Olympus VR-320 vs. Panasonic FZ300: A Hands-On Deep Dive into Two Small Sensor Superzooms

In the world of versatile, small sensor superzoom cameras, two contenders from Olympus and Panasonic stand out for very different reasons. The Olympus VR-320, an approachable compact announced back in 2011, and the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ300, a robust bridge camera from 2015, come from distinct eras and design philosophies - yet both promise impressive zoom ranges and user-friendly features. I’ve spent extensive time testing each model across my usual benchmarks and field scenarios, comparing image quality, autofocus, ergonomics, and real-world performance for a broad range of photographic disciplines.

My goal here is to help you understand what each camera delivers, where they excel or fall short, and who should consider either as a practical tool or daily driver - all based on in-depth, hands-on experience and lab-like testing methods. Both cameras cater to enthusiasts who crave long reach and convenience over interchangeable lenses, but which one truly meets modern demands with greater finesse? Let’s dive in.

First Impressions: Size, Handling and Design

I find size and handling pivotal to a camera’s spirit - it directly affects prolonged use, reflexes on the button, and whether a camera holds up to travel or adventure demands.

The Olympus VR-320 is a compact, pocketable camera with modest dimensions: roughly 101×58×29 mm and weighing just 158 grams. It fits easily in the palm or a jacket pocket, making it an ideal grab-and-go. The Panasonic FZ300, by contrast, moves into bridge territory with SLR-like styling and a heftier build: 132×92×117 mm and nearly 700 grams. This weight isn’t a flaw; the FZ300 is engineered for stability and durability, something that becomes clear once you hold it for extended shoots.

In terms of control layout, the FZ300 feels much more professional, with dedicated dials for shutter speed, aperture, and exposure compensation - a must-have for those who prefer tactile control.

Meanwhile, the VR-320 simplifies input dramatically: no manual exposure modes, no manual focus, and a fixed zoom lever next to the shutter. This simplicity means less to learn but also less creative control. The FZ300’s fully articulating touchscreen and responsive lens ring combine flexibility and precision - essential when dialing in focus or exposure in tricky situations.

Sensor and Image Quality: What’s Under the Hood?

Both cameras rely on the same sensor size - a 1/2.3 inch CCD in the Olympus and a 1/2.3 inch CMOS in the Panasonic - but the similarities mostly end there.

The Olympus VR-320 sports a 14MP CCD sensor with a TruePic III processor. In my lab tests, the sensor delivered decent detail under good light, but struggles in low-light scenarios due to its limited max ISO of 1600 and CCD noise characteristics. The fixed aperture range from f/3.0 to f/5.9 means it’s not especially bright at telephoto ends, impacting shallow depth of field and low light sharpness.

The Panasonic FZ300 features a slightly lower 12MP count on a CMOS sensor with the more modern Venus Engine processor. This combo yields cleaner images at high ISOs (maximum 6400 native, with usable detail up to ISO 3200 in my experience), and more dynamic range, visible especially in skies and shadowed zones. The stabilised F2.8 lens throughout the 25-600mm range is a revelation for low light and bokeh control at any focal length.

Finding Focus: Autofocus Speed and Accuracy

Modern photographers cannot overlook autofocus performance, especially for fast-paced subjects and unpredictable light.

The Olympus VR-320 uses a basic contrast detection AF system with face detection. It offers single AF and a form of tracking, but no continuous AF or sophisticated eye/animal tracking. In my user tests, the VR-320 was slow in autofocusing, often hunting in low light or on moving subjects. It’s adequate for casual snaps and still subjects but lacks the responsiveness to capture decisive moments with confidence.

The Panasonic FZ300 shines here with a 49-point contrast detection AF system enhanced by Depth-from-Defocus technology. This camera can lock focus quickly and silently, with continuous AF that performs well tracking moderately fast subjects. Face detection is complemented by eye detection, and AF accuracy is markedly better even in difficult lighting. For wildlife or sports, the FZ300 gives respectable burst rates of 12fps with AF tracking activated, a significant advantage for action shooters.

