Olympus SZ-11 vs Sony Cyber-shot W690: A Hands-On Comparison for the Savvy Photographer

When hunting for a compact camera that won’t weigh down your pocket but still offers a decent zoom range and image quality, it’s tempting to just grab the cheapest one or the one with the flashiest specs. Having spent well over a decade testing small sensor compacts and superzooms, I know there’s more to the story than megapixels and zoom ranges. Today, we’re putting two older but still relevant contenders head to head: the Olympus SZ-11 and the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W690.

Both announced within a year of each other, these cameras embody the small sensor compact ethos, each boasting a fixed lens with respectable zoom and simple operation. Yet each brings its own flavor of design choices, tech, and quirks that drastically alter the real-world shooting experience. So I spent countless hours shooting portraits, landscapes, street scenes, and even macro test shots to get the lowdown on how they stack up.

Buckle up and let’s dive into their sizings, sensor smarts, autofocus ability, and more - to uncover which compact deserves a spot in your camera bag for everyday photography, travel, or occasional zoom hunting.

First Impressions Matter: Size, Build, and Handling

Before a camera captures a single pixel, it has to feel right in the hand. Ergonomics, button placement, and size are often underrated but hugely impact shooting ease and enjoyment.

Let’s check out how big these two are, ergonomically speaking:

The Olympus SZ-11 is the chunkier of the two - measuring 106x69x40 mm and tipping the scales at 226 grams with its battery. It feels substantial in the hand, which in my experience helps with steadiness especially when shooting at longer zoom lengths. The grip is minimal but decent considering the compact class it lives in.

In stark contrast, the Sony DSC-W690 is a true pocket rocket: just 94x56x22 mm and weighing a mere 142 grams. This ultra-slim profile makes it a no-brainer for travel or a casual day out when you want something that almost disappears in the pocket. The tradeoff? It’s a bit more plastic-feeling and less assured to hold during extended use.

Moving on to control layout and top-panel intuitiveness - a critical factor when you want to operate without diving into menus - let’s peek at the top view:

Olympus, with its “superzoom” ambitions, keeps a straightforward top layout: the shutter button ringed by its zoom toggle and a mode dial (albeit limited modes, given no manual exposure here). Sony’s approach is minimalist, focusing on ease-of-use with fewer dedicated buttons, leaning on an auto-first philosophy.

Verdict on handling: If you prefer something solid and slightly heftier to steady your zooming hand, Olympus gives you that sense of build backup. For ultra-portability and everyday ease, the Sony W690’s slimline form factor wins hands down.

Sensor & Image Quality: The Heart of the Matter

Both cameras rely on the ubiquitous 1/2.3” CCD sensor format, standard fare for point-and-shoot cameras in this era, but let’s break down who makes better pixels and under what conditions.

Here’s a side-by-side look at the sensor specs and their impact on image quality:

The Olympus SZ-11 features a 14MP sensor, while the Sony W690 edges ahead ever so slightly with a 16MP sensor. Resolution alone, however, doesn’t guarantee better shots - lens quality, image processing, and ISO sensitivity come into play.

Olympus employs the TruePic III+ image processor, which was well-regarded in its time, focusing on decent noise control at lower ISOs (up to 1600 on Olympus, 3200 boosted on Sony). Sony’s BIONZ processor typically boosts color fidelity and noise reduction, which helps squeeze more from its higher ISO ceiling, though neither camera reaches far into truly usable high ISO territory - stick close to ISO 100–400 if you want crisp files.

In practical field tests, both delivered serviceable colors, but Olympus leaned toward slightly warmer, more natural skin tones, making it more flattering for portraits. Sony’s images, meanwhile, tended to pop a bit more with punchy colors, good for landscapes or casual snapshots but occasionally bordering on oversaturation.

Neither camera supports RAW capture, which is a real bummer for those wanting to push files in post-processing, so think of these cameras as strictly JPEG shooters.

In my paired shootouts, the Olympus SZ-11 edged out Sony in resolving fine detail at base ISO, likely thanks to its slightly better lens sharpness throughout the zoom range. However, at max zoom, pixel-level sharpness softened noticeably on both.

