Olympus TG-630 iHS vs Olympus VR-320: A Hands-On Comparison for Enthusiasts and Professionals

Selecting the right compact camera can feel like navigating a labyrinth, especially when sorting through options that vary significantly in features, price, and real-world performance. Today, I’m diving deep into two Olympus models - the waterproof rugged TG-630 iHS and the superzoom-oriented VR-320 - to help you understand what they bring to the table, where they shine, and whether they deserve a spot in your camera bag. Having personally tested thousands of cameras, what you’ll find here is a synthesis of hands-on experience, technical know-how, and practical advice - not just specs buzz.

Let’s get started by grounding ourselves in their physical presence and handling, before moving through image quality, autofocus, build, and ultimately, how they perform across the broad spectrum of photography disciplines.

A Tale of Two Designs: Ergonomics and Handling

When it comes to compact cameras, size and feel matter - not merely for pocketability but also for steady handling. The TG-630 iHS is a compact waterproof “tough” camera designed with durability in mind, featuring a sturdy 98x66x22mm body weighing just 167 grams. Meanwhile, the VR-320 is a slightly larger compact (101x58x29mm, 158g), emphasizing a long zoom range in a small package.

At first touch, the TG-630’s robust, weatherproof body immediately sets itself apart. It’s dust-, shock-, crush-, freeze-, and waterproof - Olympus promises reliability in demanding scenarios from rugged hikes to poolside adventures. Unlike the TG-630, the VR-320 lacks any environmental sealing, making it a more traditional travel or everyday compact.

Ergonomically, the TG-630’s slimmer profile with gentle contours fits nicely in hand, aided by a textured grip area. The VR-320, while comfortable, feels a touch chunkier - partly due to its longer zoom lens extending the body depth. Both have 3-inch fixed LCDs (TG-630 sports a higher-resolution 460k-dot screen; the VR-320’s panel is 230k dots), but neither offers touchscreen or articulated displays - a limitation for today’s standards, but not uncommon at their launch period.

Looking down on the layout, the TG-630’s controls prioritize simplicity with quick access to mode dials and buttons optimized for rugged use. The VR-320, on the other hand, incorporates slightly more traditional compact controls with Olympus’ TruePic III processor curiously still at work here despite the camera being more than a decade old. I appreciate the TG-630’s button placement and sturdiness especially if you’re outdoors, but the VR-320 feels versatile for general casual use.

Sensor Showdown: Image Quality Metrics and Real-World Output

Both cameras share a 1/2.3-inch sensor size, a common compact sensor dimension that limits image quality potential compared to larger APS-C or full-frame sensors - but the devil’s in the details. The TG-630 houses a 12MP CMOS sensor, while the VR-320 opts for a 14MP CCD sensor. Each sensor type brings strengths and weaknesses depending on shooting conditions.

The TG-630’s CMOS sensor, combined with newer image processing (though unspecified model) and sensor-shift image stabilization, allows for better noise control and faster shooting speeds. The VR-320’s CCD sensor, typical of older compacts, offers excellent color saturation and detail rendition at base ISO but struggles more in low light and high ISO settings, with a capped maximum native ISO of 1600 compared to the TG-630’s ISO 6400.

Looking at resolution, the VR-320 peaks at 4288 x 3216 pixels, offering more megapixels but not necessarily superior image clarity due to sensor noise and processing limits inherent to CCDs. The TG-630’s 3968 x 2976 output is more than sufficient for prints up to A3 and web use, while delivering cleaner images at higher ISOs thanks to its CMOS architecture.

In practical use, the TG-630 consistently yields better low-light shots, with notably less grain and improved dynamic range - though neither camera matches modern mirrorless standards. The VR-320’s images have slightly punchier colors, but detail can soften in shadow areas.

Focusing: Eye on Accuracy and Speed

Both cameras rely on contrast-detection autofocus systems with face detection. The TG-630 supports continuous autofocus during still shooting and features face detection, but no manual focus or advanced tracking. The VR-320 similarly relies on contrast AF with face detection enabled during live view.

Testing in real conditions, autofocus speeds on the TG-630 are responsive for a compact but not lightning-fast, with occasional hunting in low light. The VR-320 often feels slower, especially with zoom extended due to its older TruePic III processor and CCD readout speeds. Neither camera offers phase-detection AF - that’s not a surprise given their class and age.

Neither supports advanced tracking modes, eye detection autofocus, or animal face tracking, which puts limitations on portrait or wildlife work. If you’re after accurate macro manual focus or fast sports autofocus, these cameras won’t be ideal.

Ruggedness vs Zoom Range: Which Build Wins?

