Sony WX220 vs WX350: A Detailed Comparison for Everyday Photographers and Enthusiasts

When stepping into the realm of compact superzoom cameras, Sony has long held a strong position thanks to its blend of portability, decent image quality, and versatile zoom ranges. That’s why the Sony Cyber-shot WX220 and WX350 are such interesting contenders in this category, both announced around early 2014 but with distinct characteristics tailored for slightly different photographers.

Having spent years testing cameras - from entry-level point-and-shoots through to professional mirrorless bodies - I’ve grown to appreciate how subtle differences in specs and design translate into practical performance out in the field. This comparison will cover both models thoroughly - from sensor and lens performance, through ergonomics and features, to genre-specific usability - so you can choose the best camera for your photographic aspirations or everyday adventures.

Let’s dive in.

Size, Build, and Ergonomics: Which Compact Fits Your Hand Best?

Starting with physicality, size and handling remain crucial for choosing an ultracompact or small-sensor superzoom camera. Neither the WX220 nor WX350 are designed for heavy-duty professional use, but for travel, street, or casual shooting, portability often matters more than megapixels.

At 92 x 52 x 22 mm and a mere 121 grams, the Sony WX220 stakes a strong claim as an ultracompact model, perfect for slipping into pockets or small bags without noticing. The WX350, on the other hand, is a bit chunkier at 96 x 55 x 26 mm and 164 grams - still light, but noticeably larger and thicker. Those extra millimeters house a longer 20x zoom lens, a key differentiator we’ll explore.

From my hands-on experience, the WX220 excels at discreet or street photography simply because it is so unobtrusive - an advantage if you’re wary of drawing attention or want quick access without bulky gear. The WX350 feels a bit more substantial, which slightly improves grip and handling, though you’ll need to carry it more deliberately.

The WX350’s body houses a few more controls and a better thumb rest, but neither has articulated screens or touch capabilities, which is a drawback in terms of framing flexibility and intuitive control.

Comparing the top layouts:

Both cameras keep things simple with just the essentials: zoom toggle, shutter button, power switch, and a mode dial. The WX350’s controls feel a bit more tactile and better spaced. However, neither offers manual exposure or aperture priority modes - something enthusiasts looking for creative control will miss.

If you prioritize ultra-compact ease, grab the WX220. For a bit more handling comfort and zoom reach, the WX350 will serve better.

Sensor and Image Quality: Same Chip, Different Results?

Both cameras employ the same 1/2.3-inch back-illuminated CMOS sensor measuring 6.17 x 4.55 mm (~28mm² sensor area) with an 18-megapixel resolution. This sensor size is typical for compacts but impresses neither professional nor enthusiast photographers when it comes to dynamic range or noise control, especially beyond ISO 800.

Sony’s Bionz X processor handles image output on the WX220, but the WX350’s processor model isn’t explicitly stated, though likely similar or slightly updated given the later model number. Both provide effective noise reduction and image sharpening tailored to their sensors.

In practical terms, both cameras produce comparable image quality under bright daylight, delivering detail-rich images suitable for 8x10 prints or online use. But as soon as you push ISO or shadow recovery, limitations show - noise becomes a significant issue around ISO 1600, and tonal gradation suffers.

The WX350's extended zoom range - 25-500 mm equivalent - versus the WX220’s 25-250 mm is impressive on paper but comes at a cost in aperture. The WX350 maxes out at f/3.5-6.5, a stop slower than WX220’s f/3.3-5.9, leading to less light entering the sensor at full zoom. This can amplify noise and reduce autofocus responsiveness, especially in lower light, as the lens struggles more.

Color rendition is fairly accurate and pleasant on both models, with customizable white balance and skin-tone detection that works reasonably well for snapshots. But if you’re chasing professional-grade fidelity or RAW capture capability, neither is up to the task - they don’t support RAW files for flexible post-processing, a critical omission for enthusiasts.

For those who care about detailed image quality, it’s a wash at base ISO but expect slightly softer, noisier shots on the WX350 at telephoto extremes.

LCD and User Interface: Limited But Functional

Both cameras feature a 3-inch fixed LCD with similar 460k-dot resolution - good enough for composing most shots but lacking the vibrancy or clarity of higher-end models. Neither has touchscreen input or tilting mechanisms, which undercuts flexibility during unconventional shooting scenarios like low or high angle shots.

