Olympus Stylus Verve: Fashion vs Performance
by Stephen Caston on November 4, 2004 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- Digital Camera
Index
Product Samples provided by Newegg.comThe Olympus Stylus Verve (known as the µ-mini in Europe) is sure to turn a few heads with its strangely-shaped ultra-compact metal body. The camera is weatherproof and available in 6 different colors. It offers a 4 megapixel output with a 2x optical zoom lens. The Stylus Verve is a point-and-shoot camera with 14 preset shooting modes, including the usual Auto, Portrait, and Landscape modes as well as some additional modes like Cuisine, Candle, and Sunset.
In our review, we discovered that although the Stylus Verve gets plenty of attention for its appearance, its performance is not quite as impressive. The camera has decent resolution, color reproduction, and is capable of producing well-balanced exposures. However, the major downfall of the Stylus Verve is the visibility of jaggies in its output images. In regard to speed, the Verve is only mediocre. The startup, shutter lag, and write times are all equal or slightly below average. The camera has a maximum aperture of f/3.5. This means that low-light shooting is very difficult - especially without an AF-assist lamp. Read on for more details of our review of the Stylus Verve.
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.