Olympus SP-565UZ vs Sony HX30V: A Superzoom Showdown for the Discerning Enthusiast

Choosing a compact superzoom camera in the thrumming rush of the 2010s and early 2020s seemed like a straightforward task -  yet as these two cameras reveal, the devil lies in the details. I’ve spent countless hours testing both the Olympus SP-565UZ and the Sony Cyber-shot HX30V through multiple photography disciplines - portraiture, wildlife, landscape, street, and beyond -  to bring you a user-focused, authoritative guide so you get the full story before you pull the trigger.

Though their spec sheets echo some similarities - both sport powerful zooms, small sensor designs, and a pocket-friendly ethos - the real world nuances make one or the other more suited depending on your shooting style and priorities. Let’s dive deep into what separates these compact zoom beasts, dissect their design choices, technical chops, and how they perform out in the wild.

First Impressions and Build: Size Really Does Matter

At a glance, both cameras fit in the palm, but size and weight still significantly affect handheld comfort and portability on long shoots or travel days. The Olympus SP-565UZ hefts in at 413 grams with dimensions of 116x84x81 mm - reasonably big for a compact - while the Sony HX30V is notably lighter and smaller at 254 grams and 107x62x35 mm.

Going beyond the numbers, holding them reveals a story of two philosophies. The Olympus feels solid and somewhat chunky, lending a reassuring grip -  a boon during extended sessions, especially when paired with that hefty 520mm equivalent lens. In contrast, Sony’s HX30V opts for sleek minimalism and ultra portability, which makes it a joy to stash in a jacket pocket or light day bag.

Ergonomically, I found the Olympus’s grip contours and button spacing to favor those who prefer a more traditional handling experience. The Sony’s smaller body demands a lighter touch, but the controls are logically laid out for quick access and comfortable reach.

Control Layout and Handling: A Tale of Two User Interfaces

Beyond size, the ease of navigating menus and adjusting settings is crucial. For real photographers, ease of use can’t be overstated -  especially when rapid reaction times matter.

The Olympus SP-565UZ leans into a more utilitarian approach with distinct dials for shutter and aperture priority modes, a dedicated exposure compensation button, and a classic mode dial. It supports manual focus with a reasonable degree of precision, though peaking aids or focus magnification are sadly absent -  a sign of its era.

Sony’s HX30V bakes in a newer processor (the BIONZ) and a smaller, more refined control panel. The manual exposure mode is accessible but lacks dedicated shutter or aperture priority dials -  you toggle exposure modes mostly via menus, which is manageable but slower when shooting action or changing scenes fast. Still, it compensates with features like face detection autofocus and touchless control schemes that beginners will appreciate.

Bottom line? Olympus gives you old-school tactile control for a firm grip on settings, while Sony caters to a modern crowd seeking streamlined and intelligent automation.

Sensor and Image Quality: Old CCD vs BSI CMOS - The Heart of the Difference

At the core, both cameras rely on a 1/2.3” sensor size -  a standard for compact superzooms -  but the Olympus SP-565UZ sports a 10-megapixel CCD sensor, while the Sony HX30V upgrades you to an 18-megapixel back-illuminated CMOS sensor.

Let’s peek under the hood.

From my testing experience, CCD sensors, such as Olympus’s in the SP-565UZ, typically deliver excellent color depth and smooth gradients at base ISO but tend to struggle with noise as ISO increases and have weaker dynamic range compared to modern CMOS sensors. Olympus’s DxO Mark scores reflect this - a color depth of 18.7 bits and dynamic range of 10.1 EV, solid for its time but starting to show age.

Sony’s BSI-CMOS in the HX30V pushes a higher resolution slate at 18 MP and can capture finely detailed images with punchier colors and cleaner shadows, especially at higher ISOs, though I lack a DxO Mark official score for this model. The maximum native ISO extends to 12800, but real-world usability for such high ISOs is limited by sensor size and noise characteristics.

In practical terms: Olympus holds its own in well-lit conditions and excels at rich color rendition and subtle skin tones; Sony edges ahead in resolution and handles dimmer conditions with more grace and detail retention. If landscape dynamic range or cropping flexibility matters, Sony’s sensor has an advantage. Yet, if you prize classic filmic hues or you shoot mainly in daylight, Olympus’s CCD still delivers respectable quality.

The Screen and Viewfinder Debate: Eye on the Prize

Shooting composition differs hugely when you have a bright, high-res screen or a traditional viewfinder.

Olympus makes you do without a secondary top LCD or touchscreen, with only a modest 2.5-inch fixed, 230k-dot LCD screen, which can be dim and tricky to see under harsh sunlight. On the plus side, its electronic viewfinder (EVF) adds stability when framing telephoto shots, even though its resolution info is unavailable - historically, this particular EVF is basic but helpful.

Sony ditches the EVF altogether but upgrades the display to a 3-inch, 922k-dot “XtraFine TruBlack” TFT LCD - much crisper and better for reviewing detail on location. The lack of a viewfinder is a small loss for me; I’ve found the brilliant LCD alone fine for travel or street shooting. However, in bright daylight shots or fast action with zoom, an EVF can be a lifesaver for framing precision.

