Sony W320 vs WX300: An Expert Deep Dive into Two Generations of Sony’s Compact Cameras

In the world of compact cameras - a battleground increasingly dominated by smartphones - Sony’s Cyber-shot line has long strived to squeeze meaningful value from small bodies. Today, we're pitting two of their more humble yet intriguing offerings against each other: the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W320, launched in 2010, and the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-WX300, unveiled three years later in 2013. At first glance, they inhabit different corners of Sony’s compact universe - the former an ultracompact, the latter a small sensor superzoom - yet both target everyday photographers seeking pocketable, easy-to-use cameras with a touch more punch than phone cameras of their respective eras.

Having personally handled, tested, and pushed these cameras through multiple photographic scenarios - and documented their quirks and strengths - I’m here to slice through marketing fluff and provide you with a no-nonsense, detailed comparison. We’ll examine how these cameras perform across diverse photography genres, their technical DNA, usability, and ultimately, which camera suites your photographic ambitions best.

Before we dive into specs and field tests, here’s a quick size and ergonomic primer to set the stage.

First Impressions: Size and Ergonomics Matter More Than You Think

Sony’s W320 is a model classic of ultra-portability. With physical dimensions just 93mm wide, 52mm tall, and a wafer-thin 17mm thickness, it slips unobtrusively into a pocket. Weighing only 117 grams, it’s featherlight and very discreet - perfect for street or travel photography when you want to keep things stealthy and save every ounce.

The WX300, on the other hand, adds a bit more heft (166 grams) and muscle (96 x 55 x 25 mm) to accommodate its superzoom lens and a larger battery. This results in a sturdier handfeel and a more substantial grip, but it’s not something you’ll forget is in your bag. This extra size definitely benefits usability, especially when holding the camera steady at long focal lengths or shooting for extended sessions.

If pure pocketability is your non-negotiable priority, the W320’s slender chassis will win your heart. But if you value better grip and control during active shooting, the WX300’s bulk is a worthwhile trade-off.

Unpacking the Design and Control Layout

Sony kept things fairly straightforward for both cameras - after all, they’re meant for casual shooters and enthusiasts craving simplicity. The W320’s top plate offers minimal physical controls - just a shutter release, power button, zoom rocker, and flash pop-up. This minimalist approach keeps the learning curve low but sacrifices quick manual adjustments.

By contrast, the WX300, as a compact superzoom, includes a few more tactile controls. The zoom rocker is broader and smoother, making lens travel easier to dial in when hunting for subjects at the telephoto end. The power button is distinct and well-placed, and although manual exposure modes are absent on both bodies, the WX300’s buttons map more intuitive access to functions like ISO and white balance customization.

Neither camera features rear touchscreens or tilting LCDs - a sign of their generation and price class - but the WX300’s screen is larger and sharper (3 inches at 460k dots versus W320’s 2.7 inches at 230k dots), a factor we'll explore in the display section.

Inside the Pixel Pit: Sensor and Image Quality

At the heart of any camera beats its sensor. Both cameras rely on 1/2.3-inch sensors, which - in 2024 - aren’t widely regarded as “professional,” but remain standard in many compact shooters due to the balance between cost, size, and image quality.

The W320 packs a 14-megapixel CCD sensor - a technology Sony used extensively back in the day. CCDs deliver pleasant color rendition and relatively low noise at base ISO, but they’re hamstrung by slower readouts, which impacts burst shooting and video.

By 2013, the WX300 embraced a more modern 18-megapixel BSI-CMOS sensor, delivering better light sensitivity and faster readouts thanks to back-illuminated architecture. The WX300’s sensor boasts a bit more resolution and critically, improved high-ISO performance with cleaner images in dim scenarios.

In practical terms, this means images straight out of the WX300 tend to exhibit greater dynamic range with more detail preserved in shadows and highlights - vital for landscapes, outdoor portraits, and tricky lighting. The W320 struggles more as ISO increases, with visible noise creeping in beyond ISO 400.

Handling, Interface, and Screen Usability

Both cameras have fixed rear LCD screens without any touch functionality. The W320’s 2.7-inch panel, at 230k dots, feels somewhat dim and underwhelming by today’s standards, making it challenging to preview precise focus or evaluate exposure in bright light. This is no surprise given the camera’s entry-level status and era.

The WX300 steps up with a 3-inch, higher-resolution (460k dots) LCD that’s brighter and more detailed. While it lacks touchscreen controls, its size and clarity bolster framing accuracy and menu navigation, which becomes particularly noticeable when shooting telephoto or video.

Neither model includes electronic viewfinders - a downside for users who prefer composing with the eye to shield from glare - but that reflects their compact, consumer-friendly design. For outdoor or bright conditions, I’d recommend a sunshade or supplemental accessory if you rely on the LCD.

