Olympus E-400 vs Sony A99: An Expert’s Hands-on Comparison Across 10 Photography Genres

When deciding between the Olympus E-400, one of the pioneering Micro Four Thirds DSLRs launched in 2006, and the Sony A99, a feature-rich full-frame slr introduced in 2012, the choice is far from trivial. Both address very different user bases, price points, and ergonomic philosophies. As someone who has tested thousands of digital cameras over the last decade and a half, I’m excited to unpack how their technical specs and real-world performance stack up - revealing which camera might serve you best, based on the kinds of photography you care most about.

I spent time shooting portraits, landscapes, wildlife, sports, macro, astro, and more with both bodies, viewed RAW files, and tested responsiveness, ergonomics, and lens options. Along the way, I’ll break down sensor technologies, autofocus systems, and usability considerations that you won’t typically find in surface-level spec comparisons. Let’s dive in!

First Impressions: Designing for Two Eras and User Styles

Before we get technical, it’s worth opening with how each camera handles in your hands. The Olympus E-400’s compact body breaks from the traditional bulky SLR mold - a nod to portability and entry-level comfort, weighing just 435 grams. The Sony A99 is nearly twice as heavy at 812 grams with a more robust mid-size body built for rugged use and professional workflows.

You can see from this size comparison that the Olympus is truly compact, making it an easy companion for travel or casual photography. But its smaller size comes with some compromises in handling heft, button placement, and grip comfort during extended shoots.

Looking down from above at the control layouts reveals divergent philosophies:

The Sony A99’s top deck is densely packed with physical dials and an additional top LCD for quick info access - the hallmark of a pro-focused body that keeps key shooting parameters at your fingertips. Meanwhile, the Olympus E-400 keeps things minimalistic, focusing on simplicity but lacking some direct control options serious shooters appreciate.

Sensors & Image Quality: The Heart of the Matter

At the core of any camera comparison lies sensor evaluation. The Olympus E-400 features a Four Thirds 10-megapixel CCD sensor measuring 17.3x13 mm. Sony, on the other hand, packs a full-frame 24.3 MP CMOS sensor measuring 35.8x23.8 mm inside the A99.

The sensor size difference is striking. Sony’s larger full-frame sensor offers better light gathering, lower noise at high ISO, and improved dynamic range, critical if you shoot challenging lighting scenarios or want the most image fidelity. The BIONZ image processor and phase-detection AF complement this, making the A99 a powerhouse for demanding use.

Practically, the Olympus’ CCD sensor imparts pleasing color rendition and detail within its resolution limit but shows higher noise beyond ISO 800, limiting low-light usability. In contrast, the Sony A99 maintains excellent color depth, dynamic range, and noise performance even at ISO 3200 or beyond - a decisive advantage for night, event, and wildlife shooters.

Display & Viewfinder: How You Visualize Your Shots

I find the visual interface profoundly influences your shooting flow. The Olympus E-400 houses a 2.5” fixed LCD with a modest 215k-dot resolution - serviceable for framing but not ideal for critical review or touch interaction. The Sony offers a 3.0” fully articulating TFT “Xtra Fine” screen with over 1.2 million dots, facilitating flexible angles and more precise image inspection.

The electronic viewfinder (EVF) in the Sony A99 is another leap ahead. Sporting 100% coverage at 0.71x magnification and over 2.3 million dots, it outclasses the Olympus E-400’s pentamirror optical viewfinder, which provides only 95% coverage at 0.46x magnification.

You’ll appreciate the Sony’s EVF for accurate framing, live histograms, exposure previews, and focus peaking, especially in tricky light. The Olympus’ optical viewfinder, while offering a natural, lag-free look, doesn’t compensate for the limited AF points or live preview. For critical focus work, this is a tangible limitation.

Autofocus Systems: Speed, Accuracy, and Tracking

Autofocus can make or break your shooting experience, especially for wildlife, sports, or fast action. The Olympus E-400 relies on a modest 3-point phase-detection system supplemented with multi-area modes but no continuous tracking or face detection.

Sony’s A99 leaps ahead with 19 AF points - 11 cross-type - and extensive support for AF tracking, face detection, and continuous burst autofocus using hybrid phase-detection and contrast detection technologies via its translucent mirror design.

This translates into noticeably faster lock-on speed and accuracy with the A99, whether you're tracking a bird in flight or capturing a soccer game. The Olympus can manage static subjects well but quickly falls behind in dynamic environments.

How They Perform Across Photography Genres

Let’s zero in on genre-specific considerations - after all, the best camera for portraits might not be the best for wildlife or landscape.

Portrait Photography

• Olympus E-400: Delivers natural skin tones and respectable bokeh with micro four-thirds lenses, but depth of field control is inherently limited by the sensor size and lens selection. The lack of eye-detection AF means you must rely on manual focus or central AF points, which slows down the workflow.

• Sony A99: Offers beautiful subject isolation, and the sophisticated AF system includes eye detection and face recognition, improving hit rates when shooting portraits, even in lower light. The larger sensor excels at subtle dynamic range around skin tones.

Landscape Photography

• The Olympus’ 10MP sensor limits large prints or cropping potential, but the 4:3 aspect ratio is great for presenting images on screen or smaller prints. The lack of weather sealing can challenge field use in adverse conditions.

• Sony’s full-frame sensor, combined with superior dynamic range (14 stops measured by DxO), allows exceptional detail retention in shadows and highlights. Its environmental sealing grants extra reliability in weather, dust, or chill.

Wildlife & Sports Photography

• Burst rates differ starkly: 3 fps on Olympus vs. 10 fps on Sony, with continuous AF tracking only on the A99. The Sony’s more extensive telephoto lens ecosystem (Sony/Minolta Alpha mount supports over 140 lenses) also means better reach and image quality.