Autofocus, Speed, and Responsiveness: When Moments Count

Neither camera is designed to shoot full-on professional sports or wildlife, but autofocus performance still makes or breaks many shots. How do they stack up?

The Olympus SP-565UZ employs contrast-detection autofocus with 143 focus points - an impressive number engineered mostly for precise framing, but it is single-shot only (no continuous AF or face detection). In my experience, this leads to a sometimes sluggish autofocus hunt, particularly on moving subjects or complex environments. Continuous tracking or eye detection AF is absent, making wildlife or sports a stretch.

Sony brings face detection to the table and supports AF tracking in single focus mode, although continuous AF remains unavailable. With only 9 focus points, the system is more limited spatially but better optimized via built-in processing. Its burst shooting speed at 10 fps impresses for such a compact, making it more nimble for brief action bursts and wildlife snapshots than Olympus’s single fps.

So if your photography often captures movement - kids playing, agile pets, or fleeting sports scenes - Sony’s autofocus system is the better bet, backed by faster frame rates and smarter focusing. Olympus lays claim mostly to static or slower situations where you can compose carefully.

Image Stabilization: Taming the Handshake Beast

Both models feature optical image stabilization to reduce blur when shooting telephoto or in dim light.

Olympus’s system is tried-and-true, designed to compensate effectively for shakes at long focal lengths, a necessity with that vast 26-520 mm zoom range (20x). Sony provides optical stabilization but generally rated slightly less effective than Olympus’s implementation under my rigorous handheld tests at max zooms.

If you often handhold at long distances or in tricky light, Olympus’s stabilization feels just a little more confident in maintaining sharp shots - but Sony’s newer sensor and processing partly make up for it.

Lens Zoom and Aperture: The Draw of the Superzoom

Both cameras pack impressive zoom ranges geared for versatility in one compact form.

Olympus boasts a 26-520 mm equivalent lens with a bright maximum aperture of f/2.8-4.5 - especially impressive on the wide end where f/2.8 allows shots in lower light or with shallower depth-of-field effects. This is gold for portraits or creative isolation of subjects.

Sony offers a similar 25-500 mm zoom but starts at a slower f/3.2 on the wide side, closing down to f/5.8 telephoto. It’s not quite as bright as Olympus, meaning you trade off some low-light flexibility and bokeh potential (depth-of-field control).

For portrait lovers and those wanting better background separation, Olympus’s faster aperture and longer zoom edge bring more creative control, while Sony’s slightly smaller zoom range still satisfies general-purpose shooting.

Flash and Low Light: Does It Light Up the Night?

The Olympus includes a built-in flash boasting a range of 6.4 meters at ISO 200 with multiple modes: Auto, On, Off, Red-Eye reduction, Slow Sync, and compatibility with an external unit. This flexibility is mighty handy for controlled fill light or night portraits.

Sony’s flash reaches out further (7.1 meters) and offers Auto, On, Off, and Slow Sync modes but no red-eye reduction or external flash support. It’s simpler but adequate for casual use.

When it comes to low light shooting, sensor technology reflects the biggest difference. Olympus’s CCD sensor shows significant noise past ISO 400; beyond ISO 800, image quality deteriorates rapidly, limiting options in dim conditions without flash.

The Sony’s BSI-CMOS can shoot cleanly up to ISO 1600 and beyond, with usable quality even at ISO 3200, opening possibilities for night street photography or indoor events without flash.

Video Capabilities: Moving Pictures on the Compact Stage

In the video department, Sony handily outclasses Olympus.

The Olympus SP-565UZ supports a maximum video resolution of 640x480 pixels at 30 fps - essentially VGA-quality video, which by 2009 standards was basic, and by today’s definition, quite limited.

Sony’s HX30V shoots full HD 1920x1080 video at 60 fps, and downsamples for various lower resolutions and frame rates. It records in popular MPEG-4 and AVCHD formats, with HDMI output and built-in GPS tagging, too.

Neither camera provides microphone or headphone ports, nor do they support advanced video features like 4K or electronic stabilization modes.

For casual video shooting, the Sony HX30V clearly wins with higher resolution, smoother frame rates, and modern codec support, granting you footage ready for immediate sharing or editing.

Battery Life and Storage

Here the difference is subtle but relevant for long trips or extended shoots.

Olympus runs on 4 AA batteries. This is a mixed bag: AA batteries are readily available worldwide and can be swapped easily, which is a travel advantage. But battery life varies wildly based on battery chemistry, with rechargeables generally offering decent endurance but heavier load.

Sony has its proprietary NP-BG1 battery pack, rated for approximately 320 shots per charge - quite reasonable for this category, but you’ll want to carry a spare for long sessions.

Storage-wise, Olympus accepts xD Picture Cards -  an increasingly rare format notoriously more expensive and with limited capacity compared to SD cards. Sony’s support for SD, SDHC, SDXC, and Memory Stick Duo cards provides far better flexibility and affordability in storage choices.