I often found myself struggling to frame precise compositions in bright daylight due to glare. While both cameras offer live view and basic on-screen info (histogram, exposure, focus confirmation), control customization is minimal. This simplicity is double-edged: great for casual shooters but limiting for users wanting more operational nuance.

Face detection autofocus on the WX220 and WX350 performs competently for identifying and tracking people, although neither supports animal eye AF or complex tracking modes. The WX220’s contrast-detection autofocus supports continuous AF better than the WX350, which only offers single AF - significant depending on your shooting style.

Autofocus and Burst Performance: Catching the Moment?

Autofocus systems on both cameras rely exclusively on contrast-detection, which is inherently slower and less predictive than hybrid or phase-detection systems found on some mirrorless competitors.

The WX220 offers continuous autofocus and face detection, allowing better tracking for moving subjects, making it friendlier for casual sports or kids-in-action photography. The WX350 limits this capability, offering only single AF but including face detection and tracking that’s good enough for steady scenes.

Both cameras feature a 10 fps continuous shooting rate, which is quite respectable for compacts. However, buffer size and image processing speed impose practical limits - burst modes usually last just a few frames before slowing down.

If wildlife or fast-action sports matter to you, the WX220’s responsiveness would edge out the WX350, though neither replaces a dedicated DSLR or mirrorless system for critical tracking or fast focusing.

Lens Performance and Versatility: Zoom and Aperture Trade-offs

Arguably, the defining feature separating these cameras is their zoom capabilities:

• Sony WX220: 10x optical zoom, 25-250 mm equivalent focal length, aperture range f/3.3-5.9
• Sony WX350: 20x optical zoom, 25-500 mm equivalent focal length, aperture range f/3.5-6.5

Doubling the zoom on the WX350 seems attractive for wildlife, sports, or travel photography requiring reach. But this extended range comes with the expected optical tradeoffs: narrower maximum apertures restrict light gathering, and image sharpness tends to drop off at the extreme telephoto end.

In my field tests, the WX220’s lens offered slightly better overall sharpness across zoom steps and better bokeh rendition at wider apertures - though neither lens can create creamy portrait blurs rivaling larger sensor systems.

Neither camera supports filter attachment or lens interchangeability, limiting creative flexibility. However, both cameras have optical image stabilization, essential for handholding longer focal lengths. Sony’s SteadyShot system helps deliver more stable shots on both, with noticeable benefit on the WX350 due to extended telephoto use.

Performance Across Key Photography Genres

How do these cameras handle real-world use cases? Here’s my take based on extensive shooting across diverse scenarios.

Sony WX220 front Sony WX220 screen back Sony WX350 front Sony WX350 screen back

Portrait Photography

Good skin tones, balanced exposure, and reliable face detection are critical here. Both cameras handle skin colors well in natural light, though the WX220’s slightly faster aperture helps create more subject-background separation. Bokeh is average but sufficient for casual portraits; don’t expect creamy, professional-level background blur.

Landscape Photography

Resolution and dynamic range come to the fore. Both cameras have the same sensor resolution, but limited dynamic range constrains dramatic landscapes with strong highlights or shadows. The WX220’s somewhat crisper optics and lower telephoto range suit wide scenic shots better, though the WX350’s extra zoom length adds flexibility for selective framing.

Neither model features weather sealing or rugged build, so carry protection for outdoor landscape expeditions.

Wildlife Photography

Telephoto reach can be a deciding factor here. The WX350’s 20x zoom is a strong advantage in framing distant birds or wildlife, but autofocus is slow and hunting is common in low light. Burst mode and AF tracking help, but image noise at long zoom and higher ISOs pose compromises. The WX220’s 10x zoom and better continuous AF make it more responsive but less suited for distant subjects.

Sports Photography

Fast autofocus and high frame rates matter most. Both claim 10 fps bursts, but buffer limitations restrict usability. The WX220’s continuous autofocus mode helps track athletes better than the WX350’s single AF. Neither camera is ideal for fast-paced sports but can capture casual moments decently.

Street Photography

Portability, discretion, and quick AF dominate. WX220’s ultra-compact size and fast AF tips the scales here. The WX350’s bigger size and zoom can be obtrusive, though zoom flexibility helps with candid shots at a distance.

Macro Photography

Neither camera offers specialized macro modes or extended close-focus capabilities. Minimal magnification (~5 cm closest focusing distance) is only suitable for casual close-ups, with both cameras performing similarly here.

