Olympus TG-320 vs Sony A350
94 Imaging
37 Features
33 Overall
35
62 Imaging
53 Features
47 Overall
50
Olympus TG-320 vs Sony A350 Key Specs
(Full Review)
- 14MP - 1/2.3" Sensor
- 2.7" Fixed Display
- ISO 80 - 1600
- Sensor-shift Image Stabilization
- 1280 x 720 video
- 28-102mm (F3.5-5.1) lens
- 155g - 96 x 63 x 23mm
- Released January 2012
(Full Review)
- 14MP - APS-C Sensor
- 2.7" Tilting Screen
- ISO 100 - 3200
- Sensor based Image Stabilization
- No Video
- Sony/Minolta Alpha Mount
- 674g - 131 x 99 x 75mm
- Introduced June 2008
- Updated by Sony A380
Japan-exclusive Leica Leitz Phone 3 features big sensor and new modes Olympus TG-320 vs Sony A350 Overview
Lets take a deeper look at the Olympus TG-320 versus Sony A350, one being a Waterproof and the latter is a Entry-Level DSLR by rivals Olympus and Sony. The image resolution of the TG-320 (14MP) and the A350 (14MP) is relatively well matched but the TG-320 (1/2.3") and A350 (APS-C) have totally different sensor size.
Snapchat Adds Watermarks to AI-Created ImagesThe TG-320 was revealed 3 years later than the A350 and that is quite a significant gap as far as tech is concerned. The two cameras feature different body design with the Olympus TG-320 being a Compact camera and the Sony A350 being a Compact SLR camera.
Before we go right into a more detailed comparison, here is a concise highlight of how the TG-320 matches up against the A350 in terms of portability, imaging, features and an overall rating.
Samsung Releases Faster Versions of EVO MicroSD Cards Olympus TG-320 vs Sony A350 Gallery
The following is a preview of the gallery photos for Olympus TG-320 and Sony Alpha DSLR-A350. The full galleries are available at Olympus TG-320 Gallery and Sony A350 Gallery.
Reasons to pick Olympus TG-320 over the Sony A350
| TG-320 | A350 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Introduced | January 2012 |  | June 2008 | Fresher by 44 months |
Reasons to pick Sony A350 over the Olympus TG-320
| A350 | TG-320 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Manual focus |  | More exact focus | ||
| Screen type | Tilting |  | Fixed | Tilting screen |
Common features in the Olympus TG-320 and Sony A350
| TG-320 | A350 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Screen size | 2.7" |  | 2.7" | Same screen size |
| Screen resolution | 230k |  | 230k | The same screen resolution |
| Selfie screen |  | Neither contains selfie screen | ||
| Touch screen |  | Neither contains Touch screen |
Olympus TG-320 vs Sony A350 Physical Comparison
If you are aiming to carry your camera regularly, you have to factor its weight and proportions. The Olympus TG-320 has got external measurements of 96mm x 63mm x 23mm (3.8" x 2.5" x 0.9") with a weight of 155 grams (0.34 lbs) and the Sony A350 has measurements of 131mm x 99mm x 75mm (5.2" x 3.9" x 3.0") along with a weight of 674 grams (1.49 lbs).
Compare the Olympus TG-320 versus Sony A350 in the all new Camera and Lens Size Comparison Tool.
Take into account, the weight of an Interchangeable Lens Camera will vary depending on the lens you are employing during that time. Following is a front view overall size comparison of the TG-320 compared to the A350.
Using size and weight, the portability rating of the TG-320 and A350 is 94 and 62 respectively.
Olympus TG-320 vs Sony A350 Sensor Comparison
Generally, it is very tough to see the difference between sensor sizing merely by checking specifications. The graphic below should provide you a clearer sense of the sensor measurements in the TG-320 and A350.
Plainly, both of these cameras feature the identical MP albeit not the same sensor sizing. The TG-320 features the tinier sensor which should make obtaining shallow DOF harder. The fresher TG-320 will have an advantage when it comes to sensor tech.
