Olympus SP-500 UZ

6.0 megapixels | 2.5" screen | 38 – 380 mm (10×)

User reviews

Average rating: 4.41
5 stars
(11)
4 stars
(12)
3 stars
(1)
2 stars
(0)
1 stars
(0)
Sort by
123
Rcky F
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: Rcky F posted on Jan 15, 2007 UTC

Opinion: Purchased SP 500 to replace C750UZ & C765UZ. My first pics
seemed soft and slightly blurry. But the more pictures I took the better the image quality became. It may not equal the C750 & C765 but I'm very happy with it. If it had image stabilization it would be an excellent camera!

Problems: None

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report
nickb800
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: nickb800 posted on Dec 28, 2006 UTC

Opinion: A fantastic camera, great design. Very comfortable and natural to use. The short lens doesnt get in the way but still makes a comfortable hold on the camera. Perfect weight - not to heavy, but still enough mass to point where you want it.
Great live view - you can see the effect of aperture and shutter speed changes as they happen, great for beginners working out what they really do!
Massive screen (2.5") lets you scrutinise the photos out in the field.
Excellent quality images and easily adjustable images.

After investigating the competition (FujiFilm; Lumix; Sony) producing similar products I chose this model and im very happy with it.
This is an excellent camera dont let my nit-picking below put you off.

Problems: -Auto focus: in very bright or very dark light situations the auto focus has trouble focusing, sometimes it wont at all

-Manual focus: not very intuitive to use - adjusted by cheap buttons, and strangely zooms in to the centre of the subject when focusing. Dont buy if you need to use the manual focus.

-Batteries: runs on four separate AAs - cant use a battery pack - although they do last well. Doesnt come with rechargeables in the box.

-Viewfinder: Rubbish. Very distorted and although well placed, the image quality is poor. Just use the massive screen instead.

-Software: The Olympus album and editing software is rubbish - slow and complicated. I recommend that you use a standard file explorer to move the files and edit them with your usual program. The only reason to install it is for the panorama feature (which isnt that great - again use your usual program). Dont bother to install it at all!

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report
Simon RO
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: Simon RO posted on Nov 20, 2006 UTC

Opinion: This camera was an insurance replacement for my UZ750 which was unfortunately stolen at the Alhambra in Granada. There are pros and cons for the updated model.

The larger viewing screen is a plus, as is the easier switching between screens, and a much quicker start up time.
Genral handling and battery life are good, and though seemingly flimsy, as other reviewers have noted, the body seems robust enough.

I don't mind about lack of image stabilisation, as on other cameras I've seen , this just degrades quality, and with the eyelevel viewfinder I find it is much easier to keep steady at a relatively slow shutter speed

However there are 2 big minuses which make me long for my 750 (I might go on eBay and try and find one again)

Problems: These are firstly - a really terrible little eyelevel viewfinder - no eyesight correction, and nasty distortion. Over about 6 months I have sort of got used to it, but it is much more of strain than the predecessor's , or from what I've seen, rivals like Canon and Panasonic.

Second and most importantly, the lens quality does not match the crystal clarity of the 750. This may have been only 4 megapixel, but the quality was superb, and similar shots taken on the 500 look soft in comparison. To be fair it's not jut the 500. I tried a Canon Powershot S3 and that was no better. In the drive to outdo eachother with ever increasing megapixels, are manufacturers sacrificing good old basic lens quality?

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report
fairy69
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: fairy69 posted on Nov 20, 2006 UTC

Opinion: I had this camera for 6 months, after buying it with high recommendations. I am a
Nikon user (film) and this was my first digital, meant strictly for snapshots/reference
photos. From a point and shoot standard, it was worth the money, however, I, too
had problems with camera shake due to lack of image stabilization even at the
shortest zoom length. It was slow to focus in low light situations, if it focused at all
- there were many missed images due to this problem. Lastly, the flash was more
powerful than it ought to be on auto mode, even at a considerable distance. The
image quality was fine and naturally, there was some noise at the higher ISOs - but
to me that equals film grain and it didn't bother me at all.

On the flip side, the menu was very easy to navigate, as most Olympus digitals are,
and it felt fine in my hands. However, I will be trading it in for something with
image stabilization.

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report
Matt Seinberg
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: Matt Seinberg posted on Sep 6, 2006 UTC

Opinion: I took my new Olympus on vacation, and was very happy with it's performance. I took almost 200 pictures, and had to replace the batteries only once.

The only features that this camera is missing is Image Stabilization and an automatic lens cap. It's a bit of a pain to have to take off and put on this little plastic cap, that sometimes comes off it's string too.

The 10X zoom works well, but without IS, you really need to use a tripod or leverage yourself on a stationary object. The camera resets fast for multiple shots, and the menu is fairly easy to navigate.

