Canon 200D versus Olympus E-M1
The Canon EOS 200D (called Canon SL2 in some regions) and the Olympus OM-D E-M1 are two digital cameras that were revealed to the public, respectively, in June 2017 and September 2013. The 200D is a DSLR, while the E-M1 is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera. The cameras are based on an APS-C (200D) and a Four Thirds (E-M1) sensor. The Canon has a resolution of 24 megapixel, whereas the Olympus provides 15.9 MP. Read on to find out how these two cameras compare with respect to their size, their sensors, their features, and their reception by expert reviewers.
Body comparison: Canon 200D vs Olympus E-M1
An illustration of the physical size and weight of the Canon 200D and the Olympus E-M1 is provided in the side-by-side display below. Three consecutive perspectives from the front, the top, and the back are presented. All size dimensions are rounded to the nearest millimeter. You can also use the toggle button to switch to a percentage comparison if you prefer that the measures are being expressed in relative terms (in this case, the camera on the left – the 200D – represents the basis or 100 percent across all the size and weight measures).
If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Olympus E-M1 is notably larger (8 percent) than the Canon 200D. Moreover, the E-M1 is markedly heavier (10 percent) than the 200D. It is noteworthy in this context that the E-M1 is splash and dust-proof, while the 200D does not feature any corresponding weather-sealing.
The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete since they do not consider the interchangeable lenses that both of these cameras require. A larger imaging sensor will tend to go along with bigger and heavier lenses, although exceptions exist. You can find an overview of optics for the two cameras in the Canon EF Lens Catalog (200D) and the Micro Four Thirds Lens Catalog (E-M1). Mirrorless cameras, such as the E-M1, have moreover the advantage that they can use many lenses from other systems via adapters, as they have a relatively short flange to focal plane distance.
The table below summarizes the key physical specs of the two cameras alongside a broader set of comparators. If you want to switch the focus of the display and review another camera pair, just select a new right or left comparator from among the camera models in the table. Alternatively, you can also move across to the CAM-parator tool and choose from the broad selection of possible camera comparisons there.
|Camera Body Specifications
|Canon 200D (⇒ rgt)||4.8 in||3.7 in||2.8 in||16.0 oz||650||no||2017||549||latest||check|
|Olympus E-M1 (⇒ lft)||5.1 in||3.7 in||2.5 in||17.5 oz||350||YES||2013||1,399||discont.||check|
|Canon 2000D (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.1 in||4.0 in||3.1 in||16.8 oz||500||no||2018||449||latest||check|
|Canon G9 X Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||3.9 in||2.3 in||1.2 in||7.3 oz||235||no||2017||529||latest||check|
|Canon 800D (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.2 in||3.9 in||3.0 in||18.8 oz||600||no||2017||749||latest||check|
|Canon 77D (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.2 in||3.9 in||3.0 in||19.0 oz||600||no||2017||899||latest||check|
|Canon M100 (⇒ lft | rgt)||4.3 in||2.6 in||1.4 in||10.7 oz||295||no||2017||499||latest||check|
|Canon 80D (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.5 in||4.1 in||3.1 in||25.8 oz||960||YES||2016||1,199||latest||check|
|Canon M5 (⇒ lft | rgt)||4.6 in||3.5 in||2.4 in||15.1 oz||295||no||2016||979||latest||check|
|Canon 750D (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.2 in||4.0 in||3.1 in||19.6 oz||440||no||2015||749||discont.||check|
|Canon 100D (⇒ lft | rgt)||4.6 in||3.6 in||2.7 in||14.4 oz||380||no||2013||549||discont.||check|
|Nikon D3400 (⇒ lft | rgt)||4.9 in||3.9 in||3.0 in||15.7 oz||1200||no||2016||499||latest||check|
|Olympus E-M1 II (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.3 in||3.6 in||2.6 in||20.2 oz||440||YES||2016||1,999||latest||check|
|Olympus E-M5 II (⇒ lft | rgt)||4.9 in||3.3 in||1.8 in||16.5 oz||310||YES||2015||1,099||latest||check|
|Olympus E-M10 (⇒ lft | rgt)||4.7 in||3.2 in||1.8 in||14.0 oz||320||no||2014||699||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-P5 (⇒ lft | rgt)||4.8 in||2.7 in||1.5 in||14.8 oz||330||no||2013||999||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-M5 (⇒ lft | rgt)||4.8 in||3.5 in||1.7 in||15.0 oz||360||YES||2012||1,299||discont.||check|
The price is, of course, an important factor in any camera decision. The listed launch prices provide an indication of the market segment that the manufacturer of the cameras have been targeting. The 200D was launched at a markedly lower price (by 61 percent) than the E-M1, which puts it into a different market segment. Usually, retail prices stay at first close to the launch price, but after several months, discounts become available. Later in the product cycle and, in particular, when the replacement model is about to appear, further discounting and stock clearance sales often push the camera price considerably down. Then, after the new model is out, very good deals can frequently be found on the pre-owned market.
