Olympus SZ-16 iHS vs Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H55: A Deep Dive into Compact Superzoom Cameras

Choosing a compact superzoom camera - especially in the under-$250 range - can feel like navigating a maze. You want versatility, decent image quality, and a form factor that won’t weigh you down. Today, I’m putting two popular early-2010s models side-by-side: the Olympus SZ-16 iHS, announced in 2013, and the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H55 from 2010. Both promise extended zoom ranges and compact convenience, but which one truly suits your photographic pursuits? I’ve spent hands-on time with both, so I’ll share my first-hand testing insights and detailed analysis to help you decide.

Let’s unpack their specs, real-world performance, and who each camera is really for - across photography genres and usage scenarios.

Size and Handling: How They Feel in Your Hands

When you pick up a camera, ergonomics instantly influence your shooting comfort. The Olympus SZ-16 iHS measures 108x70x40mm and weighs 226g, while the Sony H55 is slightly smaller and lighter at 103x58x29mm and 200g. That difference might seem minor, but it’s noticeable in hand - especially during extended use or travel.

The Olympus has a chunkier, somewhat more rugged feel; it’s thicker and taller, making it easier to grip, particularly if you have larger hands or like a confident hold with two hands. The Sony, on the other hand, feels sleek and more pocketable - ideal if discretion or compactness is your priority.

The control layout favors the Olympus as well: dials and buttons are spaced intuitively, letting me switch modes and adjust settings without fumbling. The Sony presents a more minimalist surface, which reduces complexity but can feel cramped when trying to cycle quickly through options.

Notably, neither camera features an electronic viewfinder (EVF), relying solely on their LCDs for composing. This tends to push their usability toward bright daylight or casual snapshots rather than serious compositional work.

Top Design and Interface: Control at a Glance

Taking a peek from above, the Olympus again edges ahead with its slightly more elaborate top-plate design. It sports a zoom rocker and dedicated video record button that's within easy reach. Meanwhile, the Sony keeps it simple, with fewer dedicated controls and a crammed mode dial - compactness at the expense of quick access.

Personally, I found the Olympus’ layout more user-friendly for spontaneous shooting. The Sony requires digging into menus more frequently, a minor but cumulative frustration when you want to capture moments swiftly.

Digging into the Sensor: Image Quality Foundations

Both cameras use a 1/2.3" sensor, measuring 6.17x4.55 mm (28.07 mm²), a common size in compact superzooms. The Olympus features a 16MP CMOS sensor, while the Sony has a 14MP CCD sensor. This sensor tech difference plays a huge role in image quality, noise control, and general performance.

From my controlled testing, Olympus’ CMOS sensor offers better high-ISO performance and dynamic range compared to Sony’s CCD. CMOS technology generally excels in noise suppression and speed - crucial for handheld shooting and video - whereas CCD sensors often produce crisper images under controlled lighting but struggle in low light.

The Olympus’ higher resolution further enables more cropping or larger prints without noticeable loss. Both cameras retain an antialias filter, so fine detail smoothing is present, but the Olympus’ sensor outputs images with marginally better clarity overall.

Back Screen and Viewing Experience: Real Estate for Composition

A 3-inch LCD is standard on both, but their specifications differ notably. The Olympus presents 460k-dot resolution, doubling the Sony’s 230k-dot display - quite a leap. This translates to crisper image previews, easier menu reading, and better feedback, especially when reviewing shots in bright settings.

In practice, the Olympus’ TFT color LCD renders colors more accurately and provides a brighter, clearer screen. The Sony’s screen, while adequate, sometimes struggles outdoors, and its lower resolution hampers precise focus checking.

Neither display offers touchscreen controls, a feature that has become standard in more recent models, so all navigation relies on physical buttons.

Lens and Zoom Capabilities: Reaching Far and Wide

Here’s where the two diverge sharply. The Olympus SZ-16 iHS sports a 25-600mm equivalent zoom - a jaw-dropping 24x telephoto reach at a maximum aperture range of f/3.0–6.9. Compare that to Sony’s 25-250mm equivalent zoom with a slightly narrower aperture range of f/3.5–5.5 and a maximum 10x zoom.

Practically, Olympus gives you the flexibility to capture distant wildlife, architectural details, or far-off sports action without switching lenses or carrying extra gear. However, that massive zoom comes with trade-offs: lens speed falls off dramatically at long focal lengths, and image stabilization needs to work overtime.

The Sony’s shorter zoom range curtails reach but delivers marginally faster optics at the telephoto end, slightly benefiting low-light tele shots.

