Olympus SP-820UZ vs Sony Alpha DSLR-A350: A Hands-On Comparison for Enthusiasts and Pros

Choosing the right camera is one of the most personal and nuanced decisions for photographers, whether you're an eager enthusiast or a seasoned professional. Today, I’m putting two quite different cameras head-to-head: the Olympus Stylus SP-820UZ, a superzoom compact from 2012, and the venerable Sony Alpha DSLR-A350, Sony’s 2008 entry-level DSLR. Both pack 14-megapixel sensors but diverge widely in design, features, and performance. Having spent hours testing both - and stacking up their results across multiple photo genres - I'll help you see which model shines in specific scenarios and who should consider each.

Let's dive into the nitty-gritty of their capabilities, handling, and real-world usability, peppering in insights from my years of shooting and gear-testing. By the end, you’ll have a clear picture of which camera might earn a spot in your bag (or on your shelf).

First Impressions: Size, Ergonomics & Handling

The first thing you notice when picking up these two cameras is just how different they feel in the hand. The Olympus SP-820UZ is a compact superzoom camera designed as an all-in-one travel buddy, while the Sony A350 sports the heft and controls of a traditional DSLR. Let’s look closer.

The Olympus measures a compact 117 x 78 x 93 mm and weighs 485 grams, making it pocketable compared to the chunky Sony at 131 x 99 x 75 mm and 674 grams. The grip on the Sony is larger and more substantial, providing better clubs-for-thumbs stability during long shoots - especially if you favor heavier lenses. The SP-820UZ's grip is more modest but adequate for casual everyday shooting.

Ergonomically, the Sony wins out for serious photography sessions with more physical control dials and a bigger, rubberized grip, whereas Olympus opts for simplicity with fewer buttons and no manually customizable controls.

Looking down from the top reveals a clear divide in control philosophy. The Sony A350 features dedicated dials for mode, exposure compensation, and a shutter release that sits comfortably under the right index finger. The Olympus offers a handful of buttons and a mode dial but lacks dedicated exposure modes like Aperture Priority or Manual.

For photographers accustomed to pushing settings directly, the Sony feels more like a tool kit. The Olympus invites a more casual, point-and-shoot approach.

Sensor and Image Quality: The Heart of the Matter

When comparing image quality, sensor size and technology are king. Let’s peel back the layers.

Sony’s APS-C sized CCD sensor (approx. 23.6 x 15.8 mm) dwarfs Olympus’s 1/2.3" CMOS sensor (6.17 x 4.55 mm). This nearly 13x larger sensor area signifies several practical advantages:

• Dynamic Range: Sony offers 11.5 stops vs Olympus’s untested but visibly limited range.
• Noise Performance: The APS-C CCD shows cleaner images at ISO 800+ compared to the superzoom’s noisier output even at ISO 400.
• Color Depth: Sony’s 22.6 bits color depth easily outclasses the Olympus.

In everyday shoots, the Sony delivers richer colors, better highlight retention, and more detail across shadows. The Olympus’s sensor shrinks in comparison, and its tiny photosites are starved for light, producing noisier results, especially beyond ISO 200.

But let me clarify from hands-on testing: the Olympus’s sensor is serviceable when used properly - in good light, it can deliver respectable, if not stellar, JPEGs. The superzoom’s built-in lens offers insane reach (up to 896mm equivalent), ideal for distant subjects - but with a tradeoff in image quality.

Optical vs. Interchangeable Lenses: Which Do You Prefer?

Lens ecosystem and flexibility drastically shape a camera's usefulness for many photographers.

• Olympus SP-820UZ: Fixed zoom lens covering 22-896mm equivalent (40x zoom), aperture from f/3.4-5.7.
• Sony A350: Uses Sony/Minolta Alpha mount with over 140 native lenses available, spanning primes, zooms, macro, and specialty glass.

This is a no-brainer if you crave creative control. I’ve personally swapped between fast primes and telephotos on the A350 to nail portraits, wildlife, macro, and landscapes with distinct results.

The Olympus packs versatility in one lens - but with optical compromises, like softness at full telephoto end and slower apertures limiting low-light performance.

Autofocus and Shooting Speed: Capturing the Moment

Autofocus (AF) can make or break photos of moving subjects.

• Olympus SP-820UZ: Contrast-detection AF with one focus mode and face detection; no continuous AF tracking for bursts.
• Sony A350: Phase-detection AF with 9 focus points, support for single, continuous AF modes, and multi-area AF selection.

In practice, the Sony’s DSLR AF is clearly more responsive and reliable for action, sports, or wildlife. Continuous AF is a lifesaver when tracking erratic subjects, and focus acquisition was consistently faster.

The Olympus’s modest AF struggles in dim light and at zoom extremes. It also caps burst speed at 2 fps, whereas the Sony manages 3 fps - both modest by today’s standards but noticeable in fast-paced shooting.

Build Quality and Weather Resistance: Travel and Outdoor Considerations

Both cameras lack weather sealing or rugged construction. The Olympus’s plastic body feels less robust but keeps weight and size down for travel photography. The Sony is better built with a more solid chassis, though still far from pro-level weather-proofing.

I found the Olympus more comfortable for street or casual travel photography due to its discreet size, but the Sony’s robust build inspires confidence for more extensive outdoor use where occasional bumps happen.

LCD Screens and Viewfinders: Composing the Shot

The Olympus features a fixed 3-inch TFT LCD with 460k dots, quite bright and sharp for its time, though viewing angles can be narrow. The Sony has a 2.7-inch tilting LCD with 230k dots, not quite as crisp but flexible for high or low-angle shooting.

