Sony RX100 V vs. Sony W320: A Deep Dive into Two Very Different Cameras

Whether you’re a photography enthusiast seeking a versatile pocket companion or a casual snapper looking for simplicity in your next camera, Sony’s lineup offers a wide range of options. Today, I want to take you through an in-depth comparison between two distinct Sony compacts from very different eras and categories - the advanced Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 V (released 2016) and the basic Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W320 (released 2010). These cameras might share the Sony brand but serve wildly different purposes and user expectations.

Drawing on my hands-on testing experience and rigorous analysis, I’ll explore each camera’s design, technical features, real-world performance, and suitability across various photographic disciplines. By the end, you’ll understand which camera serves your unique needs and where each one shines or stumbles.

First Impressions: Size, Build, and Handling

Right out of the gate, the physical differences between these two models are striking, reflecting their respective class and design focuses.

The RX100 V, a large sensor compact, is significantly larger and heftier (102x58x41 mm; 299 g) than the ultra-pocketable W320 (93x52x17 mm; 117 g). The RX100 V’s heft is not a liability but rather a boon for ergonomics - it offers a substantial grip, easily accessible controls, and a robust build quality befitting a premium compact aimed at enthusiasts.

The W320 is ultra-slim and light, ideal for slipping into tight pockets or purses, but this comes at the expense of handling comfort during extended shoots. Buttons are smaller and less tactile, and there’s no grip to speak of. As a travel-friendly, no-fuss point-and-shoot, it is what it is: incredibly portable and simple.

While the W320 sacrifices ergonomics for size, the RX100 V strikes an excellent balance between compactness and usability – so if you frequently spend hours shooting, the RX100 V feels much more reassuring in hand.

Top-Down: Controls and Interface Design

Handling doesn’t just come down to size; control layout and user interface are equally key when you’re trying to shoot quickly and efficiently.

On a subjective level, the RX100 V exudes a level of professionalism that’s clear as soon as you glance at its control panel. Dials for exposure compensation, shooting modes, and a dedicated control ring around the lens make manual adjustment fast and precise. There are custom buttons, a pop-up electronic viewfinder (EVF), and an intuitive interface that supports various manual exposure modes.

Conversely, the W320 has a minimalistic top layout with just the shutter release and a zoom rocker, reflecting its intent as a simple point-and-shoot for casual use. There are no manual exposure modes or customizable settings, and the lack of an EVF means compulsory reliance on the LCD screen in all lighting conditions (more on that in a moment).

The takeaway here? The RX100 V is designed for control enthusiasts wanting quick access to advanced settings; the W320 is all about minimalist simplicity, sacrificing versatility for ease of use.

Sensor Technology: The Heart of Image Quality

The size, type, and quality of a camera’s sensor profoundly affect image resolution, noise handling, dynamic range, and ultimately the final photographic outcome.

The RX100 V’s 1-inch Exmor RS BSI CMOS sensor with 20.1MP resolution dwarfs the W320’s modest 1/2.3-inch CCD sensor with 14MP resolution in several critical ways:

• Sensor size: The RX100 V’s sensor area (116.16 mm²) is over four times larger than the W320’s (28.07 mm²). A larger sensor collects more light, resulting in cleaner images, better dynamic range, and improved low-light capabilities.
• Pixel count: Although the W320’s 14 MP might seem respectable, they are cramped onto a smaller sensor, leading to more noise and reduced detail compared to RX100 V’s well-sized pixels.
• Technology: The RX100 V employs a back-illuminated (BSI) CMOS sensor, which is generally faster and more sensitive than the older CCD sensor found in the W320 - meaning better autofocus performance, faster readout speeds, and more reliable noise control at higher ISO.
• Image processing: Coupled with the RX100 V’s powerful Bionz X processor, this sensor setup can deliver rich jpeg output and high fidelity raw files, something the W320 lacks entirely.

From my hours testing the RX100 V under challenging conditions, its sensor delivers punchy colors, crisp definition, and reliable performance even at ISO 3200+ - a far cry from the W320’s noisy, softer images if lighting dims or action speeds up.

Shooting Experience: Viewfinder and Screen

Whether through a viewfinder or an LCD screen, your subject framing and composition depend heavily on clear, responsive visual feedback.

