Sony TX1 vs Sony W220: A Hands-On Comparison from a Seasoned Camera Tester

When I first sat down to compare the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-TX1 (TX1) and the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W220 (W220), I was immediately reminded how much charm and challenge come with compact cameras from the late 2000s. These two Sony models, both announced in 2009, cater to budget-conscious buyers seeking simple, point-and-shoot solutions, yet their design philosophies differ noticeably. After spending hours putting both through their paces in studio and real-world conditions, I’m here to share an in-depth, no-nonsense comparison that balances technical details with practical experience. So, whether you’re hunting down a budget secondary camera or are an enthusiast curious about compact options from Sony’s lineup, this article is written with you in mind.

Let’s jump right in with a comprehensive look at what these cameras bring to the table - and where each might fit your photographic ambitions.

Size, Handling, and Ergonomics: Which One Fits Your Hands Better?

Back in 2009, Sony crafted the TX1 as an ultracompact camera that pushed the boundaries of portability without sacrificing some modern conveniences (like touchscreen control). Meanwhile, the W220 landed squarely in the “small sensor compact” category, with slightly chunkier proportions and traditional button control.

Take a peek below to see the physical size difference, which can meaningfully affect your grip and ease of use, especially for extended shooting sessions.

The Sony TX1 measures a svelte 94 x 58 x 17 mm and weighs around 142 grams, making it slim enough to slide into tight pockets or clutch bags. The W220 is slightly thicker at 95 x 57 x 22 mm and a hair heavier at 147 grams. That extra thickness translates to a more substantial grip for folks who find the TX1’s wafer-thin chassis fiddly or flimsy - a common complaint when handling ultracompacts.

One thing I appreciated about the TX1 was its touchscreen LCD, ahead of its time for 2009. It’s surprisingly responsive considering this is a budget model, making navigation through menus less frustrating than the usual club-for-thumbs button mashing on the W220. The W220 sticks to traditional physical buttons and lacks any touch interface, which may appeal to those who prefer tactile feedback or are touch-averse.

Still, both models suffer from cramped control layouts due to their size. On the TX1, the touchscreen helps compensate for minimal buttons, but I found the W220’s buttons reasonably placed, if a bit small for larger fingers. Neither camera offers custom buttons or dials for advanced shooters or quick setting changes.

For side-by-side visual comparison, here’s the top view of both cameras to highlight button placement and styling:

The TX1’s minimalist design with a central shutter release and zoom rocker keeps things clean - but at the cost of fewer direct controls. Meanwhile, the W220 packs in a few more buttons, including dedicated playback and scene mode access, which some users may prefer.

Pro Tip: If you’re going to use your camera one-handed often, the W220’s thicker body may feel more secure. However, if pocketability is your top priority, the TX1 is the clear club champion.

Sensor Technology and Image Quality: More Pixels or Smarter Sensor?

For anyone who cares about final image quality - which should be all of us - the heart of these cameras lies in their sensor design and processing pipeline. Despite similar sensor sizes, the TX1 and W220 use different sensor technologies that noticeably influence their real-world output.

See sensor size and specs comparison here:

Sony TX1 Sensor Rundown

• Type: BSI-CMOS (Backside-Illuminated CMOS)
• Size: 1/2.4” (6.104 x 4.578 mm)
• Resolution: 10 Megapixels (Max 3648x2736)
• ISO Range: 125 (min) to 3200 (max native)
• AA Filter: Yes

The TX1 boasts a BSI-CMOS sensor - a big deal for 2009 - that allows improved light gathering at smaller pixel sizes compared to the W220’s CCD. The backside illumination design collects more photons per pixel, promising better low-light performance and reduced noise.

Sony W220 Sensor Rundown

• Type: CCD (Charge-Coupled Device)
• Size: 1/2.3” (6.17 x 4.55 mm)
• Resolution: 12 Megapixels (Max 4000x3000)
• ISO Range: 80 (min) to 3200 (max native)
• AA Filter: Yes

The W220 offers a slightly larger sensor area but uses a CCD sensor, well-known for good color accuracy but generally higher noise and slower readout speeds. It pushes a higher resolution (12MP vs. 10MP) but beware that more pixels on a similar-sized sensor risk increased noise and softer results at base ISO.

Real-World Image Quality Assessment

In daylight conditions, both cameras deliver acceptable images that suit casual snapshots and holiday galleries. The W220’s images are slightly crisper due to higher resolution, but you’ll notice more digital sharpening artifacts if you pixel-peep.

Thanks to the TX1’s BSI-CMOS sensor, its images maintain better exposure latitude and cleaner tones under low light or indoor incandescent lighting. The TX1’s sensor also handles mixed lighting better, preserving details in shadows without too much noise.

In terms of color, the W220 leans a little warmer overall, offering pleasant, punchy JPGs straight out of the camera, whereas the TX1 tends to reproduce colors more neutrally.

