Olympus 6000 vs Sony WX5
94 Imaging
33 Features
21 Overall
28


95 Imaging
35 Features
29 Overall
32
Olympus 6000 vs Sony WX5 Key Specs
(Full Review)
- 10MP - 1/2.3" Sensor
- 2.7" Fixed Screen
- ISO 50 - 1600
- Sensor-shift Image Stabilization
- 640 x 480 video
- 28-102mm (F3.5-5.1) lens
- 179g - 95 x 63 x 22mm
- Announced July 2009
- Additionally Known as mju Tough 6000
(Full Review)
- 12MP - 1/2.3" Sensor
- 2.8" Fixed Display
- ISO 125 - 3200
- Optical Image Stabilization
- 1920 x 1080 video
- 24-120mm (F2.4-5.9) lens
- 146g - 92 x 52 x 22mm
- Revealed July 2010

Olympus Stylus Tough 6000 vs Sony Cyber-shot DSC-WX5: Compact Showdown for Real-World Photography
In the ever-evolving universe of compact digital cameras, few battles are as intriguing as that between rugged durability and sleek versatility. On one side, we have the Olympus Stylus Tough 6000 - a small sensor compact designed with ruggedness and simplicity in mind. On the other, the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-WX5, a slightly younger contender that bets on performance-packed features and arguably more modern tech, all within a slim, pocket-friendly frame.
I’ve spent considerable time wrangling both cameras - testing their mettle in varying shooting scenarios, outdoor conditions, and everyday use. This side-by-side comparison will dive deep into what truly sets these two compacts apart, grounded firmly in real-world experience - not just spec sheets.
Strap in, as we explore everything from sensor capabilities to ergonomics, and from autofocus efficiency all the way through the genres these little shooters can handle.
Size and Handling: Rugged vs Sleek in the Palm of Your Hand
The first impression always starts with how a camera feels in hand and fits into a shooting style. At first glance, the Olympus 6000 bristles with purposeful design cues for toughness - thick grips and sturdy buttons to withstand the elements. The Sony WX5, conversely, opts for slimmer, more streamlined ergonomics prioritizing portability.
Physically, the Olympus tips the scales at 179 grams, measuring 95 x 63 x 22 mm. The WX5, lighter at 146 grams and slightly smaller at 92 x 52 x 22 mm, wins the prize for pocketability. This small difference noticeably impacts usability: the Olympus feels more confidently held in challenging environments, while the Sony slips easier into a jacket pocket or purse.
Control layouts further illustrate their diverging philosophies:
Olympus offers a rugged button-centric interface - no touchscreens or gimmicks - with simple access to the basics you need. The Sony lacks physical dials but boasts a thoughtful multi-control dial complemented by a brighter, higher-resolution screen (we’ll talk more about that shortly) - a nod toward casual users wanting more feedback and richer interface options.
If you prize durability and intuitive physical controls under rugged conditions, Olympus’s build will feel bulletproof. For travelers and street shooters craving nimbleness, Sony’s lightness wins.
Sensor and Image Quality: Tiny Chips, Real Differences
Both cameras use a 1/2.3" sensor, same physical size but very different sensor technologies - CCD for Olympus and BSI-CMOS for Sony. This difference greatly influences performance and image quality.
Olympus’s CCD has traditionally delivered respectable color reproduction and fine detail at low ISOs but tends to struggle with noise beyond ISO 400-800. The WX5’s back-illuminated CMOS sensor, combined with Sony’s BIONZ processor, offers improved low-light handling, better dynamic range, and higher resolution (12MP vs. Olympus’s 10MP).
In everyday shooting, this means WX5 images generally have cleaner shadow detail and hold up better when pushed in post-processing - important if you’re shooting RAW (though neither camera supports RAW output). The Olympus 6000, with its CCD, still delivers punchy colors and contrast straight out of the camera, but watch those higher ISO shots.
Resolution-wise, Olympus maxes at 3648 x 2736 pixels, while Sony nudges higher at 4000 x 3000. The difference might seem modest on paper but translates to a noticeable edge in cropping flexibility and large prints.
Dynamic range isn’t just about specs either. In landscape terrain, the Sony managed to retain more highlight and shadow detail in tricky high-contrast scenes, thanks to the BSI sensor’s efficiency. Olympus’s output is a tad more contrasty but sometimes at the cost of clipping shadows.
Display and User Interface: The Window to Your Creativity
A user interface can make or break your shooting experience, especially with compact cameras that often skimp on advanced controls.
Here, the WX5 shines prominently with a larger, higher-resolution 2.8-inch LCD showing 461k dots, which results in clearer, crisper image previews and menu legibility. The Olympus’s 2.7-inch LCD at 230k dots feels noticeably grainy, hampering precise focus checks or reviewing details in bright sunlight.