Here, the division is stark. The TG-630 is purpose-built for harsh environments and active lifestyles. Its waterproof rating, combined with dustproof, shockproof, crushproof, and freezeproof capabilities, makes it a bulletproof choice for outdoors enthusiasts, underwater photographers, or those in unpredictable climates. I’ve tested similar Olympus tough cameras in mountain trekking and lake swims - they endure tremendous abuse with no loss of function.

Contrast that with the VR-320, which offers no weather sealing whatsoever. It’s a standard compact designed for regular daily shooting in benign conditions. Olympus packages it with a remarkably long 24-300mm equivalent zoom lens, a 12.5x telephoto reach that turns it into a versatile traveler’s camera or wildlife shooter at a distance.

The TG-630’s zoom maxes out at 140mm equivalent (5x), far shorter but still practical for portraits and mid-range shots. Its strength lies in flexible shooting situations where durability matters more than massive zoom reach.

Screen and Interface: What’s It Like Looking Through?

While neither model includes an electronic viewfinder - a missing feature that some photographers might miss, especially in bright outdoor light - the LCD screens are where you’ll frame your shots and review images.

The TG-630 boasts a 3-inch, 460k-dot display that’s bright and clear enough even under partial sunlight, helping compose and check focus with ease. By comparison, the VR-320’s same-sized screen comes in at 230k dots, meaning a softer, less detailed preview experience. This difference is especially noticeable when zooming in on images to check sharpness or critical focus.

Neither offers touchscreen functionality, which could have simplified navigation through menus or quick AF point selection, but for their era, the interfaces feel straightforward. Expect menu diving for white balance adjustment on the VR-320 - TG-630 has custom white balance options, which can assist in tricky lighting outdoors.

Image Samples: Putting Theory to the Test

I've snapped a variety of subjects side-by-side - portraits, landscapes, macro flora, and street scenes - with both cameras. The differences become readily apparent in detailed viewing.

The VR-320’s higher megapixel count gives a slight edge in cropping flexibility, but the images showcase more noise and reduced shadow detail compared to the TG-630. In daylight, both hold up well though: crisp details and accurate colors with reasonable saturation, although the VR-320’s colors lean more saturated, sometimes to a slightly unnatural degree.

When shooting macro subjects at 1cm minimum focus distance, both cameras impress with detail and sharpness, but the TG-630 edges out with slightly faster focus acquisition and steadier handheld shots thanks to sensor-shift stabilization. The VR-320's longer zoom can struggle here due to lens extension magnifying camera shake.

Low-light performance favors the TG-630 by a long shot: ISO 800+ shots remain usable, while VR-320 images quickly become grainy. If you’re hoping to capture night scenes or indoor gatherings, the TG-630 will serve better.

Olympus TG 630 iHS front Olympus TG 630 iHS screen back Olympus VR 320 front Olympus VR 320 screen back

Shooting Across Photography Disciplines: Which Camera Excels Where?

Let’s break down how each model performs across popular photography genres:

Portraits

Skin tones look more natural on the TG-630, helped by its CMOS sensor and better white balance options. The 28-140mm zoom range covers typical portrait focal lengths comfortably, and face detection improves framing. Unfortunately, no eye-detection AF limits focus precision on subjects’ eyes, but contrast detection does a decent job.

The VR-320’s broader zoom gives you more framing flexibility from wide to telephoto but may require more patient focus confirmation. Colors tend to over-saturate skin tones a bit, giving a less flattering look.

Verdict: TG-630 offers better overall portrait imaging experience.

Landscapes

Both cameras have roughly similar sensor sizes limiting dynamic range, but TG-630’s newer CMOS sensor and improved processing confer better detail in shadows and highlights. Though the VR-320’s higher resolution sensor provides a marginal detail boost on textured scenes, TG-630’s better ISO performance and rugged weather sealing make it a safer bet for outdoor landscape photography where environmental conditions may be harsh.

Weather sealing alone makes TG-630 a smart choice for outdoor adventurers, especially in mist, rain, or dusty winds.

Wildlife

VR-320 extends a long 24-300mm zoom, offering far greater reach than the TG-630’s 140mm max. This is critical for getting tight frames of distant animals.

That said, autofocus speed and accuracy is limited on both models, so capturing fast-moving wildlife is still tricky. Continuous shooting is only about 5 fps on the TG-630 and unknown but slow on the VR-320, so action sequences are compromised.

Recommendation: VR-320 for zoom range, but don’t expect pro-level wildlife performance.

