Olympus TG-320 vs Ricoh WG-50
94 Imaging
37 Features
33 Overall
35
![Olympus TG-320 front Olympus TG-320 front](https://pxlmag.com/db/images/cameras/gallery/medium/Olympus-TG-320/Olympus-TG-320-front.jpg)
![Ricoh WG-50 front Ricoh WG-50 front](https://pxlmag.com/db/images/cameras/gallery/medium/Ricoh-WG-50/Ricoh-WG-50-front.jpg)
91 Imaging
42 Features
39 Overall
40
Olympus TG-320 vs Ricoh WG-50 Key Specs
(Full Review)
- 14MP - 1/2.3" Sensor
- 2.7" Fixed Screen
- ISO 80 - 1600
- Sensor-shift Image Stabilization
- 1280 x 720 video
- 28-102mm (F3.5-5.1) lens
- 155g - 96 x 63 x 23mm
- Revealed January 2012
(Full Review)
- 16MP - 1/2.3" Sensor
- 2.7" Fixed Screen
- ISO 125 - 6400
- Digital Image Stabilization
- 1920 x 1080 video
- 28-140mm (F3.5-5.5) lens
- 193g - 123 x 62 x 30mm
- Launched May 2017
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/snapchat-218x150.jpg)
Olympus TG-320 vs Ricoh WG-50 Overview
Its time to look a bit more closely at the Olympus TG-320 and Ricoh WG-50, both Waterproof digital cameras by brands Olympus and Ricoh. The sensor resolution of the TG-320 (14MP) and the WG-50 (16MP) is relatively well matched and both cameras provide the same sensor sizing (1/2.3").
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/No-Surprise-Pentax-17-Pre-Orders-218x150.jpg)
The TG-320 was released 6 years earlier than the WG-50 and that is quite a serious difference as far as technology is concerned. Each of the cameras have the same body design (Compact).
Before delving into a in depth comparison, here is a simple synopsis of how the TG-320 scores versus the WG-50 with regard to portability, imaging, features and an overall grade.
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/ai-licence-218x150.jpg)
Olympus TG-320 vs Ricoh WG-50 Gallery
This is a preview of the gallery photos for Olympus TG-320 & Ricoh WG-50. The complete galleries are provided at Olympus TG-320 Gallery & Ricoh WG-50 Gallery.
Reasons to pick Olympus TG-320 over the Ricoh WG-50
TG-320 | WG-50 |
---|
Reasons to pick Ricoh WG-50 over the Olympus TG-320
WG-50 | TG-320 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Launched | May 2017 | ![]() | January 2012 | More recent by 65 months |
Focus manually | ![]() | More exact focusing |
Common features in the Olympus TG-320 and Ricoh WG-50
TG-320 | WG-50 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Screen type | Fixed | ![]() | Fixed | Fixed screen |
Screen dimensions | 2.7" | ![]() | 2.7" | Equal screen measurement |
Screen resolution | 230k | ![]() | 230k | The same screen resolution |
Selfie screen | ![]() | Neither has selfie screen | ||
Touch screen | ![]() | Lack of Touch screen |
Olympus TG-320 vs Ricoh WG-50 Physical Comparison
When you are intending to lug around your camera frequently, you'll have to factor in its weight and size. The Olympus TG-320 has outside dimensions of 96mm x 63mm x 23mm (3.8" x 2.5" x 0.9") with a weight of 155 grams (0.34 lbs) whilst the Ricoh WG-50 has specifications of 123mm x 62mm x 30mm (4.8" x 2.4" x 1.2") accompanied by a weight of 193 grams (0.43 lbs).
Check the Olympus TG-320 and Ricoh WG-50 in our completely new Camera & Lens Size Comparison Tool.![Camera Size Comparison with Lenses Camera Size Comparison with Lenses](https://pxlmag.com/db/assets/camera-size-comparison-animation.gif)
Don't forget, the weight of an ILC will change dependant on the lens you use at the time. Here is a front view dimension comparison of the TG-320 compared to the WG-50.
![Olympus TG-320 vs Ricoh WG-50 size comparison Olympus TG-320 vs Ricoh WG-50 size comparison](https://pxlmag.com/db/images/camera-compare/Olympus-TG-320-vs-Ricoh-WG-50-size-comparison.jpg)
Looking at dimensions and weight, the portability score of the TG-320 and WG-50 is 94 and 91 respectively.
![Olympus TG-320 vs Ricoh WG-50 top view buttons comparison Olympus TG-320 vs Ricoh WG-50 top view buttons comparison](https://pxlmag.com/db/images/camera-compare/Olympus-TG-320-vs-Ricoh-WG-50-top-view-buttons-comparison.jpg)
Olympus TG-320 vs Ricoh WG-50 Sensor Comparison
Typically, it is very tough to envision the contrast between sensor measurements purely by reading through technical specs. The visual here will help give you a much better sense of the sensor sizes in the TG-320 and WG-50.
As you can tell, both of the cameras provide the same sensor dimensions albeit not the same megapixels. You can count on the Ricoh WG-50 to resolve greater detail as a result of its extra 2MP. Higher resolution will also let you crop pictures more aggressively. The older TG-320 is going to be disadvantaged in sensor technology.
