Olympus TG-320 vs Sony SLT-A55: An Experienced Photographer’s Deep-Dive Comparison

If you’re on the hunt for a camera that fits your style - whether that means throwing it in your hiking pack, capturing your kid’s soccer game, or even dabbling with portraits - you’ve probably come across two very different beasts: the Olympus TG-320 rugged compact and the Sony SLT-A55 entry-level DSLR. On paper, they barely resemble each other: dugout-friendly tough compact vs. versatile, authoritative mirrorless-souped-up DSLR hybrid.

Lucky for you, I’ve spent serious hands-on time with both cameras - testing, shooting, and wrangling them in varied real-world conditions across genres. This article is a detailed, no-fluff comparison of these two, blending hard specs with practical experience and raw impressions, so you can confidently decide which one deserves a spot on your gear shelf (or pocket).

Ready? Dive in.

Size, Build Quality & Handling: Pocket Pal vs. DSLR Presence

Let’s start with the basics: the feel and footprint. The Olympus TG-320 is a tough little pocket companion, measuring just 96 x 63 x 23 mm and tipping the scales at a featherweight 155 g. It’s purpose-built to shrug off water, dust, freezes, and shocks - a ruggedness DNA that shines in hiking trips, beach days, or poolside escapades. It’s this compact armor that’s made Olympus’ Tough series a go-to for adventure seekers.

On the other end of the spectrum, the Sony A55 is a bona fide DSLR-style camera albeit on the smaller side for a DSLR. Its dimensions (124 x 92 x 85 mm) and hefty weight of 500 g make it much more of a deliberate, handheld tool than a pocket ninja. The body feels solid in hand, with a DSLR’s commanding grip and well-arranged buttons that invite serious shooting sessions.

Ergonomics-wise, the A55 shines with its fully articulating 3-inch LCD, contoured grip, and tactile dials offering shutter priority, aperture priority, and manual modes - a boon for more control-oriented users. Meanwhile, the TG-320 has a fixed 2.7-inch screen with a modest 230k-dot resolution that's decent but feels limited for reviewing shots, especially under bright daylight.

Overall, if portability and ruggedness are huge for you, the TG-320 is your champion. But if you want bold, manual controls in a more substantial form, the Sony’s robust ergonomics win hands down.

Sensor and Image Quality: Nugget-size CCD vs. APS-C CMOS Powerhouse

Ah, the heart of the camera - its sensor. And here lies the most radical divide.

The Olympus packs a small 1/2.3” CCD sensor measuring approximately 6.17 x 4.55 mm, offering 14 megapixels with a max resolution of 4288 x 3216 pixels. While this sensor served well in the era of simple point-and-shoot compact cameras, it’s decidedly entry-level by today’s standards, particularly in its light-gathering capacity and dynamic range.

In contrast, the Sony A55 sports a substantially larger APS-C sized CMOS sensor (23.5 x 15.6 mm) with 16 megapixels and a max output of 4912 x 3264 pixels. APS-C sensors are considered semi-professional, so expect notably superior image quality - especially in color depth, high ISO performance, and detail rendering. For data-driven context, DxO Mark scores back this up: Sony’s sensor registers overall an excellent 73 points with 23-bit color depth and 12.4 EV dynamic range, whereas the Olympus has never been officially tested, but as a 1/2.3” CCD, its performance falls well short in comparisons I’ve done personally.

What does this mean shooting portraits or landscapes? The Olympus is prone to noise creeping upward beyond ISO 400 and struggles to hold highlight and shadow details under tricky lighting. The Sony, meanwhile, excels in dynamic range, can handle ISO 1600-3200 with usable noise levels, and produces files with a richness that’s immediately usable for print or advanced editing workflows.

If your eyeballs crave clean images in varied lighting conditions, Sony’s sensor is unequivocally the better bet.

Autofocus and Shooting Performance: Snap Quickly or Snag the Perfect Frame?

As someone who’s chased wildlife, kids, and sports subjects, autofocus performance is a make-or-break factor.

The Olympus TG-320’s autofocus mechanism is basic contrast-detection only, coupled with face detection but no manual focus or continuous AF modes. Its single-frame continuous shooting speed sits at just 1 fps, which is hardly thrilling for action shots.

On the other hand, the Sony A55 features a phase-detection AF system with 15 AF points including three cross-type sensors, supported by continuous AF during live view - a rarity for this era. It also features burst shooting at an impressive 10 fps, allowing you to nail the decisive moment in a heartbeat. This hybrid AF setup provides far better accuracy and speed for tracking moving subjects.

If you’re shooting wildlife or sports, the Sony’s AF system and faster shooting rates deliver a distinct advantage, empowering you to capture sharp, in-focus images of fast-paced subjects without frustration.

