- Page 1 Olympus mju 725 SW Review
- Page 2 Olympus mju 725 SW Review
- Page 3 Olympus mju 725 SW Review
- Page 4 Feature Table Review
- Page 5 Test Shots – Full Resolution Crops Review
- Page 6 Test Shots – Exposure Evaluation Review
- Page 7 Test Shots – Exposure Evaluation Review
- Page 8 Test Shots – Exposure Evaluation Review
Unfortunately the 725 also has the same 3x zoom lens as the 720, a very slow f/3.5 – f/5.0 unit with a focal length of 6.7 – 20.1mm (equivalent to 38 – 114mm). I was really hoping that this would have been improved, because when I reviewed the 720 I found that the lens suffered from serious spherical distortion at wide angle as well as chromatic aberration and softness around the edges of the frame. I guess the EISA must have missed that part.
Unsurprisingly it has exactly the same faults on the 725, and so the comments that I made about that camera’s picture quality apply to this one too. As well as the problems with the lens, I found that the images were over-processed, suffered from colour noise even at 200 ISO, and had visible compression artefacts.
Unusually for an Olympus camera I also found that the light meter tended to under expose, resulting in pale washed-out colours. Also the restricted dynamic range seriously limited the amount of shadow or highlight detail. All in all a very disappointing performance from a camera which should have been so much better.
This might be the most pointless upgrade I’ve ever seen. The mju 725 SW is identical to its predecessor the mju 720 except for an extra two metres of underwater depth. It has all the same faults as the previous camera, and there are plenty of them. If you need a camera to take diving, buy a Fuji F30 or Canon A540 with an underwater case instead.
Unlike other sites, we thoroughly test every product we review. We use industry standard tests in order to compare features properly. We’ll always tell you what we find. We never, ever accept money to review a product. Tell us what you think - send your emails to the Editor.