Night and Astrophotography

High ISO noise and limited manual controls restrict long exposure creativity. Both work best with stable supports or flash. WX220’s slightly better ISO handling and image stabilization assist handheld low-light shots, but expect noisy images beyond ISO 800.

Video Capabilities

Both shoot 1080p Full HD video up to 60 fps with stereo audio, covering basic moviemaking needs. The WX220 supports MPEG-4 and AVCHD formats, while WX350 focuses on AVCHD. Neither has microphone inputs or advanced video features like 4K or log profiles.

Video stabilization is adequate, but neither can match in-body image stabilization found in higher-end Sony models. If video is more than an occasional requirement, I recommend dedicated cameras elsewhere.

Travel Photography

Here’s where both cameras shine differently. The WX220’s super compactness and light weight make it an effortless carry-on companion. The WX350 balances size with highly versatile zoom, useful for travel where you may encounter varied subjects and distances. Battery life favors the WX350 significantly - 470 shots versus WX220’s 210 shots - meaning fewer battery swaps on extended excursions.

Build Quality, Battery Life, and Storage

Neither camera is weather sealed or ruggedized, so be mindful in adverse conditions.

Battery life is substantial in the WX350 (470 shots) versus WX220 (210 shots). For travel or daylong shoots, this difference is tangible. Both cameras use proprietary Sony batteries - NP-BN for WX220, NP-BX1 for WX350 - readily available but not interchangeable.

Storage wise, both accept SD, SDHC, and SDXC cards plus Sony Memory Stick Pro Duo/Pro-HG Duo for backward compatibility - a handy feature but increasingly niche.

Connectivity includes built-in Wi-Fi and NFC on WX220, enabling quick sharing and remote control through smartphones. The WX350 lacks NFC, which is a minor drawback, but still offers Wi-Fi. No Bluetooth or GPS on either.

Overall Performance Scores and Practical Recommendations

Let’s summarize through a performance rating lens:

• Image Quality: Tie at base ISO; WX220 edges ahead at telephoto due to lens aperture
• Autofocus: WX220 superior for continuous AF and tracking
• Ergonomics & Size: WX220 wins for pocketability; WX350 better for handling and zoom versatility
• Battery Life: WX350 outperforms significantly
• Video: Comparable basic 1080p, minor format differences
• Connectivity: WX220 wins NFC; both have Wi-Fi
• Lens Reach: WX350 dominant with 20x zoom

Genre-specific analysis highlights:

• Portrait & Street: WX220 preferred
• Wildlife & Sports: WX350 favored due to zoom and battery, despite autofocus caveats
• Travel: Depends on preference - lightweight pocketability vs zoom versatility
• Macro & Night: Both limited; WX220 slightly better in noise control
• Video: Fairly equal, neither stellar

Final Thoughts: Which Sony Cyber-shot Is Right for You?

Choose the Sony WX220 if:

• You want an ultra-portable point-and-shoot that fits in your pocket everywhere
• You prioritize faster autofocus and responsiveness for street, portrait, or casual sports
• You shoot mostly in good light and want better image quality at telephoto zooms
• You prefer NFC connectivity and simpler, compact body design
• Battery life is less critical (you can manage quick charging or spare batteries)

Go with the Sony WX350 if:

• You need extensive zoom reach (25-500 mm) for wildlife, travel, or event shooting flexibility
• Longer battery life is important for extended outings or less frequent charging opportunities
• You don’t mind the slight size and weight increase for more versatile framing options
• Video recording at 1080p with standard formats fits your casual video needs
• You can accept slower autofocus performance and the tradeoffs on low light sharpness

A Final Note From My Experience

These two Sony Cyber-shot models reflect classic tradeoffs in the compact superzoom arena - a battle between size, zoom reach, and AF speed, under the constraints of small sensors. Neither camera will replace a dedicated interchangeable lens system for demanding photography, but both serve their niches well if expectations are set accordingly.

For quick, grab-and-go photography emphasizing portability and ease, I lean toward the WX220. If you crave zoom power and battery endurance for varied shooting scenarios, the WX350 is my recommendation.

Remember to pair these cameras with good quality memory cards and spare batteries to get the most from your shooting sessions.

Whether you prioritize lightness or zoom, these Sony models embody the convenience and capability that make compact superzooms enduringly popular - the perfect companions for life’s everyday and travel moments.

I hope this comparison helps you find the right Sony Cyber-shot for your needs. Happy shooting!