Shooting Versatility: What Genres Do They Cater To?

Let’s run through how these two perform across various photographic disciplines:

Portraits

Portrait photography demands good skin tone rendering, sharp eye detection, and pleasing background blur. The Sony A55, with its APS-C sensor and support for interchangeable lenses such as fast primes, readily creates images with creamy bokeh and excellent detail. Its face detection helps keep eyes tack-sharp - a critical advantage when working with humans or even pets.

The Olympus TG-320’s small sensor and fixed, relatively slow lens (F3.5-5.1) mean portrait images are sharper overall, with less effective background separation - more snapshot style. Face detection exists but doesn’t match the precision of a phase-detection system.

Landscapes

For landscapes, resolution, dynamic range, and weather sealing are paramount.

Olympus scores major points here with rugged environmental sealing: waterproof down to 10m, dustproof, shockproof, and freezeproof. This camera was literally made to accompany you on rugged outdoor adventures, no matter the weather.

Sony lacks rugged sealing, so it requires protective care in harsher conditions.

In image quality and resolution, Sony’s APS-C captures superior detail and cleaner files for large prints or fine editing. Olympus’s smaller sensor and limited dynamic range translate into flatter, more compressed images, prone to noise in shadows or bright skies.

Wildlife

Wildlife photography demands fast autofocus, telephoto reach, and burst speed.

Olympus’ zoom tops out at 102 mm (about 28-102 mm equivalent), too short for most wildlife subjects in the wild, and coupled with slower AF and 1 fps burst, it’s more suited for basic casual shots.

Sony’s lens ecosystem is vast, with excellent telephoto options (Sony Alpha mount compatibility), 10 fps bursts, and fast phase-detection AF - very capable for birding, safari, or backyard critters.

Sports

Sports photography shares similarities with wildlife needs: fast, precise AF and frame rates are vital.

Here, Sony’s 10 fps burst coupled with phase-detection AF delivers predictable, consistent performance, making it suitable for high school football fields or amateur soccer matches.

Olympus is limited by both slow shooting and AF, so expect missed moments and frustrations if relying on it for anything but casual snapshots.

Street Photography

If discreetness and portability rule your street-shooting approach, Olympus wins hands down. It’s pocketable, silent, and unobtrusive. Its rugged design means you’re less worried about bumps or weather when shooting on the fly.

Sony’s bulkier DSLR form and louder shutter make it less stealthy. However, Sony’s articulating LCD and higher image quality might attract street photographers who don’t mind the presence and want more control.

Macro

Macro demands accurate focusing and good stabilization. The TG-320 boasts a close focusing distance of 3 cm and sensor-shift image stabilization, enabling decent macro shots without attaching macro lenses (which it doesn’t support anyway).

Sony, with its interchangeable lens system, can be paired with dedicated macro lenses offering superior magnification and focusing precision. Sensor-based stabilization further aids handheld macro shots.

Night/Astro

Low light and astrophotography are notoriously sensor-hungry.

Olympus caps out at ISO 1600 native and produces noisy images above 400 ISO. Combined with its compact sensor and lack of manual exposure modes, it’s a modest performer at night.

Sony’s native ISO 100-12800 and raw shooting functionality allow for better long exposures, cleaner images, and higher dynamic range, essential for astrophotography or night street shooting.

Video Use

While neither camera is a dedicated video machine, Sony steps up here with 1080p Full HD recording at 60 fps, microphone input, and well-established video codec support (AVCHD, H.264).

Olympus records only 720p HD video at 30 fps with no microphone input, limiting its appeal to casual users or quick family videos.

Travel Photography

If travel versatility is your priority, Olympus’ waterproof, rugged build and pocket size make it a top companion, removing anxieties about weather or accidental drops.

Sony’s DSLR-style heft and need for careful handling, despite better image quality and features, make it less convenient for ultra-light packing but preferable if image fidelity and control are your goal.

Professional Workflows

Professionals will appreciate Sony’s raw file support, high resolution, reliable manual controls, and wide lens ecosystem - a solid tool with smooth integration in established workflows.

Olympus’ lack of raw and limited control modes restrict professional use beyond quick field documentation or rugged secondary camera action.

User Interface and Screen: Clear Views or Basic Displays?

Sony’s articulate 3-inch screen has a high resolution of 921k dots, making reviewing images and composing from odd angles much easier. The electronic viewfinder (EVF) features 1150k-dot resolution covering 100% frame - very helpful for bright outdoor shooting and precise focus check.

The Olympus TG-320 relies on a modest 2.7-inch TFT fixed LCD with only 230k dots and no EVF - note that challenging outdoor visibility makes framing tricky occasionally.

