Olympus Stylus Verve: Fashion vs Performance
by Stephen Caston on November 4, 2004 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- Digital Camera
Final Words
Olympus gives new meaning to the word "fashionable" with the Stylus Verve. It is sleek, stylish, and comes in a variety of colors. Although it is a point-and-shoot camera by definition, it also offers extra features such as special image effects and unlimited video recording. The body is water-resistant and ergonomically designed for easy handling and portability. However, in our camera reviews, we place a strong emphasis on performance. Unfortunately for the Stylus Verve, it is not going to turn too many heads with its performance results.For the most part, the Verve showed an average performance on almost every test. The image quality had the potential to be really great. Color reproduction and saturation are good and JPEG compression is applied sparingly. The resolution performance is comparable to other 4 megapixel ultra-compact cameras. Additionally, the camera showed pretty decent noise control. Unfortunately, the images suffer from too much in-camera sharpening. This results in jaggies along edges and sharp lines. It is unfortunate that the Stylus Verve does not offer the option to adjust the strength of the sharpening. As for the battery test, we were not entirely surprised to see a somewhat below average performance. To keep the camera as compact as it is, Olympus had to use a smaller and weaker battery.
In our timing tests, the Verve proved to be fairly average overall. However, two particularly slow points were Shot to Shot with Flash and low-light focusing. The low-light focusing problem could have been remedied with the addition of an AF-assist lamp. With a maximum aperture of f/3.5 and a weather-resistant body, Olympus almost certainly intends for this camera to be used primarily outdoors. Considering the 11.5 second flash recycle time, we think that most people will find themselves avoiding low-light photo ops. Overall, this camera is really aimed at the outdoor point-and-shoot user who doesn't plan on making large prints. For this person, the camera does a pretty good job. The question is, "Is it worth the price?" To answer this question, you will have to weigh looks versus performance. For us, the price is a bit too steep for an attractive camera that provides only average performance.
| Pros | Cons |
|
|
Thanks again to Newegg.com for loaning us the Olympus Stylus Verve for review.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
10 Comments
View All Comments
shuttleboi - Thursday, November 4, 2004 - link
When is Anandtech going to review portable storage devices/personal video players?Souka - Thursday, November 4, 2004 - link
grab a Canon S410 for $275 delievered from a variety of online places...jiulemoigt - Thursday, November 4, 2004 - link
you'd think after getting acess to fuji's electronics they'd have really nice optic combined with their really nice lenses... only these look cool but have crappy eletronics and crappy lenses!Foxbat121 - Thursday, November 4, 2004 - link
I bought one for my wife for just $299 (Newegg). It's a nice camera for what it is intended for (point and shoot in a compact design). Overall, it is well worth the money I paid for considering the similar sized cameras are no cheaper either with lower resolution (Canon SD110, 3MP).AtaStrumf - Thursday, November 4, 2004 - link
Looks like a nice little camera. Its a shame its so expensive.stephencaston - Thursday, November 4, 2004 - link
WooDaddy, thanks for the comment. I agree, it is shocking to see such jagged edges in the pictures taken by this camera. As for the details of Olympus's image processing, I'm sorry I can't offer any specifics. Since this is a point and shoot camera, we can only assume that Olympus designed the process this way so that users would not need or want to post-process the images at all. Indeed, if these images are printed at the popular 6x4" format, the problem would be hard to see. And it looks like Olympus knows this.WooDaddy - Thursday, November 4, 2004 - link
Stephen can you comment on this for me?As a previous owner of an olympus camera (back in 1999) it just seems that Olympus doesn't get it when it comes to handle aliasing? Looking at the resolving fine lines page, it looks like their aliasing algorithm or low-pass filter is non-existant. Do you see it too? Suggestions?
WooDaddy - Thursday, November 4, 2004 - link
Good article.I'm glad a review finally came out for this camera... But I'm disappointed that Olympus feels it's worth $399. There are a PLETHORA of other cameras that perform so much better than this one. I agree that the price is too much. Don't be afraid to say that. Hell, I think it's just plain ridiculous. I'm starting to think the limits have been met for the megapixel squeeze; meaning a 4mp sensor in a camera with a tiny/crappy lens just is a waste of money. Especially when the aperture isn't fast nor slow.
Maybe a Foveon sensor in the same package... but nope.
I disagree with #1 though. Viewfinder in compact cameras have always been limiting and inaccurate. I understand the feeling of pressing up a camera against your face just makes you feel good and professional like, but in the digital world where you can take better pictures now, LCD-only is the way to go. Heck I wish I had a big 2.5" screen on mine.
goku21 - Thursday, November 4, 2004 - link
That is one hairy arm =)CasmirRadon - Thursday, November 4, 2004 - link
Very very pretty.You know though, all other negatives aside (did anyone expect it to perform above average?) I got to say that I really don't like the idea of not having a quality viewfinder on these ultracompact cameras. I just plain don't like taking pictures with the LCD screen.