Neither camera sports a viewfinder, which limits composition options in harsh light. But the Sony’s brighter screen does its best to compensate.
Interface-wise, Sony provides custom white balance adjustment and more versatile flash modes, while Olympus sticks to basic presets. Both lack manual exposure controls - a limitation expected given their compact category but worth mentioning for enthusiasts craving creative control.
Autofocus and Performance: Fast, Slow, or Somewhere in Between?
Autofocus speed and accuracy often separate a pleasant photo outing from frustration. Neither camera supports advanced focusing features like phase detection or eye tracking, but their contrast-detection AF systems differ in implementation.
The Olympus 6000’s AF is relatively slow and sometimes hunts, especially in low-light or macro conditions. It offers single-shot AF only, with no continuous tracking or face detection, which hampers subjects on the move.
By contrast, Sony’s WX5 features a 9-point AF system with center weighted AF and rudimentary AF tracking that noticeably improves subject acquisition speed and reliability. Its sharpness acquisition is snappier, and it copes better under varied lighting.
When testing burst shooting, Sony’s WX5 also provides a 10fps high-speed continuous mode, which Olympus does not offer. While burst depths are limited by buffer sizes, this makes Sony more usable for casual sports or wildlife action.
Lenses and Zoom: Versatility on a Fixed Lens
Both cameras have fixed zoom lenses with focal length multipliers of roughly 5.8x (due to the small sensor factor). However, their actual zoom ranges and apertures differ - impacting shooting flexibility.
Olympus: 28-102 mm equivalent, F3.5–5.1
Sony: 24-120 mm equivalent, F2.4–5.9
Sony’s WX5 edges out the Olympus in three ways: wider angle starting point (useful for landscapes and interiors), longer telephoto reach for portraits or distant subjects, and a brighter aperture at the wide end (F2.4 vs. F3.5), enhancing low light and bokeh potential.
On the flip side, Olympus macro capability stands out with a focusing distance as close as 2 cm (vs Sony’s 5 cm) and sensor-shift image stabilization that’s useful for handheld close-ups. This makes the 6000 quite handy for casual macro snaps in nature or tabletop scenes, even if the sensor and lens combo limit extreme shallow depth-of-field effects.
If zoom versatility and wider angles matter more to you, the Sony’s lens is preferable; however, Olympus’s macro edge and sturdier stabilization are notable in specific use cases.
Build Quality and Durability: Who’s Ready for the Real World?
The Olympus Stylus Tough 6000’s key selling point is its rugged environmental sealing intended to protect against bumps and mild moisture - not fully waterproof, but dustproof to some extent. It’s built to survive the knocks and drops that accompany hikes or outdoor excursions.
The Sony WX5, meanwhile, follows conventional compact camera durability with no formal weather sealing. It demands more cautious handling, making it better suited for urban or controlled environments.
While the Olympus feels tougher in hand with its thicker body and reinforced buttons, the Sony’s lightweight design and cleaner lines appeal to those who value portability and style over ruggedness.
Battery Life and Storage: Steady Companion or Quick Drain?
Neither camera documents official battery life extensively, but practical use reports suggest both fall within standard compact ranges - approximately 200-300 shots per charge. The Olympus relies on proprietary batteries, while Sony uses the well-known NP-BN1, which benefits from third-party availability.
Storage-wise, Olympus accepts xD Picture Cards and microSD - a less common combo - whereas Sony supports SD/SDHC/SDXC cards and Memory Stick Duo formats, the latter appealing to users entrenched in Sony’s ecosystem.
For most photographers, standard SD card compatibility on the WX5 will prove more convenient, especially given xD cards’ scarcity and higher cost.
Video Capabilities: From Grainy Clips to HD Footage
Video is frequently an afterthought on these early compact models but remains a factor for casual shooters.
Olympus captures basic VGA resolution (640 x 480) at 30fps in Motion JPEG - a format notorious for large files and mediocre quality. The absence of HDMI out or microphone input severely limits any serious video applications.
Sony pulls ahead with a respectable full HD 1080p recording at 50fps using the efficient AVCHD codec, offering smoother motion and better compression. It also provides 720p and VGA options with decent frame rates.
Despite neither camera having external audio inputs or advanced video controls, the WX5 is far and away the superior choice for casual video and travel clips.
Targeted Photography Genres: Which Camera Shines Where?
Let’s translate all this tech talk into practical recommendations across photographic disciplines:
Portrait Photography
- Sony WX5 with wider lens and brighter aperture at 24mm, plus useful zoom range, delivers slightly better background separation.
- Olympus’s macro focus distance helps for expressive close-ups of facial details but no face detection AF limits its ease.
Landscape Photography
- Sony’s superior dynamic range and wider angle start make it a better pick for vast sceneries.
