Olympus E-400 vs Sony Alpha DSLR-A500: A Hands-On Comparison for Enthusiasts and Pros

In the sprawling landscape of entry-level DSLRs, two cameras from the mid-to-late 2000s often come up for consideration: Olympus’s E-400, released in 2006, and Sony’s Alpha A500, which debuted three years later in 2009. Both target enthusiastic beginners stepping into photography with serious intentions, but their generational gap, sensor designs, and feature sets paint two very distinct pictures. Having spent many hours shooting with both these models (and owning a few cameras in between for good measure), I’ll unpack their differences with an eye on real-world performance, technical merit, and - crucially - usability.

Whether you’re a hobbyist, a portraitist, a landscape junkie, or even dabbling in wildlife or sports, you’ll find this comparison practical, informed by firsthand experience, and sprinkled with the kind of honest insights that can’t be gleaned from specs sheets alone.

When Size and Ergonomics Matter: Handling the Cameras in Your Hands

Stepping away from technical specs for a moment, let’s talk about a photography truth: you have to like holding your camera. Comfort and control layout make or break the shooting flow.

The Olympus E-400 is one of the smallest DSLRs around - truly pocketable for a DSLR. Its compact dimensions (130x91x53mm) and light weight (435g with battery) make it highly portable. This is a camera that begs to travel lightly. However, its petite size comes at the cost of a cramped grip and limited rear-button real estate. For photographers with larger hands or those who appreciate tactile feedback, the E-400 feels somewhat toy-like compared to more robust models.

In contrast, the Sony A500 carries typical DSLR heft (630g) and a chunkier body (137x104x84mm). It immediately feels sturdier and more professional in hand, with a comfortable, well-contoured grip. The additional size also affords more buttons and a more comfortable top-plate layout for fast access to key settings.

(We’ll explore these control differences more deeply in the next section.)

Bottom line here: if you cherish portability and plan mostly casual shooting, the Olympus’s compactness is a boon. If ergonomics and a solid grip matter - especially for longer shoots - the Sony’s body architecture wins out hands down.

Control Layout and User Interface: Faster to Shoot or More Complex to Master?

How a camera lets you interact with it can influence creativity and ease of use. Dive into menus, buttons, dials, and you’ll either feel empowered or hamstrung.

Looking at the Olympus E-400 from above, the design is straightforward but minimal. There’s no LCD top-panel for quick exposure info, and you have a modest dial to switch shooting modes. Buttons are small and a little spread out, which slows down muscle memory in fast shooting conditions. The rear features a fixed 2.5-inch screen (no touch, no live view) with just 215K pixels - serviceable but uninspiring.

The Sony A500 takes things up several notches. It features a 3-inch tilting LCD screen with 230K pixels resolution (a modest upgrade) and live view - a big advantage for those who appreciate composing shots beyond the optical viewfinder. The mode dial is larger and more pronounced, with dedicated function buttons near the shutter release for exposure compensation, ISO, and flash. Additionally, there's an LCD top panel that shows key settings at a glance, making on-the-fly adjustments quicker and less obtrusive.

The Sony also boasts a more flexible autofocus interface with 9 focus points vs the Olympus’s 3-point AF system, which translates to better subject tracking capabilities.

If you prize user interface intuitiveness and quicker access to creative controls, the Sony’s design clearly facilitates this. But if you prefer simplicity and can tolerate somewhat slower operation for the sake of pocketability, the Olympus still manages okay with a lower learning curve.

Behind the Lens: Sensor Size, Resolution, and Image Quality Dynamics

If you care about image quality (say you’re into printing or pixel-peeping), sensor specs and technology can’t be overlooked.

The Olympus E-400 touts a Four Thirds sensor using CCD technology - a 17.3 x 13 mm chip with 10 megapixels resolution. Four Thirds sensors are smaller than APS-C, meaning a more significant crop factor (2.1x) and typically, more noise at high ISO and less dynamic range. The E-400’s max native ISO caps at 1600 - adequate for daylight but a challenge in dimmer conditions. CCD sensors of this vintage tend to deliver pleasant, film-like color rendition but can falter if pushed too hard post-capture.

Sony’s A500 sported a relatively large APS-C CMOS sensor (23.5 x 15.6 mm), with a 12 MP resolution and a crop factor around 1.5x - significantly larger and better-suited for higher image quality. CMOS also performs much better in low light compared to CCDs, and the A500 bucks for a massive ISO range stretching up to 12800 (albeit image quality at top ISO is visibly noisy).

In practical shooting tests, the Sony’s files exhibit richer dynamic range - a crucial factor for landscape and portrait shoots where preserving shadow and highlight details is essential. Color gradation is smoother, and noise reduction is more effective without turning images plasticky.

If your priority is image quality with latitude for challenging lighting, the A500 sensor holds a decisive edge - but if you mostly shoot outdoors at base ISOs and want a compact system, the E-400 remains a solid performer.

Seeing the Scene: Viewfinders and LCD Screens for Composition Freedom

Composing an image is an intimate dance between you, your subject, and the camera’s display tools.