Sensor comparison: Canon 200D vs Olympus E-M1
The size of the imaging sensor is a crucial determinant of image quality. All other things equal, a large sensor will have larger individual pixel-units that offer better low-light sensitivity, wider dynamic range, and richer color depth than smaller pixels in a sensor of the same technological generation. Furthermore, a large sensor camera will give the photographer more possibilities to use shallow depth-of-field in order to isolate a subject from the background. On the downside, larger sensors tend to be more expensive and lead to bigger and heavier cameras and lenses.
Of the two cameras under consideration, the Canon 200D features an APS-C sensor and the Olympus E-M1 a Four Thirds sensor. The sensor area in the E-M1 is 32 percent smaller. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 1.6 and 2.0. The sensor in the 200D has a native 3:2 aspect ratio, while the one in the E-M1 offers a 4:3 aspect.
With 24MP, the 200D offers a higher resolution than the E-M1 (15.9MP), but the 200D has marginally smaller individual pixels (pixel pitch of 3.72μm versus 3.76μm for the E-M1). However, the 200D is a somewhat more recent model (by 3 years and 9 months) than the E-M1, and its sensor might have benefitted from technological advances during this time that enhance the light gathering capacity of its pixels. Coming back to sensor resolution, it should be mentioned that the E-M1 has no anti-alias filter installed, so that it can capture all the detail its sensor resolves.
Consistent information on actual sensor performance is available from DXO Mark for most cameras. This service is based on lab testing and assigns an overall score to each camera sensor, as well as ratings for dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), color depth ("DXO Portrait"), and low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports"). Of the two cameras under review, the 200D has a notably higher overall DXO score than the E-M1 (overall score 6 points higher), which gives it an advantage in terms of imaging quality. This advantage is based on 0.6 bits higher color depth, 0.7 EV in additional dynamic range, and 0.5 stops in additional low light sensitivity. The adjacent table reports on the physical sensor characteristics and the outcomes of the DXO sensor quality tests for a sample of comparator-cameras.
|Canon 200D (⇒ rgt)||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||23.6||13.4||1041||79|
|Olympus E-M1 (⇒ lft)||Four Thirds||15.9||4608||3456||1080/30p||23.0||12.7||757||73|
|Canon 2000D (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/30p||..||..||..||..|
|Canon G9 X Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||1-inch||20.0||5472||3648||1080/60p||21.9||12.5||522||65|
|Canon 800D (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||..||..||..||..|
|Canon 77D (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||23.6||13.3||971||78|
|Canon M100 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||23.5||12.9||1272||78|
|Canon 80D (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||23.6||13.2||1135||79|
|Canon M5 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||23.4||12.4||1262||77|
|Canon 750D (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||22.7||12.0||919||71|
|Canon 100D (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||17.9||5184||3456||1080/30p||21.8||11.3||843||63|
|Nikon D3400 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||24.8||13.9||1192||86|
|Olympus E-M1 II (⇒ lft | rgt)||Four Thirds||20.2||5184||3888||4K/30p||23.7||12.8||1312||80|
|Olympus E-M5 II (⇒ lft | rgt)||Four Thirds||15.9||4608||3456||1080/60p||23.0||12.5||842||73|
|Olympus E-M10 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Four Thirds||15.9||4608||3456||1080/30p||22.8||12.3||884||72|
|Olympus E-P5 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Four Thirds||15.9||4608||3456||1080/30p||22.8||12.4||895||72|
|Olympus E-M5 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Four Thirds||15.9||4608||3456||1080/60i||22.8||12.3||826||71|
Many modern cameras cannot only take still pictures, but also record videos. Both cameras under consideration have a sensor with sufficiently fast read-out times for moving pictures, but the 200D provides a higher frame rate than the E-M1. It can shoot video footage at 1080/60p, while the Olympus is limited to 1080/30p.
