Olympus Stylus SW · announced January 2006

The Olympus Stylus 720 SW: the first compact you could drop and drown, and the pictures that came with it

Also sold as the Olympus mju 720 SW in Europe² and the μ720SW in Japan.¹¹ Olympus's US press release called it the Stylus 720 SW.¹

In 2006 Olympus put a 7.1-megapixel camera in a metal shell rated for 3 metres of water and a 1.5 metre fall. Every reviewer agreed it was tough. They split on almost everything else: the colour, the speed and whether the pictures were worth the price.

Launched

January 2006

Launch price

$399.99 · about £300¹²

Sensor

7.1 MP CCD

Lens

38–114 mm, 3×

Card

xD-Picture Card

Battery

LI-42B, LI-40B

Specs and sources

Meet the camera

Imaging Resource called it the only shock-resistant model on the market in its 2006 review and said it was rated to the MIL-STD-810F drop standard and to JIS level 8 for water.¹⁴ The UK release put the numbers at waterproof to 3 metres and resistant to falls from 1.5 metres, while Olympus's US release said 10 feet and 5 feet, the same figures in feet.²¹ It weighed 149 grams and measured about 91 by 59 by 20 millimetres.³ The metal body came in Dusky Pink, Polar Blue and Steel Silver in Europe.²

The US list price was $399.99, with shipping planned for March 2006,¹ and the UK price was around £300.² The lens is a folded design: it sits at right angles inside the body and never extends, which Imaging Resource said let Olympus seal the case completely.⁴ The camera has no viewfinder, only the screen.⁴ There is no optical stabiliser either. Olympus's "Digital Image Stabilization" mode simply raised the sensitivity to as high as ISO 1600, Imaging Resource explained, which made for soft, grainy pictures.⁴

Why this one was interesting

Waterproof and shockproof together

Reviewed.com said the normal Stylus line was weatherproof but not waterproof, and that the few waterproof Pentax Optio cameras offered less resolution; only the 720 SW combined a rugged body with 7.1 megapixels.⁵ Imaging Resource called it "the best underwater offering on the market".⁴ The camera could also take a PT-033 case for depths of up to 40 metres.²

A brighter screen for dim places

Olympus's "BrightCapture" worked by averaging blocks of nine pixels on the sensor into one, which, the UK release said, made the screen much brighter and let the camera raise its sensitivity in some modes.² TechRadar called the screen good in dim conditions, even though it was "not stupendously sharp".⁶

A guide for beginners

The camera carried a Guide Function that explained modes on the screen,² and 24 scene modes, four of them for underwater shooting,²⁶ among them an Auction mode which TechRadar said was for photographing old cameras destined for eBay.⁶ Imaging Resource liked the new quick Function menu.⁴ For the cheaper, non-submersible sibling announced the same month, see our Olympus Stylus 710; Reviewed.com listed it at $349, $50 less.⁵

What was lost

Toughness cost the camera some handling. Imaging Resource liked the firm buttons but listed an easily pressed Mode button as a fault,⁴ and What Digital Camera found the buttons not necessarily any easier to use for being waterproof.⁷ TechRadar said the small controls might cause trouble with gloves or wetsuits.⁶ Reviewed.com listed poor lens placement among its dislikes, and TechRadar said fingers can stray in front of the corner-mounted lens.⁵⁶

Where the pictures fell short

Imaging Resource was blunt: the 720 SW was an excellent hardware design with somewhat mediocre image quality, its colour muted and mushy even at the lowest sensitivity.⁴ It said noise suppression was too evident at the lowest ISO and the highest resolution, and that the camera's warm auto white balance made indoor pictures look almost sepia.⁴ Reviewed.com measured a colour score of 5.22, which it called one of its worst in a while, with a mean colour error of 11.8 and colours under-saturated by almost 5 percent.⁵ It also found the dynamic range poor.⁵ TechRadar said the folded lens showed distortion, purple fringing and edge softness, and that in-camera processing then turned detail "to mush".⁶

Light was a mixed story. In its night-mode test Reviewed.com said the pictures looked decent and general low-light performance was quite good, but whites showed a blue tint at 60 lux and a red tint at 5 lux.⁵ What Digital Camera said stabilised shots lost some quality and that wide-angle pictures were marred by barrel distortion.⁷ Imaging Resource found the flash weak and the flash tube so close to the lens that red-eye was likely.⁴ TechRadar also said the flash "could do with firing a few more photons".⁶

We found no free photo from this camera whose file records a high sensitivity, so this page shows no low-light strip.

On eBay right now

Live listings for this camera, supplied by eBay and updated automatically. We earn a commission if you buy through them.

The little wins

How it drew the picture

Colour is where the reviewers parted ways. TechRadar said colours were powerful without being aggressive and were the camera's strongest point, with natural skin tones and reliable metering;⁶ What Digital Camera praised largely accurate exposures and a lovely soft gradation to natural colours, and said that when the camera was good it was very very good.⁷ Engadget described the pictures as generally low noise.⁸ Imaging Resource and Reviewed.com saw faded colour and noise in flat areas, as above.⁴⁵ CNET's verdict, as quoted by PhotographyBLOG, called it sleek, responsive and a rugged and welcome travel companion.⁹

Photos taken with this camera, from Wikimedia Commons, credited under each picture. Several are underwater or water-surface views; the file data records the camera, not the housing or settings used.