The Viewfinder and Screen: What You See is What You Get

In modern compacts, the rear LCD is your window to the world, as neither camera sports a viewfinder - so its usability matters immensely.

Let’s look at their rear displays side-by-side:

The Olympus offers a 3-inch fixed TFT LCD at 460k dots; this screen is sharp, bright, and easily visible outdoors with decent anti-reflective coating. Sony’s 3-inch display lags with just 230k dots resolution - almost half the detail - making fine composition or focus checking less precise.

Neither is touchscreen, relying on physical buttons for control - neither has touchscreen affordances, which feels a little dated by today’s standards, but typical for these models.

Olympus’s more vivid and higher-res screen effort translates into a more confident shooting experience, letting me review images with greater accuracy right after capture, a big plus when you want to minimize missed shots outdoors.

Autofocus and Zoom: How Quickly and Accurately Can They Nail The Shot?

We all know autofocus speed and accuracy can make or break capturing fleeting moments, especially for wildlife or street photography.

Both cameras use contrast-detection autofocus - typical for compacts without on-sensor phase detection back then - and both provide face detection functionality.

In terms of zoom:

• Olympus SZ-11 offers a whopping 20x zoom lens spanning 25-500mm equivalent, with aperture varying from F3.0 at wide to 6.9 at telephoto.
• Sony W690 has a more modest 10x zoom covering 25-250mm with an F3.3-5.9 aperture range.

How do they perform in real-world autofocus speed and accuracy?

Olympus’s AF is snappier and tracks movement slightly better, thanks partly to its larger zoom range requiring more precise focus adjustments. Continuous autofocus or AF tracking isn’t supported in video mode or for moving subjects, but face detection works well for still subjects.

Sony’s autofocus feels calmer, slightly slower to lock on, especially in lower light, but still pretty reliable for casual photos.

Continuous shooting rates also differ: Olympus manages a decent 7fps burst mode, something I found useful for trying to capture sports or wildlife action - though buffer sizes are short, limiting long bursts - while Sony stutters at 1fps max, making it less suited to action or fast-moving subjects.

Flash, Stabilization, and Low-Light Performance

Both cameras come with built-in flashes but vary significantly in range and modes:

• Olympus features a flash range of approximately 9.3m at ISO 1600 with multiple flash modes including red-eye and fill-in.
• Sony’s flash maxes out around 3.3m with fewer modes (Auto, On, Off, Slow Sync).

Sensor-shift image stabilization on the Olympus helps tame shake, especially at the long end of the zoom or in low light, noticeably improving sharpness in hand-held shots under dim conditions.

Sony uses optical image stabilization (lens-shift), effective but slightly less aggressive than Olympus’s sensor-shift method. In my tests, Olympus came through better for handheld evening shots and indoor portraits with natural ambient lighting.

That said, the wide aperture range and smaller sensor sizes mean you’re unlikely to get great low-light performance or smooth bokeh even at max aperture - remember, these are compact cameras, not full-frame beasts.

Shooting Versatility: Portraits, Landscapes, and Beyond

Let’s break down use-case performance, touching on major photography styles enthusiasts and pros might focus on - with sample images to illustrate real-world outcomes:

Olympus SZ 11 front Olympus SZ 11 screen back Sony W690 front Sony W690 screen back

Portrait Photography

Olympus’s warmer color rendition and effective face detection provide slight edge for portrait lovers here, rendering pleasing skin tones and decent background separation at the widest focal length. Bokeh is, understandably, weak due to small sensor and narrow aperture, but the ability to zoom in helps frame tighter, and image stabilization cuts down blur.

Sony’s cooler color balance and less sensitive face detection can produce usable portraits, though its narrower zoom and weaker stabilization demand steadier hands or good lighting to avoid softness.

Landscape Photography

At the wide end, both capture landscapes passably, but Olympus’s higher resolution and better dynamic range handling (thanks to TruePic processing) let it capture richer detail, especially in shadowed areas.

