Olympus TG-6 vs XZ-1
The Olympus Tough TG-6 and the Olympus XZ-1 are two digital cameras that were revealed to the public, respectively, in May 2019 and January 2011. Both the TG-6 and the XZ-1 are fixed lens compact cameras that are based on a 1/2.3-inch (TG-6) and a 1/1.7-inch (XZ-1) sensor. The TG-6 has a resolution of 12 megapixels, whereas the XZ-1 provides 10.1 MP.
Below is an overview of the main specs of the two cameras as a starting point for the comparison.
|Olympus TG-6||Olympus XZ-1|
|Fixed lens compact camera||Fixed lens compact camera|
|25-100mm f/2.0-4.9||28-112mm f/1.8-2.5|
|12 MP, 1/2.3" Sensor||10.1 MP, 1/1.7" Sensor|
|4K/30p Video||720/30p Video|
|ISO 100-12800||ISO 100-6400|
|No viewfinder, LCD framing||Viewfinder optional|
|3.0" LCD, 1040k dots||3.0" LCD, 614k dots|
|Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)||Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)|
|20 shutter flaps per second||2 shutter flaps per second|
|In-body stabilization||In-body stabilization|
|Waterproof body (nom)||Not weather sealed|
|340 shots per battery charge||320 shots per battery charge|
|113 x 66 x 32 mm, 253 g||111 x 65 x 42 mm, 275 g|
Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Olympus Tough TG-6 and the Olympus XZ-1? Which one should you buy? Read on to find out how these two cameras compare with respect to their body size, their imaging sensors, their shooting features, their input-output connections, and their reception by expert reviewers.
Body comparison: Olympus TG-6 vs XZ-1
An illustration of the physical size and weight of the Olympus TG-6 and the Olympus XZ-1 is provided in the side-by-side display below. The two cameras are presented according to their relative size. Three consecutive perspectives from the front, the top, and the back are available. All width, height and depth measures are rounded to the nearest millimeter.
The TG-6 can be obtained in two different colors (black, red), while the XZ-1 is also available in two color-versions, but different ones (black, white).
If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Olympus XZ-1 is somewhat smaller (3 percent) than the Olympus TG-6. However, the XZ-1 is markedly heavier (9 percent) than the TG-6. It is worth mentioning in this context that the TG-6 is splash and dust resistant, while the XZ-1 does not feature any corresponding weather-sealing. More than that, the TG-6 is water-proof up to 15m and can, thus, be used for underwater photography.
The power pack in the TG-6 can be charged via the USB port, so that it is not always necessary to take the battery charger along when travelling.
The following table provides a synthesis of the main physical specifications of the two cameras and other similar ones. If you want to switch the focus of the display and review another camera pair, just select a new right or left comparator from among the camera models in the table. Alternatively, you can also move across to the CAM-parator tool and choose from the broad selection of possible camera comparisons there.
|Olympus TG-6»||113 mm||66 mm||32 mm||253 g||340||Y||May 2019||449||Olympus TG-6|
|Olympus XZ-1«||111 mm||65 mm||42 mm||275 g||320||n||Jan 2011||499||-||Olympus XZ-1|
|Canon SX740« »||110 mm||64 mm||40 mm||299 g||265||n||Jul 2018||399||Canon SX740|
|Fujifilm XF10« »||113 mm||64 mm||41 mm||279 g||330||n||Jul 2018||499||Fujifilm XF10|
|Olympus TG-5« »||113 mm||66 mm||32 mm||250 g||340||Y||May 2017||449||-||Olympus TG-5|
|Olympus TG-4« »||112 mm||66 mm||31 mm||247 g||380||Y||Apr 2015||379||-||Olympus TG-4|
|Olympus XZ-2« »||113 mm||65 mm||48 mm||346 g||340||n||Sep 2012||599||-||Olympus XZ-2|
|Olympus E-PL3« »||110 mm||64 mm||37 mm||313 g||300||n||Jun 2011||599||-||Olympus E-PL3|
|Olympus E-PM1« »||110 mm||64 mm||34 mm||265 g||330||n||Jun 2011||499||-||Olympus E-PM1|
|Olympus E-PL1« »||115 mm||72 mm||42 mm||334 g||290||n||Feb 2010||599||-||Olympus E-PL1|
|Panasonic FT7« »||117 mm||76 mm||37 mm||319 g||300||Y||May 2018||449||Panasonic FT7|
|Panasonic LX5« »||110 mm||65 mm||43 mm||271 g||400||n||Jul 2010||499||-||Panasonic LX5|
|Ricoh WG-6« »||118 mm||66 mm||33 mm||246 g||340||Y||Feb 2019||399||Ricoh WG-6|
|Sony HX99« »||102 mm||58 mm||36 mm||242 g||370||n||Aug 2018||449||Sony HX99|
|Sony HX95« »||102 mm||58 mm||36 mm||242 g||370||n||Aug 2018||429||Sony HX95|
|Note: Measurements and pricing do not include easily detachable parts, such as interchangeable lenses or optional viewfinders.|
Any camera decision will naturally be influenced heavily by the price. The manufacturer’s suggested retail prices give an idea on the placement of the camera in the maker’s lineup and the broader market. The TG-6 was somewhat cheaper (by 10 percent) than the XZ-1 at launch, but both cameras fall into the same price category. Usually, retail prices stay at first close to the launch price, but after several months, discounts become available. Later in the product cycle and, in particular, when the replacement model is about to appear, further discounting and stock clearance sales often push the camera price considerably down. Then, after the new model is out, very good deals can frequently be found on the pre-owned market.