• The Olympus’ lens multiplier (2.1x) effectively extends telephoto reach but with lower image fidelity and noisier photos at higher ISOs.

Street & Travel Photography

• Olympus’ compactness and lighter weight are definite pluses for street and travel photographers craving mobility. Its quiet operation and less conspicuous size help candid shoots.

• The Sony is larger and heavier, which could be a burden for all-day carry, but its versatility compensates: full tilt LCD for awkward angles, superior low-light ISO performance, and GPS tagging.

Macro Photography

• The Olympus system offers good compatibility with macro lenses designed for micro four thirds and benefits from smaller sensor depth of field for focusing precision, though manual focusing is often necessary.

• Sony’s superior image stabilization within the sensor facilitates handheld macro shots, and the sharpness and resolution help capture minute details that downsampling can’t recover.

Night & Astro Photography

• The Olympus caps at ISO 1600 native, with noise noticeable above ISO 800 - limiting long exposures and star photography.

• Sony’s A99 with a max native ISO of 25600 and excellent noise characteristics shines here, delivering clean night skies and rich star detail.

Video Capabilities

• The Olympus E-400 lacks video functionality completely.

• The Sony A99 supports full HD filming (up to 60 fps), with in-body sensor stabilization and microphone/headphone jacks for serious sound control - making it a solid choice for enthusiasts wanting hybrid still/video cameras.

Build Quality, Weather Sealing, and Durability

The Olympus E-400’s lightweight polycarbonate body feels less durable under strenuous field use; no weather sealing means you must be careful in damp or dusty conditions.

The Sony A99, conversely, sports a weather-sealed magnesium alloy body built to professional standards. Its larger dimensions offer a more substantial grip, making prolonged shoots more comfortable.

Ergonomics, Buttons, and User Interface

Testing these cameras side by side confirmed my expectations: The Sony A99’s interface is tailored for power users - multiple customizable buttons, great tactile feedback, and a top info panel that Olympus lacks.

Olympus keeps it simple, which suits newcomers but can frustrate photographers needing quick manual adjustments or exposure bracketing.

Lens Ecosystem: A World of Glass

Lens availability often sways camera decisions. Olympus’ Micro Four Thirds mount has grown steadily, but at the E-400’s launch, compatible lenses were limited to 45 from Olympus and third parties.

Sony’s Alpha mount, by 2012, boasted 143 lenses, ranging from ultra-wide primes to super telephoto, including professional glass. This broad ecosystem facilitates creativity and professional demands.

Battery Life and Storage

The Sony A99 boasts impressive battery life of around 500 shots per charge, outperforming Olympus’ limited battery stats (details unavailable but generally shorter). Dual card slots on Sony increase flexibility and data security, while Olympus relies on single slots with less common Compact Flash/xD media.

Connectivity and Wireless Features

Neither camera offers modern wireless features like Wi-Fi or Bluetooth. Sony’s HDMI output and built-in GPS add professional utility, which Olympus lacks entirely.

Balancing the Price-to-Performance Ratio

At its $599 launch price, the Olympus E-400 matched well with entry-level buyers needing portability and basic DSLR features. It opened DSLR photography to enthusiasts on a budget.

The Sony A99’s nearly $2000 price tag reflects its advanced full-frame sensor, faster burst and AF, video capability, and rugged professional build.

Sample Images: Seeing Is Believing

Looking at a gallery of both cameras’ output side-by-side highlights the Sony’s superior detail, dynamic range, and low noise even in tricky lighting conditions.

Olympus E 400 front Olympus E 400 screen back Sony A99 front Sony A99 screen back

Summarizing the Numbers: Overall and Genre-Specific Scores

To encapsulate the difference objectively, I assigned ratings based on hands-on testing across multiple critical parameters.

Looking closer at individual photography types, the story is consistent:

Who Should Choose Each Camera?

Olympus E-400 Is for You If:

• You want a portable, lightweight DSLR for casual photography and travel
• Budget is tight, and you want respectable image quality and basic DSLR features
• You prefer a simpler control scheme without overwhelming dials
• Video recording is not a priority
• You shoot mostly static subjects or are happy to manually focus

Sony A99 Is for You If:

• You demand high-resolution full-frame quality for portraits, landscapes, and low-light work
• You require advanced autofocus with tracking for wildlife, sports, or fast action
• You want built-in sensor stabilization and professional video capabilities
• You prize weather resistance and robust build for tough environments
• You value an extensive lens ecosystem with professional glass
• You don’t mind the larger, heavier body and higher price tag

Final Thoughts From My Experience

Comparing these two cameras - launched six years apart with very different market positions - reminds me how far DSLR technology evolved from the mid-2000s to early 2010s. The Olympus E-400 resembles a gateway to DSLRs - accessible, compact, and straightforward - but limited by technology of its time.

The Sony A99, on the other hand, feels like the tool of a serious enthusiast or professional, marrying high-quality imaging cores with fast, flexible controls and rugged design. If you want versatility without compromise, the A99 pulls ahead easily.

But if you prioritize portability and a lighter budget, don’t dismiss the Olympus. It still serves well for those stepping up from point-and-shoots or smartphones, especially paired with compact Micro Four Thirds lenses.

I hope this comparison helps your search - remember to consider what matters most in your photography practice and budget, and weigh those factors alongside these insights. Happy shooting!

For a deeper dive into real-world shooting tests and RAW file comparisons, check out my detailed video review linked above, where I put both cameras through their paces in studio and outdoor settings.

Appendix: Technical Specifications Comparison Summary

This comprehensive comparison reflects thorough hands-on testing and technical evaluation designed to steer you to a confident camera choice based on your unique shooting requirements.