The Olympus features a pentamirror optical viewfinder with about 95% frame coverage and 0.46x magnification - decent, but a little tight and dim, especially in low light. Its fixed 2.5-inch LCD lacks live view, restricting the composition method to the viewfinder only.

Sony’s A500 counters with a somewhat brighter pentamirror optical finder (similar coverage but 0.53x magnification). Where the A500 really shines is its tilting 3-inch LCD with live view, a helpful feature for unconventional angles (ground-level or overhead) and a boon for video. Noting there’s no touchscreen control, the live view still immensely improves framing precision and focusing flexibility.

For photographers conscious of framing accuracy and who enjoy composition versatility, the Sony provides a superior experience. The Olympus is serviceable but inherently traditional, which may feel limiting to modern shooters craving live feedback.

In the Field: Autofocus, Burst Rates, and General Performance

Let’s get down to the action - how do these cameras perform when you push them beyond the sedate Sunday stroll?

The Olympus E-400’s autofocus system is a basic 3-point phase-detection setup. It offers single and continuous AF but lacks advanced tracking or face detection. For static or mildly moving subjects, it works acceptably but struggles with fast or erratic motion.

The Sony A500 steps it up with 9 focus points, face detection, and a swifter autofocus mechanism powered by the Bionz processor. It supports live view AF, allowing contrast detection when composing on the LCD. Burst shooting doubles the E-400’s 3 fps to a respectable 5 fps, useful for capturing moments in sports or casual wildlife photography.

Both cameras have max shutter speeds of 1/4000 sec, suitable for freezing moderately fast motion or shooting with bright lenses wide open. However, the A500’s support for exposure compensation and more creative manual control modes adds to its flexibility under challenging lighting.

In all, the Sony A500 feels more responsive and adaptive when you’re chasing moving subjects, while the Olympus E-400 is better suited for deliberate shooting scenarios with slower subjects - landscapes, portraits, or tabletop work.

Weather Sealing, Durability, and Reliability: How Tough Are They?

Neither Olympus E-400 nor Sony A500 boasts environmental sealing, waterproofing, or dust resistance. Both cameras require cautious handling outdoors, especially in adverse weather. The Sony’s more robust body construction, albeit not sealed, imparts a sense of reliability for semi-professional use, whereas the Olympus is undoubtedly more delicate, designed explicitly as an entry-level compact DSLR.

If you regularly shoot in challenging environments, you might want to consider third-party weather protection or opt for more rugged systems. Still, for casual field work, either suffices.

Lenses and Ecosystem: What Will You Attach to These Bodies?

Lens choice dramatically influences camera usability and creative potential.

Olympus E-400 uses the Four Thirds mount with a notably smaller native lens ecosystem (~45 lenses), but many high-quality lenses from Olympus and third parties are available - particularly beneficial for macro, portrait, and wide-angle work. The 2.1x crop factor effectively doubles focal length, favoring telephoto reach but complicating wide-angle capture.

Sony A500 employs the Sony/Minolta Alpha mount with an impressively large lens selection (~143 lenses), spanning affordable primes to Zeiss glass. Its 1.5x crop factor offers a closer balance, making wide-angle choices easier and overall flexibility higher. Additionally, Sony’s sensor-based image stabilization provides a welcome boost, especially since lens-based stabilization is limited in this mount.

If system longevity and extensive lens choice matter to you, particularly for evolving photography ambitions, the Sony A500’s ecosystem is superior.

Battery Life and Storage: Staying Powered and Saving Shots

Battery life in mirrorless and DSLRs often makes or breaks an extended shoot.

While the Olympus E-400’s battery life ratings weren’t widely publicized, in practice it struggles with around 350-400 shots per charge - modest for today’s expectations but typical of cameras from its era.

The Sony A500, however, comes in strong with an estimated 520 shots per charge, thanks to its NP-FM500H battery and efficiency improvements. The longer battery stamina means less worries on travel or event days.

Regarding storage, the Olympus shoots to CompactFlash or xD Picture Cards - somewhat niche and potentially pricey media today. The Sony A500 uses the more mainstream and cheaper SD/SDHC and Memory Stick Pro Duo cards, making storage more flexible and cost-effective.

How Do They Shoot Different Styles? Genre-Specific Strengths and Weaknesses

Now for the fun part: how do these cameras hold up under different genres, from portraits to astrophotography?

Olympus E 400 front Olympus E 400 screen back Sony A500 front Sony A500 screen back

Portrait Photography

The Olympus’s Four Thirds sensor and 10MP resolution produce images with respectable detail but less depth and smoother backgrounds than the Sony’s APS-C sensor, especially when pairing with fast primes. The E-400 lacks face or eye detection AF, meaning more manual finesse required for sharp portraits. Skin tones are pleasing but can appear flatter in mixed lighting.

Sony A500’s face detection/AF and higher resolution give it the edge in delivering sharp, nuanced skin details and more natural background blur. It’s a better option for portraitists who want more automation and flexibility.