Sensor comparison: Olympus TG-6 vs XZ-1
The size of the sensor inside a digital camera is one of the key determinants of image quality. A large sensor will generally have larger individual pixels that offer better low-light sensitivity, provide wider dynamic range, and have richer color-depth than smaller pixels in a sensor of the same technological generation. Further, a large sensor camera will give the photographer additional creative options when using shallow depth-of-field to isolate a subject from its background. On the downside, larger sensors are more costly to manufacture and tend to lead to bigger and heavier cameras and lenses.
Of the two cameras under consideration, the Olympus TG-6 features a 1/2.3-inch sensor and the Olympus XZ-1 a 1/1.7-inch sensor. The sensor area in the XZ-1 is 64 percent bigger. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 5.6 and 4.4. Both cameras feature a native aspect ratio (sensor width to sensor height) of 4:3.
In terms of chip-set technology, the TG-6 uses a more advanced image processing engine (TruePic VIII) than the XZ-1 (TruePic V), with benefits for noise reduction, color accuracy, and processing speed.
Despite having a smaller sensor, the Olympus TG-6 offers a higher resolution of 12 megapixels, compared with 10.1 MP of the Olympus XZ-1. This megapixels advantage comes at the cost of a higher pixel density and a smaller size of the individual pixel (with a pixel pitch of 1.53μm versus 2.13μm for the XZ-1). However, it should be noted that the TG-6 is much more recent (by 8 years and 4 months) than the XZ-1, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that make it possible to gather light more efficiently.
The resolution advantage of the Olympus TG-6 implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the TG-6 for good quality output (200 dots per inch) amounts to 20 x 15 inch or 50.8 x 38.1 cm, for very good quality (250 dpi) 16 x 12 inch or 40.6 x 30.5 cm, and for excellent quality (300 dpi) 13.3 x 10 inch or 33.9 x 25.4 cm. The corresponding values for the Olympus XZ-1 are 18.3 x 13.8 inch or 46.5 x 35 cm for good quality, 14.7 x 11 inch or 37.2 x 28 cm for very good quality, and 12.2 x 9.2 inch or 31 x 23.3 cm for excellent quality prints.
The Olympus Tough TG-6 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 12800. The corresponding ISO settings for the Olympus XZ-1 are ISO 100 to ISO 6400 (no boost).
Since 2007, DXO Mark has published sensor performance measurements that have been derived using a consistent methodology. This service assesses and scores the color depth ("DXO Portrait"), dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), and low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports") of camera sensors, and also publishes an overall camera score. The adjacent table reports on the physical sensor characteristics and the outcomes of the DXO sensor quality tests for a sample of comparator-cameras.
