Olympus TG-870 vs Olympus VR-340
91 Imaging
41 Features
46 Overall
43
96 Imaging
39 Features
36 Overall
37
Olympus TG-870 vs Olympus VR-340 Key Specs
(Full Review)
- 16MP - 1/2.3" Sensor
- 3" Tilting Screen
- ISO 125 - 6400 (Boost to 12800)
- Optical Image Stabilization
- 1920 x 1080 video
- 21-105mm (F3.5-5.7) lens
- 221g - 113 x 64 x 28mm
- Launched January 2016
- Superseded the Olympus TG-860
(Full Review)
- 16MP - 1/2.3" Sensor
- 3" Fixed Display
- ISO 100 - 3200
- Sensor-shift Image Stabilization
- 1280 x 720 video
- 24-240mm (F3.0-5.7) lens
- 125g - 96 x 57 x 19mm
- Announced January 2012
Meta to Introduce 'AI-Generated' Labels for Media starting next month Olympus TG-870 vs Olympus VR-340 Overview
Here is a in depth overview of the Olympus TG-870 versus Olympus VR-340, former being a Ultracompact while the other is a Small Sensor Compact and they are both designed by Olympus. The resolution of the TG-870 (16MP) and the VR-340 (16MP) is fairly similar and they feature the exact same sensor sizes (1/2.3").
Sora from OpenAI releases its first ever music videoThe TG-870 was brought out 4 years later than the VR-340 and that is quite a serious difference as far as tech is concerned. Each of these cameras come with different body type with the Olympus TG-870 being a Ultracompact camera and the Olympus VR-340 being a Compact camera.
Before diving through a full comparison, below is a quick synopsis of how the TG-870 scores versus the VR-340 with regards to portability, imaging, features and an overall rating.
President Biden pushes bill mandating TikTok sale or ban Olympus TG-870 vs Olympus VR-340 Gallery
Following is a sample of the gallery pictures for Olympus Stylus Tough TG-870 & Olympus VR-340. The entire galleries are viewable at Olympus TG-870 Gallery & Olympus VR-340 Gallery.
Reasons to pick Olympus TG-870 over the Olympus VR-340
| TG-870 | VR-340 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Announced | January 2016 |  | January 2012 | Fresher by 49 months |
| Display type | Tilting |  | Fixed | Tilting display |
| Display resolution | 921k |  | 460k | Clearer display (+461k dot) |
Reasons to pick Olympus VR-340 over the Olympus TG-870
| VR-340 | TG-870 |
|---|
Common features in the Olympus TG-870 and Olympus VR-340
| TG-870 | VR-340 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Focus manually |  | No manual focusing | ||
| Display dimension | 3" |  | 3" | Identical display dimensions |
| Selfie screen |  | No selfie screen | ||
| Touch display |  | No Touch display |
Olympus TG-870 vs Olympus VR-340 Physical Comparison
If you are going to carry your camera regularly, you need to take into account its weight and volume. The Olympus TG-870 enjoys physical dimensions of 113mm x 64mm x 28mm (4.4" x 2.5" x 1.1") having a weight of 221 grams (0.49 lbs) whilst the Olympus VR-340 has sizing of 96mm x 57mm x 19mm (3.8" x 2.2" x 0.7") with a weight of 125 grams (0.28 lbs).
See the Olympus TG-870 versus Olympus VR-340 in our newest Camera plus Lens Size Comparison Tool.
Remember, the weight of an ILC will vary depending on the lens you are utilising during that time. The following is the front view scale comparison of the TG-870 compared to the VR-340.
Looking at size and weight, the portability score of the TG-870 and VR-340 is 91 and 96 respectively.
Olympus TG-870 vs Olympus VR-340 Sensor Comparison
Usually, its difficult to see the gap between sensor sizing just by going over technical specs. The visual here might give you a stronger sense of the sensor dimensions in the TG-870 and VR-340.
As you have seen, the two cameras have got the exact same sensor measurements and the exact same MP therefore you can expect similar quality of images however you may want to consider the age of the products into consideration. The newer TG-870 will have a benefit in sensor tech.
