Sony H200 vs Sony W220

Comparing the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H200 and DSC-W220: In-Depth Analysis and Practical Buying Advice

When scouting for an entry-level camera or a cost-effective travel companion, the Sony Cyber-shot lineup often crosses our radar. Today I’m putting two distinct Sony cameras head-to-head that target very different user needs and styles: the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H200 - a bridge superzoom model with an ambitious focal range - and the compact-style DSC-W220, known for its portability and straightforward operation.

Having tested elements of both cameras extensively in my hands, this article breaks down their technical merits, real-world photographic performance, and overall value propositions. Whether you’re a hobbyist considering an inexpensive backup or stepping into casual photography, or a curious enthusiast weighing superzoom versatility against simplicity, these insights aim to guide your choice based on factual analysis and practical experience.

Let’s dive in.

First Impressions: Size, Ergonomics and Handling

The Sony H200 and W220 cater to distinct form factors. The H200 adopts a bridge camera design reminiscent of a small DSLR with a substantial built-in zoom lens, while the W220 is a compact pocket-friendly camera.

At 123 x 83 x 87 mm and weighing approximately 530 grams (with batteries), the H200 feels solid and well-balanced - good for users seeking a more substantial grip and control heft. This weight helps stabilize shots despite its lack of lens interchangeability. However, if long treks or quick snaps are your priority, the heavier and bulkier body might be tiresome over time.

By contrast, the W220’s compact dimensions (95 x 57 x 22 mm) and featherweight 147 grams make it an excellent candidate for street photography, casual snapshots, or travel when minimalism is key. It easily fits in a coat pocket, and its slim profile quickly disappears in hand or bag, making it unobtrusive.

Handling-wise, neither camera offers robust manual control dials or physical exposure settings common in advanced models. The H200’s bridge-style design does offer a more traditional grip and some button placements reminiscent of DSLRs, but both cameras rely largely on automatic or scene modes. This may leave experienced photographers wanting for more creative input but is appropriate for their intended beginner or casual audiences.

On the top panel, the H200 sports a mode dial and zoom lever surrounding the shutter button, lending some familiar tactile feedback. The W220's minimalist control scheme favors simplicity - just a mode dial and basic buttons - confirming its role as a grab-and-shoot option.

Sensor Size, Resolution, and Image Quality Considerations

Technical numbers quickly reveal the two cameras share the same sensor size: a 1/2.3-inch CCD sensor measuring 6.17 x 4.55 mm with an area of roughly 28 mm². However, they diverge in resolution and image processing.

The H200 sports a sharper 20 MP sensor offering a maximum image resolution of 5184 x 2920 pixels, whereas the W220's sensor resolution clocks in at 12 MP with 4000 x 3000 pixels. In theory, more pixels mean more detail, especially if you plan moderate cropping or large prints.

Yet, I find the resolution advantage of the H200 somewhat offset by its older CCD technology and lower native ISO performance (max ISO 3200 without RAW support). CCD sensors typically lag behind modern CMOS sensors in noise management and dynamic range, and the H200’s images under low light or high contrast often exhibit early noise and limited shadow recovery.

The W220 also utilizes a CCD sensor but at a more modest 12 MP resolution. While its low-light image quality remains around the same level, the camera’s smaller JPEG files and lower resolution can make it easier to manage noise and compression artifacts. It also offers slightly wider aperture at its telephoto end (F2.8 at 30mm), helping in dimmer conditions but losing out at full zoom extension.

Neither camera supports RAW image capture, which is a major limitation for users wishing to push post-processing boundaries.

Viewing and Composing Images: Screen and Viewfinder

Neither the H200 nor W220 includes an electronic viewfinder - a notable omission even in entry-level cameras today where eye-level framing enhances shooting stability and visibility under bright conditions.

Instead, both rely exclusively on fixed LCD displays for composing and reviewing shots.