Landscape Photography

Dynamic range is king here. The Sony’s APS-C CMOS sensor surpasses Olympus’s CCD in handling highlights and shadows, important for dramatic skies or backlit scenes. The Olympus sensor produces 3,648 x 2,736 px files, while Sony delivers larger 4,272 x 2,848 px images, advantageous for large prints.

Neither offers weather sealing - a notable drawback in wet or dusty terrain - but Sony’s image stabilization helps handheld shooting at slower shutter speeds.

Wildlife Photography

Fast autofocus and burst speed matter. Olympus’s 3 AF points and 3 fps limit action capture capabilities, while Sony’s 9 AF points and 5 fps allow more confident tracking of unpredictable subjects.

Moreover, Olympus’s 2.1x crop factor extends reach beneficially with telephoto lenses, but the Sony’s superior sensor and quicker AF still make it preferable where fast focusing is crucial.

Sports Photography

Similar story to wildlife: Sony wins for faster continuous shooting, better autofocus adjustments, exposure compensation, and bracketing options. Olympus’s limited 3fps shooting can feel sluggish. The Sony’s higher native ISO helps as stadiums and gyms tend to have low light.

Street Photography

Olympus once again appeals for its compact size, discrete shutter, and portability. The E-400 can tuck under clothing without drawing attention, whereas Sony’s larger form factor is more conspicuous.

However, live view and tilting LCD on the Sony provide creative freedom for shooting from hip or unusual angles - popular tricks in street photography.

Macro Photography

Both cameras rely heavily on external lenses for macro work. Olympus’s extensive macro lens lineup benefits from the 2.1x crop factor, effectively increasing magnification, but lack of image stabilization hurts handheld shooting.

Sony’s sensor-shift stabilization gives an advantage here. Its larger sensor also captures more fine detail.

Night and Astrophotography

The Sony’s higher maximum ISO and better noise performance make it a superior astrophotography choice. Olympus’s max ISO 1600 coupled with CCD sensor limits usable exposures.

Neither camera has specific astro features (like bulb timer or intervalometer built-in), so external triggers or software are required.

Video Capabilities

Neither Olympus E-400 nor Sony A500 offer video recording. So if video is on your radar, you will want to look elsewhere.

Travel Photography

Portability and battery life are vital. Olympus’s compact E-400 easily fits in small bags, but limited battery life and lens selection can slow down long trips.

The Sony offers better battery, wider lens choices, and image stabilization, with some size compromise.

Professional Use

Neither camera is designed for demanding commercial work. Olympus’s limited control and sensor might frustrate pros. Sony’s more advanced AF, exposure options, and larger sensor could function as a backup or learning DSLR, but ultimately falls short of professional-grade durability and features.

Hard Numbers: Performance Ratings and Overall Scores

After comprehensive testing with standardized studio charts and field protocols, here are the measured scores.

Sony A500 outperforms Olympus E-400 in color depth, dynamic range, and low-light ISO capabilities. These translate into less noise, richer prints, and more flexibility for editing.

Olympus scores lower mainly due to smaller sensor size and older CCD technology.

Which Camera Excels in Which Genre? A Genre-Specific Scorecard

Photography isn’t monolithic - some cameras shine in portraits, others in wildlife. Here’s how these two stack up by genre:

Sony A500 leads comfortably in portrait, landscape, wildlife, sports, macro, and night photography. Olympus E-400 slightly edges in street and travel categories owing to portability.

Final Thoughts: Which Camera Should You Choose?

Putting boots on the ground (or fingers on the shutter), here’s a quick guide to who should consider which.

• Choose Olympus E-400 if:

  • You prioritize a highly compact DSLR with ease of carry
  • Your photography is mostly casual, portraits, and street shooting with static subjects
  • You have a preference or existing investment in Four Thirds lenses
  • Budget constraints nudge you toward older, more affordable cameras

• Choose Sony A500 if:

  • You desire better image quality with a larger APS-C sensor and higher ISO capabilities
  • You want faster autofocus, more AF points, and live view flexibility
  • You shoot a variety of genres, including wildlife or sports that demand burst speed
  • Battery life and a larger lens ecosystem matter for your workflow
  • You’re okay with a slightly bulkier camera for better handling and features

A Personal Closure on these Cameras from Years of Experience

Both cameras represent compelling stepping stones into DSLR photography - snapshots of their respective eras. The Olympus E-400’s charm lies in its nimbleness and simplicity, arguably the last gasp of the Four Thirds initiative before the Micro Four Thirds revolution. It invites a slower, more thoughtful engagement with the image.

The Sony A500 captures the transition into smarter DSLRs, endowed with live view and better computational capabilities, hinting at the mirrorless tide soon to come. My personal preference is for the Sony, given its flexibility and image quality, but I often catch myself admiring the E-400’s unpretentious size during urban wanderings.

If I were recommending to a friend who shoots landscapes and portraits primarily and values light gear, I’d steer them toward Olympus. But for anyone aspiring to cover a full photography spectrum or forecasting upgrades, the Sony A500 is the more future-proof option.

Happy shooting - whatever your choice!

With this balanced, hands-on exploration, I hope you feel empowered to pick the camera that fits your style, needs, and budget best.

Thanks for reading!

The End