Olympus SP-560UZ 8MP Digital Camera with Dual Image Stabilized 18x Optical Zoom | 
| Brand: Olympus
List Price: $499.99
Buy New: $349.00
You Save: $150.99 (30%)
New (5) Used (5) Refurbished (4) from $239.00
Rating:  38 reviews
Sales Rank: 12768
Color: Black
Media: Electronics
Autographed: No
Memorabilia: No
System Memory: 0
Floppy Disk Drive: None
Optical Zoom: 18
Digital Zoom: 5
Display Size: 2.5
Maximum Focal Length: 84.24
Minimum Focal Length: 4.68
Maximum Resolution: 8
Has Red Eye Reduction: Yes
Shipping Weight (lbs): 1
Dimensions (in): 5.1 x 7.2 x 7.5
MPN: SP-560 UZ
Model: SP-560 UZ
UPC: 050332161429
EAN: 0050332161429
ASIN: B000UW8CU8
Release Date: October 25, 2007
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
Shipping: Expedited shipping available
Condition: new in factory box with 1 year warranty
| |
| Features:
| • | 8.0-megapixel CCD captures enough detail for photo-quality 16 x 22-inch prints | | • | 18x super telephoto zoom; Dual Image Stabilization | | • | 2.5-inch LCD; Bright Capture technology for low-light photos | | • | High-speed sequential shooting (up to 15fps) and Pre-Capture | | • | Captures images to xD memory card (not included) |
|
| Accessories:
|
| Similar Items:
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
The SP-560 UZ is an elegant, compact digital camera - it's ideal for intermediate and advanced digital photography fans who crave power and versatility. Its superior optics, 18x optical zoom and lightweight, portable design make it the perfect point-and-shoot camera for sports, outdoor and travel photography. The SP-560 UZ's Dual Image Stabilization technology provides an effortless 2-in-1 anti-blur solution for crisp, clear images in any situation. As if all that wasn't enough, the SP-560 UZ also sports the new Face Detection technology, which recognizes and tracks faces within the frame to help you capture sharp, brilliant portrait photos.
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 33 more reviews...
 A fantastic camera better suited to the intermediate to advanced photographer November 3, 2007
tim can (Pocono Mts of PA)
95 out of 96 found this review helpful
First let me share that I purchased this camera because of the recomendation of a local professional protographer and haven't been sorry. The manual controls are excellent and the auto features the most impressive I've seen on cameras running many times its price. For example: face detection and smile detection works well, I love the manually aimed focus on a single user directed point in the viewing field, while remaining in auto focus mode. Through glass mode is of questionable value and works poorly as expected. The true optical zoom outclasses everything else right now although I expect Canon to quickly match or slightly exceed the 18 times zoom.
All this technology comes at a price though and it is not in the price tag you take the hit, but in the fuction. If you are looking for a point and shot camera for quick shots of the family or friends you are barking up the wrong tree! There is a LONG delay for the auto range,focus and other features that make this camera so special to work so stop action - spur of the moment shots are not going to happen in full auto. In manual focus the time from off to open shutter cycle and completed photo is impressively fast, but you have to know how to change from full auto and be competent at range focusing. This is a trade off for the full auto - do everything modes. There are faster stop action modes, but again there is a trade off of time for auto focus, as this setting is about shuitter speed. The the burst quality is quite degraded to the point that a print of any size better than a standard snap shot may be hard.
I am not trying to spoil a great camera for anyone, but this is a camera that by definition and fuction is designed for someone who wants manual modes available to them and plans to use manual modes frequently. It's placement in the point and shoot catagory is unfortunate because for many laymen - it will be frustrating rather than rewarding. If you find a regular point and shot digial technically frustrating and want to take only snap shots, let me say it again, this is not a camera for you - there a number of better choices for less money. Like all optical zoom of any length a tripod is required in spite of image stabalization. Also video mode will work best with an H card rather than just the regular XD
For those of you who seek SLR-type manual controls with great optics and a superb auto mode then this camera is nearly impossible to beat.
Biggest improvement over the Olypmus SP-550UZ is the high spead USB cable. Downloads are lightning fast! Frankly I can't really tell the difference in my type of shooting in the .9 extra megspixal upgrade from the 550
A fantastic camera for under 375 dollars purchased through Amazon - who by the way increases the price of this camera during the daytime hours to over 400 and reduces it at night/early am hours - go figure when you want to buy. - Added on 11/8/07: Now that this is not a brand new, just released camera, the price is coming down. Nevertheless I would check at different times to see if you find a better price here at Amazon. It does continue to change.