Olympus TG-320 vs Sony A350 Screen and ViewFinder
Apple Innovates by Creating Next-Level Optical Stabilization for iPhone Photography Type Scores
Portrait Comparison
Sora from OpenAI releases its first ever music videoStreet Comparison
Photography GlossarySports Comparison
Photobucket discusses licensing 13 billion images with AI firmsTravel Comparison
Meta to Introduce 'AI-Generated' Labels for Media starting next monthLandscape Comparison
President Biden pushes bill mandating TikTok sale or banVlogging Comparison
Pentax 17 Pre-Orders Outperform Expectations by a Landslide
Olympus TG-320 vs Sony A350 Specifications
| Olympus TG-320 | Sony Alpha DSLR-A350 | |
|---|---|---|
| General Information | ||
| Brand | Olympus | Sony |
| Model | Olympus TG-320 | Sony Alpha DSLR-A350 |
| Class | Waterproof | Entry-Level DSLR |
| Released | 2012-01-10 | 2008-06-06 |
| Physical type | Compact | Compact SLR |
| Sensor Information | ||
| Processor | TruePic III+ | - |
| Sensor type | CCD | CCD |
| Sensor size | 1/2.3" | APS-C |
| Sensor dimensions | 6.17 x 4.55mm | 23.6 x 15.8mm |
| Sensor surface area | 28.1mm² | 372.9mm² |
| Sensor resolution | 14MP | 14MP |
| Anti aliasing filter | ||
| Aspect ratio | - | 3:2 and 16:9 |
| Full resolution | 4288 x 3216 | 4592 x 3056 |
| Max native ISO | 1600 | 3200 |
| Minimum native ISO | 80 | 100 |
| RAW files | ||
| Autofocusing | ||
| Focus manually | ||
| Touch focus | ||
| Autofocus continuous | ||
| Single autofocus | ||
| Tracking autofocus | ||
| Autofocus selectice | ||
| Autofocus center weighted | ||
| Multi area autofocus | ||
| Live view autofocus | ||
| Face detect focus | ||
| Contract detect focus | ||
| Phase detect focus | ||
| Number of focus points | - | 9 |
| Cross focus points | - | - |
| Lens | ||
| Lens mounting type | fixed lens | Sony/Minolta Alpha |
| Lens focal range | 28-102mm (3.6x) | - |
| Maximal aperture | f/3.5-5.1 | - |
| Macro focus range | 3cm | - |
| Available lenses | - | 143 |
| Crop factor | 5.8 | 1.5 |
| Screen | ||
| Display type | Fixed Type | Tilting |
| Display size | 2.7" | 2.7" |
| Display resolution | 230 thousand dots | 230 thousand dots |
| Selfie friendly | ||
| Liveview | ||
| Touch capability | ||
| Display technology | TFT Color LCD | - |
| Viewfinder Information | ||
| Viewfinder | None | Optical (pentamirror) |
| Viewfinder coverage | - | 95% |
| Viewfinder magnification | - | 0.49x |
| Features | ||
| Slowest shutter speed | 4 secs | 30 secs |
| Maximum shutter speed | 1/2000 secs | 1/4000 secs |
| Continuous shooting rate | 1.0 frames/s | 3.0 frames/s |
| Shutter priority | ||
| Aperture priority | ||
| Manually set exposure | ||
| Exposure compensation | - | Yes |
| Change white balance | ||
| Image stabilization | ||
| Integrated flash | ||
| Flash range | 5.80 m | 12.00 m (at ISO 100) |
| Flash options | Auto, On, Off, Red-Eye, Fill-in | Auto, Red-Eye, Slow, Red-Eye Slow, Rear curtain, wireless |
| Hot shoe | ||
| 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 | 1280 x 720 (30 fps), 640 x 480 (30 fps), 320 x 180 (30fps) | - |
| Max video resolution | 1280x720 | None |
| Video data format | MPEG-4, H.264 | - |
| Mic port | ||
| Headphone port | ||
| Connectivity | ||
| Wireless | None | None |
| Bluetooth | ||
| NFC | ||
| HDMI | ||
| USB | USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/sec) | USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/sec) |
| GPS | None | None |
| Physical | ||
| Environment sealing | ||
| Water proof | ||
| Dust proof | ||
| Shock proof | ||
| Crush proof | ||
| Freeze proof | ||
| Weight | 155g (0.34 lb) | 674g (1.49 lb) |
| Physical dimensions | 96 x 63 x 23mm (3.8" x 2.5" x 0.9") | 131 x 99 x 75mm (5.2" x 3.9" x 3.0") |
| DXO scores | ||
| DXO All around score | not tested | 65 |
| DXO Color Depth score | not tested | 22.6 |
| DXO Dynamic range score | not tested | 11.5 |
| DXO Low light score | not tested | 595 |
| Other | ||
| Battery life | 150 photos | - |
| Type of battery | Battery Pack | - |
| Battery model | LI-42B | - |
| Self timer | Yes (2 or 12 sec, pet auto shutter) | Yes (2 or 10 sec) |
| Time lapse shooting | ||
| Type of storage | SD/SDHC/SDXC | Compact Flash (Type I or II), Memory Stick Duo / Pro Duo, UDMA Mode 5, Supports FAT12 / FAT16 / FAT32 |
| Card slots | Single | Single |
| Cost at launch | $0 | $600 |