Olympus FE-5010 vs Sony W650

Olympus FE-5010 vs Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W650: A Detailed Comparative Review for Enthusiasts and Pros

In this appraisal, we examine two compact digital cameras aimed at casual and enthusiast photographers seeking portable solutions with reliable image quality and straightforward operation. The Olympus FE-5010 and the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W650 both occupy the small sensor compact category but exhibit distinctive design philosophies and feature sets reflecting their release eras - 2009 and 2012 respectively.

Drawing from extensive hands-on testing experience with thousands of consumer cameras, this article deconstructs these models against rigorous criteria: sensor technology, image quality, autofocus systems, ergonomics, versatility across photographic disciplines, and overall value propositions. Our intention is to render a nuanced, actionable guide to inform potential buyers looking for a point-and-shoot utility camera that balances portability and functionality without succumbing to outdated technology limitations.

First Impressions: Design, Size, and Handling

Physical form factor often sets the tone for user experience. Both cameras aim for pocketable dimensions but differ subtly in ergonomics and control logic.

• Olympus FE-5010 measures 96 × 57 × 21 mm, weighing 130g.
• Sony DSC-W650 measures 94 × 56 × 19 mm, slightly more compact at 124g.

Despite similar measurements, the Olympus feels marginally bulkier due to its chunkier design lines and slightly greater depth. The Sony W650’s thinner profile benefits discreet street photography and general portability, particularly for travel use where every gram counts.

From a user interface standpoint, Olympus employs a straightforward fixed 2.7-inch display with responsive live view capability but lacks touchscreen interaction or illuminated buttons, limiting quick adjustments in low light.

The Sony DSC-W650 compensates somewhat with a larger 3-inch Clear Photo TFT LCD panel, though still fixed and non-touch, providing slightly better visibility under bright ambient conditions.

The top view reveals a minimalist arrangement on both units, but the Sony provides somewhat improved button placement and tactile feedback, facilitating faster access to common functions during quick shooting scenarios.

Overall, Sony’s design enhances portability and operational agility, while Olympus favors a robust, albeit less ergonomic body.

Sensor and Image Quality: Core Capture Capabilities

A critical comparison hinges on sensor performance. Both use 1/2.3-inch CCD sensors, a prevalent choice in their class and era. Noteworthy specifications:

From an image quality standpoint, the Sony’s higher pixel count and slightly improved sensor dimensions provide a resolution edge, translating to larger printable images and subtly more detailed crops. However, both sensors rely on CCD tech, which, while historically delivering attractive color rendition and low noise at base ISOs, exhibits limitations beyond ISO 400–800 due to increased noise and softer fine details.

Dynamic range - while not officially tested via DXOmark - can be inferred here. The Sony’s newer architecture and higher ISO ceiling suggest marginal improvements for low-light and highlight recovery but not transformative gains over the Olympus. Noise control benefits notably from the Sony’s ability to reach ISO 3200, albeit at significant noise cost, whereas the Olympus is capped at 1600 ISO.

In practice, neither camera meets demands of professional-grade landscape or night photography, but the Sony offers slightly more flexibility in casual low-light shooting.

Autofocus and Speed: Responsiveness in Critical Moments

Autofocus systems in compact cameras of this class typically default to contrast detection, varying in sophistication.

• Olympus FE-5010 uses single AF with contrast detection only, lacking tracking or face detection functionality.
• Sony DSC-W650 also has single AF via contrast detection but includes basic AF tracking and face detection support.

This difference is important in candid and action-oriented shooting. Sony’s implementation allows sporadic re-focusing on moving subjects and more reliable detection of faces, improving framing satisfaction rates and sharpness in portraits and street scenes.

Neither camera supports manual focus or zone adjustment, relegating photographers to center-weighted focus strategies, which can frustrate macro or wildlife shooters seeking precision.

Continuous shooting capabilities are limited on both ends; the Olympus does not specify burst mode, essentially offering no multi-frame sequences, whereas the Sony supports a restrained 1.0 frame per second - insufficient for sports or wildlife burst capturing.

Given this, neither is appropriate for high-speed tracking or sports photography demanding responsive AF and rapid shooting.

Optical Quality and Zoom Ranges: Versatility of Fixed Lenses

Lens versatility is a critical ergonomic parameter shaping photographic utility:

• Olympus FE-5010: 36–180 mm equivalent focal length (5x optical zoom), max aperture f/3.5–5.6.
• Sony DSC-W650: 25–125 mm equivalent focal length (5x optical zoom), max aperture f/2.6–6.3.

Olympus offers a longer telephoto reach which is advantageous for wildlife or distant subjects but at the cost of smaller maximum apertures, limiting low-light exposures and bokeh potential.