 Excellent build, but mediocre picture quality November 17, 2007
Jonathan Birge (Cambridge, MA)
88 out of 96 found this review helpful
I switched to this camera from a Canon A610 that died on me. The first thing I noticed with this camera is that the picture quality on my $200 Canon was better or equal than this $400 camera. The dynamic range is terrible, with skies often washed out to white. Like many "super-zoom" cameras competing on specs, it makes up for noise and dynamic range limitations in its small CCD by over-processing, and the images show signs of heavy noise reduction filtering, washing out details. Granted, this isn't a DSLR, but this isn't a cheap camera, either. It appears that they really pushed the boundaries of the CCD to get 8 MP, and used too small a CCD for this resolution.
One thing I will add, after doing more research, is that this problem appears is common to all recent cameras in this market segment, such as the Canon S5. They are pushing the pixel counts so high, and the zoom ranges so far, that optical quality is suffering as a result. (See http://scripts.mit.edu/~birge/blog/digital-camera-buying-tip-from-an-engineer/ for more explanation of why.)
Another issue I found is that the autofocus algorithm is rather slow, especially at long focal lengths, and it often has difficulty with any scene movement. Worse, it will sometimes tell you it focused successfuly when it didn't. Part of this is the zoom, I'm sure, but my experience in this regard is backed up by some very in-depth reviews on dpreview.com.
I'm sorry to offend the Olympus fans around here, but Olympus engineers can't violate the laws of solid state physics, and smaller pixels means less photoelectron capacity, and that means less dynamic range. Smaller pixels also means less signal to noise, and it shows. The fact of the matter is that they have pushed the pixel count too far for the size of the CCD, and you will get better images from a camera with fewer pixels, ironically. I have nothing against Olympus, or I wouldn't have purchased this. Glowing, breathless reviews by people who are so inexperienced they are amazed at mediocrity aren't useful. I'm not saying don't purchase this camera in particular, as I'm suggesting this class of camera is just not worth the money.
On the bright side, the build quality is supurb. Much better than the Canon S5, which I initially considered. The camera has a nice heft and a very solid feel in the hand. The materials are high quality all over, the one exception being a cheap and annoying rubber cover on the USB port.
Another high point is the zoom and image stabilization. The range is exceptional, and essentially gives you everything from a wide-angle to a medium telephoto. Unfortunately, the cost of this is a lens that does not perform well at the extremes: at wide-angle its highly distorting, and at telephoto lengths there is significant chromatic aberration (color fringing) off center.
In summary, I'd say Olympus followed the crowd (maybe led it) by putting way too much effort into specmanship, and less into making the right engineering decisions. They clearly wanted to have 18x and 8MP printed on the box, and considered image quality a secondary concern. This may be endemic to all the brands of super-zoom cameras, but it doesn't change the fact that you don't get your money's worth where it counts with this camera: image quality. This is a huge shame, because in most every other aspect this is the nicest camera I've ever used.
My advice: if you need the resolution afforded by 8 MP, you need to just suck it up and buy an SLR. Only they have large enough CCDs to handle such resolutions adequately, and this applies to all brands, not just Olympus. Otherwise, just get a 5 MP camera. The images will be just as good, if not better, and you'll save a lot of money.
 Caveat emptor the Olympus 560! December 29, 2007
Abi Gezint
44 out of 47 found this review helpful
This review REPLACES a negative review I'd posted, based upon insufficient knowledge of the camera:
I got up this morning at about 4:00 AM thinking about the disastrous shoot I'd had at a party the other night with my new Olympus SP 560, the camera that was supposed to the the PARTY CAMERA OF MY DREAMS! On at least two occasions, the results were just awful, and I couldn't believe that Olympus had put out such a lousy box. After thinking it over and over I came to this mind-boggling possibility: could it have been (gulp, gasp) ME??? So I got out of bed and proceeded to do a series of low light experimental shots in the house. What I did was to (first) set the camera on spot-metering and then on center-weighted metering and proceed to take a series of side-by-side shots of first ISO AUTO and then the identical shot at HIGH ISO AUTO.
When they say you must get to know this camera, they aren't kidding. For such a little squirt, the SP 560 has a lot of things in it that can not only enhance your picture-taking, but can throw you off as well.
Bottom line: to avoid chaos in trying to take good pictures in low light situations, MAKE SURE that you NEVER use the ESP meter setting! If you have inadvertently chosen this setting, the camera decides that it knows more than you do about what you're trying to focus on and MAKES THE DECISION FOR YOU. If you're trying to focus on one thing and the camera decides to focus on something else, you're going to pull your hair out.
