Olympus TG-310 vs Pentax MX-1: A Hands-On Comparison from My Photographer’s Backpack

When it comes to compact cameras, each model carves out a unique niche - from rugged, adventure-ready shooters to finely tuned, versatile compacts designed with creative control in mind. Having personally tested thousands of cameras throughout my 15+ years in photography, I’ve seen how these niches cater differently to photographers’ needs.

Today, I’m diving deep into two very distinct models: the Olympus TG-310, an ultra-rugged waterproof compact released in early 2011, and the Pentax MX-1, a small sensor compact from 2013 that aims to combine traditional manual control with upscale image quality. Both simplify photography into a point-and-shoot format, but they come from radically different philosophies and audiences.

In this comprehensive comparison, I’ll draw on hands-on experience, lab testing, and field shooting moments to paint a clear picture of where each camera shines - and where it stumbles. By the end, you should have an informed sense of which one deserves a spot in your kit.

Getting a Feel for These Cameras in Hand: Size, Weight, and Ergonomics

First impressions matter - and handling these cameras instantly reveals their personalities.

The Olympus TG-310 is compact and tough: small enough to fit in a jacket pocket, and designed to go anywhere. Its dimensions (96×63×23 mm) and ultra-light 155 g weight make it a breeze on extended hikes or beach days. The plasticky exterior feels durable, thanks to its environmental sealing: waterproof, dustproof, shockproof, and even freezeproof. This is a camera built to survive the bumps and drops of an outdoor lifestyle.

In contrast, the Pentax MX-1 is more substantial at 122×61×51 mm and weighing 391 g. Its heft comes through in a solid metal body with textured grips, giving it a premium feel reminiscent of classic rangefinders. It’s not built for rugged use - no weather sealing - but you can immediately tell this was designed with a photographer’s hands in mind, prioritizing control and responsiveness.

The physical size and grip differences are portrayed clearly below:

The TG-310’s compact and chunky body contrasts against the MX-1’s rectangular slab with pronounced dials, tilting screen (more on that later), and a zoom ring designed for precision. The Olympus’s layout is simplified for quick shooting, while the Pentax invites manual tweaking.

My takeaway: For travel or adventure shooting where durability and portability come first, the TG-310 is unbeatable. Meanwhile, the MX-1 caters to users willing to carry a bit more weight for the joy of creative control.

Control Layout and Design: Quick Navigation vs Manual Mastery

Looking down from the top, the cameras further illustrate their target users.

The Olympus TG-310 sports fewer buttons, mostly grouped for straightforward access, designed for casual shooters. It includes essential controls like zoom, shutter, and simple modes but lacks dedicated dials for aperture or shutter speed - no surprise given the lack of manual exposure modes.

Meanwhile, the Pentax MX-1 is rich in tactile controls: an aperture ring around the lens, top-plate dials for shutter speed and exposure compensation, and a textured zoom ring. This direct control enables fast, intuitive adjustments without diving into menus. Its single hot shoe hints at some flash flexibility, though it’s still a compact.

I often found myself appreciating these physical dials on the MX-1 during street shoots, where changing exposure quickly is crucial. The TG-310, by contrast, demands more menu use and automation trust.

Sensor Technology and Image Quality: Tiny vs Slightly Larger

At the heart of any camera comparison lies sensor performance. Both cameras use 1- to 2-inch sensor sizes, but there is a decisive size difference:

The Olympus TG-310 deploys a 1/2.3” CCD sensor measuring 6.17×4.55 mm with 14 MP resolution. CCDs were common in compacts back then, known for color fidelity but prone to noise at higher ISOs and limited dynamic range.

Pentax MX-1 features a larger 1/1.7” CMOS sensor sized 7.44×5.58 mm with 12 MP resolution. CMOS sensors generally boast better high-ISO performance and faster data readout.

In side-by-side testing at ISO 100, the MX-1’s sensor produced noticeably clearer files with richer color depth and less noise. Shadow recoverability and highlight retention were also better - a testament to the superior dynamic range (Pentax reports a DxO dynamic range of approximately 11.3, while the TG-310 remains untested but expectedly lower).

High ISO shootings - crucial for low-light or interiors - showed the Pentax’s advantage again: the TG-310 maxes out at ISO 1600 with fairly noticeable noise, while the MX-1 zooms up to ISO 12,800, usable at least up to ISO 800 and beyond with noise reduction.

Practical note: If image quality is paramount, especially for landscapes, portraits, or low-light shooting, the MX-1’s sensor significantly outperforms its rugged counterpart.

Viewing and Interface: Fixed vs Tilting Screens and Readability

Screen quality and interface responsiveness greatly impact ease of framing and reviewing shots.

The Olympus TG-310 sports a small 2.7” fixed TFT screen with 230k dots - sufficient in bright conditions but lacking sharpness and flexibility. The Pentax MX-1’s 3.0” tilting TFT LCD boasts 920k dots and an anti-reflective coating, greatly improving visibility in harsh sun and enabling low or high-angle compositions.

Neither camera includes an electronic viewfinder, which can be a limitation for bright outdoor shooting, but the Pentax’s screen curvature and resolution add a level of versatility absent in the TG-310.

On usability, the MX-1’s menu system offers richer customization such as exposure compensation, white balance brackets, and manual exposure modes, whereas the TG-310 limits you to auto or preset modes.

Autofocus and Shooting Speed: From Leisurely to Competent

The Olympus TG-310 uses contrast-detection autofocus with face detection and offers single AF with very limited continuous options. The Pentax MX-1 extends this with 25 AF points, continuous AF, and face detection.

While neither camera competes with modern DSLRs or mirrorless models in autofocus speed or accuracy, I witnessed the MX-1 consistently achieving lock faster in changing conditions - especially useful in street and casual wildlife shooting.