Sports

Neither camera has the quick, predictive autofocus or high frame rates typical of dedicated sports cameras. The TG-630's 5 fps burst rate is serviceable for casual sports, but neither model supports shutter priority or manual exposure modes, limiting creative control in varied lighting.

Low light performance helps TG-630 here again, offering better usable frames indoors or at dusk.

Street Photography

Portability and discreetness are key for street shooting. Both cameras are compact but the smaller body with solid build of the TG-630 makes it more covert. Its quieter operation due to less lens zoom extension (and silent sensor-shift stabilization) reduces attention.

Unfortunately, no manual focus or quick AF point selection hinders creative control.

Macro Photography

Both cameras impress with close focusing down to 1cm, aided by sensor-shift stabilization in the TG-630. The VR-320’s longer zoom can lengthen effective working distance, helpful for skittish subjects.

Focus precision is marginally better on the TG-630, speeding up acquisition and reducing missed shots.

Night and Astro Photography

Neither model is designed for astrophotography, but the TG-630’s higher ISO ceiling (ISO 6400) and sensor technology permit better star field captures under stable tripod use. The VR-320 tops out at ISO 1600, creating grainy night shots.

Neither offers bulb mode or manual exposure control, which limits long-exposure astrophotography.

Video Capabilities

Video recording on the TG-630 impresses for a compact of its era: full HD 1080p at 60 fps with H.264 encoding. This enables smooth, high-quality footage suitable for casual video makers. The sensor-shift IS assists in stabilization.

The VR-320 maxes out at 720p 30 fps using Motion JPEG - a dated codec with larger file sizes and lower quality video. No HDMI or microphone port on either limits external audio or monitoring options.

For casual video, TG-630 is superior.

Travel Photography

The VR-320's enormous zoom range (24-300mm) makes it exceptionally versatile for travel photographers wanting a one-camera solution to capture everything from landscapes to distant architecture.

However, the TG-630’s toughness and light weight appeal to travelers headed into unpredictable environments or who prioritize durability.

Battery life favors the older VR-320, which generally provides longer shooting times, but neither camera excels spectacularly here (TG-630 rated at 220 shots per charge).

Professional Use

Neither camera supports RAW shooting, a serious limitation for professional workflows requiring post-processing flexibility. Both shoot only JPEGs, constraining dynamic range recovery and color grading.

Build-wise, the TG-630’s environmental sealing and solid body cater better to rugged pro usage, but its limited control and no manual modes hold it back.

The VR-320’s zoom range could be handy for quick fieldwork but lacks reliability in challenging conditions.

Technical Analysis Summary

Let’s summarize the most important technical parameters:

Looking at these specs and testing data, the TG-630 provides a more modern sensor approach and ruggedness for active use, while the VR-320 offers impressive zoom for general compact users, albeit with dated imaging technology.

Practical Recommendations Based on Use Case

When to Choose the Olympus TG-630 iHS

• You spend a lot of time outdoors hiking, swimming, skiing - you need a camera that won’t fail if it gets wet, dusty, or dropped.
• Low-light photography is important (indoors, campfire shots, twilight).
• You want decent Full HD 60p video with stabilization.
• Portability and tough build top your list.
• You don’t need advanced zoom but prefer reliability and image quality.
• Casual portraits, landscape, and macro with some on-the-go adaptability.

When to Pick the Olympus VR-320

• Your primary focus is long-range shooting: travel, distant wildlife, or architecture.
• You’re budget-conscious and want a versatile compact with 12.5x zoom.
• Indoor low light and video quality are less critical.
• You prefer slightly higher resolution daylight photos with punchier colors.
• You mostly shoot in well-lit, benign environments.

Final Thoughts: Which Olympus Compact Wins for You?

Both cameras serve different niches, despite sharing the Olympus name and compact form factor.

The TG-630 iHS is the stronger all-rounder with a focus on ruggedness, better low-light imaging, and improved video capability. Its weather sealing and sensor technology make it a trustworthy companion for adventures, casual portraiture, and occasional macro close-ups.

The VR-320 is impressive for an older small-sensor superzoom with far-reaching lens optics - ideal if you want zoom versatility in a compact design and shoot mostly in controlled lighting.

As someone who has extensively tested outdoor-focused compacts, I recommend the TG-630 iHS for active photographers wanting a dependable tool, while the VR-320 is better suited for casual zoom enthusiasts and travelers staying mostly indoors or in mild conditions.

This comprehensive comparison should serve you well in choosing between these two Olympus compacts. If you want a solid waterproof all-rounder, the TG-630 is the pick. If zoom flexibility is your top priority, the VR-320 still holds value.

Feel free to explore sample images and detailed video reviews as a next step - and happy shooting!