I've just upgraded from an old Olympus D-560 Zoom, due to its awful battery life, to a exilim Z50.
Now i'm sitting in a room lit by natural daylight and have taken identical pictures with each camera. With or without flash the D-560 is way better.
With flash, the Z50 bleaches white objects in the foreground but the background is ok (if a bit grainy). Without flash, its blurry, even with a steady hand which is fine for the D-560. Either way, it seems more grainy than the D-560 pictures. Manually changing the ISO makes it worse.
Also, with the D-560 at 3.3mp, a shot uses about 700kb. 3.3mp setting on the Z50 uses 1.5mb. Why the difference? I've bought a 512 SD card, which will apparently only give me the same number of shots as my old 256 Olympus card!
It seems Ive paid £175 for a camera more crappy than my old one - one which produces larger files with inferior shots to a cheap 3 year old camera? At the moment, Im tempted to take it back to the shop.