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 620
VS
Sensor area
21 mm²
Photosmart 32017 mm²
Photosmart 620- Area ratio
- 1.23:1
- Absolute difference
- 4 mm²
- Relative difference
- 23.4%
The Photosmart 320 has the larger sensor area. More area usually means greater light-gathering potential, though real image quality still depends on sensor architecture and generation.
Key specification differences
Photosmart 320MetricPhotosmart 620
2.1 MPEffective pixels2.1 MP
5.33 × 4Sensor4.8 × 3.6
3.19 µmPixel pitch2.87 µm
10.15 µm²Pixel area8.23 µm²
9.85 MP/cm²Pixel density12.15 MP/cm²
6.49Crop factor7.21
—Maximum video—
160 gWeight207 g
MultiMedia, Secure DigitalStorageMultiMedia, Secure Digital
AA (4) batteries (NiMH recommended)BatteryAA (4) batteries (NiMH recommended)
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 has the larger sensor area. The Photosmart 320 has the lighter body. The Photosmart 320 and Photosmart 620 have the same effective resolution. The Photosmart 320 and Photosmart 620 were both released in 2002. Also consider the lens system and subjects you shoot.
Reasons to choose Photosmart 620
Released in 2002, Photosmart 620 has about 17 mm² of sensor area, 2.1 MP effective resolution, and a 207 g body. Use these values to narrow the field, not as an overall image-quality score.