Head-to-Head Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H55 vs. Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W320: Which Compact Shooter Wins?

Choosing a compact camera today - even a decade on from these Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H55 and DSC-W320 models - can still be a nuanced affair, especially if you want a tool that punches above its weight in day-to-day usability, versatile zoom reach, and image quality without breaking the bank. Having tested thousands of cameras over 15 years, I love coming back to budget-friendly compacts to see what gems they can still offer, especially to hobbyists or pros looking for a simple, no-fuss backup or travel buddy.

In this detailed comparison, I dissect these two 2010 Sony models to reveal how they stack up across various photographic disciplines and user scenarios. Both cameras share a CCD sensor with 14 megapixels and basic fixed lenses but diverge in ergonomics, zoom capability, and feature set - details that clearly sway which camera best suits your shooting style and creative appetite. Ready? Let’s dive in.

Size Matters: Handling and Ergonomics That Influence Your Shooting Experience

Before we talk pixels, let’s chat about the physical factor - cameras aren’t just about specs; how they feel in your hand is paramount for real-world shooting.

At first glance, the Sony H55 comes across as a more substantial compact. Measuring 103 x 58 x 29 mm and weighing 200 grams, it offers a beefier grip that fits well in medium to larger hands. This body size means it doesn’t feel like a toy to hold (which sometimes plagues smaller compacts) and reduces shutter shake with a firmer grasp.

Contrast that with the Sony W320, which is designed to slip effortlessly into pockets - slimmer at 93 x 52 x 17 mm and weighing just 117 grams. As an ultracompact, it’s a discreet companion where size and weight trump extended grip comfort.

While the H55’s chunkiness lends confidence during longer shoots or bursts of action, the W320’s size truly shines for street photographers or travelers prioritizing lightweight carry.

So, if you’re a guy (or gal) who likes clubs for thumbs and a handful of buttons, the H55 is your jam. If stealth and svelte form factor rule, then the W320 is a better take-along.

The Control Deck: How Design Shapes Shooting Workflow

Digging into the camera controls is where the rubber meets the road for practical handling.

The H55 wins on the control front with more dedicated buttons, a zoom ring around the lens, and a distinct dial for switching modes. Although it lacks manual exposure control (no shutter or aperture priority modes), having separate buttons for common functions (flash, self-timer, display) lets you shift gears quicker during shoots.

Meanwhile, the W320 trims as much as possible given its minuscule footprint - its controls are sparser and more consolidated into menus and multifunction buttons. It leans heavier on auto modes and streamlined simplicity, which is a double-edged sword. Auto only can frustrate enthusiasts wanting even rudimentary control but might suit casual shooters just snapping memories.

In sum, the H55’s layout better supports photographers who want to stay in the moment with quick access to settings, where the W320 prioritizes minimalism and pocketability.

Sensor Size and Image Quality: Same Chip, Different Vision?

Technology-wise, both cameras rock a 1/2.3” CCD sensor measuring 6.17 x 4.55 mm with 14 megapixels - standard fare for compacts back in 2010. This sensor size is modest but common in the class, and results will roughly be in the same league. Let’s look closer.

CCD sensors of this size, despite their age, can provide decent image quality under good light with low noise. But their dynamic range and high ISO performance lag behind newer CMOS-based systems or larger sensor formats (APS-C, full frame).

Both share a maximum ISO of 3200, but in practice, noise becomes chunky above ISO 400-800. The H55, however, edges out slightly thanks to its optical image stabilization that steadies shots for longer exposures and zoomed-in frames - a significant boon for low-light or telephoto scenarios.

Resolution is matched at 4320 x 3240 pixels, allowing for sizeable prints and cropping room. Antialiasing filters prevent moiré but can soften finest textures - a tradeoff inherent to these sensors.

For colors and tonality, Sony’s Bionz processor in the H55 handles image processing with a touch more refinement, delivering moderately better color gradation. The W320’s processor is less talked about but produces satisfactorily vivid JPEGs for casual use.

So, expect both to perform adequately in daylight landscapes or portraits but brace for limitations as the light dims.

Rear LCD and Interface: Your Viewfinder Window to the World

With no electronic viewfinders on either model, the rear LCD becomes essential for composing and reviewing shots.

The H55 sports a larger 3-inch fixed screen, whereas the W320 offers 2.7 inches - small difference numerically, but significant in practice. The bigger screen on the H55 makes it easier to check focus, exposure, and composition on the fly.

Both have 230k resolution, so sharpness and color accuracy are roughly on par. Neither has a touchscreen, so menus require button navigation, which aligns with their budget orientations.

If you tend to shoot outdoors, be mindful both LCDs struggle under direct sunlight - a common complaint with compact cameras of this era.

I find the somewhat larger LCD on the H55 more comfortable for live view framing and playback unless extreme portability is your single priority.

Zoom Range and Lens Characteristics: Reach Matters Depending on Your Subject

If you’re like me, the lens focal range often dictates what kind of photography you’ll feel comfortable shooting.