Overall, I think the camera is a good value for the money, and I would recommend it.

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report
unsukim
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: unsukim posted on Jul 21, 2006 UTC

Opinion: I've had this cam for seven months now and I think it's the best point and shoot cam you could have. The Pic are great. Easy to use. For a person who just wants a point and shoot, this would be the best and easy to learn. You will get great shots using the presettings that come with the cam. No problems here what so ever.

Problems: None

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report
John Erhardt
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: John Erhardt posted on Jul 2, 2006 UTC

Opinion: I had previously owned a C770UZ and was partial to Olympus and the UZ line of cameras. When my 770 packed it in, I decided to go for the SP500. Based on some reviews that I saw on the web (most negative) I thought with an open mind that I would give this camera a go.

One word sums up my short experience with this camera: disappointed.

Olympus has certainly cheaped out on this camera. The C770 was a solid camera, albiet with 4MP, it had a number of features that were not passed to the SP500 - namely the Hot Shoe and Remote Control (what good id BULB mode without a remote control?). All items that a Pro-Sumer camera of this nature should have. Another thing that didn't transfer over was the large EVF screen - the SP500's EVF is like looking into a tunnel and has no dioptre on it.

Using the same lens configuration from a camera almost 3 years old kind of ticked me off too. It's like Olympus thought we are all stupid and just repacked the C series camera in a fancy black plastic wrap for us to buy again.

Another item lacking is image stabilization - wow, it is more noticable on this camera than it was on the C770; unless you are shooting on an extremely sunny day and your shutter speed is 1/800 or higher, than forget about a steady shot (unless you use a tripod, and who want to lug a tripod everywhere?).

Images aren't too great - I had an SP350 and SP500 at the same time. Sure the 350 is 8MP and the 500 is 6MP, but taking the same shot with the same settings produced such an amazing difference in the image, it was clear that this camera was not up to traditional Olympus calibre. Purple hinting was everywhere when using the zoom. Even in RAW format, the images were a little better but that was because of a fabulous RAW plugin by Adobe. Saving the images is another thing - this camera is SLOW in writing to the xD cards (even with the 'faster' cards). If shooting in RAW, better expect to wait 10 secs before you can take another picture!!

I used this camera for about 3 weeks and decided that if I want a long zoom, the either I will wait for Olympus to introduce image stabilization or purchase a DSLR in the near future.

The 2.5" LCD is an improvement, however the resolution is so low, that reviewing an image may or may not help you in determining if the picture actually turned out or not!

Dissappointed, because I did like the UZ line from Olympus, but they sure need to get with the times for the price this camera is.

Problems: - No remote
- Purple Hinting when zooming
- Small EVF
- No dioptre
- 4 AA batteries make this camera heavy
- Cheap Plastic feel (unlike the C770)

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report
jtdpalm
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: jtdpalm posted on Jun 28, 2006 UTC

Opinion: I must say that this camera surprised me with its image quality and ease of use.

I also have a C-8080 which is an excellent camera for many situations with superb image quality, but the SP-500 fills the gaps at the closest macro ranges and at telephoto shots that the C-8080 cannot do. I also do shots with a Nikon D70 at work now and then and have also tried the Canon 350D with different lenses...

The dSLR:s are faster on focusing than the SP-500 (and C-8080) but it seems it's more like of a hit & miss game with the dSLR:s than with the Olympus digicams.

The 6 MP are enough for clear & crisp shots with very little noise compared to more expensive cameras as eg the noisy 8 MP Canon 350D, and the results are generally great. The SP-500 optics may be softer than top notch lenses, but the SP-500 optics is certainly better than the cheap kit lenses offered by Canon & Nikon regarding sharpness...

It is possible to take good shots at the 10x zoom end too with a steady hand and some support, but quick action shots at 10x is nothing you would use this camera for.

The eyepiece could be much better too, the hole is too small and no diopter adjustment - which is a shame since the EVF display itself is ok, but you can't see it properly. You simply end up using the 2,5" screen instead for most shots. However, that works too.

The use of 4 rechargeable or regular AA batteries is great, since you can always bring cheap extra batteries in case you run out of juice during a hike or such... But battery life is good with this camera so it should be no major problem.

Overall, it is a great camera that produces great pictures for a great price. Will get the TCON-17 tele converter to see how far you can take telephoto with this little beast...

Problems: None so far (2 months)

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report
Kada2110
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: Kada2110 posted on Jun 5, 2006 UTC

Opinion: I had it for a long time, and its ULTRA ZOOM is soooo gooood!!!You never need to buy new objectives.

Problems: I dont like the digital viewfinder...

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report
123