The RX100 V comes equipped with a crisp 3-inch tilting LCD boasting 1.2 million dots and an OLED electronic viewfinder with 2.36 million dots - a rarity in compact cameras that seriously enhances visibility in bright light and brings DSLR-like compositional confidence.

The W320 relies solely on a fixed, small 2.7-inch screen with a mere 230K-dot resolution. It’s perfectly adequate for simple framing at arm's length in moderate light, but not for fine detail work or shooting under harsh sunlight. The absence of any EVF means distracting shadows or screen glare become frequent nuisances.

For photographers who appreciate accuracy and flexibility in composing shots from various angles, the RX100 V’s screen and EVF combination is a substantial advantage. Casual users who prioritize simplicity and don’t mind eyeing the LCD at arm’s length may find the W320 sufficient.

Autofocus Systems: Speed, Precision, and Tracking

A camera’s autofocus system critically impacts its ability to capture sharp images, especially in dynamic scenarios like wildlife or sports photography.

The RX100 V boasts a hybrid Phase Detection/Contrast Detection autofocus system with 315 focus points, face and eye detection, and continuous autofocus tracking up to an impressive 24 fps burst. This allows razor-sharp capture of fast-moving subjects and reliable focus lock on eyes in portraits.

The W320 sports a much simpler 9-point contrast detection system with center-weighted focus; it has basic face detection but lacks any advanced tracking or eye AF capability. Burst shooting is limited to essentially single shots, making it unsuitable for action photography.

My extensive field tests confirm the RX100 V locks focus swiftly and accurately - even in low-light or challenging compositions. The W320, however, can struggle with slow autofocus hunt, occasionally missing focus in dimmer settings or on moving subjects.

Lens and Zoom Performance

Both cameras have fixed lenses, meaning lens swapping is impossible, but their zoom ranges and optical constructions differ substantially.

• RX100 V: 24-70mm (equivalent) F1.8-2.8 fast aperture zoom. This 2.9x zoom range strikes a perfect balance between wide-angle flexibility for landscapes or architectural shots and moderate telephoto reach for portraits and close-ups. The bright aperture enables attractive bokeh and better low-light usability.
• W320: 26-105mm (equivalent) with a variable F2.7-5.7 aperture zoom, offering a longer 4x zoom range but at the cost of much slower aperture especially at telephoto end.

In practice, I’ve found the RX100 V’s lens much preferable for image quality and bokeh control, with consistently sharp, contrasty output. The W320’s longer zoom is convenient but produces softer, noisier images at the telephoto setting - read: suitable for snapshots but limited creative potential.

Real-World Photography Tests: Across Genres

Let’s assess how these cameras stack up in various photography specialties based on my hands-on shooting experience and test images.

Portraiture: Capturing Skin Tones and Eyes

The RX100 V shines here with its bright F1.8 aperture capability, excellent face and eye detection AF, and subtle bokeh that helps subjects pop from backgrounds. Skin tones are rendered with natural warmth and smooth gradations without oversaturation.

W320 portraits are serviceable but flat by comparison - slower lens and limited AF result in fewer keeper shots with shallow depth-of-field. Skin detail can be noisy at higher ISO levels indoors.

Landscape: Dynamic Range and Resolution

The RX100 V’s larger sensor and excellent dynamic range (about 12.4 EV measured on DxOmark) yield landscapes with vibrant yet nuanced colors and well-preserved highlights/shadows. The 20 MP resolution provides enough detail for moderate enlargements.

The W320, with its smaller sensor, lower dynamic range, and 14 MP resolution, produces less detailed and duller landscapes with crushed shadows or blown highlights under complex light.

Wildlife and Sports: Autofocus and Burst Shooting

RX100 V dominates due to its 24 fps continuous shooting and advanced autofocus tracking. While it lacks interchangeable telephoto lenses, its fast zoom and AF systems managed small birds in my test field surprisingly well, outperforming many compact cameras.

W320 is ill-suited for sports/wildlife because it offers no continuous AF or fast burst modes, making it miss much action.

Street and Travel Photography: Portability and Discretion

Here’s where W320’s small size and simplicity show value - it slips easily into a pocket and is unobtrusive, great for casual street shooters or travelers who want a "grab and go" camera.

RX100 V is larger but still pocketable for those valuing image quality with manageable weight (~300g). Its tilting screen is useful for creative street angles, though its somewhat more complex menus may slow quick snaps.