|Olympus TG-6»||1/2.3||12.0||4000||3000||4K/30p||-||-||-||-||Olympus TG-6|
|Olympus XZ-1«||1/1.7||10.1||3664||2752||720/30p||18.8||10.4||117||34||Olympus XZ-1|
|Canon SX740« »||1/2.3||20.2||5184||3888||4K/30p||-||-||-||-||Canon SX740|
|Fujifilm XF10« »||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||4K/15p||-||-||-||-||Fujifilm XF10|
|Olympus TG-5« »||1/2.3||12.0||4000||3000||4K/30p||-||-||-||-||Olympus TG-5|
|Olympus TG-4« »||1/2.3||15.9||4608||3456||1080/30p||-||-||-||-||Olympus TG-4|
|Olympus XZ-2« »||1/1.7||11.8||3968||2976||1080/30p||20.4||11.3||216||49||Olympus XZ-2|
|Olympus E-PL3« »||Four Thirds||12.2||4032||3024||1080/60i||20.9||10.3||499||52||Olympus E-PL3|
|Olympus E-PM1« »||Four Thirds||12.2||4032||3024||1080/60i||21.0||10.3||499||52||Olympus E-PM1|
|Olympus E-PL1« »||Four Thirds||12.2||4032||3024||720/30p||21.5||10.1||487||54||Olympus E-PL1|
|Panasonic FT7« »||1/2.3||20.2||5184||3888||4K/30p||-||-||-||-||Panasonic FT7|
|Panasonic LX5« »||1/1.7||10.0||3648||2736||720/60p||19.6||10.8||132||41||Panasonic LX5|
|Ricoh WG-6« »||1/2.3||20.2||5184||3888||4K/30p||-||-||-||-||Ricoh WG-6|
|Sony HX99« »||1/2.3||18.0||4896||3672||4K/30p||-||-||-||-||Sony HX99|
|Sony HX95« »||1/2.3||18.0||4896||3672||4K/30p||-||-||-||-||Sony HX95|
Many modern cameras are not only capable of taking still images, but can also record movies. Both cameras under consideration are equipped with sensors that have a sufficiently high read-out speed for moving images, but the TG-6 provides a higher video resolution than the XZ-1. It can shoot video footage at 4K/30p, while the XZ-1 is limited to 720/30p.
Feature comparison: Olympus TG-6 vs XZ-1
Beyond body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. The TG-6 and the XZ-1 are similar in the sense that neither of the two has a viewfinder. The images are, thus, framed using live view on the rear LCD. That said, the XZ-1 can be equipped with an optional viewfinder – the VF-2. The table below summarizes some of the other core capabilities of the Olympus TG-6 and Olympus XZ-1 in connection with corresponding information for a sample of similar cameras.
|Olympus TG-6»||-||n||3.0||1040||fixed||n||1/2000s||20.0||Y||Y||Olympus TG-6|
|Olympus XZ-1«||-||n||3.0||614||fixed||n||1/2000s||2.0||Y||Y||Olympus XZ-1|
|Canon SX740« »||-||n||3.0||922||tilting||n||1/3200s||10.0||Y||Y||Canon SX740|
|Fujifilm XF10« »||-||n||3.0||1040||fixed||Y||1/4000s||6.0||Y||n||Fujifilm XF10|
|Olympus TG-5« »||-||n||3.0||460||fixed||n||1/2000s||20.0||Y||Y||Olympus TG-5|
|Olympus TG-4« »||-||n||3.0||460||fixed||n||1/2000s||5.0||Y||Y||Olympus TG-4|
|Olympus XZ-2« »||-||n||3.0||920||tilting||Y||1/2000s||5.0||Y||Y||Olympus XZ-2|
|Olympus E-PL3« »||-||n||3.0||460||tilting||n||1/4000s||5.5||n||Y||Olympus E-PL3|
|Olympus E-PM1« »||-||n||3.0||460||fixed||n||1/4000s||5.5||n||Y||Olympus E-PM1|
|Olympus E-PL1« »||-||n||2.7||230||fixed||n||1/2000s||3.0||Y||Y||Olympus E-PL1|
|Panasonic FT7« »||1170||n||3.0||1040||fixed||n||1/1300s||10.0||Y||Y||Panasonic FT7|
|Panasonic LX5« »||-||n||3.0||460||fixed||n||1/4000s||2.5||Y||Y||Panasonic LX5|
|Ricoh WG-6« »||-||n||3.0||1040||fixed||n||1/4000s||1.0||Y||n||Ricoh WG-6|
|Sony HX99« »||638||n||3.0||922||tilting||Y||1/2000s||10.0||Y||Y||Sony HX99|
|Sony HX95« »||638||n||3.0||922||tilting||n||1/2000s||10.0||Y||Y||Sony HX95|
The Olympus TG-6 and the Olympus XZ-1 both have an intervalometer built-in. This enables the photographer to capture time lapse sequences, such as flower blooming, a sunset or moon rise, without purchasing an external camera trigger and related software.