![Olympus TG-320 vs Ricoh WG-50 sensor size comparison Olympus TG-320 vs Ricoh WG-50 sensor size comparison](https://pxlmag.com/db/images/sensor-compare/Olympus-TG-320-vs-Ricoh-WG-50-sensor-size-comparison.png)
Olympus TG-320 vs Ricoh WG-50 Screen and ViewFinder
![Olympus TG-320 vs Ricoh WG-50 Screen and Viewfinder comparison Olympus TG-320 vs Ricoh WG-50 Screen and Viewfinder comparison](https://pxlmag.com/db/images/camera-compare/Olympus-TG-320-vs-Ricoh-WG-50-screen-back-comparison.jpg)
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/LP3_cut_13f_0212-218x150.jpg)
Photography Type Scores
Portrait Comparison
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/photography-glossary-218x150.jpg)
Street Comparison
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/maxresdefault-218x150.jpg)
Sports Comparison
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/iphone-optical-stabilization-218x150.jpg)
Travel Comparison
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/tiktok-218x150.jpg)
Landscape Comparison
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Approach-to-AI-Generated-Content-218x150.jpg)
Vlogging Comparison
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/samsung-evo-microsd-cards-featur-218x150.jpg)
Olympus TG-320 vs Ricoh WG-50 Specifications
Olympus TG-320 | Ricoh WG-50 | |
---|---|---|
General Information | ||
Brand Name | Olympus | Ricoh |
Model type | Olympus TG-320 | Ricoh WG-50 |
Class | Waterproof | Waterproof |
Revealed | 2012-01-10 | 2017-05-24 |
Body design | Compact | Compact |
Sensor Information | ||
Powered by | TruePic III+ | - |
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 | 14 megapixels | 16 megapixels |
Anti alias filter | ||
Aspect ratio | - | 1:1, 4:3 and 16:9 |
Peak resolution | 4288 x 3216 | 4608 x 3456 |
Highest native ISO | 1600 | 6400 |
Min native ISO | 80 | 125 |
RAW images | ||
Autofocusing | ||
Focus manually | ||
Touch to focus | ||
Continuous AF | ||
AF single | ||
Tracking AF | ||
Selective AF | ||
AF center weighted | ||
AF multi area | ||
AF live view | ||
Face detection focusing | ||
Contract detection focusing | ||
Phase detection focusing | ||
Total focus points | - | 9 |
Cross type focus points | - | - |
Lens | ||
Lens support | fixed lens | fixed lens |
Lens zoom range | 28-102mm (3.6x) | 28-140mm (5.0x) |
Largest aperture | f/3.5-5.1 | f/3.5-5.5 |
Macro focusing range | 3cm | 1cm |
Crop factor | 5.8 | 5.8 |
Screen | ||
Screen type | Fixed Type | Fixed Type |
Screen sizing | 2.7" | 2.7" |
Screen resolution | 230k dot | 230k dot |
Selfie friendly | ||
Liveview | ||
Touch operation | ||
Screen tech | TFT Color LCD | - |
Viewfinder Information | ||
Viewfinder type | None | None |
Features | ||
Minimum shutter speed | 4 seconds | 4 seconds |
Fastest shutter speed | 1/2000 seconds | 1/4000 seconds |
Continuous shutter speed | 1.0fps | 8.0fps |
Shutter priority | ||
Aperture priority | ||
Expose Manually | ||
Change WB | ||
Image stabilization | ||
Integrated flash | ||
Flash distance | 5.80 m | 5.50 m (at Auto ISO) |
Flash options | Auto, On, Off, Red-Eye, Fill-in | On, off |
External flash | ||
AE bracketing | ||
White balance bracketing | ||
Exposure | ||
Multisegment | ||
Average | ||
Spot | ||
Partial | ||
AF area | ||
Center weighted | ||
Video features | ||
Video resolutions | 1280 x 720 (30 fps), 640 x 480 (30 fps), 320 x 180 (30fps) | 1920 x 1080 @ 30p, MOV, H.264, Linear PCM |
Highest video resolution | 1280x720 | 1920x1080 |
Video file format | MPEG-4, H.264 | MPEG-4, H.264 |
Microphone jack | ||
Headphone jack | ||
Connectivity | ||
Wireless | None | Yes (Wireless) |
Bluetooth | ||
NFC | ||
HDMI | ||
USB | USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/sec) | USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/sec) |
GPS | None | None |
Physical | ||
Environment seal | ||
Water proofing | ||
Dust proofing | ||
Shock proofing | ||
Crush proofing | ||
Freeze proofing | ||
Weight | 155 gr (0.34 lbs) | 193 gr (0.43 lbs) |
Physical dimensions | 96 x 63 x 23mm (3.8" x 2.5" x 0.9") | 123 x 62 x 30mm (4.8" x 2.4" x 1.2") |
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 life | 150 photos | 300 photos |
Battery form | Battery Pack | Battery Pack |
Battery ID | LI-42B | D-LI92 |
Self timer | Yes (2 or 12 sec, pet auto shutter) | Yes (2 or 10 secs, remote) |
Time lapse shooting | ||
Type of storage | SD/SDHC/SDXC | SD/SDHC/SDXC card |
Storage slots | Single | Single |
Launch pricing | $0 | $280 |