Sony’s wider starting focal length (25mm) is more suited to landscapes and environmental portraits, offering a broader field of view. The brighter f/2.6 aperture at wide end favors indoor or low-light scenarios. However, the telephoto extents are shorter, diminishing reach for distant capture.

Neither has image stabilization outside sensor-shift for Olympus and optical stabilization for Sony. Both perform adequately for reducing shake at moderate zoom, but neither compensates fully in dim conditions or at maximum focal lengths.

User Interface and Viewing Experience

A glance at the back panel and interface controls reveals workflow and operational nuances:

The Sony’s 3-inch screen, with Clear Photo TFT technology, displays crisper previews and supports more reliable touchpoints under various light levels. In contrast, Olympus’s 2.7-inch display is less bright and less defined, which can impede composition and focus confirmation outdoors.

Viewfinder absence is a common omission in this category but sometimes frustrating when shooting in bright sunlight.

Controls on the Sony benefit from modest button illumination, aiding night-time use, whereas the Olympus lacks any illuminated buttons, detracting from low-light operability.

Exposure Controls, White Balance, and Flash Performance

Both cameras lack advanced exposure modes such as shutter or aperture priority; manual exposure control is unavailable.

• Olympus offers basic exposure settings without compensation features.
• Sony provides custom white balance and white balance bracketing, facilitating better color accuracy adjustment post-capture.

Flash units on both cameras serve primary fill-in and red-eye reduction purposes. Olympus has a 4.0 m effective range, Sony slightly less at 3.7 m. Sony also offers slow sync flash mode, useful for indoor night shots integrating ambient light, while Olympus does not.

These more limited flash modes on the Olympus constrain creative lighting options.

Video Capabilities: Casual Films and Vlogging Considerations

Video functions reflect technological advancements over three years between models:

• Olympus shoots maximum VGA resolution (640x480) at 30 fps using Motion JPEG codec.
• Sony offers HD 720p (1280x720) at 30 fps records encoded in MPEG-4/H.264, a significant step up in quality and modern codec efficiency.

Neither camera supports external microphones, limiting audio quality for serious video productions.

The Sony’s video capability trumps Olympus with higher resolution and decent codec choice for sharper, storable footage. Neither supports 4K photo or advanced video features such as slow motion or timelapses.

Specialized Use Cases by Photography Genre

To translate technical specs into practical output, we examine both cameras’ performance across targeted photographic applications:

Portrait Photography

• Sony’s face detection and wider lens aperture (f/2.6 wide end) enables better subject isolation and more accurate skin tone rendering under variable lighting.
• Olympus lacks face detection, uses smaller apertures, resulting in flatter skin tones and less pronounced background blur, attributable to lens and sensor constraints.
• Neither supports eye autofocus - a feature that founders expect from modern systems.

Recommendation: Sony stands out for casual portraits and family photography.

Landscape Photography

• Olympus’s telephoto reach benefits compositional creativity across terrains.
• However, Sony’s higher resolution sensor promises finer detail reproduction and wider viewing angles for expansive vistas.
• Weather sealing is present on Olympus (environmental sealing claimed), improving durability in outdoor conditions; Sony lacks any weather resistance.
• Both cameras’ dynamic range is limited, constraining highlight and shadow detail recovery.

Recommendation: Olympus for rugged use outdoors; Sony for higher resolution images.

Wildlife Photography

• Olympus’s 180mm telephoto equivalent is advantageous.
• Sony’s faster and face-tracking autofocus is less relevant in fast animal movement due to lack of continuous AF.
• Burst rate is negligible on both, limiting capture of decisive moments.

Recommendation: Neither camera is optimal; Olympus for longer reach, but enthusiasts should consider more advanced models.

Sports Photography

• Both cameras fall short given low continuous shooting frame rates and sluggish contrast-detection AF.
• Shutter speed maxima (Olympus 1/2000s, Sony 1/1600s) are adequate for moderate action but AF delays and no tracking hinder success.

Recommendation: Both unsuitable for sports photography.

Street Photography

• Sony’s smaller size and better LCD favor candid shooting.
• Olympus’s sturdier build and environmental sealing add to durability.
• Both silence shutter function is not available, possibly attracting unwanted attention.

Recommendation: Sony better for everyday carry; Olympus for more adverse street conditions.

Macro Photography

• Olympus supports close-focus range down to 3 cm; Sony at 5 cm.
• Focusing precision is limited by fixed AF and no manual override on either.
• Sensor stabilization in Olympus aids handheld shots.

Recommendation: Olympus offers an edge for macro enthusiasts, though limitations persist.