Both the TG-6 and the XZ-1 have zoom lenses built in. The TG-6 has a 25-100mm f/2.0-4.9 optic and the XZ-1 offers a 28-112mm f/1.8-2.5 (focal lengths in full frame equivalent terms). Hence, the TG-6 provides a wider angle of view at the short end than the XZ-1, but less tele-photo reach at the long end. The XZ-1 offers the faster maximum aperture.
Concerning the storage of imaging data, both the TG-6 and the XZ-1 write their files to SDXC cards. The TG-6 supports UHS-I cards (Ultra High Speed data transfer of up to 104 MB/s), while the XZ-1 cannot take advantage of Ultra High Speed SD cards.
Connectivity comparison: Olympus TG-6 vs XZ-1
For some imaging applications, the extent to which a camera can communicate with its environment can be an important aspect in the camera decision process. The table below provides an overview of the connectivity of the Olympus Tough TG-6 and Olympus XZ-1 and, in particular, the interfaces the cameras (and selected comparators) provide for accessory control and data transfer.
|Olympus TG-6»||-||stereo||mono||-||-||micro||2.0||Y||-||-||Olympus TG-6|
|Olympus XZ-1«||Y||mono||-||-||-||mini||2.0||-||-||-||Olympus XZ-1|
|Canon SX740« »||-||stereo||mono||-||-||micro||2.0||Y||Y||Y||Canon SX740|
|Fujifilm XF10« »||-||stereo||mono||Y||-||micro||2.0||Y||-||Y||Fujifilm XF10|
|Olympus TG-5« »||-||stereo||mono||-||-||micro||2.0||Y||-||-||Olympus TG-5|
|Olympus TG-4« »||-||stereo||mono||-||-||micro||2.0||Y||-||-||Olympus TG-4|
|Olympus XZ-2« »||Y||stereo||mono||-||-||mini||2.0||-||-||-||Olympus XZ-2|
|Olympus E-PL3« »||Y||stereo||-||-||-||mini||2.0||-||-||-||Olympus E-PL3|
|Olympus E-PM1« »||Y||stereo||mono||-||-||mini||2.0||-||-||-||Olympus E-PM1|
|Olympus E-PL1« »||Y||stereo||-||-||-||mini||2.0||-||-||-||Olympus E-PL1|
|Panasonic FT7« »||-||stereo||mono||-||-||micro||2.0||Y||-||-||Panasonic FT7|
|Panasonic LX5« »||Y||mono||mono||-||-||mini||2.0||-||-||-||Panasonic LX5|
|Ricoh WG-6« »||-||mono||mono||-||-||micro||3.0||-||-||-||Ricoh WG-6|
|Sony HX99« »||-||stereo||mono||-||-||micro||2.0||Y||Y||Y||Sony HX99|
|Sony HX95« »||-||stereo||mono||-||-||micro||2.0||Y||Y||Y||Sony HX95|
It is notable that the TG-6 offers wifi support, while the XZ-1 does not. Wifi can be a very convenient means to transfer image data to an off-camera location.
The TG-6 is a recent model that features in the current product line-up of Olympus. In contrast, the XZ-1 has been discontinued (but it can be found pre-owned on eBay). As a replacement in the same line of cameras, the XZ-1 was succeeded by the Olympus XZ-2. Further information on the two cameras (e.g. user guides, manuals), as well as related accessories, can be found on the official Olympus website.
Review summary: Olympus TG-6 vs XZ-1
So how do things add up? Is there a clear favorite between the Olympus TG-6 and the Olympus XZ-1? Which camera is better? A synthesis of the relative strong points of each of the models is listed below.
Advantages of the Olympus Tough TG-6:
- More detail: Offers more megapixels (12 vs 10.1MP) with a 9% higher linear resolution.
- Better jpgs: Has a more modern image processing engine (TruePic VIII vs TruePic V).
- Better video: Provides higher definition movie capture (4K/30p vs 720/30p).
- More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1040k vs 614k dots).
- Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (20 vs 2 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
- Wider view: Has a wider-angle lens that facilitates landscape or interior shots.
- Easier travel charging: Can be conveniently charged via its USB port.
- Better sealing: Is weather sealed to enable shooting in dusty or wet environments.
