As well as being compared against other compacts, the Olympus FE-170 is also often compared to ultra compacts. The Olympus FE-170's top rivals come from Olympus (such as the FE-360 and the Stylus 760) and Canon (such as the ELPH 300 HS)

Competitor classes

compared toCompact competitors

Generally, compared to other compact competitors the Olympus FE-170 has a significantly narrower wide angle lens (38 mm vs 24 mm), is much larger (compact (90×63×31 mm) vs super compact (94×56×21 mm)), doesn't have image stabilization (none vs sensor shift), has a CCD-family sensor (CCD vs CMOS) and is older (august 2006 vs august 2008).

Olympus FE-360

Olympus FE-360
2 years newer
$179

Significant advantages of the FE-360 (vs the FE-170)

  • Much smaller: Super compact (94×56×21 mm) vs Compact (90×63×31 mm)
  • Significantly thinner: 0.8" vs 1.2"

Significant disadvantages of the FE-360 (vs the FE-170)

  • None found

common strengths of the FE-360 and FE-170

  • Very small: Super compact (94×56×21 mm) vs Compact (90×63×31 mm)
  • Very light: 138 g vs 175 g
  • Thin: 0.8" vs 1.2"

Canon ELPH 300 HS

Canon ELPH 300 HS
4 years newer
$261

Significant advantages of the 300 HS (vs the FE-170)

  • Much better wide angle: 24 mm vs 38 mm
  • Much smaller: Super compact (92×56×20 mm) vs Compact (90×63×31 mm)
  • Image stabilization:
    1. Lens
    vs None

Significant disadvantages of the 300 HS (vs the FE-170)

  • None found

common strengths of the 300 HS and FE-170

  • Very small: Super compact (92×56×20 mm) vs Compact (90×63×31 mm)
  • Very light: 141 g vs 175 g
  • Thin: 0.8" vs 1.2"

Olympus Stylus 760

Olympus Stylus 760
5 months newer

Significant advantages of the Stylus 760 (vs the FE-170)

  • Much smaller: Compact (99×54×24 mm) vs Compact (90×63×31 mm)
  • Image stabilization:
    1. Sensor shift
    vs None
  • Significantly thinner: 0.9" vs 1.2"

Significant disadvantages of the Stylus 760 (vs the FE-170)

  • None found

common strengths of the Stylus 760 and FE-170

  • Very small: Compact (99×54×24 mm) vs Compact (90×63×31 mm)
  • Very light: 160 g vs 175 g
  • Thin: 0.9" vs 1.2"

Olympus FE-140

Olympus FE-140
7 months older

Significant advantages of the FE-140 (vs the FE-170)

  • Significantly smaller: Compact (96×63×25 mm) vs Compact (90×63×31 mm)
  • Thinner: 1" vs 1.2"

Significant disadvantages of the FE-140 (vs the FE-170)

  • None found

common strengths of the FE-140 and FE-170

  • Very small: Compact (96×63×25 mm) vs Compact (90×63×31 mm)
  • Very light: 160 g vs 175 g
  • Thin: 1" vs 1.2"

compared toUltra compact competitors

Generally, compared to ultra compact competitors the Olympus FE-170 has a much narrower wide angle lens (38 mm vs 24 mm), has a much smaller screen (2.5" vs 3"), is much larger (compact (90×63×31 mm) vs ultra compact (98×58×17 mm)), doesn't have image stabilization (none vs lens) and takes slightly lower resolution photos (5.9 MP vs 9.7 MP).

Samsung WB30F

Samsung WB30F
6 years newer
$177

Significant advantages of the WB30F (vs the FE-170)

  • None found

Significant disadvantages of the WB30F (vs the FE-170)

  • None found

common strengths of the WB30F and FE-170

  • None found