Feature comparison: Canon 200D vs Olympus E-M1
Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. For example, the E-M1 has an electronic viewfinder (2360k dots), while the 200D has an optical one. Both systems have their advantages, with the electronic viewfinder making it possible to project supplementary shooting information into the framing view, whereas the optical viewfinder offers lag-free viewing and a very clear framing image. The adjacent table lists some of the other core features of the Canon 200D and Olympus E-M1 along with similar information for a selection of comparators. If you need more detail on the specs, you can find comprehensive listings, for example, in the dpreview camera hub.
|Canon 200D (⇒ rgt)||optical||no||3.0||1040||swivel||YES||4000||5.0||9.8||no|
|Olympus E-M1 (⇒ lft)||2360||no||3.0||1037||tilting||YES||8000||10.0||no||YES|
|Canon 2000D (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||3.0||920||fixed||no||4000||3.0||9.2||no|
|Canon G9 X Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||no||no||3.0||1040||fixed||YES||2000||8.2||6||YES|
|Canon 800D (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||3.0||1040||swivel||YES||4000||6.0||12||no|
|Canon 77D (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||3.0||1040||swivel||YES||4000||6.0||12||no|
|Canon M100 (⇒ lft | rgt)||no||no||3.0||1040||tilting||YES||4000||6.1||5||no|
|Canon 80D (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||3.0||1040||swivel||YES||8000||7.0||12||no|
|Canon M5 (⇒ lft | rgt)||2360||no||3.2||1620||tilting||YES||4000||9.0||5||no|
|Canon 750D (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||3.0||1040||swivel||YES||4000||5.0||12||no|
|Canon 100D (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||3.0||1040||fixed||YES||4000||4.9||9.4||no|
|Nikon D3400 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||3.0||921||fixed||no||4000||5.0||7||no|
|Olympus E-M1 II (⇒ lft | rgt)||2360||no||3.0||1037||swivel||YES||8000||18.0||no||YES|
|Olympus E-M5 II (⇒ lft | rgt)||2360||no||3.0||1037||swivel||YES||8000||10.0||no||YES|
|Olympus E-M10 (⇒ lft | rgt)||1440||no||3.0||1037||tilting||YES||4000||8.0||5.8||YES|
|Olympus E-P5 (⇒ lft | rgt)||no||no||3.0||1037||tilting||YES||8000||9.0||7||YES|
|Olympus E-M5 (⇒ lft | rgt)||1440||no||3.0||610||tilting||YES||4000||9.0||no||YES|
The 200D is a current model that online retailers, such as amazon, will have in stock. In contrast, the E-M1 has been discontinued (but it can be found pre-owned on eBay). As a replacement in the same line of cameras, the E-M1 was succeeded by the Olympus E-M1 II.
Review summary: Canon 200D vs Olympus E-M1
So how do things add up? Which of the two cameras – the Canon 200D or the Olympus E-M1 – has the upper hand? Below is a summary of the relative strengths of each of the two contestants.
Arguments in favor of the Canon EOS 200D:
- More detail: Offers more megapixels (24 vs 15.9MP) with a 25% higher linear resolution.
- Better moiré control: Has an anti-alias filter to avoid artificial patterns to appear in images.
- Better image quality: Scores markedly higher (6 points) in the DXO overall assessment.
- More dynamic range: Captures a larger spectrum of light and dark details (0.7 EV of extra DR).
- Better low-light sensitivity: Requires less light for good images (0.5 stops ISO advantage).
- Better video: Provides higher movie framerates (1080/60p versus 1080/30p).
- Brighter framing: Features an optical viewfinder for clear, lag-free composition.
- More flexible LCD: Has swivel screen for odd-angle shots in portrait or landscape orientation.
- Longer lasting: Can take more shots (650 versus 350) on a single battery charge.
- Easier fill-in: Is equipped with a small onboard flash to brighten deep shadow areas.
- More affordable: Was introduced into a lower priced category (61 percent cheaper at launch).
- More modern: Reflects 3 years and 9 months of technical progress since the E-M1 launch.
Advantages of the Olympus OM-D E-M1:
- Maximized detail: Lacks an anti-alias filter to exploit the sensor's full resolution potential.
- More framing info: Has an electronic viewfinder that displays shooting data.