SO -- when you first turn on the camera make this your standard routine: (1) choose your shooting mode (I prefer the P mode for instance), and (2) THEN PRESS THE OK/FUNC BUTTON TO CHECK THE CAMERA'S SETTINGS. This brings up a toolbar along the bottom of the screen, and a stack of settings icons in the lower left-hand margin of the screen. MAKE SURE YOU HAVE THE FOLLOWING SETTINGS (listed from top to bottom) when intending to shoot in low light situations with the camera on auto settings:
WB AUTO
ISO AUTO (or ISO HIGH AUTO)
SINGLE FRAME (a picture of a rectangle)
CENTER-WEIGHTED METERING (a rectangle with a white dot) or SPOT METERING (a rectangle with a black dot).
If you have the metering setting at ESP, CHANGE IT TO ONE OF THE OTHERS, or you'll get a massive headach as well as terminal heartburn trying to get the camera to focus on what YOU want it to. I can't emphasize this enough: the ESP setting is the SETTING FROM HELL, if you don't realize you've chosen it!
The other thing is the AF assist lamp:
In dim light situations, the AF lamp is blind to things with horizontal line patterns, and may hunt and hunt and not focus. TURN THE CAMERA to somewhere between 45 degrees and vertical to remedy this. In this turned position, get the focus locked, then position the camera for the shot and proceed accordingly.
In addition, if you are focusing on something so dark that not enough light is thrown back to the camera, it will not lock. Same thing if you're so far away from the subject that the light is too dim for the focus to lock. So beware of all these things and compensate accordingly.
I put the shots into Adobe Bridge to see what the camera was doing settingwise.
In ISO AUTO, it was choosing no higher than ISO 400. That meant a slow shutter speed. That meant holding my breath with my body locked while bracing the camera against my nose while the camera took the shot with a 1/2-second exposure. In HIGH ISO AUTO, it was choosing no higher than ISO 800. This got me a much better shutter speed (around 1/25-second) and a somewhat brighter picture, that was somewhat more noisy, but still acceptable for a VERY DIMLY-LIT shooting situation. It still means some Photoshop surgery, but not totally useless pictures!
The bottom line: MAKE SURE you don't use that ESP metering setting; it's a disaster -- at least in dim light. Since the camera doesn't go beyond ISO 800 on its own, you probably shouldn't do it on your own either. Those higher settings -- and I once did an entire dim-light shoot on ISO 3200 -- are worse than useless -- your entire effort is trashed.
I now upgrade my camera review from two to four stars. A very good camera IF you know what settings to choose and what settings to avoid. (Why not 5 stars? Because I had to go to so much trouble!)
So Far So Good November 1, 2007
YelleBelle (Stamford, CT)
29 out of 34 found this review helpful
I've only had this camera for a day, but I thought I'd post an early review since there are none up yet. I was reluctant to buy this camera because it is SO new, and I generally prefer to wait for reviews to be in, but the 560 had so many interesting features I decided to give it a try. So far I'm glad I did. I've only been taking trial snapshots around my house to become famliar with the camera, but they're all coming out beautifully; very sharp, rich colors, no visible noise. Even low-light and high-zoom shots have been surprisingly good. The pre-programmed settings and other features (of which there are many, you should check the porfessional reviews to see them all) are really useful and I think some of them are unique to this camera right now.
The design is great if you don't mind pushing buttons often. I looked at other cameras that had easier access to different settings, but were crowded with buttons. The 560 has much fewer buttons cluttering its surface, but that means more button pushing to get things done. I'd rather do that than have all that clutter on the body, but others might not. It's also small, lightweight and fits nicely in my hands.
I don't really know yet if this deserves 5 stars, so I might revise this after I've had some time to take pictures outdoors and generally use it more. As of now I'm very satisfied all around. I bought it from a reputable online store with good independent reviews for about $380.
Disappointed December 3, 2007
Keyser Soze (Birmingham, Alabama)
10 out of 14 found this review helpful
I have been eagerly awaiting the release of this camera and purchased one as soon as I could. Disappointed! The professional reviews I read were on-target, however, my experience with the auto-focus and color electronic viewfinder (EVF) were not up to what I was expecting. I currently have a Sony DSC-H2 and a DSC-F717 before that, so I'm comparing the Olympus to my experience with these two cameras. The auto-focus did not have a high level of consistency in focusing properly/sharply. Too many of my pictures were slightly or way-out of focus. With my Sony's, the auto-focus is highly consistent - only an occasional picture is out of focus. This is what I've come to expect with any camera.
The SP-60UZ's color electronic view finder seemed primitive (again, in comparison with the Sony). It looks like a 'cheap TV' picture and not a true representation of the image you are taking. Because of this, it looked like all of my pictures were in-focus, but the resulting image was not. So the EFV was no help in determining if the camera was focused or not. I'm not going to spend a day taking pictures only to find-out afterwards that a high percentage of them are not focus properly.
The images that were in focus looked spectacular so image quality is what they say in the pro reviews.
Anyway, I was hoping for a new 18x super-zoom with great image quality and was disappointed in the camera I received.
|
|
|