Autofocus and Speed: Catching the Decisive Moment

The Olympus uses contrast-detection autofocus with face detection and multi-area tracking, but lacks continuous AF and manual focus options. Notably, its autofocus tracking is rudimentary, sufficient for static or mildly moving subjects but challenged by fast action.

The Sony also relies on contrast-detection AF but with 9 focus points and a center-weighted metering system. Though it lacks face detection, the Sony benefits from an often snappier autofocus lock and a rapid 10 fps continuous shooting mode, compared to Olympus’ sluggish 2 fps.

This difference becomes clear in action scenarios like sports or wildlife photography. Olympus is better suited for casual use in these genres, while Sony’s burst mode capability might capture fleeting moments slightly better, assuming lighting and autofocus lock hold up.

Image Stabilization: Keeping Shots Sharp

Olympus incorporates sensor-shift image stabilization, moving the sensor to counteract camera shake. This often results in steadier handheld shots, especially at its extreme 600mm zoom length.

Sony’s system is optical, stabilizing lens elements rather than the sensor. Optical stabilization tends to be effective and can combine well with faster shutter speeds, but sensor-shift systems sometimes do a better job with variable focal lengths.

In real-world shooting, I found the Olympus’ stabilization marginally more effective at longer focal lengths and lower shutter speeds, enabling more crisp handheld telephoto shots than the Sony, which struggled slightly beyond 150mm in tricky light.

Video Quality and Features: Which Handles Motion Better?

Both cameras shoot 1280x720 HD video at 30fps, which is modest even by 2010 standards. Olympus encodes video in MPEG-4 and H.264, while Sony sticks with MPEG-4. Neither camera supports 4K or advanced video codecs.

Neither model offers microphone or headphone jacks, limiting external audio control - an issue for vloggers or videographers who prioritize sound quality.

Olympus’ image stabilization works during video capture, significantly smoothing handheld footage. Sony also has stabilization but without sensor-shift benefits, so VHS-like shakes creep in faster.

Video autofocus options differ: Olympus includes face detection AF during video, improving focus on people, whereas Sony lacks face detection altogether, relying on fixed or single point AF during recording.

Battery Life and Storage: Powering Your Adventures

The Olympus SZ-16 uses the LI-50B battery, rated for approximately 220 shots per charge. Not robust, but typical for compact superzooms with large zoom mechanisms and power-hungry stabilization.

The Sony’s battery life is less clear from specs but tends to be in the same ballpark, with a similar small battery pack (NP-BG1). Realistically, expect 200-250 shots per charge.

Both models take SD/SDHC/SDXC cards, but Sony supports Memory Stick Duo series as well, providing a bit more flexibility.

Connectivity and Special Features: Modern Conveniences?

Neither camera offers wireless connectivity - no Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, or NFC. Olympus does include an HDMI out port, allowing quick viewing on compatible TVs, while Sony lacks HDMI.

Both provide USB 2.0 for tethering and file transfer.

Neither model has GPS or environmental sealing, so neither is tailored for extreme outdoor use or geotagging your images.

Real-Life Performance Across Photography Genres

Breaking down how each model fares in specific shooting disciplines reveals practical strengths and shortcomings.

Portrait Photography

• Olympus: Face detection AF and higher resolution assist skin tone rendering and fine details. However, lack of manual exposure limits creative control. Bokeh from the small sensor & slow tele apertures is weak but acceptable for casual portraits.

• Sony: No face detection makes focus hunting tougher, and lower resolution softens details. Autofocus somewhat faster but less precise on portraits.

Landscape Photography

• Olympus: 16MP CMOS sensor captures richer detail and better dynamic range, benefiting landscapes. No weather sealing is limiting outdoors, but built-in sensor-shift stabilization helps for handheld shots.

• Sony: 14MP CCD sensor yields good sharpness but struggles with dynamic range; often highlights blow out in bright skies. Slightly smaller zoom range makes wide-angle shots less versatile.

Wildlife Photography

• Olympus: Enormous 24x zoom is its trump card but slow autofocus and low burst rate hamper tracking moving animals.

• Sony: Less zoom reach but improved burst and auto-focus speed offer better capture chances for quick wildlife moments within reasonable distances.

Sports Photography

• Olympus: 2fps burst makes it tough to get critical moments; slow AF tracking also a drawback.

• Sony: 10fps burst is solid at this class level, though reduced resolution and sensor limit detailed sports captures.

Street Photography

• Olympus: Larger size and zoom make it less discrete; good stabilization suits handheld shooting but less so for stealth.

• Sony: Smaller, lighter, and quicker operation make it more street-friendly despite limited tele reach.

Macro Photography

• Olympus: No official macro range specified. Limited close-focus capability due to lens design.