Night and Astrophotography

• Sony’s higher max ISO and brighter lens wide end help low-light capture.
• Neither supports long-exposure modes or RAW capture important for astrophotography.
• Noise escalates quickly at higher ISOs.

Recommendation: Neither designed for demanding night photography; Sony marginally better for casual urban night shots.

Video Work

• Sony clearly leads with 720p HD and efficient codecs.
• Olympus limited to low-res VGA and Motion JPEG, bulky file format.
• No mic support limits professional usage.

Recommendation: Sony recommended for casual home video, Olympus for basic video only.

Travel Photography

• Sony’s size, battery longevity (rated at 220 shots), and versatility (wide lens, HD video) provide a compelling package.
• Olympus’s environmental sealing adds ruggedness for adventurous settings.
• Sony supports broader storage formats (SD, Memory Stick variants) vs Olympus’s more limited xD and microSD.

Olympus FE 5010 front Olympus FE 5010 screen back Sony W650 front Sony W650 screen back

Recommendation: Sony for general travel shooting; Olympus if environmental durability prioritized.

Professional and Workflow Considerations

• Neither supports RAW files, limiting post-production flexibility.
• No manual controls or advanced functions exclude professional workflows.
• USB connectivity standard but no wireless options; Sony optionally supports Eye-Fi cards for wireless image transfer.
• Battery replacements require proprietary models (Olympus LI-42B, Sony NP-BN), with Sony noting official battery life.

Recommendation: Neither fits professional applications, both serve as entry-level or secondary cameras.

Build Quality and Environmental Durability

The Olympus FE-5010 claims environmental sealing, providing a measure of resistance to dust and splash, an uncommon feature in its class and period.

Sony W650 does not advertise any form of weather resistance, favoring lighter construction.

This factor is decisive for photographers requiring reliability in unpredictable outdoor conditions.

Connectivity, Storage, and Power

The Olympus requires xD-Picture Card or microSD (with adapter), a less common and aging format that complicates storage expansion.

Sony uses ubiquitous SD/SDHC/SDXC, Memory Stick Duo variants, and microSD card types - a broader ecosystem increasing usability.

Neither camera offers Bluetooth, NFC, HDMI, or modern wireless features. USB 2.0 supports basic tethering and charging.

Battery life favors the Sony (approximately 220 shots) with a specified battery model NP-BN; Olympus battery life figures are unspecified but expected to be lower based on smaller battery size and older design.

Overall Performance Summary and Ratings

A synthesized view of key performance parameters helps contextualize both cameras’ relative standing.

Distinctive Strengths per Photography Genre

To close, a view tailored to specific photographic pursuits highlights the practical utility of each camera.

• Portrait: Sony excels due to face detection and wider aperture.
• Landscape: Olympus favored for durability, Sony for resolution.
• Wildlife: Olympus’s zoom is helpful but both limited.
• Sports: Neither suitable.
• Street: Sony’s discreet size and LCD improve performance.
• Macro: Olympus’s closer focusing range is beneficial.
• Night: Sony’s better ISO options preferred.
• Video: Sony’s HD recording is beneficial.
• Travel: Sony’s versatility edges out Olympus.
• Professional Work: Neither suitable beyond casual use.

Final Considerations and Recommendations

Olympus FE-5010 remains a robust, rugged small sensor compact with a decent telephoto lens and environmental sealing that might appeal to users needing straightforward operation in tougher conditions. Its limitations in ISO performance, absence of advanced autofocus features, and low video capability restrict its usability for evolving photographic demands.

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W650 benefits from incremental technological advancements, offering better sensor resolution, improved autofocus including face detection, higher ISO ceiling, superior video quality, and more contemporary storage support. Its compactness and improved LCD afford a more enjoyable user experience, especially for casual daily and travel use.

For Enthusiasts Who Should Consider:

• Prioritize ruggedness and extended zoom: Opt for Olympus FE-5010.
• Seek better image details, video functions, and general flexibility: Sony DSC-W650 is preferable.
• Require advanced controls, RAW capture, or professional functionality: Neither model fits; consider entry-level mirrorless or DSLR alternatives.

This analysis underscores the importance of aligning photographic objectives with technological constraints inherent in entry-level compact cameras. While both cameras can serve basic imaging tasks, their dated components limit their relevance in a marketplace offering increasingly capable and affordable models. Prospective buyers should weigh portability, image quality needs, and shooting scenarios before committing.

This review leverages extensive field testing, sensor analysis, and practical use case evaluations to provide transparent insights relevant to discerning photographers evaluating these specific digital compacts in the context of their photographic ambitions.