Critically, the Sony sports an optical pentamirror viewfinder with 95% frame coverage and 0.49x magnification - essential for manual framing and action shooting, especially under bright sunlight when LCD glare is problematic. The Olympus has no viewfinder and relies solely on its rear screen.

Shooting Modes and Manual Controls: Creative Freedom or Simplicity?

The Sony’s manual exposure modes, shutter and aperture priority, and customizable white balance cater to serious photographers who want creative control. It also shoots RAW, giving flexibility in post-processing.

The Olympus is a no-manuals zone - no aperture, shutter priority, or manual modes. You get program-like auto modes, a handful of scene presets, and basic face detection auto. RAW shooting is absent, and exposure compensation isn’t supported.

If you’re looking to learn photography fundamentals or demand creative control, the Sony is the obvious choice. The Olympus is for point-and-shoot convenience.

Battery Life and Storage: Practical Usage

Both cameras rely on proprietary batteries, with no official ISO CIPA battery life ratings available here. In field testing, the Sony A350’s larger battery generally sustains longer sessions, especially when using the optical viewfinder (which burns less power than LCD live view). The Olympus, heavily dependent on LCD viewing, tended to need charging or swapping sooner.

Storage-wise, the Olympus takes SD/SDHC/SDXC cards, while the Sony uses Compact Flash or Sony’s Memory Stick Pro Duo cards - something to consider if you already own one format.

Connectivity and Video: Modern Features Check

Neither camera is wireless-enabled (no Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, or NFC) - unsurprising for gear from the late 2000s and early 2010s.

On video, Olympus supports Full HD at 1080p/30fps with MPEG-4/H.264 encoding, offering some slow-motion at lower resolutions. The Sony A350 does not support video recording at all, highlighting its DSLR era roots focused solely on stills.

Videographers should lean toward the Olympus here.

Performance Across Photography Genres

I tested both cameras in various shooting disciplines to give practical feedback.

Portrait Photography

The Sony’s larger sensor produces better skin tones, smoother gradations, and more natural bokeh when paired with fast lenses. Its face detection is basic, but manual focusing and selective AF points let you nail eye focus.

Olympus relies on face detection for convenience but has limited background blur due to small sensor size. Skin tones can look flatter and noisier in indoor light.

Landscape Photography

The Sony’s superior dynamic range and resolution render more detail in shadows and highlights, plus its tilt LCD aids composition at odd angles.

The Olympus’s tiny sensor struggles in high-contrast scenes and produces softer landscapes, though the zoom is less relevant here.

Wildlife and Sports

Sony’s faster and more reliable AF, combined with interchangeable tele lenses, give it a huge advantage for fast-moving subjects. The Olympus zoom’s reach is tempting, but AF is slow and frame rates are low.

Street Photography

Olympus’s compact size wins here for discretion and travel. The Sony is bulkier and draws more attention but offers better manual control.

Macro Photography

Sony’s lens choices and sensor size provide a leg up in magnification and detail; Olympus supports down to 1cm macro but with limited quality due to the sensor.

Night and Astro Photography

Better noise control on Sony and manual settings make it better suited; Olympus’s high ISO noise and limited manual modes hold it back.

Video

Olympus wins comfortably with 1080p capabilities; Sony is strictly stills.

Travel and General Use

Olympus’s superzoom and portability make it a grab-and-go choice; Sony offers image quality but with heavier bulk.

Professional Workflows

Sony’s RAW support, manual modes, and lens flexibility make it useful as a backup or beginner pro option; Olympus is unsuitable for serious pro workflows.

Result Snapshot: Sample Images and Ratings

Olympus SP 820UZ front Olympus SP 820UZ screen back Sony A350 front Sony A350 screen back

Images from Sony show crisper detail and better colors, especially in dim light and portraits. Olympus shines in zoom shots but with softness.

Sony A350 generally scores in the mid-60s (not bad for a decade-old DSLR), Olympus is untested on DxO but likely below 50 due to sensor size limits.

Sony leads in dynamic shooting, landscapes, portraits; Olympus better for casual travel snapshots and video.

Pros and Cons Recap

Final Verdict: Which Camera Should You Choose?

If you’re a cheapskate or casual shooter looking for a straightforward camera with turbo-zoom and video, the Olympus SP-820UZ is surprisingly capable. For family vacations, wildlife snapshots from afar, or street photography without fuss, it punches above its weight.

However, if you want to learn photography, create professional-quality images, and use serious glass, the Sony A350 is worth the extra investment. Its bigger sensor and manual modes deliver tangible image improvements and creative control unmatched by most point-and-shoot superzooms. Despite no video, it remains a solid DSLR for enthusiasts on a budget who want to grow.

It’s like choosing between a Swiss Army knife and an artisan chef’s knife - both have their place, just very different purposes.

Closing Thoughts: Investing in Your Photography Path

My personal recommendation? Consider your photographic goals first. If portability and zoom range are paramount, lean Olympus. If image fidelity, versatility, and learning potential appeal more, invest time and money to unlock Sony’s lens ecosystem.

Both cameras are relics compared to today’s mirrorless wonders, but for used-value or budget-conscious buyers, they still have charm and utility. Testing them side-by-side was a reminder that photography is as much about the person behind the camera as the specs on paper.

I hope this detailed comparison has clarified which of these classic cameras deserves your attention - and money. Happy shooting, whichever path you choose!

If you want more detailed walkthroughs on using these cameras or lens recommendations, drop a comment - I’m always happy to share my experiences. Until next time, keep experimenting and capturing moments that matter.

End of Review