Where it let you down

Speed was the biggest practical complaint. Imaging Resource said full-autofocus shutter response was sluggish, and its lab measured about 1.1 seconds of lag with autofocus and 0.087 seconds when pre-focused.⁴³ Reviewed.com measured 0.5 seconds from shutter to shot and 2.6 seconds from power-on to first picture, where Imaging Resource's table listed a 1.8 second start-up.⁵³ What Digital Camera called it pretty nippy and Engadget found its workings quite quick,⁷⁸ but TechRadar found the shutter hesitant while locking on, and said autofocus underwater took ages unless the Underwater mode locked focus.⁶ Reviewed.com said underwater pictures did not turn out well, partly because the screen caught glare.⁵ Imaging Resource said images from its pool looked aged, and that water on the microphone muffled the sound.⁴

Video was limited to 640 by 480 at 15 frames a second, which Reviewed.com called choppy,²⁵ and the screen disappointed Imaging Resource, which called it grainy, while Engadget said its resolution was a bit low.⁴⁸ Reviewed.com found the supplied software archaic and said some features, such as panoramas, needed an Olympus-branded xD card, whose serial number the software asked for.⁵ It said a single jack combined USB, video-out and DC-in.⁵ Battery life was also an argument: Imaging Resource's table lists 180 shots and its text called battery life good for a compact, while Reviewed.com said it got about 300 shots per charge.³⁴⁵

What the reviewers said

The same camera got a Dave's Pick from Imaging Resource and a harsh letdown verdict from Reviewed.com. Two years later, Imaging Resource said the printed output of the 10-megapixel Stylus 1030 SW was worse than that of the 720 SW; see our Stylus 1030 SW review.¹²

The timeline

• 26 January 2006Olympus announces the camera in the US and UK, around the PMA show: $399.99 and about £300.¹²
• March 2006Planned shipping month in both announcements.¹²
• 10 April 2006Engadget's short take.⁸
• 19 May 2006PhotographyBLOG points to CNET's review.⁹
• 31 May 2006TechRadar publishes its review.⁶
• 11 July 2006Imaging Resource posts its review.⁴
• 9 September 2006Sail magazine's gear note.¹⁰
• 6 August 2008Imaging Resource compares the Stylus 1030 SW unfavourably for print quality.¹² For a later Olympus rugged compact, see our Tough TG-1 iHS review.

Should you buy one now?

Buy one if you want a small, metal, early rugged compact with a particular look, and you can live with muted colour and slow focus. It launched at $399.99;¹ what it sells for now is a question for the sold listings, not for us. We have not tested a unit yet, and we cannot say how a 2006 seal behaves today. Before you bid, check these:

• The name. Search the Stylus 720 SW, or mju 720 SW in Europe.²
• The seals. Waterproofing depended on rubber gaskets in the doors, and Imaging Resource advised shaking water off before opening them;⁴ look for dirt, cracks or a warped door. Treat any old unit as splash-resistant until you have tested it.
• The battery. It uses an LI-42B (the LI-40B is also listed);³ a replacement is on Amazon ↗. Reviewed.com said a full charge took about 300 minutes.⁵
• The card. It takes xD-Picture Cards,³ and Reviewed.com said it accepted cards up to 1 GB.⁵ See our memory card guide.
• The cable. The box held a USB cable and an AV cable.⁴
• The screen and lens. Check that the screen is not scratched and that the lens door opens and closes when you switch on.

If you are wondering why cameras like this are being hunted down again, we tell that story once, in Pictures that never left the card.

See recent sold prices on eBay ↗Shop on eBay ↗LI-42B battery ↗

Sources

1. Imaging Resource, “Olympus: New shock-proof, water-proof digicam” by Michael R. Tomkins, with Olympus's US press release (26 Jan 2006)
2. PhotographyBLOG, “Olympus mju 720 SW” with Olympus UK press release by Mark Goldstein (26 Jan 2006)
3. Imaging Resource, Olympus Stylus 720 SW specification table (retail price, availability, lab timings)
4. Imaging Resource, Olympus Stylus 720 SW review, introduction by Shawn Barnett (posted 11 Jul 2006)
5. Reviewed.com, Olympus Stylus 720SW review by Emily Raymond (undated page, $399.99 list price)
6. TechRadar, Olympus mju 720SW review by Mark Harris, published 31 May 2006 (page credits tech.co.uk staff, via PhotoRadar)
7. What Digital Camera, Olympus mju 720 SW review (the archive page shows 31 Oct 2014; the original 2006 date is not shown)
8. Engadget, “Olympus' water/shockproof Mju Stylus 720SW reviewed” by Paul Miller (10 Apr 2006), a short note on another outlet's review
9. PhotographyBLOG, “Olympus mju 720 SW Review at CNET” (19 May 2006), quoting CNET's verdict; we did not read CNET's own page
10. Sail magazine, “Olympus Stylus 720 SW” by Sail Staff (9 Sep 2006), a short gear note
11. Impress Digital Camera Watch, “オリンパス、耐衝撃性と水深3mの防水機能を備えた「μ720SW」” (31 Jan 2006), for the Japanese name
12. Imaging Resource, Olympus Stylus 1030SW review by Theano Nikitas (6 Aug 2008)

Photographs are credited under each one, all via Wikimedia Commons. Links to eBay and Amazon are affiliate links.