Optical Zoom and Lens Capabilities: From Breadth to Reach

Sony engineered these cameras for different zoom ambitions. The W320 offers a modest 4x optical zoom, covering a 26mm to 105mm equivalent focal length. This range suits casual snapshots - wide enough for landscapes or group photos; telephoto adequate for moderate portraits but far from extreme zoom needs.

The WX300 crushes this with a 20x optical zoom spanning 25mm to 500mm equivalent. This massive reach lets you tap into distant subjects - think wildlife, sports, or architectural detail - from a safe or discreet distance. Having tested the WX300 extensively outdoors, I can attest to its surprising sharpness at longer focal lengths thanks in part to effective optical image stabilization.

One trade-off with the WX300’s lens is a smaller maximum aperture, dropping from f/3.5 at wide angle to f/6.5 fully zoomed in, which demands slower shutter speeds or higher ISOs in low light. The W320 starts brighter at f/2.7 and ends at f/5.7. While neither camera competes with DSLR-interchangeable lens brightness, the W320’s lens offers slightly better light gathering at the short end.

Autofocus and Shooting Speed: Patience vs. Performance

The W320 employs a contrast-detection autofocus system with 9 focus points and center-weighted metering, relying on single autofocus mode only. It aims at basic focal accuracy but can be sluggish and hunt in lower light, especially at telephoto focal lengths. Its continuous shooting speed maxes out at a crawlingly slow 1 frame per second - fine for snapping still moments, inadequate for action.

The WX300, although still lacking phase detection or hybrid AF, improves with face detection and AF tracking capabilities, assisting in keeping moving subjects focused. Sony increased its continuous shooting speed significantly to 10 frames per second, a real boon for wildlife or sports amateurs capturing fleeting action.

In real-world experience, the WX300’s autofocus feels more confident and peppy in mixed lighting, though it still doesn’t match faster mirrorless systems. The W320, meanwhile, is best suited for static subjects and leisurely shooting.

Flash and Low-Light Photography: Illumination Matters

Both models feature built-in flash units, but the W320’s flash reaches up to 4.8 meters, whereas the WX300’s effective range is slightly less at 4.3 meters. The WX300 includes a somewhat better automatic flash sync with slow-sync modes, helping balance ambient and flash exposure in dusk or indoor settings.

But neither camera excels in low-light scenarios due to sensor and lens constraints. The W320’s CCD sensor introduces noise heavily beyond ISO 400, making it less suitable for night scenes. The WX300’s BSI-CMOS and optical stabilization provide cleaner shots up to ISO 800 or 1600, but pushing beyond that reveals grainy images.

Notably, neither camera offers manual exposure modes, long shutter speeds beyond 1/1600 sec minimum, or customization like exposure bracketing - so creative night photography or high-precision control is limited.

Video Capabilities: How Do They Stack Up for Moving Pictures?

The W320 videos max out at 640 x 480 pixels resolution at 30fps, encoded in the relatively bulky Motion JPEG format. That’s effectively VGA quality, which feels obsolete by any modern standard - grainy, soft, and tightly compressed.

The WX300 jumps ahead with Full HD 1080p video at 60fps, encoded in the much more efficient AVCHD format, producing smooth footage with better color fidelity and detail.

Neither camera features microphone inputs, headphones, or advanced video control modes like manual focus or aperture control during recording, limiting appeal for serious videographers. However, for casual recording - family videos, quick social shares - the WX300 is noticeably more capable.

Battery and Storage: Staying Power When It Counts

Sony designed these cameras for easy portability, which often comes with battery life sacrifices.

The W320 uses the NP-BN1 battery and supports SD, SDHC, and Memory Stick Duo cards. Real-world battery life hovers around 200 shots per charge under moderate use - adequate but not exemplary.

The WX300 ups capacity with the NP-BX1 battery, offering reasonable longevity in the compact superzoom category - typically closer to 300 shots per charge, aided by a power-efficient processor and improved sensor technology.

Both cameras support a variety of memory card types with a single slot. Neither supports dual slots or faster storage options, reflecting their entry-level design.

Connectivity and Extra Features: A Look Beyond the Lens

The W320 essentially forgoes wireless connectivity - which in 2010 wasn’t unusual - but does sport a mini HDMI port for video playback on external screens.

The WX300, released when Wi-Fi was becoming more mainstream in cameras, includes built-in wireless connectivity, allowing image transfer and remote control, albeit limited compared to today’s standards. However, it lacks Bluetooth or NFC.

Neither camera offers GPS tagging or rugged environmental sealing, so outdoor photographers need to consider protective cases or supplementary gear depending on conditions.

How Do They Perform Across Photography Genres?

Sony W320 front Sony W320 screen back Sony WX300 front Sony WX300 screen back

Portraits: Skin Tone and Bokeh

The W320’s limited zoom range and smaller maximum aperture struggle with subject isolation. Coupled with a 14MP sensor with moderate resolution and no face/eye detection AF, portraits tend to be soft and flat under indoor or low-light conditions.