• Sony: 5cm macro focusing is an advantage for close-ups and detail shots.

Night and Astro Photography

• Olympus: Better high ISO performance, but small sensor size ultimately restricts long-exposure detail.

• Sony: Struggles more at high ISO; max native ISO 3200 vs Olympus’ 6400.

Video Use

• Olympus: Superior video stabilization and face detection AF make it the better handheld video camera, despite modest resolution.

• Sony: Faster continuous shooting but less video usability overall.

Travel Photography

• Olympus: Greater zoom and screen resolution aid variety and preview clarity but bulkier.

• Sony: Compactness and faster operation favor travelers who prioritize portability.

Professional Workflow

• Neither body supports RAW, limiting post-processing flexibility. File transfer speeds via USB 2.0 are on par, but the Olympus’ better sensor tech slightly edges over the Sony for final image quality.

Olympus SZ 16 iHS front Olympus SZ 16 iHS screen back Sony H55 front Sony H55 screen back

Studying these sample images I shot side-by-side reveals the key distinctions clearly. Olympus delivers sharper, more detailed images with better noise handling. Sony’s images come out softer and noisier under the same conditions.

Reliability, Build, and Durability: Will They Last?

Neither camera boasts environmental sealing or ruggedized features. Both feel solid enough for casual use but aren’t suited for heavy-duty fieldwork or adverse conditions.

The Olympus’ slightly heavier build inspires more confidence, but physically both will require careful handling. Given their fixed lenses, issues like lens creep or zoom mechanism wear could manifest over time.

Price-to-Performance Analysis: Which Offers Better Value?

Current new prices sit close: Olympus SZ-16 iHS around $230 and Sony H55 roughly the same.

For your money, the Olympus offers vastly superior zoom flexibility, better sensor technology, higher resolution, and improved stabilization - features with real impact on image quality and versatility.

The Sony compensates with faster burst rates and a smaller footprint, making it attractive where speed and portability trump zoom range or resolution.

Looking at objective performance scoring - based on ergonomics, image quality, autofocus, shooting speed, video, and features - Olympus consistently ranks higher, with Sony excelling mainly in shooting speed and compactness.

Genre-specific scores highlight Olympus leading in landscape and wildlife (due to zoom and sensor) and Sony favored in sports and street photography (burst speed and portability).

Final Verdict: Which Should You Pick?

• Choose the Olympus SZ-16 iHS if:

  • You want maximum zoom reach (up to 600mm equivalent) for wildlife or travel photography.
  • Image quality and higher resolution matter - landscapes, portraits, casual video.
  • You value better stabilization and video performance.
  • You don’t mind a bulkier, less discreet camera.
  • Raw files aren’t a dealbreaker but you want the best JPEGs possible from a fixed-lens compact.

• Choose the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H55 if:

  • Portability and light weight are your top priorities - ideal for street and travel snapshots.
  • You want faster continuous shooting for quick action moments.
  • Macro close-up capability is attractive.
  • You’re often shooting in brighter environments where sensor noise is less of an issue.
  • You need broader compatibility with memory formats (Memory Stick plus SD).

Personal Takeaway and Recommendations

Having logged countless hours with superzoom compacts, I lean towards the Olympus SZ-16 iHS for almost all casual enthusiast uses where image quality and zoom versatility dominate. The difference CMOS vs CCD sensor makes, paired with superior stabilization and zoom reach, trumps the Sony’s burst speed in real-world shooting.

That said, if you’re someone who prioritizes speed and discretion, or simply wants a no-fuss pocket camera with reasonable zoom and good macro ability, the Sony H55 still holds merit.

Do remember, neither camera offers RAW shooting or high-end professional workflow features, so serious pros or advanced hobbyists might find both limiting compared to mirrorless or DSLR sets.

Wrapping Up

Choosing between these two cameras boils down to your shooting style and priorities - zoom vs speed, image sharpness vs pocketability. I hope this detailed, experience-driven comparison sheds light on their unique strengths and helps you make an informed choice. Whether you lean Olympus or Sony, you’re getting a compact capable of capturing meaningful memories without the bulk and complexity of larger systems.

Happy shooting, and remember - the best camera is the one you feel excited to carry and use!

If you want to see more detailed hands-on tests and video reviews I conducted with these cameras, feel free to reach out or check my YouTube channel where I break down real-world shooting scenarios.

Image Credits

1. size-comparison.jpg
2. top-view-compare.jpg
3. sensor-size-compare.jpg
4. back-screen.jpg
5. cameras-galley.jpg
6. camera-scores.jpg
7. photography-type-cameras-scores.jpg