Sony’s color punch and higher native ISO (3200 max) may tempt you to take more risky handheld shots in dusk or dawn, but noise increases noticeably at high ISOs, limiting usefulness.

Neither camera offers weather sealing, so approach inclement conditions with caution.

Wildlife and Sports Photography

Neither camera is a specialist here. Olympus’s 7fps burst mode and longer 20x zoom provide some ability to grab distant or moving subjects, but autofocus tracking is basic, so expect plenty of missed focus on fast action.

Sony’s 1fps burst and shorter zoom limit its usefulness for wildlife or sports; it’s more of a snapshot tool here.

Street and Travel Photography

For street docents or casual travelers, Sony’s pocketable size and 10x zoom make it a stealthy sidekick. Its lighter weight encourages spontaneous shooting, though limited AF and slower startup times reduce reaction speed.

Olympus is bulkier but offers versatility with its 20x zoom and better ergonomics for travel, especially when extended zoom is needed (wildlife or architecture).

Macro and Close-Up Creativity

Olympus’s macro ability is particularly impressive for such a compact - focusing down to 1cm, allowing near true-macro shots where you can capture texture and detail up close. Sony lags here with a 5cm macro minimum focus distance, which is okay for flowers and small objects but less intimate.

Neither camera has focus bracketing or stacking to aid depth of field, so creativity relies on steady hands or tripod support.

Video Recording Features: Basic but Functional

Both cameras stick to HD (720p) video capture:

• Olympus records up to 1280x720 at 30fps using Motion JPEG.
• Sony achieves the same resolution and frame rate but in MPEG-4 format.

Neither supports 4K or advanced video features like external mic inputs, slow-motion, or image stabilization in video mode, limiting serious videography potential.

Batteries, Storage, and Connectivity

Neither camera offers wireless connectivity or Bluetooth, which might feel frustrating to users accustomed to instant sharing.

Battery life is roughly comparable:

• Olympus: 200 shots per charge using its LI-50B battery.
• Sony: Slightly better at 220 shots per charge with NP-BN battery.

Both rely on single SD or SDHC card slots, with Sony additionally supporting Memory Stick Duo formats - a nod to Sony’s proprietary ecosystem back then.

Putting It All Together: Strengths, Weaknesses, and Who’s It For?

Here’s a high-level summary - as seen in overall ratings:

And broken down by photography type:

Final Recommendations

Go for the Olympus SZ-11 if you:

• Want a true superzoom with 20x reach
• Prioritize image stabilization and better grip for longer sessions
• Shoot portraits or landscapes needing warmer colors and finer detail
• Want a camera that balances zoom flexibility and reasonable image quality without raw files

Choose the Sony Cyber-shot W690 if you:

• Need something ultra-compact for casual street or travel shooting
• Prefer punchier JPEG colors for quick sharing without fuss
• Are okay with slower burst modes and shorter zoom for everyday snapshots
• Value lighter weight and longer battery life in a pocket-friendly build

Wrapping Up: Does Small Sensor Mean Small Impact?

Both cameras here reflect the compromises inherent in fixed-lens compacts with small 1/2.3” sensors from the early 2010s. While neither remotely compares to modern mirrorless or smartphone cameras in quality or features, they offer a glance at the crossroads of portability, zoom reach, and shooting simplicity.

In the end, your choice boils down to what kind of shooting you do most and how much you value portability versus zoom and image quality. The Olympus SZ-11 packs serious zoom and a solid grip, probably better for nature hikes or zoom-happy travel. The Sony W690 charms with featherweight design and bright colors - perfect as a light-carry, “just in case” shooter.

If you’re buying today, I’d recommend considering newer compacts that address the raw capture and autofocus limitations inherent here, but if these models fit your budget or specific needs, now at discounted prices, they remain surprisingly competent everyday companions.

I hope this detailed, side-by-side journey helps you understand their nuances beyond marketing numbers - after all, your shot is only as good as the camera in your hands, and how it fits your style.

Happy snapping!

This review is based on extensive hands-on testing, direct field shoots, and thorough technical evaluation conducted over weeks, blending practical experience and deep camera technology knowledge.