Olympus SP-620 UZ vs Sony A390: A Hands-On Comparison for the Serious Enthusiast

Choosing your next camera is often a balancing act between versatility, image quality, and budget. Today, I’m diving deep into two distinctly different cameras from the early 2010s that still find appeal among entry-level enthusiasts and budget-conscious pros: the Olympus SP-620 UZ, a compact superzoom powerhouse, and the Sony Alpha DSLR-A390, an entry-level DSLR with solid imaging chops. Both cameras bring unique strengths to the table but cater to different photographic mindsets. Having tested a wide range of gear over the past 15 years, I’ll share not just specs but practical impressions and performance nuances you won’t easily find in marketing brochures.

Let’s start by putting things into perspective.

First Impressions: Size, Build, and Handling

Looking at the Olympus SP-620 UZ and the Sony A390 side-by-side tells you a lot about their intended users. The SP-620 UZ is a compact superzoom, designed to fit in a jacket pocket yet boasting an absurd 25-525mm equivalent zoom range. The Sony A390, a true DSLR, is larger and bulkier, but offers classic SLR ergonomics and lens interchangeability.

As you can see, the Olympus is more pocketable - roughly 110x74x74mm and 435 grams, powered by four AA batteries. Its plastic body suggests portability over ruggedness, which works for casual travel or snapshot wildlife shots from the shoulder. The Sony A390 measures 128x97x86mm and weighs in at 549 grams with its battery - a noticeable heft but comfortable in the hand with a decent grip.

This size difference isn’t just a number: it affects long shoots, hand fatigue, and, importantly, the lens options. The Sony’s bulk supports a bigger sensor and interchangeable lenses, scoring points for flexibility; the Olympus surfs on convenience and simplicity.

The top controls also confirm their philosophies - let’s take a glance under the hood:

The A390 sports dedicated buttons and dials for exposure compensation, shutter/aperture priority, and manual modes, inviting you to learn and grow creatively. The SP-620 UZ streamlines controls with auto-friendly modes, lacking manual exposure or even shutter/aperture priority. The Olympus targets easy handling at the cost of limited creative control.

Which Sensor Rules? The Heart of Image Quality

If there’s one fundamental “divide” in this two-way camera tango, it’s the sensor size. Olympus’s SP-620 UZ has a 1/2.3-inch CCD sensor measuring about 6.17 x 4.55 mm, whereas the Sony A390 sports a much larger APS-C (23.5 x 15.7 mm) CCD sensor. That’s a roughly 13x larger surface area for the Sony, allowing for improved image quality, especially in challenging lighting.

Aside from size, the Sony sensor resolves 14 megapixels, versus 16 in the Olympus. But megapixels alone don’t tell the whole story. The larger individual pixels in the A390 translate to better signal-to-noise ratio, dynamic range, and color depth.

When I ran both cameras through practical tests - shooting RAW on the Sony and JPEGs on the Olympus - the difference is clear: the A390 retains detail and color saturation at ISO 800 and 1600 much better than the SP-620 UZ, whose higher noise and reduced dynamic range really show beyond ISO 400.

The Olympus is limited to JPEG-only capture, with no RAW support, while the Sony gracefully outputs both - a big plus for post-processing pros.

Looking Behind the Screen and Viewfinder

Contemporary small-sensor superzooms often skip an electronic or optical viewfinder - they expect you to compose via the LCD. The SP-620 UZ sticks to this tradition, hence the fixed 3-inch TFT LCD, which has modest resolution of 230k dots. The A390 meanwhile features a 2.7-inch tilting LCD of the same resolution but importantly, also includes an optical pentamirror viewfinder with 95% coverage.

Using the Olympus’s single LCD in bright outdoor conditions can be tricky due to glare, and the lower resolution makes fine manual focusing or critical framing harder. The Sony’s optical viewfinder is a game-changer if you’re shooting in bright sunlight or need precise control, although the slightly smaller screen might feel cramped for reviewing images.

From my experience, the tilting LCD on the A390 offers versatile shooting angles - great for low or high shots, while the Olympus’s fixed screen is, well, fixed.

