Olympus mju 725SW

Review Date : Mon, 4 Dec 2006

Author : WDC Team

Olympus Mju 725SW
Olympus Mju 725SW Olympus Mju 725SW multiview

Hard-bodied compact gets minimal upgrade

Pros: Solid build and feel, Shockproof and waterproof
Cons: Fringing, Lens flare, Noise and camera shake, Priced at a slight premium

Available in a choice of three colours, the Olympus mju 725 SW is similar to its mju 720 SW predecessor in many ways.

Features
It features a 3x zoom, claims to be shockproof when dropped a distance up to 1.5m, and is waterproof to depths of 5m (the 720 managed three). Its top ISO speed is 1600.

Design

With the back dominated by the 2.5in LCD, there’s no optical viewfinder. Attendant controls are small, but responsive. The 725’s all-metal body is rugged and slots easily into both palm and pocket.

Performance

The 725 powers up instantly. There’s little shutter lag and write time is similarly swift, though it’s easy for fingertips to stray into shot. If we’re nit picking, the LCD displays ghosting under artificial light. Still, the menu screens are very easy to navigate.

Image Quality

Typically, there’s evidence of purple fringing between areas of high contrast, and colours are slightly washed out when compared with the vivid default results from competing compacts. Shots in less than bright light are soft due to camera shake – despite the dedicated image stabilisation setting – plus there’s visible noise.

Value For Money

The 725 SW is at the top of the price bracket for its class; you’re paying a premium for its rough and tumble features and sealed, all-metal build.

\n

Verdict

Outwardly desirable, but pictures lack punch. Still, when dropped, the Mju 725SW gives hope to the butter-fingered by coming back for more rather than shattering.

Verdict

Outwardly desirable, but pictures lack punch. Still, when dropped, the Mju 725SW gives hope to the butter-fingered by coming back for more rather than shattering.


Compact Camera Reviews

  • Webfeed
  • Print
  • Share

Price as reviewed
£300.00

Scores

Design 17/20
Image Quality 17/20
Performance 17/20
Value 16/20
Features 17/20
Overall Score 84%