The H200 offers a 3-inch ClearPhoto LCD with 460k-dot resolution, which renders images with decent sharpness and brightness. During extended use, though, I noticed the lack of touch capability slows menu navigation compared to modern touchscreens. Moreover, the fixed position restricts creative angles and awkward framing.

The W220’s smaller 2.7-inch LCD with only 230k dots is less crisp, making fine focus confirmation challenging, particularly in bright daylight. Its smaller size also makes menu interactions slightly fiddly, but again the compact form factor might trump that flaw for convenience seekers.

Neither camera provides tilting or articulating displays, and their brightness adjustment options remain basic, further influencing ease of use outdoors.

Lens Capabilities: Range, Aperture, and Macro

Now, the cameras differ dramatically in their optical zoom capabilities and lens versatility.

The Sony H200’s headline feature is its whopping 26.4x optical zoom - 24mm wide to 633mm telephoto equivalent.

Sony H200 front Sony H200 screen back Sony W220 front Sony W220 screen back

This range is impressive, rivaling some entry-level superzoom cameras, and it enables shooters to capture everything from sweeping landscapes to distant wildlife without swapping lenses. Its maximum aperture varies from F3.1 at wide to F5.9 at full zoom, resulting in dimmer shots at long focal lengths, but decent light gathering upfront for general use.

In contrast, the W220’s zoom is humble - 4x optical zoom spanning 30-120mm equivalent. While the F2.8 maximum aperture at wide-angle suggests good background blur potential (bokeh), its short zoom range limits reach, making it less suited to distant subjects, wildlife, or sports.

For macro enthusiasts, the W220 supports an extremely close focusing distance of 5 cm, compared to 20 cm on the H200 - a significant advantage when photographing details like flowers or insects up close. Both cameras use contrast-detection autofocus systems without any manual focus override in the H200 and limited manual focus in the W220, impacting fine focus control during macro work.

Autofocus Performance: Speed and Accuracy

Neither camera aims for pro-level autofocus sophistication, but their systems reflect their usage focus.

The H200 uses contrast detection AF with face detection enabled, supporting single autofocus, center-weighted AF, and AF tracking. It offers some rudimentary subject tracking, though the focus speed is generally slow to moderate. In dynamic shooting environments like sports or wildlife, the H200 struggles to keep pace, leading to missed shots or hunting.

The W220 features a 9-point contrast detection AF system but lacks face or eye detection. Its AF speed is likewise modest, with slow acquisition in low light and no continuous AF modes. Confidence-inspiring autofocus performance is not this camera’s strong suit but suits casual snapshot scenarios.

The H200’s AF tracking provides some edge over the W220 when subjects move, albeit still underwhelming compared to modern hybrid AF or phase-detect technologies.

Shutter and Continuous Shooting Dynamics

Faster continuous shooting and shutter responsiveness can make the difference in capturing fleeting moments.

The H200 supports 8 frames per second (fps) burst shooting at reduced resolution - not bad for its class and year - but its buffer fills quickly, and autofocus during burst is disabled, so subject tracking during rapid sequences suffers.

Conversely, the W220 only manages a 2 fps burst mode with minimal buffer depth, insufficient for most action photography needs. Its shutter lag is also more pronounced compared to the H200.

For those interested in photographing fast-moving sports or wildlife, the H200’s higher frame rate nominally edges out, though its AF limitations still curtail success in challenging shoots.

Battery and Storage: Real-World Usability

On the power front, the two cameras differ starkly.

The H200 runs on four AA batteries - either alkaline or rechargeable NiMH. This design can be both a blessing and a curse. AA batteries are ubiquitous and cheap to replace globally, perfect for travel without access to proprietary spare batteries. However, the weight and bulk add to the camera's heft, and battery life estimates hover around 240 shots per charge cycle - fair but not exceptional.

The W220 uses an unspecified proprietary lithium-ion battery with no official battery life figure provided. From hands-on experience, I found it adequate for casual day trips, but as with many compacts of its generation, spares are desirable for extended outings.

