Reasons to choose Photosmart 320
Released in 2002, Photosmart 320 has about 21 mm² of sensor area, 2.1 MP effective resolution, and a 160 g body. Use these values to narrow the field, not as an overall image-quality score.
Side-by-side comparison
HP Photosmart 320
vs HP Photosmart 612
VS
Sensor area
21 mm²
Photosmart 32021 mm²
Photosmart 612- Area ratio
- 1:1
- Absolute difference
- 0 mm²
- Relative difference
- 0%
The Photosmart 320 and Photosmart 612 have the same sensor area. Compare pixel density, sensor architecture, and release generation to understand likely image-quality differences.
These cameras were released 1 years apart. Consider sensor generation when comparing pixel metrics.
Key specification differences
Photosmart 320MetricPhotosmart 612
2.1 MPEffective pixels2.3 MP
5.33 × 4Sensor5.33 × 4
3.19 µmPixel pitch3.04 µm
10.15 µm²Pixel area9.27 µm²
9.85 MP/cm²Pixel density10.79 MP/cm²
6.49Crop factor6.49
—Maximum video—
160 gWeight227 g
MultiMedia, Secure DigitalStorageCompactFlash type I
AA (4) batteries (NiMH recommended)Battery4x AA
Amber marks the value that is generally preferable in this comparison context. It is not an overall camera score.
How to choose between these cameras
The Photosmart 320 and Photosmart 612 have the same sensor area. The Photosmart 320 has the lighter body. The Photosmart 612 has the higher effective resolution. The Photosmart 320 is the newer release. Also consider the lens system and subjects you shoot.
Reasons to choose Photosmart 612
Released in 2001, Photosmart 612 has about 21 mm² of sensor area, 2.3 MP effective resolution, and a 227 g body. Use these values to narrow the field, not as an overall image-quality score.