Macro and Close-up

The RX100 V has a minimum focus distance of 5cm enabling detailed macro shots with sharpness and background separation. W320’s 4cm distance is similar but with softer detail and lower image quality.

Night and Astro Photography

The RX100 V manages high-ISO noise much better, thanks to sensor and processor, making it a reliable companion for nightscapes or astro shots with relatively short exposures.

W320 noise levels are prohibitive above ISO 400, hindering low-light performance.

Video Capabilities

RX100 V features 4K UHD video at 30p (100 Mbps) with standard codecs (XAVC S), optical image stabilization, and a robust video mode suite, albeit lacking microphone or headphone jacks. It’s a very competent vlogging or casual cinematography tool.

W320 offers only VGA (640x480) video at 30 fps in basic Motion JPEG format - adequate for simple clips but dated even by older standards.

Build Quality and Environmental Resistance

Neither camera features weather sealing, waterproofing, or shockproofing. However, the RX100 V’s more solid metal construction feels tougher and more reliable during rough use compared to the mostly plastic body of the W320. This should be a factor if you plan to shoot outdoors extensively.

Battery Life and Storage

The RX100 V uses a proprietary NP-BX1 battery rated for approximately 220 shots per charge - fairly typical but limited for extended shooting days without spares.

W320’s battery specification isn’t published as clearly, but given its simpler electronics, battery life is longer in standby but modest during usage.

Both cameras use a single SD or Memory Stick card slot; memory compatibility is similar.

Connectivity and Extras

RX100 V includes Wi-Fi and NFC for wireless image transfer and remote control via smartphone apps - a modern convenience lacking in the W320, which has no wireless features.

Neither camera has GPS or external mic/headphone jacks, limiting some pro workflows.

Price and Value Assessment

At launch, the RX100 V commanded around $999 - a professional-grade compact price. The W320’s price hovered closer to $269, catering strictly to budget-oriented casual users.

While the RX100 V’s price might be steep, the return in image quality, speed, and versatility is substantial. The W320’s cost is accessible but comes with significant compromises.

Summary Scores and Genre Recommendations

If you want a concise visual summary before final recommendations, here are the performance ratings from our extended testing pipeline:

The RX100 V leads comfortably for image quality, autofocus, video, low light, and speed, while the W320 mainly scores only in portability and budget-friendly simplicity.

Who Should Buy Which Camera?

Sony RX100 V: The Enthusiast’s Choice

If you’re an enthusiast or prosumer craving best-in-class image quality, fast and reliable autofocus, 4K video, and the flexibility to shoot across portraits, landscapes, sports, and travel - the RX100 V is a gem. It’s especially valuable for those who want DSLR-level control in a pocketable package or a “second” camera for professional work.

Its 1-inch sensor, fast zoom lens, and solid build justify the premium price. Just be mindful of battery life and invest in spare batteries for extensive outings.

Sony W320: For Casual Users and Budget Buyers

If your photographic aspirations are modest - snapshots, family photos, vacation shots - and your priority is ease, convenience, and affordability, the W320 is an uncomplicated friend. It’s an excellent camera for beginners or those who want a simple always-with-you device without fuss.

However, expect compromises in image quality under anything but good lighting and don’t expect advanced controls or video capabilities.

Final Thoughts and Personal Take

I’ve spent countless hours testing both cameras in the field, lab, and everyday settings. The RX100 V impresses with its blend of image quality, speed, and sophistication rare in a compact system. It’s the kind of camera you can rely on for both creative projects and professional shoots where carrying a larger system isn’t practical.

The W320 offers a glimpse into simpler times: point-and-shoot convenience without the trappings of modern camera tech. While admirable for its size and ease-of-use, it’s largely outclassed by modern smartphone cameras today.

Ultimately, your choice depends on whether you want power and control in a compact package, or simplicity and portability at a lower cost. For me, the RX100 V is the clear winner if you’re serious about photography - the W320 is a lightweight, no-frills snapshot tool.

Sony RX100 V front Sony RX100 V screen back Sony W320 front Sony W320 screen back

These sample images show the RX100 V’s sharpness, detail, and tonal richness versus the W320’s softer, noisier output.

Thank you for joining me on this detailed comparison. Whether you’re upgrading your compact or acquiring a basic backup, understanding these differences will help you invest confidently in the camera best fit for your photographic journey.

Happy shooting!