The Sony H55 boasts a 25-250 mm equivalent zoom lens with 10x optical zoom. That’s an impressive telephoto reach for crushing distant subjects, wildlife, or even candid street shots from afar.

The Sony W320 features a more modest 26-105 mm equivalent zoom with 4x optical zoom. It’s tailored for general snapshots, wide in tight spaces, and moderate telephoto for portraits, but won’t get you close enough for shy critters or long-distance sports action.

Both lenses have a relatively slow max aperture range (F3.5-5.5 on the H55, F2.7-5.7 on the W320). The W320’s wider aperture at the short end (F2.7) means slightly better low-light performance for wide-angle shots. The H55 loses some brightness but compensates with optical stabilization.

Sharpness tends to peak around the mid-range focal lengths for both, softening a bit at extremes - a typical lens trait. Neither produces artistic bokeh to drool over due to smaller sensors and lens design but both handle macro reasonably well, with close focus distances at 4-5 cm.

If you want a jack-of-all-trades zoom to cover everything from landscapes through casual wildlife, the H55’s 10x zoom is the clear winner here.

Autofocus and Shooting Speed: Quick Draws or Thoughtful Moments?

Fast, reliable autofocus is crucial for wildlife, sports, or quick snapshots. Both cameras use contrast-detection AF systems with 9 focus points.

• The H55 offers single autofocus with no tracking or face detection.
• The W320 basically matches this but has fewer shooting speed options.

Speaking of speed, the H55 boasts a continuous shooting rate of 10 fps, which sounds impressive, but with small buffers and mediocre autofocus tracking, it’s more useful for brief bursts than professional sports.

The W320 is slower at just 1 fps burst mode, making it ill-suited for action but fine for leisurely shooting.

Neither camera has manual focus or advanced AF features like eye detection or tracking, so when speed and precision matter, these compacts won’t replace an advanced interchangeable lens camera. Still, in daylight, focusing is brisk enough for casual use.

Building Toughness and Weather Sealing: Can These Cameras Brave the Elements?

For landscape photographers or travelers, durability can be a deciding factor.

Neither the H55 nor the W320 offers official weather sealing or ruggedized bodies. They’re standard compacts with plastic shells, vulnerable to dust and moisture.

That said, the H55’s heftier build gives a slightly more reassuring feel in your hands, but be careful in damp or rough environments.

If you need a go-anywhere tough camera, look elsewhere, or invest in protective bags and covers.

Battery Life and Storage Options: How Long Can You Keep Shooting?

These compacts rely on proprietary batteries:

• The H55 uses the NP-BG1 battery.
• The W320 uses the smaller NP-BN1.

Neither camera’s battery life is stellar by today’s standards, but the H55 typically affords longer shooting cycles - around 330 shots per charge versus approximately 200-250 for the W320.

Both take a single memory card (Memory Stick Duo/Pro Duo and SD/SDHC), offering flexible storage choices.

If you’re out shooting all day, consider carrying spares, especially with the W320’s smaller capacity battery.

Connectivity and Video Capabilities: Sharing and Moving Pictures

Connectivity-wise, neither camera boasts wireless options like Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, or NFC - standard for 2010-era entry-level compacts.

The H55 does lack HDMI output, limiting direct playback on HDTVs, whereas the W320 includes an HDMI port, a modest but handy advantage for quick slideshows on larger screens.

As for video, the H55 shoots up to 1280 x 720 at 30 fps in MPEG-4 format, decent for casual HD clips for family or travel logs.

The W320 tops out at 640 x 480 at 30 fps (SD resolution) in Motion JPEG format, less sharp and dated by modern standards.

Neither offers external microphone inputs, so audio capture is basic.

Real-World Photography Tests: What Can Each Do Across Genres?

Enough specs, let me share insights from putting these cameras through their paces across popular photography types.

Sony H55 front Sony H55 screen back Sony W320 front Sony W320 screen back

Portraits: Skin Tones and Bokeh

Both cameras produce accurate, pleasant skin tones under natural light. The H55’s longer lens allows for tighter headshots without physical closeness, but neither camera can truly isolate backgrounds for creamy bokeh due to their sensor size and aperture limits. Face-detection autofocus is absent, so focusing falls on you to be deliberate.

Landscapes: Dynamic Range and Resolution

Both capture nice landscape images with respectable detail at base ISO. I found color rendition from the H55 slightly richer with better shadow detail, likely due to its Bionz processor optimizations and optical steadiness for sharp shots at slower shutter speeds. Neither rivals modern cameras for dynamic range, so watch out for blown highlights.

Wildlife: Zoom and AF Speed

The H55’s 10x zoom readily smokes the W320 here - being able to frame birds or animals at a distance is a solid plus. That said, neither camera’s AF speed or tracking is adequate for fast wildlife motion. The W320’s shorter focal length severely limits your reach in this genre.