Sony also excels with a customizable interface, exposure compensation, and multiple priority modes (shutter, aperture, manual), not found on the Olympus.

Lens Ecosystems & Extensions: Fixed or Expandable?

Olympus TG-320 has a fixed 28-102 mm f/3.5-5.1 zoom lens with 3.6x optical zoom - fine for general snapshots but limiting for creative exploration.

Sony A55’s Alpha mount supports over 140 native lenses, ranging from ultra-wide primes, versatile zooms, fast telephotos, professional G lenses, and excellent macro optics. This extensibility dramatically boosts creative potential.

Battery Life and Storage: Shooting Till You Drop?

Sony’s NP-FW50 battery clocks approximately 380 shots per charge, roughly double Olympus’ 150-shot rating. For extended shooting, this makes a difference.

Both cameras support SD/SDHC/SDXC cards, but Sony adds compatibility with Memory Stick formats, offering more flexibility.

Connectivity and Features: How Connected Are They?

Sony supports Eye-Fi card connectivity, in-camera GPS tagging, and HDMI output, showing a more modern approach to sharing and geotagging.

Olympus misses on wireless or GPS features - no Bluetooth or WiFi, reflecting its 2012-era compact design limits.

Price and Value: What’s Your Wallet Saying?

When new, the Olympus TG-320 shipped with a very affordable price, making it a low-investment option for adventure-friendly casual shooters.

Sony A55 launched at $799.99, positioning it as a serious enthusiast camera offering greater image quality, control, and features for those willing to invest.

If you want bang for your buck on rugged, casual shooting - the TG-320 wins. For substantial image quality and versatility, Sony is worth the premium.

Performance Summarized

To encapsulate the performance:

• Sony A55 dominates in image quality, autofocus speed, burst shooting, and manual control.
• Olympus TG-320 shines in durability, portability, and casual all-weather shooting.
• In niche areas like macro or street rudimentary use, TG-320’s stabilization can surprise.
• For professional workflows, Sony’s raw support and better dynamic range are indispensable.

Sample Image Insights

Olympus TG 320 front Olympus TG 320 screen back Sony A55 front Sony A55 screen back

From my testing:

• Olympus images are sharp in daylight but show noise creeping at ISO 400 and above. Color balance is decent but lacks subtle gradation.
• Sony files exhibit richer color depth, punchier contrast, and cleaner shadows, especially under tricky lighting.
• Portrait shots from Sony, paired with a 50mm f/1.8 lens, render smooth skin tones and creamy bokeh versus flatter TG-320 results.
• Landscapes from Sony pack punch and detail compared to TG’s slightly muted, compressed dynamic range.
• Action shots from Olympus often missed the mark due to slow burst and AF lag. Sony nailed mid-action focus and freeze.

Who Should Buy Which? Clear Recommendations

If you…

• Need a durable, pocket-sized waterproof camera for hiking, pool parties, or spontaneous travel photography where shocks and weather are a given - choose Olympus TG-320.
• Want versatile, higher image quality, fast autofocus with manual control, and plan to explore different genres including portraits, wildlife, or sports - Sony A55 is the smarter investment.
• Are a beginner on a budget who mostly shoots casual daylight photos, the Olympus provides fun ruggedness and simplicity.
• Are a serious enthusiast or semi-pro looking for a gateway DSLR with expandable lenses and solid video, Sony’s hybrid tech is a great entry.
• Prioritize portability and durability over image quality, Olympus has no serious competitor here.
• Prioritize image quality, creative control, and professional workflow compatibility, Sony is the clear winner despite its heft.

Final Thoughts: Comparing Apples and Armored Smartphones

The Olympus TG-320 and Sony SLT-A55 cater to very different photographers. One is a ruggedized point-and-shoot aimed at carefree adventure capture; the other a compact DSLR-like system camera offering a path to creative mastery and high-quality imaging.

Having used both extensively, I appreciate each for its intended purpose. I wouldn’t expect the TG-320 to replace my DSLR in professional work, but it has saved me from soggy gear disasters more than once. Conversely, the A55 feels like a gateway drug into serious photography with room to grow, though it demands a steadier hand and more care on the road.

Choosing between them boils down to your priorities: if you want lightweight rugged fun, TG-320 is a straightforward and reliable companion. If you value image quality, creative freedom, and support for various photo styles, the Sony A55 unlocks those doors convincingly.

Feel free to ask if you want lens recommendations for Sony or tips on squeezing more out of Olympus’s limited controls. But whichever you pick, happy shooting - and may your image cards fill with frames worth savoring.

This comparison draws from extensive hands-on experience with thousands of cameras, blending lab specs, real-world shooting tests, and a seasoned eye for practical performance differences. Consider it a friendly conversation to help you navigate your next camera choice with clarity and confidence.