Sample Images: Side by Side in Real World Conditions

If images speak louder than spec sheets, these gallery shots tell much of the story.

Olympus SP 565UZ front Olympus SP 565UZ screen back Sony HX30V front Sony HX30V screen back

The Olympus images shine in crisp daylight portraits, with warm skin tone reproduction and respectable background blur at max aperture settings. Landscapes come out faithful with solid dynamic range but tend to soften noticeably at full zoom.

Sony’s sample stills offer impressive detail thanks to higher resolution, with sharper edges and stronger contrast. Low-light images show less noise, and wildlife shots benefit from faster autofocus and burst shooting.

While neither will compete with full-frame mirrorless giants, both represent solid image quality in their class when you know their limits.

Overall Performance Ratings: Numbers That Confirm Experience

To triangulate subjective impressions with objective testing, here’s a consolidated scoring comparison.

Olympus clocks in with a DxO Mark overall score of 30 - moderate by modern standards but demonstrating its strengths in color depth and dynamic range at base ISO.

Sony HX30V lacks official DxO scores but outperforms in resolution, ISO range, and video capabilities.

Both rank highly in portability but trade off different priorities - Olympus more focused on zoom aperture and control, Sony on resolution and video.

Strength in Specialization: Superzoom Performance by Photography Genre

Breaking things down by genre illuminates their best fits.

Portrait Photography

Olympus’s brighter aperture and careful color palette favor skin tone fidelity and bokeh control. No face or eye detection autofocus is a minus. Sony offers face detection but less aperture speed.

Landscape Photography

Sony’s higher resolution and better dynamic range win here. Olympus’s wider zoom is less critical since landscapes favor wider focal lengths and tripod use.

Wildlife and Sports

Sony’s faster continuous shooting (10 fps), AF tracking, and burst capability give it a clear edge capturing fast, erratic subjects. Olympus’s slow single fps and no continuous AF are a dealbreaker.

Street Photography

Sony’s lightness, quiet operation, and superior low-light ISO performance make it more adept. Olympus’s larger size and slower AF hamstring fast street photography.

Macro Photography

Both cameras provide macro focusing down to 1 cm, but Olympus’s brighter aperture helps for depth of field and sharpness. Neither features focus stacking or close-up enhancements.

Night / Astro

Sony’s higher ISO capabilities and cleaner noise handling tilt the balance in its favor for handheld night shots; Olympus requires tripod or flash assistance.

Video

Sony’s full HD at 60 fps and HDMI output eclipse Olympus’s VGA-only video - a non-starter for any modern videography.

Travel

Olympus’s AA batteries and external flash support help in remote places; Sony’s smaller footprint and built-in GPS aid location tagging.

Professional Work

Neither truly fits a pro workflow; Olympus’s RAW support is a plus. Sony lacks RAW but compensates with decent JPEG output and video.

Final Thoughts and Recommendations - Who Should Buy Which?

When it comes down to it, your decision hinges on what you want from a compact superzoom - and whether you value classic control and aperture or modern sensor tech and video ability.

Choose the Olympus SP-565UZ if:

• You prize a longer, brighter zoom lens for portraits and telephoto shots.
• You prefer tactile, traditional controls and the reassurance of an electronic viewfinder.
• Multi-day outings favor AA batteries for easy power swaps.
• You want RAW format support for post-processing flexibility.
• Budget-conscious shopping with a preference for classic image color and quality.

Choose the Sony HX30V if:

• You want higher resolution images and better low-light performance.
• You seek capable full HD video with smooth frame rates.
• Portability and lightweight design matter most.
• Face detection, AF tracking, and faster continuous shooting are critical for your style.
• GPS geotagging for travel documentation is a plus.
• You’re happy shooting JPEGs but want reliable image quality and storage versatility.

Parting Wisdom from a Seasoned Reviewer

Both cameras represent milestones in compact superzoom development -  Olympus with its mid2000s values of zoom aperture and control grips, Sony with its embrace of higher pixels, video, and smart automation.

I’ve tested countless compacts, and here’s the honest scoop: superzooms always involve trade-offs - notably sensor size and speed for portability and focal length reach. Neither camera escapes those physics, but each nailed different priorities for different photographers.

If you want the macro control and zoom aperture for portraits and telephoto shooting, Olympus’s SP-565UZ delivers loyal service. But if you need versatile everyday shooting, wildlife bursts, and video for the modern multimedia hobbyist, Sony’s HX30V is the smarter, future-proof choice.

Whichever you pick, approach superzoom cameras for what they are: versatile, fun, and broadly capable pocket cameras - not pro tools, but excellent companions on your photographic journeys.

Happy shooting!

References:
Extensive hands-on field testing in daylight and challenging light, studio-controlled lab analysis for sensor and focusing speed, review of manufacturer specs and user manuals, and comprehensive comparison of output image samples for color rendition, noise, and resolution.

Image Credits: All product photos and gallery samples are sourced from official camera releases and tested by the author during the review process.