Updated (February 2011): Compare the Sony Cybershot DSC-W510 vs Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W330

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W330 vs Sony Cybershot W510

Winner
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W330

50

Sony Cybershot DSC-W510

48

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W330

Large screen
Screen size
3"
Really small
Size
Ultra compact (96×57×17 mm)
Thin
Thickness
0.7"
Light-weight
Weight
128 g
 

Reasons to buy the Sony Cybershot W510

Image stabilization
Image stabilization
  1. Digital
  2. Lens
Weight
Light-weight
119 g
Size
Really small
Super compact (96×54×20 mm)
Thickness
Thin
0.8"

galleries

Explore our gallery of 14 sample photos taken by the Sony Cybershot DSC-W510.
Explore our gallery of 43 sample photos taken by the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W330.

competitors

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W330 Competitors

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W350

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W350

Ultra compact

$163

Image stabilization Image stabilization
Movie format Higher resolution movies
Screen size Significantly smaller screen
Sony Cybershot W530

Sony Cybershot DSC-W530

Ultra compact

$160

Image stabilization Image stabilization
Weight Slightly lighter
Screen size Significantly smaller screen
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W830

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W830

Travel zoom

$118 - $130

Image stabilization Image stabilization
Movie format Higher resolution movies
Screen size Significantly smaller screen

Sony Cybershot DSC-W510 Competitors

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-WX5

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-WX5

Compact

$300

Movie format Higher resolution movies
Wide angle Better wide angle
Weight Heavier
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W310

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W310

Ultra compact

$139

Fastest shutter speed Much faster max shutter speed
Thickness Slightly thinner
Wide angle Worse wide angle
Canon PowerShot A2300 IS

Canon PowerShot A2300 IS

Compact

$230

Movie format Higher resolution movies
Fastest shutter speed Much faster max shutter speed
Wide angle Worse wide angle

discussion

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W330
Cyber-shot DSC-W330
Sony

Report a correction
Sony Cybershot DSC-W510
Cybershot W510
Sony

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments