Olympus Stylus Tough 8000 vs Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W620: A Hands-On Comparative Review for Enthusiasts and Pros

When considering small sensor compacts in the sub-$400 realm, two contenders often come up: the Olympus Stylus Tough 8000 (aka mju Tough 8000), launched in 2009, and the slightly later Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W620 from 2012. Both aim to serve the casual shooter who wants pocketable convenience without burning a hole in their wallet. But how do they really stack up when placed side-by-side in real-world shooting scenarios? As someone who has tested thousands of cameras over 15 years, including many budget compacts, I’ll break down these models with a no-nonsense, experience-driven approach.

In this extensive 2500-word dive, I’ll cover sensor tech, ergonomics, autofocus, image quality, and how each performs across a broad spectrum of photography disciplines - from portrait to wildlife, macro to night photography, and everything in between. I will then give you a clear verdict based upon practical usage, value for money, and intended shooting styles.

Size, Build & Ergonomics: The Feel Factor in Your Hands

Before you even press the shutter, the camera’s size, weight, and design influence usability - especially important for street and travel photographers who want to carry light without compromising comfort.

The Olympus 8000 measures 95x62x22 mm and weighs about 182 grams, quite chunky for its class but with a rugged build featuring environmental sealing (dust and splash proof). On the other hand, the Sony W620 is a lighter 116 grams with a slightly slimmer profile at 98x56x20 mm. The Sony’s sleeker silhouette favors pocketability and discretion, while Olympus’s more robust construction hints at higher durability.

Ergonomically, Olympus sacrifices finesse for function. It has larger, well-spaced buttons and a rubberized grip that makes it easier to hold firmly, especially outdoors or in wet conditions. Sony’s controls are smaller and flatter - nice for streamlined travel but less friendly if you're wearing gloves or shooting action.

Pro tip: If you often shoot outdoors in rugged environments, Olympus’s environmental sealing and grip arrangement give it a serious advantage.

Sensor and Image Quality: Small Sensors, Big Differences?

Both cameras feature a 1/2.3-inch CCD sensor - a common size for compact cameras of their era. Olympus’s sensor resolution is 12 megapixels, whereas Sony edges out with 14 megapixels. While more pixels don’t necessarily mean better images, Sony’s sensor size is marginally larger (28.07 mm² vs. 27.72 mm² for Olympus), offering potentially better light gathering.

However, both sensors come with anti-aliasing filters to reduce moiré, which slightly softens images. Their native ISO ranges are also telling: Olympus caps at ISO 1600 max (no expanded ISO boost), while Sony offers ISO 3200 and a higher minimum ISO 100 compared to Olympus’s ISO 64, potentially advantageous for daylight shots.

Tested side-by-side, the Olympus tends to deliver punchier colors and a crisper look in good light, thanks partly to its lens and sensor tuning. Sony’s shots can sometimes look softer owing to their processing, but dynamic range and noise control at high ISOs are surprisingly competitive when you consider the class.

Real-World Autofocus Performance and Shooting Speed

Small compacts often skimp on autofocus sophistication, and neither Olympus 8000 nor Sony W620 offers manual focus or advanced AF modes like face or eye detection (except the Sony has rudimentary face detection and AF tracking).

Olympus relies solely on contrast detection AF with only a center-weighted focus area - this means slower acquisition and some hunting under challenging light. Sony’s AF uses contrast detection but includes multi-area AF and face detection, helping it lock focus more reliably on human subjects.

Continuous shooting is minimal on both but present on Sony at about 1 fps, while Olympus does not specify and tends to be single-shot oriented.

Display and User Interface

Both cameras use a fixed 2.7-inch LCD with 230k-dot resolution. The Sony’s "Clear Photo TFT LCD" offers slightly better contrast and color accuracy. Olympus’s LCD is fairly standard with no touchscreen or articulating mechanisms.

Sony’s interface is more intuitive, with easier menu navigation and quicker access to scene modes. Olympus’s UI is basic, lacking exposure compensation, manual modes, or custom white balance options, which may frustrate more advanced shooters.

Heads up: Neither camera has an electronic viewfinder; relying on LCD framing can be tricky outdoors in bright sunlight.