Neither model supports RAW shooting, so all image quality listings here are baked into the cameras’ JPEG engines. For enthusiasts wanting post-processing flexibility, this is a limitation, but for budget point-and-shoot buyers, it’s par for the course.

You can see sample comparisons here, showing differences in detail and color rendition:

Sony TX1 front Sony TX1 screen back Sony W220 front Sony W220 screen back

Autofocus and Speed: Fast Enough for the Moments That Matter?

When it comes to snapping portraits or street scenes, autofocus performance can make or break your experience.

Neither camera offers advanced autofocus modes like phase-detection or subject tracking - they rely on contrast-detection AF with 9 focus zones. The TX1 does not provide continuous AF mode - just single AF, meaning the camera locks focus once before each shot, which can slow you down if your subject moves unpredictably. The W220's autofocus system offers a continuous shooting rate of 2 fps, but AF is also single-shot.

Both cameras lack face and eye detection; yes, this was pre-AI for compacts. This means you may need to half-press the shutter a little longer for accurate focus confirmation. The TX1’s touchscreen lets you tap the focus point, improving accuracy, which is a small but handy advantage.

Burst or continuous shooting: If sports or wildlife is your jam, neither camera will keep up. The TX1 lacks any continuous burst mode, while the W220’s 2fps shooting is barely enough for static or slow-moving subjects.

In practical shooting tests, I found the TX1 was slightly quicker to lock focus indoors and in low light thanks to the CMOS sensor's faster readout. The W220’s CCD sensor can struggle with hunt-and-peck AF in darker settings, leading to a few missed shots.

Design and Interface: Screen Size, Touch Tech, and Usability

The LCD screen is your window into composing and reviewing shots. Let’s compare these cameras’ displays side by side:

• Sony TX1: A 3” touchscreen with 230k-dot resolution.
• Sony W220: A 2.7” non-touchscreen with the same 230k-dot resolution.

While neither screen is particularly high-res by today’s standards, the TX1’s touchscreen ease of use feels surprisingly modern. You can quickly tap to focus, swipe through images, and navigate menus - helpful for casual photographers who dislike button jockeying.

The W220 screen is smaller, and menu navigation requires using buttons exclusively. For photographers used to manual control or needing quick scene changes, this might be somewhat annoying.

Both cameras lack any kind of electronic or optical viewfinder, making bright daylight framing a bit of an eyestrain if you prefer eye-level shooting.

Lens Specs and Performance: Versatility in Composition?

When you’re stuck with a fixed lens, every millimeter counts for your framing and creativity.

The W220's lens offers a slightly wider starting point at 30mm with a brighter f/2.8 aperture on the wide end. This is quite valuable for landscapes, street photography, or indoors where wider angles and lower light capabilities matter. However, it quickly narrows to f/7.1 at telephoto, limiting low-light performance in zoomed shots.

The TX1 covers a longer telephoto reach (140mm) but starts at 35mm, slightly tighter for group or landscape shots. Its aperture at f/3.5 wide and f/4.6 telephoto is moderately bright but not class-leading.

Both cameras feature optical image stabilization, though the TX1 uses “Optical SteadyShot," which performed marginally better in testing to keep handheld shots sharp at slower shutter speeds.

For macro enthusiasts, the W220 impresses with a closer minimum focus distance of just 5 cm versus the TX1’s 8 cm, meaning you can get in tighter for those detailed flower or insect shots.

Outdoor Durability: Weather Sealing and Build Quality

Neither the TX1 nor the W220 offers any weather sealing, dust or shock resistance, or freezeproof ratings. Both are delicate ultracompacts built for casual use rather than harsh environments.

If you’re after a vacation camera for the beach or hiking, pack them in a protective case and avoid exposure to moisture or dust.

Shooting in Different Photography Types: How Do These Cameras Perform?

To help you picture which camera suits your photographic style better, let’s break down the strengths and weaknesses across major genres:

Portrait Photography

• TX1: The 10MP BSI-CMOS sensor produces pleasing skin tones with decent dynamic range. Touchscreen focus point selects eye-level subjects quickly, though no face detection hinders autofocus speed for candid portraits. The longer 140mm focal length produces a nice background compression, but the maximum aperture limits creamy bokeh.
• W220: 12MP resolution aids details and cropping. Wider 30mm focal length helps for group portraits in tight spaces, but f/7.1 telephoto here makes subject separation tricky. The lack of touchscreen and face detection means slower focusing.

Landscape Photography

• TX1: Limited to 35mm wide, which is reasonable but not ultrawide. Better high ISO allows handheld shooting at dusk. BSI-CMOS aids better shadow detail, though 10MP resolution isn’t jaw-dropping.
• W220: Slightly wider 30mm coverage is welcome, and 12MP allows larger prints. However, slower CCD sensor can struggle with noise and highlight clipping. Macro mode at 5cm is nice for close flora shots on trails.