Storage-wise, the H200 supports SD, SDHC, SDXC, and Sony Memory Stick cards, offering flexibility with widely-available media formats. The W220 accepts Memory Stick Duo/Pro Duo cards plus has internal storage - a unique bonus for temporary image holding, albeit limited capacity.

Video Capabilities: Basic Cinematography

When it comes to video, both cameras deliver entry-level recording features.

The H200 can shoot HD video at 720p (1280 x 720) at 30 fps with MPEG-4 or AVCHD formats, which is serviceable for casual clips. It lacks external microphone and headphone ports, limiting sound quality and monitoring options.

The W220 is more modest, confined to VGA resolution (640 x 480) at 30 fps, producing lower quality footage by modern standards. Its video format is Motion JPEG, a simple codec that creates bulky files with minimal compression.

Neither camera supports 4K recording or advanced stabilization during video, though both use optical image stabilization to assist handheld shots.

Environmental Durability and Build Quality

Neither the Sony H200 nor W220 feature weather sealing, dustproofing, shockproofing, or other ruggedization standard in contemporary cameras designed for outdoor adventure or professional fieldwork.

I would caution against exposing these models to heavy rain or dusty environments without protective accessories.

Build quality on both cameras is largely plastic with some metal elements on the H200. The H200’s heft and grip feel sturdier, suitable for more prolonged handheld use, whereas the W220 is lightweight but less robust against rough handling.

Connectivity and Interface: Modern Convenience Missing

Both cameras lack wireless options altogether - no Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, or NFC. This limitation restricts easy image transfer or remote control capabilities that have become widespread features in newer cameras.

USB 2.0 is the sole interface, primarily for file transfer and charging (if applicable). Neither camera has HDMI ports for direct connection to TVs or external monitors.

The absence of modern connectivity is somewhat expected given their release dates (2009 for the W220, 2013 for the H200), but it is a noteworthy disadvantage for today's users expecting seamless integration with smart devices or social media.

Pricing and Value: What You Get for Your Investment

At current street prices - approximately $250 for the H200 and $160 for the W220 - the cost difference reflects the divergent positioning.

The H200’s superzoom versatility commands the premium, promising wide focal lengths and more megapixels for less than $300. For photographers prioritizing telephoto reach and moderate image resolution on a budget, the H200 is compelling.

The W220 appeals as a wallet-friendly compact with simple user experience and portability. It suits casual users or families who want a straightforward camera without budget strain.

Neither camera competes well today against modern smartphones or entry-level mirrorless models with superior sensors and features, but for vintage bargains or brand loyalists, both remain useful.

Performance Across Photography Genres: Where Each Camera Shines

Portrait Photography
The H200’s higher resolution sensor gives it a slight advantage capturing skin tones and details with some clarity. Its long zoom lets you compose tight portraits from a distance - useful for unposed candid work. However, its limited maximum aperture hampers shallow depth-of-field effects, and absence of advanced eye detection AF limits pin-sharp focus on eyes. The W220's wider aperture at short focal lengths can produce softer backgrounds for portraits but with reduced resolution and less refined autofocus.

Landscape Photography
Landscape photographers need resolution, dynamic range, and wide-angle fidelity. The H200’s 24mm equivalent wide-end is better suited than the W220’s minimum 30mm, permitting broader compositions. However, the CCD sensor’s limited dynamic range and absence of RAW restrict post-processing potential for complex scenes. Neither camera offers weather sealing. The W220 provides less resolution and narrower field of view, better for snapshots than serious landscapes.

Wildlife Photography
Superzoom is king for wildlife, giving the H200 a clear edge with 633mm reach. Its 8 fps burst speed helps capture action, though slow autofocus blunts efficiency. The W220 can’t compete at long distances given its 120mm max zoom and low frame rate. Neither camera matches professional-level AF speed or tracking.

Sports Photography
Fast autofocus and frame rates dominate here. The H200’s 8 fps burst is useful but modest; slow AF and no phase detection limit tracking fast subjects. The W220’s 2 fps and sluggish AF make it impractical for sports.