- Faster shutter: Has higher mechanical shutter speed (8000/sec vs 4000/sec) to freeze action.
- Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (10 vs 5 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
- Better sealing: Is splash and dust sealed for shooting in inclement weather conditions.
- More legacy lens friendly: Can use many non-native lenses via adapters.
- Sharper images: Has stabilization technology build-in to reduce the impact of hand-shake.
- More heavily discounted: Has been around for much longer (launched in September 2013).
If the number of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the 200D is the clear winner of the match-up (12 : 8 points). However, the relative importance of the various individual camera aspects will vary according to personal preferences and needs, so that you might like to apply corresponding weights to the particular features before making a decision on a new camera.
In any case, while the comparison of technical specifications can provide a useful overview of the capabilities of different cameras, it says nothing about, for example, the handling, responsiveness, and overall imaging quality of the 200D and the E-M1 in practical situations. At times, user reviews, such as those published at amazon, address these issues in a useful manner, but such feedback is on many occasions incomplete, inconsistent, and unreliable. This is where reviews by experts come in. The table below summarizes the assessments of some of the best known camera review sites (cameralabs, dpreview, ephotozine, imaging-resource, photographyblog). You can find the full text of the reviews by clicking on the site logo in the table header.
|Canon 200D (⇒ rgt)||HiRec||78/100 Silver||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||2017||549||latest||check|
|Olympus E-M1 (⇒ lft)||HiRec||84/100 Gold||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||2013||1,399||discont.||check|
|Canon 2000D (⇒ lft | rgt)||reviewed||..||3.5/5||..||3.5/5||2018||449||latest||check|
|Canon G9 X Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||..||75/100||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||2017||529||latest||check|
|Canon 800D (⇒ lft | rgt)||..||80/100 Gold||4.5/5||4/5||4/5||2017||749||latest||check|
|Canon 77D (⇒ lft | rgt)||..||82/100 Silver||4.5/5||4.5/5||4/5||2017||899||latest||check|
|Canon M100 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Rec||..||4/5||..||3.5/5||2017||499||latest||check|
|Canon 80D (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||84/100 Silver||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||2016||1,199||latest||check|
|Canon M5 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Rec||82/100 Silver||4/5||4.5/5||4/5||2016||979||latest||check|
|Canon 750D (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||75/100||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||2015||749||discont.||check|
|Canon 100D (⇒ lft | rgt)||Rec||78/100 Gold||4/5||4/5||4/5||2013||549||discont.||check|
|Nikon D3400 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Rec||76/100||4/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||2016||499||latest||check|
|Olympus E-M1 II (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||85/100 Gold||4.5/5||5/5||4.5/5||2016||1,999||latest||check|
|Olympus E-M5 II (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||81/100 Silver||5/5||4.5/5||5/5||2015||1,099||latest||check|
|Olympus E-M10 (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||80/100 Gold||5/5||4.5/5||5/5||2014||699||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-P5 (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||78/100 Silver||4.5/5||4.5/5||5/5||2013||999||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-M5 (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||80/100 Gold||4.5/5||5/5||5/5||2012||1,299||discont.||check|
The above review scores should be interpreted with care, though. The assessments were made in relation to similar cameras of the same technological generation. A score, therefore, has to be seen in close connection to the price and market introduction time of the camera, and comparing ratings of very distinct cameras or ones that are far apart in terms of their release date have little meaning. Also, please note that some of the review sites have changed their methodology and reporting over time.
Other camera comparisons
Did this review help to inform your camera decision process? In case you would like to check on the differences and similarities of other camera models, just make your choice using the following search menu. There is also a set of direct links to comparison reviews that other users of the CAM-parator app explored. If you cannot find the camera you are interested in, kindly get in touch, and I will try to update the database with the necessary infos.
- Canon 77D vs Canon 1D Mark III
- Canon G1 X Mark III vs Leica X Typ 113
- Canon G7 X vs Fujifilm X70
- Canon M6 vs Canon 5D Mark III
- Canon M6 vs Canon 6D Mark II
- Nikon D1 vs Sony RX10 III
- Nikon D500 vs Olympus E-M10
- Nikon D7100 vs Nikon D700
- Nikon D800 vs Panasonic GX850
- Panasonic GX85 vs Sony A5100
- Sony A6300 vs Leica X-U Typ 113
- Sony A7S II vs Pentax K-70