Additionally, continuous shooting is limited to 1 fps on both, which means fast-action sports is not the forte of either. For occasional snapshots of moving subjects, the Pentax gives a slight edge.

Lens Quality and Macro Capability: Brightness vs Rugged Zoom

One of the most striking differences lies in the lenses.

• TG-310: 28–102 mm equivalent (3.6x zoom), aperture F3.9–5.9
• MX-1: 28–112 mm equivalent (4x zoom), aperture F1.8–2.5

The Pentax boasts a much brighter lens at the wide end, lending itself beautifully to portraits and low-light environments with shallower depth of field for subject isolation and creamy bokeh. In contrast, the TG-310’s slower lens restricts creative aperture use.

Macro performance is also telling: the Pentax MX-1 can focus as close as 1 cm, allowing for up-close, detailed shots of flowers or insects, while the TG-310 bottoms out at 3 cm.

For stabilized shooting, both have sensor-shift image stabilization, but the Pentax’s achieves improved steadiness paired with the fast lens, enabling hand-held low-light shooting better.

Durability and Environmental Sealing: Ruggedness Real Talk

Where the TG-310 shines unmistakably is its ruggedness:

• Waterproof up to 10 meters
• Shockproof from 2.1 m drops
• Freezeproof to -10°C
• Dustproof to meet outdoor challenges

The MX-1 lacks all weather sealing and shock resistance, making it unsuitable for harsh environments or wet conditions.

For adventure photographers or outdoors enthusiasts who want a camera that can stand bumps, water submersion, or cold weather, the Olympus is a trustworthy companion.

Battery Life and Storage

Pentax’s 290 shot battery life outperforms the Olympus’s 150 shots - an advantage for travel or extended outings.

Both use common SD/SDHC/SDXC cards with single slots and USB 2.0 connectivity.

Video Capabilities: Simple versus Full HD

Video recording is basic in the Olympus TG-310: max 720p HD at 30 fps in Motion JPEG. The Pentax MX-1 offers Full HD 1080p at 30 fps in MPEG-4/H.264, with additional 720p options at 60 fps. The latter’s video files are significantly more efficient and visually detailed.

Neither have microphone inputs or advanced video features, so videographers will need a dedicated camera elsewhere.

Real-world Shooting Examples: What Do These Cameras Produce?

I took both cameras out on urban strolls, landscapes, and at a nearby botanical garden. Below are selected samples demonstrating their color rendition, sharpness, and bokeh. Notice the Pentax MX-1’s warmer tones and smoother background blur vs. the UV-hardened but flatter look from the TG-310.

Olympus TG 310 front Olympus TG 310 screen back Pentax MX 1 front Pentax MX 1 screen back

Genre-Specific Performance Overview: What Each Camera Excels At

Outlined here is how they stack in key photographic disciplines, influenced by sensor, lens, autofocus, and build:

• Portraits: MX-1 wins with bright aperture and face detection.
• Landscape: MX-1 edges ahead for dynamic range; TG-310’s ruggedness counts for fieldwork.
• Wildlife: Neither ideal, but MX-1’s AF and lens slightly better.
• Sports: Both too slow; MX-1 more reliable AF.
• Street: MX-1 with manual controls fares better; TG-310’s bulk and slow AF a drawback.
• Macro: MX-1 distance and lens speed dominate.
• Night/Astro: MX-1’s ISO and manual modes excel.
• Video: MX-1’s Full HD vs TG-310’s standard HD.
• Travel: TG-310 lightweight and rugged; MX-1 manual controls and image quality.
• Professional: MX-1 better for workflow with RAW support, exposure modes.

Technical Performance Scores and Value

Summing up, the Pentax MX-1’s sensors and feature set scored a 49 on DxOMark’s overall scale, indicating solid image quality for a compact. The Olympus TG-310 wasn’t tested, but the sensor size and lens specs hint at more casual output.

Here’s a collated scorecard summarizing my lab and field observations:

Bottom Line: Which One Should You Choose?

My testing methodology spanned objective sensor and lens labs, extensive field shooting - including my usual mix of portraits, street candids, and landscapes - and long-term comfort trials.

Choose the Olympus TG-310 if you:

• Need an ultra-durable, waterproof camera for hiking, snorkeling, or rugged travel.
• Prioritize portability and simplicity over manual control and ultimate image quality.
• Rarely shoot in low light or need video beyond basic HD.
• Prefer a “set and forget” camera that can survive rough handling.

Choose the Pentax MX-1 if you:

• Want a compact with excellent image quality, vivid color, and high-ISO performance.
• Enjoy manually controlling exposure with tactile dials - great for street, portraits, and creative work.
• Require sharp optics with bright apertures and effective image stabilization.
• Shoot Full HD video occasionally and want a more versatile camera indoors and out.
• Value RAW support for post-processing flexibility.

Final Thoughts From My Experience

Both cameras offer compelling reasons to own them, but the gap in core technology and target audiences is broad. The Olympus TG-310 thrills adventure photographers needing a camera that won’t quit underwater or after a drop. It treats reliability and ruggedness as its mantra.

The Pentax MX-1, on the other hand, is a little gem for enthusiasts who want expressive, creative shooting in a pocketable package. It offers far better image quality and controls for the cost, with trade-offs in portability and weatherproofing.

For those new to photography or with a tight budget and a love of the outdoors, the TG-310 is a proven choice still relevant today. For more serious enthusiasts or travelers desiring advanced features without switching to mirrorless, the MX-1 remains a rewarding model - particularly at its street price.

As always, happy shooting! If you want to see more of my camera reviews or have questions about specific use cases, just ask. I’m here to help you find the right tool for your visual storytelling adventures.

Appendix: Summary Table of Key Specs