Street Photography
Portability is prized; the W220’s compact size and discreet appearance suit street shooters favoring subtlety. The H200 is bulkier and more conspicuous but offers zoom flexibility. Low-light performance on both is average.

Macro Photography
The W220’s 5 cm macro focusing distance excels for close-ups and detail work, assisted by slightly faster apertures. The H200’s 20 cm minimum focus limits macro potential.

Night/Astro Photography
Both cameras struggle in very low light due to limited high ISO performance and lack of manual exposure control or bulb modes. The H200’s max ISO 3200 is a benefit but with noisy results. Neither is ideal for astrophotography.

Video
The H200 records HD (720p), while the W220 caps at VGA. Without mic inputs or stabilization options, video performance is basic for memory-making.

Travel Photography
Here, the choice depends on style: the H200 offers all-in-one zoom versatility offset by size and weight, whereas the W220 prioritizes portability and ease of operation at acceptable image quality.

Professional Use
Neither camera fits professional workflows due to limited controls, no RAW capture, and mediocre image quality. They’re firmly consumer-oriented devices.

Summarizing Strengths and Weaknesses

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H200
Pros:
• Massive 26.4x zoom range (24-633 mm equiv.)
• Higher 20 MP resolution for detailed images
• 8 fps continuous shooting burst mode
• Optical image stabilization and face detection AF
• AA battery compatibility - easy power sourcing
• Larger 3-inch, higher-resolution LCD screen

Cons:
• Bulkier and heavier than compact competitors
• CCD sensor limits low-light quality and dynamic range
• No EVF or touchscreen
• Slow autofocus performance, limited manual controls
• No Wi-Fi or modern connectivity
• No RAW image output

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W220
Pros:
• Compact, pocketable design (95x57x22 mm)
• Lightweight at 147 grams - and easy to carry all day
• Macro focus down to 5 cm for close-up photography
• Faster aperture at wide end (F2.8) for better low-light snaps
• Simple user interface ideal for beginners
• Internal memory plus Memory Stick support

Cons:
• Limited 4x zoom (30-120 mm equivalent)
• Lower 12 MP resolution
• No face detection AF or tracking
• Basic VGA video capabilities only
• Small, lower resolution LCD screen
• No wireless features or EVF support
• Short shutter speeds and slow continuous shooting

Recommendations: Which Sony Camera Fits Your Needs?

If your priority is an affordable, all-in-one camera for general photography - landscapes, wildlife at a distance, travel with diverse subjects - the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H200 stands as the clear winner. Its superzoom, higher pixel count, and solid ergonomics deliver flexibility rarely found at this budget. Be prepared to manage its bulk and modest low-light limitations, and don’t expect professional-grade performance or post-processing flexibility.

For casual users who want something ultra-portable, simple, and capable of taking everyday photos - family events, street scenes, vacation snapshots - with decent macro options, the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W220 remains a solid choice. It will not excel at action or low light but rewards with convenience and ease of use.

Final Thoughts

Both cameras epitomize entry-level point-and-shoot technology from an earlier era - offering limited controls, no RAW, and CCD sensors more vulnerable to noise and dynamic range constraints. In today’s market, many smartphones and newer mirrorless models will outperform them in several respects.

Still, when we factor in price, usability, and niche strengths - the H200’s extraordinary zoom and the W220’s remarkable pocketability - their appeal to specific audiences remains intact. I've spent hours testing these cameras under varied conditions to confirm these conclusions, and I encourage buyers to consider how these strengths align with their photographic ambitions.

If you value superzoom versatility and don’t mind extra weight, the H200 rewards your choice. For users prioritizing portability and a straightforward shooting experience, the W220 is a commendable option.

I hope this detailed comparison helps you cut through specs and marketing, focusing instead on real-world photographic value. Happy shooting!

This review combines comprehensive first-hand testing, technical analysis, and practical use considerations to serve photography enthusiasts seeking an informed Sony compact camera purchase.