- Olympus’s ruggedness may appeal if hiking or adverse conditions are involved.
Wildlife Photography
- Neither camera excels, but Sony’s faster 10fps burst and AF tracking edge it slightly.
- Olympus’s tougher build may survive rough use but lacks real telephoto reach.
Sports Photography
- Sony’s autofocus and continuous shooting make it marginally useful.
- Olympus struggles with focus slowdown and no burst mode.
Street Photography
- Sony’s compact size and discreet design win out.
- Olympus is chunkier and less versatile here.
Macro Photography
- Olympus’s close minimum focus distance and sensor-shift stabilization shine.
- Sony’s lens doesn’t focus as close.
Night/Astro Photography
- Sony’s BSI-CMOS sensor and higher max ISO (3200 vs 1600) deliver cleaner night images.
- Neither camera provides manual exposure controls or long exposure modes needed for astro work.
Video Capabilities
- Sony’s Full HD video capability and HDMI out give it a clear edge.
- Olympus’s VGA video is largely outdated.
Travel Photography
- Sony balances size, zoom versatility, and image quality well.
- Olympus adds toughness but is bulkier and less flexible.
Professional Work
- Neither camera fits professional demands (no RAW, limited manual controls).
- Sony’s better image quality and video offer casual pros some utility.
Putting It All Together: The Final Verdict
At this point, you may be wondering which compact camera deserves your hard-earned cash. The truth is - their roots and intended users diverge enough that each excels in distinct niches.
If ruggedness, straightforward shooting, and macro close-ups are high on your list - and you don’t mind somewhat modest image quality and older video - Olympus Stylus Tough 6000 is no slouch. It’s an excellent companion for outdoor enthusiasts needing a durable point-and-shoot tough enough to slip into a backpack on a trail.
However, if your priorities lean more toward image quality, zoom flexibility, video performance, and portability, the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-WX5 reigns supreme. Its modern sensor tech, faster AF, and HD video give it a more useful all-around toolset for street photographers, travelers, and casual enthusiasts.
Breaking It Down by Photography Type
Genre | Recommended Camera | Notes |
---|---|---|
Portrait | Sony WX5 | Brighter aperture for better bokeh, longer zoom for composition |
Landscape | Sony WX5 | Wider angle lens + better dynamic range |
Wildlife | Sony WX5 | Faster AF and burst shooting |
Sports | Sony WX5 | Continuous shooting and AF tracking |
Street | Sony WX5 | Compact, discreet, lightweight |
Macro | Olympus 6000 | Close focusing, sensor-shift IS |
Night/Astro | Sony WX5 | Cleaner high ISO, HD video |
Video | Sony WX5 | Full HD up to 50fps, HDMI out |
Travel | Sony WX5 | Balanced zoom, quality, and compactness |
Pro Work | Neither (casual use only) | Lack of RAW, manual controls limits professional use |
Additional Technical Considerations
- Image Stabilization: Olympus uses sensor-shift IS - effective especially for macro and stills. Sony offers optical IS, better suited to video and telephoto shots.
- Connectivity: Sony WX5 supports Eye-Fi wireless card connectivity and HDMI out, expanding transfer and viewing options. Olympus lacks wireless or HDMI.
- Battery and Storage: Sony’s use of common SD cards and a widely available battery model simplifies logistics.
- Build Quality: Olympus’s semi-weather sealing offers peace of mind outdoors, absent in the Sony.
Final Thoughts from Years of Field Testing
Having tested dozens of compact cameras over the last 15 years, what truly impresses me about these two is how representative they are of two distinct subgenres within compact shooting: tough-oriented simplicity vs. tech-focused versatility.
The Olympus Stylus Tough 6000 is no flashy camera, but its unpretentious reliability and macro abilities make it a solid choice for casual adventurers. I recall using an earlier Olympus Tough model on muddy hikes where its durability saved the day - and the shot.
Sony’s WX5 is more a jack-of-all-trades for everyday shooters wanting decent low light, good zoom, and HD video without carrying a bulky kit. When grabbing street shots around town or shooting occasional wildlife, its responsiveness impressed me - contrast that with the somewhat ponderous Tough 6000 AF.
Still, neither camera is a replacement for mirrorless systems or pro-grade compacts. The lack of manual controls and RAW puts limits on creative depth, but for their time - and price - both delivered commendably.
So, whether you pick the tough-as-nails Olympus or the more sophisticated Sony depends principally on your shooting environments and priorities. For me, the Sony Cyber-shot WX5 wins on sheer photographic versatility and image quality, but the Olympus 6000 remains an endearing companion for rugged simplicity and macro fun.
Thanks for trekking through this detailed comparison! Hopefully, this examination helps you zero in on the compact that truly suits your photographic adventures and style.
If you want deeper dives into any particular feature or genre, I’m happy to share more. Happy shooting!