Wildlife Photography

• Both are underpowered here. Slow contrast AF, lack of continuous focus tracking, and low burst rates make wildlife shots more of a waiting game.
• The TX1’s longer 140mm reach may be marginally advantageous, but still inadequate for fast-moving animals.

Sports Photography

• Neither camera can sustain fast frame rates or track subjects cleanly.
• The W220’s 2fps burst works for very casual action shots but expect many misses.
• The lack of manual exposure modes limits the ability to freeze motion reliably.

Street Photography

• Both compact bodies fit street shooting niches.
• The TX1’s discreet ultracompact size and touchscreen focusing make it a bit more candid-friendly.
• W220’s wider 30mm lens aids environmental storytelling but sacrifices pocketability.

Macro Photography

• W220 wins with 5cm macro focusing distance, making close-ups punchier.
• TX1’s 8cm minimum focus distance restricts delicate detail capture somewhat.

Night and Astro Photography

• Neither camera excels here.
• The TX1’s better high ISO performance and optical stabilization improve handheld night shots.
• Long exposures limited due to lack of manual exposure control; slowest shutter speed is 1 or 2 seconds only.

Video Capabilities

• TX1: Records HD video at 1280x720p at 30 fps, a nice plus for its generation. No external microphone or headphone ports limit audio quality control.
• W220: Max video is 640x480 VGA at 30 fps, less useful for serious video.
• Neither supports 4K or slow motion.

Travel Photography

• Both lightweight and portable, but the TX1’s slim profile and touchscreen make it better suited for quick photo grabs on the go.
• Battery life info is unavailable, but low-power ultracompacts typically require extra batteries for overseas trips.

Professional Work

• Neither camera targets pro workflows: no RAW output, no external flash, and limited control make them amateur devices.
• Ideal only as backup cameras or for casual documentation.

Build Quality, Battery, and Connectivity

Neither camera boasts rugged construction or environmental resistance, so handle carefully.

Battery life details are scarce (typical of compacts) but expect moderate range requiring spare batteries.

For connections:

• TX1: USB 2.0, HDMI out for easy TV viewing, but no wireless features.
• W220: USB 2.0 only, no HDMI or wireless.

Putting It All Together: A Side-by-Side Scorecard

After spending days shooting identical scenes on both cameras in various scenarios, I assembled a performance summary based on image quality, ease of use, and feature set.

And to give you more context on each genre:

The Bottom Line: Who Should Buy Each Camera?

Why You Might Choose the Sony TX1

• You value ultracompact, pocketable design with a sleek glass-and-metal finish.
• You want a modern touchscreen for easier focusing and menu navigation.
• You prefer the BSI-CMOS sensor’s superior low light and cleaner image output.
• You want HD 720p video capabilities for casual filming.
• You like some telephoto reach up to 140mm for portraits or modest wildlife.
• You’re ready to accept no RAW format or advanced manual controls at this price point.

In short: The TX1 suits casual enthusiasts and travelers who want a stylish, easy-to-use camera with better low-light performance and HD video.

Why You Might Choose the Sony W220

• You want slightly higher resolution (12MP) for cropping or larger prints.
• You appreciate the wider 30mm lens start for landscapes and tighter indoor shots.
• You want macro shots at close 5cm focus distance.
• You prefer more traditional physical buttons over touchscreen.
• You want a lower price point (approx. $160 new vs. $350 for TX1).
• You can live without HD video and prefer VGA quality video.

In short: The W220 is a budget-friendly option for casual photographers who prize resolution, wider angles, and close macro shooting over modern touchscreen or HD video.

Where Neither Camera Excels

• Serious sports or wildlife shooters will find sluggish AF and low burst rates frustrating.
• Professional users will miss RAW support and manual exposure controls.
• No weather sealing means careful handling in challenging environments.

Final Thoughts: Which One Would I Pack?

If I needed a compact, lightweight camera for casual everyday shooting with solid image quality, especially in less-than-perfect light, I’d go for the Sony TX1. Its touchscreen interface and HD video offer a bit of future-proofing, and the BSI-CMOS sensor yielded noticeably better images during my tests.

However, if your budget is tight, and you prioritize a wider-angle lens and macro capabilities over sleek design, the Sony W220 holds its ground as a solid entry-level compact with quality stills and a familiar button layout.

At the end of the day, your choice boils down to what matters most in your shooting style and budget. Both cameras reflect Sony’s drive to pack useful features into compact housings - just with different compromises and strengths.

I hope this detailed comparison helps you cut through the specs and marketing noise to pick the best fit for your photography. Feel free to ask about testing methods or real-world results - after testing thousands of cameras, I’m always happy to share practical nuggets that go beyond spec sheets!

Happy shooting!