Sports Shooting: Frame Rates and Tracking

The H55’s 10 fps burst looks promising but the small buffer and locking AF reduce practical burst lengths - enough for brief action sequences but insufficient for sustained tracking. The W320’s 1 fps shooting effectively takes it out of competitive sports scenarios.

Street Photography: Discretion and Responsiveness

The W320’s slim profile and lighter weight shine in street photography scenarios - it’s less intimidating and easier to operate one-handed. The H55 is a bit bulkier but still quite pocketable. Low light performance is similar and limited; neither camera excels at night street scenes.

Macro Shots: Close Focus and Detail

With minimum focus distances around 4-5 cm, both models handle macro shots passably for casual flowers or objects. The H55’s longer zoom lets you shoot close-ups from a bit farther away, which adds compositional flexibility.

Night & Astro Photography: ISO and Exposure Stability

CCD sensors and lack of manual exposure control curtail astrophotography ambitions. Both cameras introduce noticeable noise above ISO 400; the H55’s optical stabilization helps slightly with keeping exposures steady but neither camera is designed for long-exposure night shots or star trails.

Video Recording: Quality and Usability

If recording family videos or travel snippets matters, the H55’s HD 720p video at 30 fps offers a clearer image. The W320’s VGA resolution (640x480) video looks decidedly dated. Neither camera allows manual video controls or microphone input, limiting creative video work.

Travel Photography: Portability vs. Versatility

The W320 wins on portability with a lighter build and very pocket-friendly dimensions - ideal for casual travelers and urban explorers.

The H55 excels at versatility with its wider zoom, larger screen, and better image stabilization - better suited for guided trips where size is less critical.

Professional Usability: Can These Cameras Work in a Workflow?

Neither camera shoots RAW, which is a big limitation for professional output. JPEG-only capture means little room for post-processing latitude.

They do offer manual exposure compensation options only on the H55 (and even that is limited).

File transfer is USB 2.0, sufficient for most casual workflows, but no built-in Wi-Fi or tethering for instant studio connection.

Professionals might consider these cameras strictly as backups or for quick snaps during shoots rather than primary creative tools.

How Do They Score Overall? A Quick Performance Snapshot

In my scoring system incorporating image quality, usability, features, and value:

• Sony H55: Solid 6.5/10
• Sony W320: Basic 5/10

Not a huge gap, but clear when you factor in zoom versatility and shooting speed.

How Each Performs Across Photography Genres

• Portraits: H55 leads due to zoom flexibility
• Landscape: Slight edge H55 for image quality
• Wildlife: H55 dominant due to 10x zoom
• Sports: H55 marginally better due to burst shooting
• Street: W320 preferred for pocketability
• Macro: Tied, both do the job
• Night/Astro: Both poor performers
• Video: H55 better HD capture
• Travel: W320 preferred for size and convenience
• Professional Use: Neither ideal; H55 usable as backup

Pros and Cons At a Glance

Sony H55 Advantages:

• 10x optical zoom (25-250 mm eq.) versatile for many genres
• Optical image stabilization reduces camera shake
• Larger 3-inch LCD aids composition and playback
• Continuous shooting up to 10 fps for brief action bursts
• Slightly better image processing with Bionz chip

Sony H55 Drawbacks:

• Larger and heavier - less pocket-friendly
• No manual exposure modes or RAW shooting
• No wireless connectivity or HDMI port
• Outdated video specs (720p max)

Sony W320 Advantages:

• Ultra-compact and lightweight - travel-friendly
• Slightly wider max aperture at wide-angle (F2.7)
• HDMI output for easy TV playback
• Simple point-and-shoot operation for casual users

Sony W320 Drawbacks:

• Short 4x zoom limits framing flexibility
• No image stabilization - more prone to blur
• Slow continuous shooting (1 fps)
• Lower-res video capture (640x480)
• Minimal control options & no battery life info

Final Verdict: Who Should Buy Which Camera?

Both cameras have aged gracefully as basic compact cameras, suitable mostly for hobbyists or budget-conscious buyers who want simple cameras for daylight shooting with minimal fuss.

• Pick the Sony H55 if:
  You want better telephoto reach, a more substantial grip, faster shooting, and decent stabilization. Ideal for casual wildlife photography, travel where zoom is useful, and snapping portraits or landscapes with slightly better color. Accept larger size and limited controls.

• Pick the Sony W320 if:
  Your top priority is pocketable convenience and a super-lightweight carry. Good for street photography enthusiasts who want a discrete companion or casual snapshooters who prefer simplicity over features. However, be ready for limited zoom range and basic image quality.

If budget allows and you want a compact zoom camera with some stretch to your images, the H55 provides superior versatility and image quality. The W320 feels like a cheapskate’s compact - the size savings come at visible cost in zoom and stabilization.

I hope this comparison helps you see past the numbers into the lived reality of shooting with each camera. Both have their charm and place, depending on what and how you shoot. Whichever you pick, these little Sonys still remind us that photography fundamentally comes down to the photographer’s eye - and sometimes a bit of reach.

Happy shooting!