Olympus SZ-16 iHS vs Sony WX350: A Definitive Comparison for Enthusiasts and Pros

When choosing a compact superzoom camera, you want a model that balances portability with enough zoom power and image quality to cover a wide range of shooting scenarios. The Olympus SZ-16 iHS and Sony WX350 are two contenders in this space, each offering extensive zoom ranges and accessible features, yet catering to somewhat different priorities.

Having spent years testing hundreds of such models, I’ll break down the subtle - and not so subtle - aspects that truly differentiate these cameras, drawing on real-world usage and technical performance. Whether you’re eyeing landscapes, wildlife, travel, or casual video capture, these insights will help you pick the one that suits your style and budget best.

Size and Handling: Feel the Difference Before You Look

First impressions count, and how a camera feels in your hand impacts how long you’ll enjoy shooting with it. Both are compact superzooms with fixed lenses, but their ergonomics differ due to size, weight, and control layouts.

The Olympus SZ-16 iHS is built a bit chunkier, weighing in at 226 grams with dimensions of roughly 108x70x40 mm. The Sony WX350 is notably lighter and more pocket-friendly at 164 grams and 96x55x26 mm.

In practice, the Olympus’s slightly larger grip area provides a reassuring hold when you’re zooming toward the telephoto end - the SZ-16 goes up to 600 mm equivalent, which edges out the WX350’s 500 mm by a decent margin. However, if discreetness and easy carry are priorities - maybe street photography or travel - Sony’s smaller form factor really shines.

The SZ-16’s buttons are well spaced but lack illumination, which can make night shooting a bit fiddly. The WX350, while compact, doesn’t feel cramped and offers a more modern interface layout (we’ll dig deeper shortly).

In sum, if pocketability is a priority, I lean toward the WX350. But if you’re hunting for a more solid grip to cover long-range zooming comfortably, the SZ-16 earns points.

Control and Interface: Getting Your Hands on the Essentials

The control layout and user interface make a world of difference in how fluidly you can frame, adjust, and shoot.

Take a look at the top view of both cameras:

The Olympus SZ-16 keeps things straightforward - a single exposure dial is missing here, and manual exposure modes are non-existent. This means you’re shooting mostly in fully automatic or scene modes, with little room for tweaking aperture or shutter priority settings. The WX350 is similar in automation but supports custom white balance, giving you more control over color rendition.

Neither camera includes a touchscreen, so navigation relies on physical buttons and a directional pad. I find the button layout on the Sony to be slightly more intuitive, which helps when adjusting settings on the fly.

Both cameras lack an electronic viewfinder, relying solely on their 3-inch LCD screens, each with 460k-dot resolution. The SZ-16’s TFT LCD and WX350’s unspecified screen technology perform adequately in bright light, although glare can be an issue outdoors on both.

The SZ-16’s menu system feels a bit dated but accessible to beginners. The Sony, with a marginally more modern UI, edges out in ease of use. Still, neither offers touchscreen convenience, so if you prefer that, you’ll likely look elsewhere.

Sensor and Image Quality: Tiny Sensors, Big Expectations

Both cameras use relatively small 1/2.3-inch sensors measuring 6.17 x 4.55 mm - a common choice in this segment aimed to keep the bodies compact.

The Sony WX350’s sensor is a back-illuminated CMOS variant offering 18 megapixels, compared to the Olympus’s standard CMOS sensor with 16 megapixels. While the resolution difference is modest, the sensor technology matters - BSI sensors typically perform better in low light due to enhanced light-gathering efficiency.

In real-world shooting, this translates to the Sony delivering cleaner images at higher ISOs - up to ISO 12800 native versus Olympus’s 6400 - meaning better low-light capability. The Olympus, while respectable for its era, shows more noise in darker conditions.

However, both cameras impose limits due to small sensor size - noise and dynamic range will never match larger APS-C or full-frame models. Yet for casual use, the 16-18 MP resolutions suffice for 8x10 prints or web sharing.

Neither camera supports RAW, which limits post-processing latitude - a downside for enthusiasts wanting more control. Olympus’s anti-aliasing filter helps combat moiré but slightly softens detail. Sony’s sensor includes an AA filter as well.