Lens and Zoom Range: Versatility on Your Terms

The Olympus 8000 has a 3.6x optical zoom lens ranging from 28-102mm equivalent focal length with max apertures F3.5-5.1. It shines in macro with a close focusing distance of 2 cm, superior to Sony’s 5 cm - great for getting razor-close with nice background blur.

The Sony W620 offers a longer 5x zoom (28-140mm) but with slower apertures from F3.2 to F6.5 at the telephoto end, making it less ideal in low light or fast-moving subjects.

Photography Discipline Breakdown: How They Perform in Various Genres

Portraits: Skin Tones and Bokeh

Olympus’s slightly wider aperture at wide end and better macro focusing translates into better subject isolation and soft bokeh, enhancing portrait shots. Sony’s longer zoom helps for candid portraits from a distance but limited max aperture reduces background separation.

Sony’s face detection AF improves sharp focus on subjects’ eyes, a notable advantage. However, the Olympus’s color rendering offers richer skin tones, closer to natural hues.

Landscapes: Detail, Dynamic Range, and Durability

Landscape shooters benefit from maximal resolution and dynamic range to capture vast scenes with rich tonality.

Sony’s 14MP sensor provides slightly more resolution, useful if printing or cropping large. Its better max ISO of 3200 can be helpful in pre-dawn or dusk lighting, although noise starts to creep in early.

Olympus holds an edge with its environmental sealing and ruggedness, making it better suited for hiking and harsh outdoor conditions. Its sensor’s slightly better native ISO 64 helps produce cleaner daylight shots, too.

Wildlife and Sports: Autofocus Tracking and Burst Rate

Neither small sensor compact is tailored for fast-action photography. Both lack impressive burst rates (Sony at 1 fps, Olympus unspecified but slow), and neither has sophisticated AF tracking.

Sony’s AF tracking and face detection make it better for occasional moving subjects, but its slow continuous shooting hampers capturing decisive moments.

Olympus’s ruggedness facilitates outdoor wildlife shooting (say, near water or rough terrain), but its limited AF and slow speed are frustrating when quick focus is essential.

Street Photography: Discretion and Portability

Sony’s smaller size and lighter weight make it a better street photographer’s companion, slipping unnoticed into pockets and avoiding the "clubs for thumbs" feel that Olympus’s chunkier build imparts.

On the flip side, Olympus’s ruggedness means less worry about accidental bumps or rain showers on the street.

In low-light street settings, both struggle with noise beyond ISO 400-800, so be mindful.

Macro: Close-Up Capabilities

In macro, Olympus triumphs with a 2 cm minimum focus distance allowing intimate close-ups and better background blur thanks to wider apertures.

Sony’s 5 cm macro focusing is respectable, but it cannot match the tight framing or sharpness Olympus affords out of the box for insect, flower, or product photography.

Night and Astro Photography

Small sensors with CCD technology are not known for exceptional night performance, but ISO capabilities differ.

Sony tops out at ISO 3200, which can help in low light though noise is significant. Olympus maxes at ISO 1600 and performs well up to ISO 400.

Neither camera offers bulb or long exposure modes critical for astro shooting, limiting their utility for star trails or night sky.

Video Capabilities

Sony supports 1280x720 HD video at 30 fps - decent for casual clips - while Olympus maxes out at 640x480 VGA resolution.

Neither has microphone inputs, image stabilization for video (Sony lacks stabilization altogether), or advanced video features. Olympus’s sensor-shift stabilization helps still photos but doesn’t translate fully for video.

Travel: Versatility, Battery, and Convenience

Sony W620 shines with longer zoom range (5x vs. 3.6x Olympus), lower weight, and a more varied card compatibility (SD, Memory Stick variants).

Battery-wise, Sony specifies approx. 220 shots per charge, Olympus’s battery life is unspecified but generally short due to older tech and environmental features.

Olympus’s seal rating adds confidence for adventure travel but adds bulk.

Professional Use: Reliability and Workflow

Neither camera is designed for professional workflows - both lack RAW support - the Olympus doesn’t shoot RAW at all, and Sony also doesn't support RAW, forcing JPEG-only capture.