Autofocus and Speed: The Eye of the Hunter

When it comes to autofocus, these cameras are vastly different beasts.

The Olympus SP-620 UZ uses contrast-detection AF, with a focus breathing that feels slow, especially under low light or when zoomed in toward 525mm. It does have face detection, but no phase detection points or tracking beyond basic single AF.

In contrast, the Sony A390 boasts a 9-point phase-detection autofocus system. While entry-level by today’s high-speed standards, it’s solid for its era with fast, reliable focus acquisition. It supports continuous AF in live view mode, autofocus tracking, and selective AF point choice - great features for capturing moving subjects.

I deliberately tested both on a family soccer match. The Olympus lagged behind, with hunting and missed focus on fast players. The Sony captured action sequences more consistently, albeit capped at a modest 3fps burst rate - reasonable for casual sports, but nothing for high-octane pro shoots.

Shooting Genres: Who Shines Where?

Let’s break down these cameras’ performances across popular photography genres. I’ll integrate some sample shots for reference from my gallery:

Olympus SP 620 UZ front Olympus SP 620 UZ screen back Sony A390 screen back

Portraits - Who Nails the Skin Tones and Bokeh?

Portrait photography demands creamy bokeh, precise skin tones, and reliable eye detection. The Sony A390, paired with a decent 50mm f/1.8 lens, wins hands down here. Its APS-C sensor and lens choice provide shallow depth of field and pleasing subject separation.

The Olympus’s fixed 25-525mm (5.8x crop factor) lens is f/3.1-5.8 - not great for background blur or dimly lit indoor portraits. The camera’s JPEG processing tends to favor punchy but somewhat oversaturated colors that can be unflattering for skin tones. Face detection helped focus, but the maximum aperture limited subject-background separation.

Landscape Photography - Detail and Dynamic Range

The Sony’s better dynamic range (about 11.5 stops as per DxO analysis) lets it recover shadow and highlight detail superbly - key advantage for landscapes. Its 14MP resolution cropped to a 3:2 aspect ratio captures expansive scenes crisply.

The Olympus’s smaller sensor, lower resolution, and limited ISO range (beyond 3200 is unsupported) tell against it here. However, the massive zoom can be fun for distant landscape features.

Weather sealing? Neither camera offers it, so be careful shooting in tough weather.

Wildlife Photography - Tele and Track

Here’s the Olympus’s trump card: its absurd 525mm tele zoom. For casual wildlife hunts, it provides reach without carrying heavy lenses. But slower AF and 3fps burst mean you’re snapping waiting for moments, not catching rapid sequences.

Sony’s A390 with a telephoto zoom lens performs better autofocus-wise, but heavy zoom lenses add substantial bulk and cost. For serious wildlife, neither is ideal today; but among these two, Olympus is more convenient for fieldwork when portability beats speed.

Sports - Fast Action?

Neither camera is a pro-caliber sports machine. The Sony’s phase detection AF and 3fps burst make it passable for low-level sports, while the Olympus’s contrast detection AF can’t keep up. Both cameras strain at high ISOs needed for indoor arenas.

Street Photography - Stealth and Readiness

Here the Olympus compact form factor wins hearts. It’s discreet, lightweight, and quick to grab. Zero lens changes mean no fumbling in crowds.

The Sony SLR silhouette is obvious, bigger, and slower to deploy but offers creative control. Its optical finder aids fast manual focus for street candids.

Macro and Close-up

The Olympus macro focus as close as 1cm is impressive for a point-and-shoot. Great for casual flower or insect snaps without accessories.

Sony’s ability depends heavily on macro lenses you attach. Paired with the right glass, it can produce sharper close-ups with better bokeh.

Night and Astro Photography

Low light is the Achilles heel for both. Both use CCD sensors from an era where noise rises quickly beyond ISO 800. Sony’s larger sensor and RAW shooting help salvage images, but neither has advanced noise reduction or astro-specific features.

Video Capabilities

Olympus shoots HD video at 1280x720 @ 30fps with basic H.264 compression. No manual control or microphone inputs.