The WX300’s improved 18MP sensor, face detection, and superzoom lens, despite its slower aperture, can achieve tighter framing and better subject-background separation at telephoto range. The lack of manual aperture control caps shallow depth-of-field ability, but in good light, portraits look sharper and more vibrant.

Landscapes: Dynamic Range and Resolution

Here, the WX300 has an edge. Its back-illuminated CMOS sensor offers better dynamic range and higher resolution, enabling crisper landscape details and smoother tonal gradation from shadow to highlight. The W320’s CCD sensor and lower resolution limit ultimate image quality, and its lens’s narrower zoom range limits composition flexibility.

Neither camera is weather sealed, so cautious handling outdoors is advised.

Wildlife and Sports: Autofocus and Burst

The WX300’s 20x zoom and 10 fps burst make it a modest field kit for casual wildlife or sports. Autofocus tracking enhances hit rate on moving subjects. The W320’s slow 1 fps burst and basic AF center point, limited zoom, and slow response rule it out for these uses.

Street Photography: Discretion and Portability

W320 shines in street shooting scenarios: compact, light, and unobtrusive. Snapshots are quick, if not stunningly sharp. WX300 is a bit bulkier but still fairly portable, offering longer reach when you want to capture candid shots in bigger environments.

Macro: Close Focusing and Stabilization

The W320 offers a macro mode down to 4cm, enabling tight close-ups, but image stabilization is absent, so handheld macro shots can be shaky.

WX300 lacks a specified macro range but includes optical image stabilization, facilitating steadier close-ups, though minimum focusing distance is longer.

Low Light and Night Photography

The WX300’s better sensor and stabilization make it more suitable for nighttime scenes, though both cameras are limited due to sensor size and aperture ceiling.

Video: Casual Capture

WX300 firmly outpaces the older W320 in video quality, supporting Full HD at decent frame rates, while W320’s VGA video feels dated and grainy.

Travel Photography: Versatility and Battery

WX300’s extensive zoom range, improved battery, and connectivity lean towards a better all-in-one travel camera, while W320 wins for absolute portability and simplicity.

Professional Work: File Formats and Reliability

Neither camera supports RAW shooting, limiting post-processing flexibility. Both produce decent JPEGs for casual use but fall short for pros requiring high bit depth or workflow integration. Build quality reflects consumer-grade design without environmental sealing or ruggedness.

Performance Summary in Numbers

While neither camera was subject to scientific DxOMark testing, my experience ranks the WX300 clearly ahead for handling, image quality, zoom capability, and versatility. The W320 suits the lightweight, casual snapper on a budget.

Specialized Genre Scores

• Portraits: WX300 recommended
• Landscapes: WX300 preferred
• Wildlife/Sports: WX300 only viable choice
• Street: W320 ideal for absolute stealth
• Macro: WX300 better stabilization
• Night/Astro: WX300 modest edge
• Video: WX300 the only choice
• Travel: WX300 versatile, W320 ultraportable
• Professional Use: Neither ideal, but WX300 marginally better

Wrapping Up: Which One Should You Buy?

Both the Sony W320 and WX300 reflect Sony’s expertise in pocket-sized cameras, but target different users and needs.

• Choose the W320 if:

  • You crave the smallest, lightest camera possible.
  • Your priority is simple point-and-shoot functionality.
  • Budget is tight (~$270 new price reference).
  • You primarily shoot well-lit scenes or travel light.
  • Video capture is unimportant.

• Go for the WX300 if:

  • You want a versatile compact with massive zoom reach.
  • Better image quality, especially in varied lighting, is key.
  • You appreciate faster continuous shooting and face detection AF.
  • You want Full HD video capability.
  • You don’t mind slightly larger size and higher cost (~$330).
  • Wireless connectivity and improved LCD matter.

Final Thoughts: Practical Truths Behind Marketing

Both cameras eschew professional-grade controls, RAW capture, and rugged build in favor of simplicity and convenience. The WX300, launching three years later, reflects incremental progress in sensor tech and features, notably in zoom and video.

If you want cutting-edge compact performance today, even these cameras feel dated next to modern mirrorless or advanced compacts - with better sensors, touchscreens, RAW, and 4K video. Still, for a budget-oriented beginner or someone nostalgic for tried-and-true Cyber-shot ease, the W320 and WX300 each have their niche summits to claim.

Whether your workflow demands the reach and sharper pixels of the WX300, or you value low-profile portability of the W320 for candid snaps, I hope this head-to-head clarifies where your money and enthusiasm will find the most rewarding frame. As ever, I recommend trying hands-on if possible, since feel and intuitive use can make or break photographic joy.

Happy shooting!

All photos and performance analyses were made under controlled conditions with multiple shooting environments - from studio portraits to bright landscapes and dim interiors - to ensure the fullest appraisal of each camera’s capabilities.