Color depth and dynamic range remain average, and given the absence of DxO Mark testing for these exact models, subjective testing shows the WX350 edges slightly in tonal gradation.

Zoom Capability and Lens Performance: Reach Beyond Limits

Here’s where both cameras get interesting - the Olympus SZ-16 iHS boasts a 24x zoom covering 25-600mm equivalent focal length, while the Sony WX350 offers a wider aperture lens with 20x zoom from 25-500mm.

While the extra 100 mm on the telephoto end may seem trivial, it can make the difference when shooting distant wildlife or sports fields. However, the Olympus’s maximum aperture drops from f/3.0 wide to f/6.9 at the tele end, versus Sony’s f/3.5 to f/6.5 range - a small but potentially noticeable difference in light gathering.

Optically, the Sony’s lens is sharp, especially in the wide-to-mid zoom ranges, with good control of chromatic aberration and minimal distortion - a surprise for a compact superzoom. The Olympus lens performs well but doesn’t quite match the Sony’s consistency across zoom stages.

You also get sensor-shift image stabilization on the Olympus versus optical stabilization on the Sony. Both deliver effective blur reduction, but I found the Sony’s system a bit more responsive-ideal for shooting at full zoom without a tripod.

Ultimately, if you want max reach, Olympus wins; if you want better sharpness and stabilization throughout the range, Sony nudges ahead.

Autofocus and Shooting Performance: Tracking and Speed Matter

Neither camera sports phase-detection autofocus or advanced hybrid AF systems; both rely on contrast-detection AF. This is typical for compact superzooms but limits speed and tracking ability under challenging conditions.

Continuous autofocus and burst shooting speed on the SZ-16 is limited - 2 frames per second (fps), while the Sony WX350 offers a more capable 10 fps burst. For subjects in motion (pets, kids, sports), this difference is palpable.

Both cameras support face detection focusing - useful for portraits and street photography - and provide autofocus tracking in a basic form. However, limited AF point counts and no eye-tracking features mean you’ll want to be deliberate in focusing.

Low light AF hunting can be slow on the Olympus. The Sony’s BSI sensor helps here with marginally quicker focusing in dim conditions, thanks to better contrast.

In short bursts and casual subjects, both are usable, but for any serious wildlife or sports shooting, I’d recommend leaving these behind.

Build Quality, Weather Resistance, and Durability: Practical Considerations

Neither camera boasts weather sealing, dustproofing, or shockproof features - this is expected in this price and category, but worth noting if you shoot outdoors aggressively.

The Olympus is heavier and thicker, which gives it a more substantial feel but also makes it less pocketable. The Sony’s smaller frame suits travelers who need lightweight gear that won’t weigh down their day.

Both have built-in flashes with varying ranges: Sony’s reaching about 4.3 meters compared to Olympus’s unspecified range. Neither supports external flash units, limiting advanced lighting setups.

The battery on the Sony WX350 fares much better with a claimed 470 shots per charge, double the Olympus’s 220. This is critical if you plan long shooting days without frequent recharging.

Video Features: Quality and Flexibility

If video capture matters to you, the Sony WX350 holds a clear advantage. It records Full HD 1080p at 60 interlaced or 60 progressive fps in AVCHD and MP4 formats, whereas the Olympus maxes out at 720p HD.

Sony’s videos show good detail and fluid motion, while Olympus clips can feel softer and less professional. Neither camera offers microphone input or headphone monitoring, but Sony’s built-in wireless connectivity helps streamline file transfers.

No 4K or high frame rate slow-motion modes exist on either model - unsurprising given the generation and class.

Specialized Photography Scenarios: How Do They Perform?

Let’s break down suitability across popular genres:

Portraits

Skin tone rendition is slightly more natural on the Sony due to better sensor and custom white balance support, plus the 18 MP resolution helps with detail. Both have face detection but lack advanced eye autofocus.

Bokeh quality is limited by small sensors and relatively slow apertures, but the Olympus’s longer reach allows some creative framing with stronger background compression.

Landscape

Here, image quality and dynamic range become important. Both cameras struggle with high contrast, but the Sony’s better sensor and color depth give it an edge in landscape shots.

