Olympus FE-5020 vs Olympus VG-160: A Detailed Camera Comparison for the Enthusiast Eye

When it comes to choosing an entry-level compact camera, the options can be surprisingly nuanced, even within a single brand’s lineup. Today, I’m diving into the Olympus FE-5020 and Olympus VG-160 - two small-sensor, fixed-lens compacts aimed at casual shooters but with different feature sets and design philosophies. Despite their modest specs, these cameras represent distinct epochs in Olympus’ compact camera evolution around the 2009 to 2012 period. After testing both extensively, I’ll break down how each performs across multiple photography styles and technical benchmarks, giving you the clarity you need to decide which might fit your needs - or whether to look beyond them altogether.

Let’s start with a quick visual overview to set the stage.

Handling and Ergonomics: Feel the Difference

First impressions count, and these two cameras feel subtly different in hand. The FE-5020, introduced in 2009, is slightly thicker (25 mm) and weighs 137 grams, while the VG-160, arriving three years later, trimmed down to 19 mm thickness and 125 grams. That makes the VG-160 flatter and a little lighter - more pocketable for street and travel photography.

Looking at the top controls…

…neither camera offers manual exposure controls, so Olympus kept things simple: a mode dial combined with zoom and shutter buttons. The FE-5020 opts for a more rounded grip area, a small advantage if you want a stable hold, but the VG-160’s sleeker form feels less bulky for quick shots on the go. Neither has an electronic viewfinder, so you’ll be relying heavily on their LCDs, which brings us to screen tech.

The VG-160 sports a 3-inch TFT LCD, slightly larger than the FE-5020’s 2.7-inch fixed screen. Resolution is similar at 230k dots, but the VG-160’s newer screen has better viewing angles and contrast, which really helps when framing shots in bright daylight. Neither has touch controls or articulating screens, typical for cameras in their class and generation.

So, if shooting comfort and composure are priorities for you, the VG-160 wins on ergonomics and display clarity. But that’s just the start - image quality and speed often trump feel.

Sensor, Image Quality & Performance: The Heart of the Matter

Both cameras use a 1/2.3-inch CCD sensor measuring 6.17 x 4.55 mm, a diminutive size by today’s standards but common for compact cameras. However, the FE-5020 offers 12 megapixels, while the VG-160 bumps that to 14 MP.

On paper, the VG-160’s modest resolution increase should yield slightly sharper images with finer detail. But does more megapixels necessarily mean better photos? Not always. The FE-5020’s TruePic III processor - vintage but optimized - handles noise reduction aggressively, which trades off some detail for cleaner images, especially at ISO 400 and above. The VG-160’s processor is not specified by Olympus but introduces basic white balance bracketing, hinting at slightly enhanced color processing.

Speaking of ISO, both tops out at 1600 native sensitivity, but given the CCD sensor, you’ll notice significant noise at the high end, especially in dim scenes or indoor portraits. Neither offers RAW capture, which limits post-processing flexibility - a downside for enthusiasts wanting complete image control.

In real-world shooting across various lighting conditions, the VG-160 impresses with marginally improved sharpness and a bit more dynamic range, but the differences won't dazzle most casual photographers. That said, the VG-160 supports face detection autofocus - a boon for portraits and group shots - while the FE-5020 lacks any advanced AF features.

Let's put some sample images side by side for a direct look.

Olympus FE 5020 front Olympus FE 5020 screen back Olympus VG 160 front Olympus VG 160 screen back

Looking at portraits, the VG-160’s face detection keeps subjects sharply focused and natural-looking. Skin tones are generally pleasant and well-balanced out of camera, although neither camera can compete with modern sensors on smooth bokeh or shallow depth of field - expected given their small sensors and f/2.8-6.5 / f/3.3-5.8 apertures.

Meanwhile, landscape shots reveal limited dynamic range on both cameras, with highlight clipping on bright skies and shadows that lack detail. The VG-160’s slightly higher resolution allows for better printing at larger sizes but again, detail retention beyond 8x10 prints might be optimistic.

Autofocus and Speed: Do These Cameras Keep Up?

Neither camera has continuous autofocus or tracking modes, which limits action or wildlife photography capabilities. The FE-5020 relies on a simple contrast-detection AF system with single-area focusing only, which results in slower lock times, especially in low light. The VG-160 improves this somewhat with multi-area contrast AF and face detection, but burst shooting isn't supported on either.

Neither can keep up with fast-moving subjects like sports or wildlife. So, if shooting soccer games or birds in flight is your main goal, these likely fall short.

Build Quality and Weather Resistance: Will They Last?

Interestingly, the FE-5020 is equipped with basic environmental sealing. While it's not waterproof or shockproof, this gives some protection against dust and moisture - a surprising feature among low-cost compacts of its era. The VG-160, on the other hand, has no environmental sealing at all. Both are constructed mainly of plastic with simple mechanical buttons, so don’t expect rugged professional durability.

For travelers who shoot outdoors, dust resistance can mean less downtime for cleaning and fewer image artifacts due to sensor contamination.

Zoom Range and Macro Capabilities: Flexibility for Close and Far

The FE-5020 offers a 24–120 mm equivalent zoom, while the VG-160 slightly extends focal reach to 26–130 mm. Optical quality on both is average but usable for casual snapshooting. Maximum apertures are slower than ideal - FE-5020’s f/3.3–5.8 and VG-160’s f/2.8–6.5 - so low-light zoom shots will push ISO higher and noise will appear earlier.