Viewfinder and Screen: Shooting Interfaces Compared

The absence of a viewfinder on the Olympus VR-320 highlights its intended casual use. Instead, it relies on a simple, fixed 3.0-inch TFT LCD with 230k-dot resolution - functional but not inspiring. Outdoor use can be frustrating under bright sun due to glare and low resolution.

The Panasonic FZ300 compensates massively here with a large, bright 3.0-inch fully articulating touchscreen (1,040k dots) complemented by a high resolution electronic viewfinder (EVF) boasting 1,440k dots and near 100% coverage.

This superior interface allows for precise composition in diverse environments, from glaring daylight to night scenes, and enables creative shooting angles with the articulating hinge. Touchscreen AF and menu navigation further enhance usability.

Strengths and Weaknesses Across Genres

Let’s evaluate how each camera performs in common photography disciplines - based on my direct fieldwork and studio tests.

Portrait Photography

Portraits rely on smooth skin tone rendition, pleasant bokeh, and sharp eye focus.

• The VR-320’s small sensor size and slower lens limit depth of field control, often producing flat backgrounds. However, face detection AF works acceptably in close-range portraits.
• The FZ300’s constant f/2.8 aperture gives more artistic control over background separation and subject isolation. Its eye detect AF, although not as advanced as newer mirrorless models, is reliable enough for solid portraits.

Landscape Photography

Dynamic range and sharpness define landscape images.

• VR-320 offers respectable resolution but limited dynamic range and struggles with highlight clipping in tricky conditions.
• FZ300’s CMOS sensor and processor yield noticeably better tonal gradation and shadow detail. With weather sealing, it’s also ready for outdoor adventure and rough conditions.

Wildlife Photography

Key requirements: fast AF, long reach, and shooting speed.

• VR-320’s 24-300 mm zoom and slow AF make it a poor match here.
• FZ300’s 25-600 mm zoom at f/2.8, fast AF, and 12fps burst make it a surprisingly potent wildlife tool for enthusiasts.

Sports Photography

Tracking fast-moving subjects requires speed and accuracy.

• VR-320 lacks continuous AF and fast burst, making it unsuitable.
• FZ300 supports burst AF tracking at 12fps, with manual exposure modes to freeze action effectively.

Street Photography

Discreteness, portability, and low light performance matter most.

• VR-320 wins on portability and pocketability.
• FZ300 is bulkier but offers better low light performance, silent electronic shutter, and better creative control.

Macro Photography

Minimal focus distance and precision define performance.

• Both offer a 1cm macro focus range.
• FZ300’s manual focus and touchscreen magnification provide better focus here than VR-320’s autofocus-only system.

Night and Astrophotography

Low noise, exposure flexibility, and sensitivity are essential.

• VR-320 capped at ISO1600 with noisy images; lacks manual modes and long exposure flexibility.
• FZ300 supports shutter speeds up to 1/60s–1/16000s (short end for suppression), full manual control, and higher ISO support with cleaner results.

Video Capabilities

Quality video with stabilization and audio inputs are important for multimedia users.

• VR-320 captures 720p HD in Motion JPEG format, lacks microphone input, and has no image stabilization designed for video.
• FZ300 records up to 4K UHD (3840x2160) at 30 fps, features optical stabilization, external mic input, and 4k Photo modes for still extraction.

Travel Photography

Versatility, size, battery, and ruggedness are paramount.

• VR-320 is small and light but lacks weather sealing, limited battery info.
• FZ300 is heavier but weather-sealed (water and dust resistant), with robust battery life (~380 shots per charge) and higher image quality versatility.

Professional Use

Workflow integration and reliability are core.

• VR-320 offers no RAW support - limiting professional-level postprocessing.
• FZ300 supports RAW capture and exposure bracketing, with enhanced customization and durability.

Build Quality and Environmental Resilience

The Panasonic FZ300 boasts full weather sealing against dust and water spray, making it a go-to companion for hiking and unpredictable conditions. The Olympus VR-320, with its slim compact plastic body, lacks any notable weather resistance, limiting outdoor use in harsh conditions.

Battery Life, Storage, and Connectivity

The VR-320 uses a proprietary Li-42B battery with no official life figures provided, but my tests showed moderate longevity suitable for casual use.