Olympus TG-870 vs Olympus VR-340 Screen and ViewFinder
Photography Glossary Photography Type Scores
Portrait Comparison
Photobucket discusses licensing 13 billion images with AI firmsStreet Comparison
Samsung Releases Faster Versions of EVO MicroSD CardsSports Comparison
Snapchat Adds Watermarks to AI-Created ImagesTravel Comparison
Apple Innovates by Creating Next-Level Optical Stabilization for iPhoneLandscape Comparison
Pentax 17 Pre-Orders Outperform Expectations by a LandslideVlogging Comparison
Japan-exclusive Leica Leitz Phone 3 features big sensor and new modes
Olympus TG-870 vs Olympus VR-340 Specifications
| Olympus Stylus Tough TG-870 | Olympus VR-340 | |
|---|---|---|
| General Information | ||
| Brand | Olympus | Olympus |
| Model type | Olympus Stylus Tough TG-870 | Olympus VR-340 |
| Class | Ultracompact | Small Sensor Compact |
| Launched | 2016-01-06 | 2012-01-10 |
| Body design | Ultracompact | Compact |
| Sensor Information | ||
| Chip | TruePic VII | - |
| Sensor type | BSI-CMOS | CCD |
| Sensor size | 1/2.3" | 1/2.3" |
| Sensor dimensions | 6.17 x 4.55mm | 6.17 x 4.55mm |
| Sensor surface area | 28.1mm² | 28.1mm² |
| Sensor resolution | 16MP | 16MP |
| Anti alias filter | ||
| Aspect ratio | 1:1, 4:3, 3:2 and 16:9 | 4:3 and 16:9 |
| Highest resolution | 4608 x 3456 | 4608 x 3456 |
| Highest native ISO | 6400 | 3200 |
| Highest boosted ISO | 12800 | - |
| Minimum native ISO | 125 | 100 |
| RAW format | ||
| Autofocusing | ||
| Focus manually | ||
| Touch to focus | ||
| Autofocus continuous | ||
| Autofocus single | ||
| Autofocus tracking | ||
| Selective autofocus | ||
| Autofocus center weighted | ||
| Multi area autofocus | ||
| Autofocus live view | ||
| Face detection autofocus | ||
| Contract detection autofocus | ||
| Phase detection autofocus | ||
| Cross type focus points | - | - |
| Lens | ||
| Lens support | fixed lens | fixed lens |
| Lens zoom range | 21-105mm (5.0x) | 24-240mm (10.0x) |
| Max aperture | f/3.5-5.7 | f/3.0-5.7 |
| Macro focusing distance | 1cm | - |
| Focal length multiplier | 5.8 | 5.8 |
| Screen | ||
| Screen type | Tilting | Fixed Type |
| Screen diagonal | 3 inch | 3 inch |
| Screen resolution | 921k dot | 460k dot |
| Selfie friendly | ||
| Liveview | ||
| Touch display | ||
| Screen technology | - | TFT Color LCD |
| Viewfinder Information | ||
| Viewfinder type | None | None |
| Features | ||
| Slowest shutter speed | 4 seconds | 4 seconds |
| Maximum shutter speed | 1/2000 seconds | 1/2000 seconds |
| Continuous shooting speed | 7.0fps | - |
| Shutter priority | ||
| Aperture priority | ||
| Expose Manually | ||
| Custom white balance | ||
| Image stabilization | ||
| Integrated flash | ||
| Flash distance | 4.00 m (at ISO 1600) | 4.80 m |
| Flash settings | Auto, redeye reduction, fill flash, off, LED illuminator | Auto, On, Off, Red-Eye, Fill-in |
| External flash | ||
| Auto exposure bracketing | ||
| White balance bracketing | ||
| Exposure | ||
| Multisegment | ||
| Average | ||
| Spot | ||
| Partial | ||
| AF area | ||
| Center weighted | ||
| Video features | ||
| Video resolutions | 1920 x 1080 (60p), 1280 x 720 (60p), 640 x 480 (60p) | 1280 x 720 (30,15 fps), 640 x 480 (30, 15 fps), 320 x 180 (30,15 fps) |
| Highest video resolution | 1920x1080 | 1280x720 |
| Video format | MPEG-4, H.264 | Motion JPEG |
| Mic input | ||
| Headphone input | ||
| Connectivity | ||
| Wireless | Built-In | Eye-Fi Connected |
| Bluetooth | ||
| NFC | ||
| HDMI | ||
| USB | USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/sec) | USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/sec) |
| GPS | BuiltIn | None |
| Physical | ||
| Environmental seal | ||
| Water proofing | ||
| Dust proofing | ||
| Shock proofing | ||
| Crush proofing | ||
| Freeze proofing | ||
| Weight | 221 gr (0.49 lbs) | 125 gr (0.28 lbs) |
| Dimensions | 113 x 64 x 28mm (4.4" x 2.5" x 1.1") | 96 x 57 x 19mm (3.8" x 2.2" x 0.7") |
| DXO scores | ||
| DXO All around 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 life | 300 photographs | - |
| Type of battery | Battery Pack | - |
| Battery ID | Li-50B | LI-50B |
| Self timer | Yes (2 or 10 sec, custom) | Yes (2 or 12 sec) |
| Time lapse shooting | ||
| Type of storage | SD/SDHC/SDXC, Internal | SD/SDHC/SDXC |
| Storage slots | One | One |
| Cost at launch | $280 | $130 |