who do not have the budget for a “pro” camera miss out. Does providing RAW as an option cost the camera manufacturers any more??? You wouldn’t think so, but providing the software for the conversion may cost them a little extra. Imagine the savings from this fact alone….. Think money, and you begin to understand why this is happening. a

      • This is a cheap camera aimed at the masses, the P&S crowd who never shoot raw and most do not even know what RAW is. This is a $399 camera, not a $1500 camera.

        • Have you heard what a certain company is planning on doing to their range of cameras?? Anything that is not a true pro camera is loosing its RAW ability….. but once the word gets out and everyone has their say about it, they may change their mind.
          But with this Olympus….. Why not include RAW?? People start out with these type of cameras…. this is how they begin to learn the different aspects of photography. Others may choose to go with an DSLR, but not everyone.
          But it hasn’t got it, so don’t get it if you want RAW.
          And Steve… I believe I have made a few valid points in regards to the question on why RAW was not included regardless of the price of the camera. Quite frankly, it doesn’t matter if it was included. … it’s what the camera does that matters….. at this price anyway…
          But…. great site.. great reviews… I enjoy your enthusiasm and passion for photography and the tools used.l

          • “…what a certain company is planning…”

            Is the company’s name a secret?

          • It was announced march 31st via that FroKnows guy who received the information from Nikon…. If it was April 1st then we all know it would most likely be just a joke, but apparently the D610 and everything below will no longer be capable of producing RAW files….. How true this is, is anyone’s guess, but if it is true, then Nikon may be making a bad decision….
            And I came about this information because I am on his emailing list…. quite easy to find via Facebook or his website to check it out for yourself if you would like. But jusy because this guy has apparently received information directly from Nikon does not instantly make it true…… but thinking about it from an economic point of view, it does make sense as they would save a fortune on CD’s for the software for Nikon’s RAW converter….. which most are never needed.
            Just a hunch…. but this information may be somewhat correct.
            your feelings on this Robert ??? am I just crying wolf, or is there some degree of truth to this…. rumor???

          • March 31st–the eve of April Fool’s Day? Makes you wonder.

        • Steve: Why does this need explaining? Should you say something about why it’s not full frame too? Oh, and maybe why it’s not a constant aperture f1.4 zoom, or why the zoom range doesn’t start at 14 mm (equivalent)? Oh, it doesn’t make you a martini at 6 pm either. Pretty damn fine, in your pocket, better than your phone, lighter than your m4/3s outfit, small sensor camera with meaningful bigger sensor camera technology. I mean, why confuse things by actually looking at the core value of the camera? 🙂

          • Steve explains because he is too tactful to say, DUH. (-:

          • Hi John.
            Yeah…. The April Fools thing did occur to me, but then with the very first remark on this post, plus the Nikon thing, I put two and two together….. it probably adds up to 17 somehow, but it did get me wondering….
            I totally agree with your above comment, but I would prefere it to brew coffee rather than mix martinis. After considering how much difference having the raw option on my 4mp tiny sensor Canon G2 made (which was bugger all), I then remembered where I learnt the advantages of using raw. No, it wasn’t a cheap camera, but I’m sure the above Olympus would run rings around it.
            As I would not even consider the above camera, I re ally don’t care what specifications it has, but it might matter to someone. And if every camera manufacturer decided to take this approach, which Nikon have apparently indicated (which may also be a A/F joke applied a day early), then a 10 year old Billy who gets such a camera, who also reads dad’s old camera magazines will not get the opportunity to experiment with raw files.
            As for consideration towards adults into photography…….. if ya want raw, get a top end camera that can do it as, like me, you wouldn’t even be considering this one.

    • A RAW file off a sensor this tiny with a 25-600 zoom lens range is pointless.

    • Why not? I dropped RAW usage from 100% to 10% of my shots since starting shoot with OM-D E-M1. The JPEG what E-M1 produces are perfect and only limiting factor now is me. When there comes a scene I know I want to manipulate, I press Fn1 button and camera shoots RAW+JPG.

      RAW in todays cameras with wide exposure range and great color storing like E-M1 has is more about wasting storage space. I can understand that Canon and Nikon shooters needs to stick in RAW to get good results from their shots (unless using something like D800 with its exposure range, but still).

      People are too attached to idea “I need to shoot RAW to get high quality!”. That was true 3 years ago! Things has changed a lot in time like when OM-D line was presented!

      I want to shoot more and less sit front of the computer. I want to get the as finalized shot with the camera, than thinking I can fix it in post process.

      If I am shooting in studio, I don’t even want to do anything else than crop if it is possible. As that is one of the my main rules I follow, leave space for reframing. Otherway I spend extra minute or two to thinking when building the set and then extra seconds to guide models or get a point of view.

      Photographers who swears in name of RAW, I don’t anymore believe that they know what they are talking about.

      Disclaimer: I have shot maybe a over million shot together in RAW on various cameras from main camera manufacturers. And that was one of the main fears I needed to leave behind with E-M1, that I am perfectly fine with a JPEG only. Even a lens hood gives higher benefits than shooting in RAW formats.

      • Thanks for your perspective on this jpeg/ raw issue Mr Fri13…. Interesting conclusion you have come to using the EM1. All the more reason to take the jump to Olympus 😉

Comments are closed.