Where the FE-5020 stands out is macro focusing down to 1 cm - exceptionally close - allowing detailed capture of tiny objects and textures. The VG-160’s macro mode’s closest focus is 7 cm, which is adequate but doesn’t offer quite the same intimacy. Neither has image stabilization, so handheld macro shots may require steady hands or a tripod.

Video Capabilities: Modest by Today’s Standards

Neither camera is designed for serious videography. The FE-5020 caps video at 640 x 480 (VGA) resolution at 30 fps, with uncompressed MJPEG format. The VG-160 improves to 1280 x 720 (720p HD) at 30 fps, offering a noticeably sharper video image for casual use.

Neither provides an external microphone port or headphone jack - so sound quality is basic and not adjustable. Video stabilization is absent, so expect shaky footage without accessories.

If video is a serious focus, consider more modern models or DSLRs/mirrorless cameras with comprehensive video features.

Battery Life and Storage Options: Planning Your Shoot

In terms of power, the FE-5020 uses the Olympus LI-42B battery but does not specify exact battery life in shots per charge. The VG-160 uses the LI-70B battery with an official estimate of 165 shots per charge, which is quite modest.

Neither camera supports USB charging, so you’ll need to carry battery spares for extended shoots.

As for storage, the FE-5020 accepts the proprietary xD-Picture Card as well as microSD cards, while the VG-160 uses standard SD/SDHC cards. Given the ease of finding SD cards and greater capacities, the VG-160 offers more convenient and cost-effective storage options long-term.

Connectivity and Sharing: Minimal Options

Neither camera includes wireless connectivity such as Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, NFC, or GPS tagging. In an era when instant sharing is often key, this constraint means you’ll need to physically transfer files via USB or card readers.

Pricing and Value: What You Get for Your Money

At current estimated prices, the FE-5020 hovers around $160, while the VG-160 can be found for approximately $90. Given the VG-160’s newer design, added megapixels, larger display, and HD video, it arguably offers stronger value for budget-conscious buyers. However, if you find the environmental sealing of the FE-5020 appealing for outdoor use, that could justify paying more.

Let's look at the overall performance ratings I assessed after extensive side-by-side testing:

On paper, the VG-160 edges out the FE-5020 in image quality, usability, and features, but neither scores highly for professional use nor in high-performance categories like speed or low-light. For everyday casual photography - vacations, family snapshots, basic macro work - both fulfill core demands adequately.

How These Cameras Perform Across Photography Genres

To provide a focused guide, here’s how each camera handles popular genres, referencing performance analysis:

Portrait Photography

• VG-160: Face detection autofocus shines here, aiding sharp focus on eyes and faces. Colors are pleasing but limited in depth.
• FE-5020: No face detection, so getting tack-sharp focus on eyes requires careful aim.
• Neither provides shallow depth or creamy bokeh due to sensor size and lens aperture.

Landscape Photography

• Both struggle with dynamic range; shadows and highlights lose detail under challenging light.
• VG-160’s higher resolution yields more detail for prints.
• FE-5020’s environmental sealing offers a resilience advantage against dust, useful outdoors.
• Neither has weather sealing for rain or harsh conditions.

Wildlife Photography

• Both cameras lack fast continuous autofocus, tracking, or burst speed - unfit for action or wildlife.
• Zoom ranges provide modest reach for casual animal shots.

Sports Photography

• Neither offers rapid burst shooting or subject tracking expected in sports cameras.

Street Photography

• VG-160’s smaller, flatter body is easier to conceal and quick to deploy.
• Both cameras are quiet but lack silent shutter mode.
• VGA live view responsiveness is average.

Macro Photography

• FE-5020 excels with near 1 cm macro focusing, enabling detailed close-ups.
• VG-160’s 7 cm min focusing is decent but less flexible.

Night and Astro Photography

• Low-light performance is capped by sensor size and noise levels.
• Absence of manual exposure modes limits control for night photographers.

Video Capabilities

• VG-160’s 720p video is acceptable for casual use; FE-5020 limited to VGA resolution.
• No stabilization or audio inputs reduce video quality.

Travel Photography

• VG-160’s lighter, slimmer body combined with improved screen and extended zoom suits travel well.
• FE-5020’s dust sealing could be appreciated on dusty adventures.

Professional Use

• Neither supports RAW capture, limiting advanced workflows.
• Both are designed as amateur compacts with no serious professional workflow integration.

The Final Verdict: Which Olympus Compact Suits Your Style?

Summarizing the detailed insights above:

• Choose the Olympus VG-160 if… you want a compact, affordable camera with slightly better image quality, face detection to aid portraits, HD video, and convenience features like a larger screen and standard SD card support. Its form factor and specs favor casual photographers and travelers wanting simple, reliable pictures without fuss.

• Choose the Olympus FE-5020 if… your shooting ventures include dusty or moderately harsh environments where a bit of environmental sealing helps protect your gear. Also, if macro photography excursions excite you, the impressively close 1-cm focusing distance is compelling. Be ready to handle a slightly thicker body and forgo face detection.

Given the significant price gap and technological improvements between the release dates, I personally lean towards the VG-160 for most casual users wanting the best bang for their buck. For macro enthusiasts or those valuing durability over ultra-portability, the FE-5020 remains a valid contender.

If you can, test each model in person or review sample images from photographers shooting with them in the wild. Hands-on experience remains invaluable beyond technical specs alone.

Whether you’re capturing memories or honing your photography hobby, I hope this hands-on comparison clarifies what these Olympus compacts offer and where they've quietly excelled or constrained shooting possibilities.

Happy shooting!

For more detailed shot comparisons and in-depth video reviews, check the linked galleries and testing workflow notes in my full review series.