Neither camera offers weatherproofing, so caution is needed outdoors. Resolution and lens sharpness favor Sony again, while Olympus’s longer zoom is less critical here.

Wildlife

For casual wildlife, Olympus’s 600mm equivalent gives more reach, but Sony’s faster autofocus and burst mode aid in capturing fleeting moments. Neither is ideal for serious wildlife photography but good for beginners.

Sports

Sports require speed and tracking. Sony’s 10 fps burst speed outpaces Olympus’s 2 fps, and better AF response means it’s more suited to fast action.

Street

Sony’s compact, lighter design and superior shutter speed range (max 1/1600 s) make it preferable for street photography where discreetness and quick reflexes count.

Macro

Neither shines for macro - no dedicated macro modes or significant magnification. Both handle moderate close-ups satisfactorily but not specialist level.

Night and Astro

Sony’s superior ISO range (up to 12800) and BSI sensor allow cleaner low-light shots, which is essential for night scenes. Olympus’s 6400 max ISO limits usability here.

Travel

Sony WX350 has the edge with lighter body, longer battery life, and built-in wireless connectivity for quick sharing, making it my pick for travel convenience.

Professional Work

Both lack RAW support, limiting their use as serious professional tools. File flexibility and control are minimal. However, the Sony offers custom white balance for better color accuracy.

Connectivity, Storage, and Battery Life: Everyday Usability

Sony WX350 includes built-in wireless for quick transfers, an advantage in the age of instant sharing. Olympus lacks wireless connectivity entirely, relying on USB 2.0 and HDMI outputs.

Both use standard SD/SDHC/SDXC cards, but Sony adds Memory Stick Pro Duo compatibility, offering flexibility if you own Sony accessories.

Battery life differences are stark - almost double on Sony - with the NP-BX1 battery versus Olympus’s LI-50B. For extended outings, Sony wins hands down.

Price and Value: What’s the Best Bang for Your Buck?

As of now, Olympus SZ-16 iHS is priced around $230, and Sony WX350 at roughly $270.

Considering newer sensor, better video, longer battery life, and wireless features, the WX350 justifies the slightly higher price for users seeking versatility and convenience.

Olympus remains attractive for those wanting the longest zoom reach at an entry price and can tolerate shorter battery life and older technology.

Summary of Performance Scores and Recommendations

Viewing the overall camera scores based on my thorough testing protocols:

And breaking down genre-specific scores:

You can see Sony WX350 generally outperforms Olympus SZ-16 in autofocus, video, low-light, and battery life, while Olympus edges it on zoom reach and handling bulk.

Sample Gallery: See What They Can Do

Viewing sample images side-by-side gives perspective on color rendition, sharpness, and noise levels.

Olympus SZ 16 iHS front Olympus SZ 16 iHS screen back Sony WX350 front Sony WX350 screen back

Notice the Sony’s images exhibit crisper detail, more vibrant colors, and better noise control at higher ISO values. Olympus’s telephoto shots reach farther but occasionally lose clarity at maximum zoom.

Final Thoughts: Which Should You Choose?

For casual casual photography enthusiasts valuing zoom range and solid build without fuss, the Olympus SZ-16 iHS offers excellent reach and ergonomics at a value price. It’s a straightforward shooter for everyday snaps with decent image stabilization.

However, if you want better overall image quality, faster shooting performance, Full HD video, superior battery life, and wireless file sharing, the Sony WX350 takes the crown. Its compact size and superior sensor technology deliver more satisfying results across diverse photography genres, including travel, street, and low light scenes.

Bottom line: I recommend the Sony WX350 to most buyers seeking a flexible, compact superzoom with modern features. The Olympus SZ-16 iHS suits those prioritizing zoom reach and solid handling with a tighter budget.

Dear Olympus and Sony, if you're listening - please bring back the perfect fusion of long zoom, image quality, and modern connectivity in your next pocket superzoom! Until then, choose your compromise wisely.

Whether you’re just starting out or a seasoned enthusiast, I hope this detailed comparison helps steer your decision with hands-on insight and data-backed evaluations. Happy shooting!