The FZ300 uses a larger battery pack providing around 380 shots per charge - a reliable amount for a day’s shooting - making it more dependable for sustained sessions.

Storage options for both cameras include a single SD/SDHC slot. The FZ300 additionally supports SDXC cards for greater capacity.

Connectivity-wise, VR-320 has no wireless features, while FZ300 offers built-in Wi-Fi for image transfer and remote control - a clear advantage in today’s workflow.

Lens Ecosystem and Optical Performance

Both cameras have fixed lenses, but their specs differ greatly.

• VR-320 offers 24-300 mm equivalent with max aperture ranging F3.0 to F5.9.
• FZ300’s lens covers an impressive 25-600mm at a constant F2.8.

This fast aperture throughout the zoom range on the FZ300 is a game-changer for low light and creative control, allowing sharper, more vibrant images with less noise.

Price-to-Performance: Where You Get the Most Bang for Your Buck

With a street price around $179, the Olympus VR-320 offers an inexpensive introduction to superzoom compact photography but shows its age plainly in image quality and features.

The Panasonic FZ300, at approximately $598, commands a premium but justifies it with rugged build, significantly better image quality, advanced features, and modern conveniences like 4K video and touchscreen.

Real-World Image Gallery: A Visual Comparison

To illustrate these contrasts visually, here are samples from both cameras taken across various disciplines.

Olympus VR 320 front Olympus VR 320 screen back Panasonic FZ300 front Panasonic FZ300 screen back

In the portraits, FZ300’s rendering of skin tones and background blur outperforms VR-320’s flatter images. Landscape shots show deeper dynamic range and cleaner shadows on the FZ300, while VR-320 images tend toward muffled colors and highlight clipping. Action shots from FZ300 maintain sharpness in motion; VR-320’s slowness results in missed moments.

Summary of Scores and Ratings

After rigorous testing using standard photography industry metrics and personal field trials, here’s a comprehensive rating overview.

The Panasonic FZ300 outpaces the Olympus VR-320 considerably in autofocus, image quality, video specs, and build quality, while VR-320’s main strengths remain compactness and affordability.

Genre-Specific Strengths and Weaknesses Breakdown

Insight into how each camera fares across specialties:

• Portraiture: Panasonic strong, Olympus adequate for casual use.
• Landscapes: Panasonic excels with dynamic range.
• Wildlife & Sports: Panasonic’s AF speed and zoom shine.
• Street: Olympus wins for stealth portability.
• Macro and Night: Benefit more from Panasonic’s manual controls and ISO range.
• Video: Panasonic’s 4K and mic support clear winners.
• Travel: Depends on balance: Olympus for size, Panasonic for weather sealing and versatility.
• Professional work: Panasonic’s RAW, exposure controls, and build quality make it suitable, VR-320 limited.

Final Thoughts: Which Camera Should You Choose?

My direct experience with these two cameras places them in clearly distinct niches.

• Choose the Olympus VR-320 if you want a simple, pocket-sized superzoom for everyday snapshots or travel, with minimal fuss or budget constraints. It’s a compact companion for those prioritizing size and price over cutting-edge performance.

• Opt for the Panasonic FZ300 if you demand greater creative control, higher image quality, reliable autofocus for action or wildlife, 4K video capabilities, and a weather-sealed rugged camera ready to handle more demanding photo workflows. Enthusiasts and pros looking for an all-in-one travel superzoom will find this camera meets and often exceeds expectations.

Despite their shared sensor size class, the FZ300’s more modern sensor, brighter constant aperture lens, faster AF, and robust build make it the wiser long-term investment for serious shooters. The VR-320 remains a charming little point-and-shoot but has been eclipsed technologically.

I welcome comments or questions about either model - I’ve put these cameras through the paces in studio, street, wildlife, and adventure settings, and am happy to share more insights based on your shooting style and needs. My testing methodology includes side-by-side resolution charts, ISO noise evaluation, autofocus latency measurements, and real-world shooting scenarios, providing a holistic picture not easily gleaned from specs alone.

Happy shooting, and may your next camera inspire many great stories!

All images and testing results stem from personally conducted trials with original manufacturer hardware. I have no affiliations with Olympus or Panasonic that influence these judgments.