Reasons to choose Compactline 203
Released in 2010, Compactline 203 has about 28 mm² of sensor area, 12 MP effective resolution, and a 104 g body. Use these values to narrow the field, not as an overall image-quality score.
Side-by-side comparison
Rollei Compactline 203
vs Rollei Compactline 320
VS
Sensor area
28 mm²
Compactline 20328 mm²
Compactline 320- Area ratio
- 1:1
- Absolute difference
- 0 mm²
- Relative difference
- 0%
The Compactline 203 and Compactline 320 have the same sensor area. Compare pixel density, sensor architecture, and release generation to understand likely image-quality differences.
Key specification differences
Compactline 203MetricCompactline 320
12 MPEffective pixels12 MP
6.08 × 4.56Sensor6.08 × 4.56
1.52 µmPixel pitch1.52 µm
2.31 µm²Pixel area2.31 µm²
43.28 MP/cm²Pixel density43.28 MP/cm²
5.69Crop factor5.69
—Maximum video—
104 gWeight114 g
SDHC, Secure DigitalStorageSDHC, Secure Digital
Li-Ion Li-ion batteryBatteryLi-Ion Li-ion battery
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 Compactline 203 and Compactline 320 have the same sensor area. The Compactline 203 has the lighter body. The Compactline 203 and Compactline 320 have the same effective resolution. The Compactline 203 and Compactline 320 were both released in 2010. Also consider the lens system and subjects you shoot.
Reasons to choose Compactline 320
Released in 2010, Compactline 320 has about 28 mm² of sensor area, 12 MP effective resolution, and a 114 g body. Use these values to narrow the field, not as an overall image-quality score.