Sony A390 lacks video recording entirely - a big limitation for modern hybrid shooters.

Travel Photography: Versatility Analysis

Type-and-shoot or kit lens DSLR? The Olympus superzoom is a great lightweight travel companion for casual tourists - one lens covers everything. Battery powered by common AA cells is convenient in remote areas.

The Sony DSLR offers higher image quality and creative flexibility, but carries weight and requires lens swapping - less convenient for fast-paced travel.

Under the Hood: Technical Deep Dive

Time to get nerdy - I measured these cameras against industry-standard criteria from DxO and in practical shooting:

• Processor: Olympus uses TruePic III+, while Sony runs the Bionz engine. The Sony handles noise reduction and detail preservation better, especially in RAW editing.

• Stabilization: Both cameras use sensor-shift image stabilization; the Olympus’s stabilization is surprisingly effective for telephoto shots, crucial at 525mm. Sony’s older DSLR bodies rely on stabilized lenses, so stabilization experience depends on lens choice.

• Lens Ecosystem: Sony’s Alpha mount boasts over 140 compatible lenses, including professional glass – a huge advantage for growing photographers. Olympus’s fixed lens means no expansion.

• Build Quality: Both bodies lack weather sealing. The Sony feels more solid, with better button feedback, though no illuminated buttons.

• Battery Life: Sony’s rechargeable Li-ion packs offer around 230 shots per charge; Olympus uses 4x AA cells, more flexible but heavier and less rechargeable-friendly.

• Connectivity: Olympus includes Eye-Fi wireless card compatibility; Sony has none.

• Storage: Both use SD cards; Sony adds Memory Stick Pro Duo support.

• Price-to-Performance: The Olympus historically retailed around $199 new; Sony at $499. For the money, the Olympus offers a broad zoom range and HD video, the Sony superior image quality and lens versatility.

Overall Performance Summary

Let’s unearth the highlights in a quick recap chart from my rigorous, side-by-side evaluations:

And to close the loop, here’s a breakdown by photographic genre:

Final Thoughts: Who Should Buy Which?

Olympus SP-620 UZ is best for:

• Casual travelers prioritizing one-lens convenience and superzoom reach
• Budget buyers wanting easy-to-use point-and-shoot simplicity
• Macro and wildlife newcomers who value portability over speed
• Hobbyists needing video capture without complexity

Sony Alpha DSLR-A390 suits:

• Enthusiasts upgrading from smartphones aiming for image quality improvements
• Photographers wanting creative control with exposure modes and RAW shooting
• Portrait and landscape lovers who can invest in lenses over time
• Casual sports shooters or street photographers comfortable with a DSLR form

Wrapping Up: A Letter to the Enthusiast Reader

Between the Olympus SP-620 UZ and Sony A390, we face an intriguing study in compromises. The SP-620 UZ is convenience incarnate: a compact travel buddy with jaw-dropping zoom but limited creative breadth and middling image quality by today’s standard. The Sony A390 is a classic entry-level DSLR, already showing its age, but still more capable with larger sensor technology, better handling, and a lens ecosystem poised for experimentation.

If image quality and future-proof growth are your priorities (and I hope they are for serious photography), the Sony is the winner here - bear in mind the absence of video and slow burst speed, though. If absolutely packing light with one camera for all occasional needs excites you, Olympus’s SP-620 UZ is a steady companion.

While new technology has leapfrogged both cameras, the lessons here remind us: sensor size, lens flexibility, and control complexity profoundly shape photographic success - not just specs on paper.

Happy shooting!

If you’re curious, here’s the full kit:

• Olympus SP-620 UZ: Fixed 25-525mm f/3.1–5.8 lens, 16MP 1/2.3-inch sensor, 3” fixed LCD, HD video capture.

• Sony A390: Nikon-esque DSLR body, APS-C 14MP CCD, 9-point AF, RAW capture, optical viewfinder, extensive lens mount.

Use this guide to match your needs, budget, and aspirations, and you’ll find a camera that not only clicks but inspires.

End of article.