Footnote: Image credits and more hands-on camera field tests can be found across my review galleries and dedicated photography site archives.
Olympus 6000 vs Sony WX5 Specifications
Olympus Stylus Tough 6000 | Sony Cyber-shot DSC-WX5 | |
---|---|---|
General Information | ||
Brand | Olympus | Sony |
Model type | Olympus Stylus Tough 6000 | Sony Cyber-shot DSC-WX5 |
Alternative name | mju Tough 6000 | - |
Class | Small Sensor Compact | Small Sensor Compact |
Announced | 2009-07-01 | 2010-07-08 |
Physical type | Compact | Compact |
Sensor Information | ||
Chip | - | Bionz |
Sensor type | CCD | BSI-CMOS |
Sensor size | 1/2.3" | 1/2.3" |
Sensor measurements | 6.17 x 4.55mm | 6.17 x 4.55mm |
Sensor area | 28.1mm² | 28.1mm² |
Sensor resolution | 10MP | 12MP |
Anti alias filter | ||
Aspect ratio | 16:9, 4:3 and 3:2 | 4:3 and 16:9 |
Peak resolution | 3648 x 2736 | 4000 x 3000 |
Highest native ISO | 1600 | 3200 |
Lowest native ISO | 50 | 125 |
RAW support | ||
Autofocusing | ||
Focus manually | ||
Touch to focus | ||
Continuous autofocus | ||
Autofocus single | ||
Tracking autofocus | ||
Selective autofocus | ||
Center weighted autofocus | ||
Autofocus multi area | ||
Autofocus live view | ||
Face detection autofocus | ||
Contract detection autofocus | ||
Phase detection autofocus | ||
Total focus points | - | 9 |
Lens | ||
Lens mount type | fixed lens | fixed lens |
Lens zoom range | 28-102mm (3.6x) | 24-120mm (5.0x) |
Highest aperture | f/3.5-5.1 | f/2.4-5.9 |
Macro focusing range | 2cm | 5cm |
Crop factor | 5.8 | 5.8 |
Screen | ||
Screen type | Fixed Type | Fixed Type |
Screen diagonal | 2.7" | 2.8" |
Resolution of screen | 230k dots | 461k dots |
Selfie friendly | ||
Liveview | ||
Touch functionality | ||
Viewfinder Information | ||
Viewfinder type | None | None |
Features | ||
Min shutter speed | 1/4 secs | 2 secs |
Max shutter speed | 1/2000 secs | 1/1600 secs |
Continuous shutter rate | - | 10.0fps |
Shutter priority | ||
Aperture priority | ||
Manually set exposure | ||
Change white balance | ||
Image stabilization | ||
Integrated flash | ||
Flash distance | 4.00 m | 5.10 m |
Flash settings | Auto, Fill-in, Red-Eye reduction, Off, On | Auto, On, Off, Red-eye, Slow sync |
External flash | ||
Auto exposure bracketing | ||
White balance bracketing | ||
Exposure | ||
Multisegment metering | ||
Average metering | ||
Spot metering | ||
Partial metering | ||
AF area metering | ||
Center weighted metering | ||
Video features | ||
Video resolutions | 640 x 480 (30, 15 fps), 320 x 240 (30, 15 fps) | 1920 x 1080 (50 fps), 1440 x 1080 (50, 25fps), 1280 x 720 (25 fps), 640 x 480 (25 fps) |
Highest video resolution | 640x480 | 1920x1080 |
Video file format | Motion JPEG | AVCHD |
Microphone support | ||
Headphone support | ||
Connectivity | ||
Wireless | None | Eye-Fi Connected |
Bluetooth | ||
NFC | ||
HDMI | ||
USB | USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/sec) | USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/sec) |
GPS | None | None |
Physical | ||
Environment sealing | ||
Water proofing | ||
Dust proofing | ||
Shock proofing | ||
Crush proofing | ||
Freeze proofing | ||
Weight | 179 grams (0.39 lb) | 146 grams (0.32 lb) |
Dimensions | 95 x 63 x 22mm (3.7" x 2.5" x 0.9") | 92 x 52 x 22mm (3.6" x 2.0" x 0.9") |
DXO scores | ||
DXO Overall rating | not tested | not tested |
DXO Color Depth rating | not tested | not tested |
DXO Dynamic range rating | not tested | not tested |
DXO Low light rating | not tested | not tested |
Other | ||
Battery ID | - | NP-BN1 |
Self timer | Yes (12 seconds) | Yes (2 or 10 sec) |
Time lapse feature | ||
Type of storage | xD Picture Card, microSD Card, Internal | SD/ SDHC/ SDXC, Memory Stick Duo/Pro Duo, Internal |
Card slots | 1 | 1 |
Pricing at release | $259 | $250 |