Limited resolution, slow AF, stereotypical compact build, and restricted manual controls mean these cameras are best suited for casual or enthusiast use rather than serious pro work.

Technical Nuggets That Matter

• Image Stabilization:
  Olympus includes sensor-shift IS, valuable for handheld shots in lower light. Sony W620 lacks IS, so slow shutter shots risk blur unless you find a tripod.

• White Balance:
  Sony supports white balance bracketing to accommodate varying lighting, helpful if you want options in post. Olympus offers no white balance bracketing or custom WB.

• Storage Options:
  Sony accepts a wider range of memory cards, enhancing flexibility and future-proofing. Olympus uses xD Picture Cards, now obsolete and hard to find, which is a big downside.

• Connectivity:
  Sony includes Eye-Fi card compatibility for wireless image transfer; Olympus has no wireless or Bluetooth options, making sharing less convenient.

• Shutter Speeds:
  Olympus has faster max shutter at 1/2000s vs Sony’s 1/1600s, slightly better for bright scenes or fast action.

Sample Images from Both Cameras

Olympus 8000 front Olympus 8000 screen back Sony W620 front Sony W620 screen back

Here, you can see the Sony’s slightly higher resolution but less punchy colors versus Olympus’s vibrant but sometimes contrast-heavy photos. The Olympus handles macro shots with noticeable finesse - flowers and insects have greater detail and softly blurred backgrounds.

Final Performance Scores and Summary of Strengths

Genre-Specific Recommendations

Pros and Cons at a Glance

Olympus Stylus Tough 8000 Pros:

• Rugged environmental sealing (splash and dust resistant)
• Sensor-shift image stabilization for sharper handheld shots
• Excellent macro focusing (2cm minimum distance)
• Crisp color rendition for portraits and daylight
• Faster shutter speeds up to 1/2000s
• Larger, tactile buttons for easier use with gloves

Olympus Stylus Tough 8000 Cons:

• Heavier and bulkier, less pocket-friendly
• No RAW shooting, limited manual controls
• Older sensor with lower max ISO
• Limited video capabilities (VGA only)
• Uses obsolete xD Picture Cards

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W620 Pros:

• Lighter, slimmer, more pocketable design
• Longer zoom range (5x) with decent optics
• Higher resolution sensor (14MP)
• Supports face detection AF and better AF tracking
• HD video capture (720p)
• Broader memory card compatibility and Eye-Fi wireless support

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W620 Cons:

• No image stabilization increases risk of blur
• Smaller buttons, less rugged for tough conditions
• Limited burst speed (1 fps)
• Softer image rendering and weaker macro performance
• No RAW support or manual exposure controls

In Conclusion: Who Should Pick Which?

Both cameras come from an era where compact CCD compacts dominated the entry-level market, but their design philosophies diverged.

If you are an enthusiast who frequently ventures outdoors - hiking, beach trips, or light adventure - the Olympus Stylus Tough 8000 is a compelling choice thanks to its rugged build, in-body stabilization, and macro strength. It’s a camera that forgives a few technical limitations with sheer dependability and better handling in tricky conditions.

Conversely, if your priority is a lightweight, easy-to-carry camera for casual travel, street photography, or family snapshots, the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W620 offers a sharper, higher resolution sensor, longer zoom reach, handy face detection autofocus, and HD video, all in a pocket-friendly chassis.

Neither is perfect for professional or technically demanding photographers who need RAW, manual controls, or fast autofocus. But for those on modest budgets hunting for a reliable compact, your choice boils down to rugged reliability and macro chops (Olympus) vs. versatile zoom, video, and ease-of-use (Sony).

Whether you lean Olympus or Sony, understanding tradeoffs between ruggedness, imaging, and handling is key. Both form solid entry points into compact photography history - and with proper expectations, both can serve as capable everyday shooters.

Happy shooting, and may your next camera be just the right tool for your photographic adventures!

Appendix: Quick Links to Referenced Images

• 
• 
• 
• 
• Olympus 8000 front Olympus 8000 screen back Sony W620 front Sony W620 screen back