Today's compact cameras look like crap – so I bought one from 2016

So, I caved in. I bought into the hype about compact cameras and decided it's about time I bought a compact camera.

(I'm talking about proper compact cameras here – super small bodies with big zoom lenses – rather than fixed-lens compacts like the Fujifilm X100VI or Sony RX1R III.)

But despite the resurgence in compacts, with new or renewed being launched by everyone from Canon and Panasonic to Kodak and Agfa, there's one big problem: they're all absolutely butt ugly.

Okay, I take that back: the Leica D-Lux 8 is a nice-looking camera. In fact, I posited that the 100 Years of Leica edition might be the most beautiful camera money can buy. But these are luxury compacts that cost $2,000 in the US. Why do regular compacts have to look like garbage?

Take the Canon PowerShot SX740 HS. WHY does it need to have "40x optical zoom" scrawled in giant letters on the front of the body? And I get that the Kodak FZ45 is a cheap camera, but does it really have to look cheap?

I wanted a capable compact that looks as good as the pictures it takes (but without paying Leica money) and there's simply nothing like that on today's market… but there was almost ten years ago.

Image 1 of 12

This is the Olympus Stylus SH-3, a brilliant compact camera from 2016 that I picked up for £180 (around $245 / AU$365).

Olympus only released the SH-3 in Japan, but its predecessor – the Stylus SH-2, which had very similar specs – hit the US and UK market in 2015 with a price tag of $400 / £300.

I think you'll agree, it's a beautiful little camera. Its design took cues from the PEN range of cameras, and you can see the same DNA in bodies like the Olympus PEN-F and Olympus PEN E-P7, so it looks more like a classic film camera than the plastic fantastic compacts of today.

It's not just a pretty face, though. The SH-3 packs a back-side illuminated 1/2.3" sensor with a modest but still sufficient resolution of 16MP. The sensor is kept steady by 5-axis in-body image stabilization, too – which you'll need, with the impressive zoom range.

The lens is a native 4.5-108mm, which given the 5.5x crop factor gives it an effective range of 25-600mm – something that scarcely few of today's compacts can match (I can only think of the SX740 HS, which achieves an amazing 24-960mm).

Video is limited, at FullHD 60p, and it's "compact camera circa 2016" video – so it's not good for much, though I'm sure Gen Zers will probably enjoy the retro digicam vibe.

The sensitivity ceiling is low, at ISO6400, so this isn't the best low-light camera in the world, but for daytime photography the SH-3 is actually a beast: lightning-fast autofocus, 11.5fps bursts, RAW shooting and it also has an early iteration of Oly's awesome Vintage filter among the 13 Art Filters on offer.

Crucially it's also tiny, at just 109 x 63 x 42mm, and it weighs next to nothing at just 271g – which means, unlike today's fixed-lens "compacts", this thing slips into a pocket on my jeans or jacket lapel.

So there you have it – a decade-old compact camera that scratches the itch today's compacts cannot. Nothing would please me more than to see OM System (the modern-day Olympus) do what Canon and Panasonic did, firing up furnaces again and bringing back the Stylus SH series. We need more compacts like this!

If you want to track down one of your own, there are a few Olympus Stylus SH-3s on eBay right now in both black and silver.

You might also like…

Take a look at the best compact cameras and the best point-and-shoot cameras you can buy right now – and if you have the cash to splash, check out my colleague Gareth's Leica D-Lux 8 review for a current-day compact that is beautiful!