- Water-proof: Is rugged and sealed and can thus be used for underwater photography (up to 15m).
- Easier file upload: Has wifi built in for automatic backup or image transfer to the web.
- Faster buffer clearing: Has an SD card interface that supports the UHS-I standard.
- More modern: Reflects 8 years and 4 months of technical progress since the XZ-1 launch.
Reasons to prefer the Olympus XZ-1:
- More framing options: Can be equipped with a hotshoe-mounted accessory-viewfinder.
- Better light gathering: Has a lens with a wider maximum aperture (f/1.8 vs f/2.0).
- More tele-reach: Has a longer tele-lens for perspective compression and subject magnification.
- Better lighting: Features a hotshoe and can thus hold and trigger an external flash gun.
- More heavily discounted: Has been around for much longer (launched in January 2011).
If the count of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a measure, the TG-6 is the clear winner of the match-up (11 : 5 points). However, the relative importance of the various individual camera aspects will vary according to personal preferences and needs, so that you might like to apply corresponding weights to the particular features before making a decision on a new camera. A professional wildlife photographer will view the differences between cameras in a way that diverges from the perspective of a family photog, and a person interested in architecture has distinct needs from a sports shooter. Hence, the decision which camera is best and worth buying is often a very personal one.
How about other alternatives? Do the specifications of the Olympus TG-6 and the Olympus XZ-1 place the cameras among the top in their class? Find out in the latest Best Travel-Zoom Camera listing whether the two cameras rank among the cream of the crop.
In any case, while the comparison of technical specifications can provide a useful overview of the capabilities of different cameras, it says little about, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance of the TG-6 and the XZ-1 in practical situations. User reviews, such as those found at amazon, can sometimes inform about these issues, but such feedback is often incomplete, inconsistent, and biased.
Expert reviews: Olympus TG-6 vs XZ-1
This is where reviews by experts come in. The following table reports the overall ratings of the cameras as published by some of the major camera review sites (cameralabs, dpreview, ephotozine, imaging-resource, and photographyblog). As can be seen, the professional reviewers agree in many cases on the quality of different cameras, but sometimes their assessments diverge, reinforcing the earlier point that a camera decision is often a very personal choice.
|Olympus TG-6»||-||-||-||-||-||May 2019||449||Olympus TG-6|
|Olympus XZ-1«||-||74/100||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||Jan 2011||499||-||Olympus XZ-1|
|Canon SX740« »||+||-||4/5||-||4/5||Jul 2018||399||Canon SX740|
|Fujifilm XF10« »||-||75/100||4/5||-||4.5/5||Jul 2018||499||Fujifilm XF10|
|Olympus TG-5« »||+ +||-||4/5||o||4/5||May 2017||449||-||Olympus TG-5|
|Olympus TG-4« »||+||79/100||4/5||4/5||4/5||Apr 2015||379||-||Olympus TG-4|
|Olympus XZ-2« »||+||-||4.5/5||4/5||4.5/5||Sep 2012||599||-||Olympus XZ-2|
|Olympus E-PL3« »||+ +||72/100||4.5/5||-||4/5||Jun 2011||599||-||Olympus E-PL3|
|Olympus E-PM1« »||86/100||71/100||4.5/5||-||4.5/5||Jun 2011||499||-||Olympus E-PM1|
|Olympus E-PL1« »||86/100||69/100||4/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||Feb 2010||599||-||Olympus E-PL1|
|Panasonic FT7« »||+||-||3.5/5||-||3.5/5||May 2018||449||Panasonic FT7|
|Panasonic LX5« »||+||73/100||4.5/5||5/5||4.5/5||Jul 2010||499||-||Panasonic LX5|
|Ricoh WG-6« »||-||-||-||-||-||Feb 2019||399||Ricoh WG-6|
|Sony HX99« »||-||-||4/5||-||4.5/5||Aug 2018||449||Sony HX99|
|Sony HX95« »||-||-||-||-||-||Aug 2018||429||Sony HX95|
|Notes: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (-) not available.|
The above review scores should be interpreted with care, though. The assessments were made in relation to similar cameras of the same technological generation. Thus, a score needs to be put into the context of the launch date and the launch price of the camera, and comparisons of ratings among very different cameras or across long time periods have little meaning. Also, kindly note that some of the listed sites have over time developped their review approaches and their reporting style.
Other camera comparisons
Did this review help to inform your camera decision process? In case you would like to check on the differences and similarities of other camera models, just make your choice using the following search menu. There is also a set of direct links to comparison reviews that other users of the CAM-parator app explored.
- Canon 200D vs Olympus TG-6
- Fujifilm X-A5 vs Olympus TG-6
- Leica M10-P vs Olympus TG-6
- Leica Q2 vs Olympus TG-6
- Nikon A1000 vs Olympus TG-6
- Nikon P1000 vs Olympus TG-6
- Olympus TG-6 vs Panasonic FZ80
- Olympus TG-6 vs Panasonic G9
- Olympus TG-6 vs Panasonic GH5s
- Olympus TG-6 vs Panasonic TZ200
- Olympus TG-6 vs Ricoh WG-6
- Olympus XZ-1 vs Panasonic LX7
Specifications: Olympus TG-6 vs Olympus XZ-1
Below is a side-by-side comparison of the specs of the two cameras to facilitate a quick review of their differences and common features.
|Camera Model||Olympus TG-6||Olympus XZ-1|
|Camera Type||Fixed lens compact camera||Fixed lens compact camera|
|Camera Lens||25-100mm f/2.0-4.9||28-112mm f/1.8-2.5|
|Launch Date||May 2019||January 2011|
|Launch Price||USD 449||USD 499|
|Sensor Specs||Olympus TG-6||Olympus XZ-1|
|Sensor Format||1/2.3" Sensor||1/1.7" Sensor|
|Sensor Size||6.17 x 4.55 mm||7.85 x 5.89 mm|
|Sensor Area||28.0735 mm2||46.2365 mm2|
|Sensor Diagonal||7.7 mm||9.8 mm|
|Sensor Resolution||12 Megapixels||10.1 Megapixels|
|Image Resolution||4000 x 3000 pixels||3664 x 2752 pixels|
|Pixel Pitch||1.53 μm||2.13 μm|
|Pixel Density||42.74 MP/cm2||21.81 MP/cm2|
|Moiré control||Anti-Alias filter||Anti-Alias filter|
|Movie Capability||4K/30p Video||720/30p Video|
|ISO Setting||100-12800 ISO||100-6400 ISO|
|Image Processor||TruePic VIII||TruePic V|
|DXO Sensor Quality (score)||..||34|
|DXO Color Depth (bits)||..||18.8|
|DXO Dynamic Range (EV)||..||10.4|
|DXO Low Light (ISO)||..||117|
|Screen Specs||Olympus TG-6||Olympus XZ-1|
|Viewfinder Type||No viewfinder||Viewfinder optional|
|LCD Framing||Live View||Live View|
|Rear LCD Size||3.0 inch||3.0 inch|
|LCD Resolution||1040k dots||614k dots|
|LCD Attachment||Fixed screen||Fixed screen|
|Shooting Specs||Olympus TG-6||Olympus XZ-1|
|Autofocus System||Contrast-detect AF||Contrast-detect AF|
|Manual Focusing Aid||Focus Peaking||No Peaking Feature|
|Continuous Shooting||20 shutter flaps/s||2 shutter flaps/s|
|Time-Lapse Photography||Intervalometer built-in||Intervalometer built-in|
|Image Stabilization||In-body stabilization||In-body stabilization|
|Fill Flash||Build-in Flash||Build-in Flash|
|Storage Medium||SDXC cards||SDXC cards|
|Second Storage Option||Single card slot||Single card slot|
|UHS card support||UHS-I||no|
|Connectivity Specs||Olympus TG-6||Olympus XZ-1|
|External Flash||no Hotshoe||Hotshoe|
|USB Connector||USB 2.0||USB 2.0|
|HDMI Port||micro HDMI||mini HDMI|
|Wifi Support||Wifi built-in||no Wifi|
|Body Specs||Olympus TG-6||Olympus XZ-1|
|Environmental Sealing||Waterproof body (15m)||Not weather sealed|
|Battery Type||LI-92B power pack||Li-50B power pack|
|Battery Life (CIPA)||340 shots per charge||320 shots per charge|
|In-Camera Charging||USB charging||no USB charging|
113 x 66 x 32 mm
(4.4 x 2.6 x 1.3 in)
111 x 65 x 42 mm
(4.4 x 2.6 x 1.7 in)
|Camera Weight||253 g (8.9 oz)||275 g (9.7 oz)|
Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.