Canon 200D versus Olympus E-M5 II
The Canon EOS 200D (called Canon SL2 in some regions) and the Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark II are two digital cameras that were officially introduced, respectively, in June 2017 and February 2015. The 200D is a DSLR, while the E-M5 II is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera. The cameras are based on an APS-C (200D) and a Four Thirds (E-M5 II) 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-M5 II
An illustration of the physical size and weight of the Canon 200D and the Olympus E-M5 II 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. If you prefer, you can also use the toggle button to switch to a comparison in percentage terms (in this case, the camera on the left side – the 200D – represents the basis for the calculations 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-M5 II is notably smaller (7 percent) than the Canon 200D. However, the E-M5 II is slightly heavier (4 percent) than the 200D. It is noteworthy in this context that the E-M5 II 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-M5 II). Mirrorless cameras, such as the E-M5 II, 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-M5 II (⇒ lft)||4.9 in||3.3 in||1.8 in||16.5 oz||310||YES||2015||1,099||latest||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-M10 II (⇒ lft | rgt)||4.7 in||3.3 in||1.9 in||13.8 oz||320||no||2015||799||discont.||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-M1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.1 in||3.7 in||2.5 in||17.5 oz||350||YES||2013||1,399||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 50 percent) than the E-M5 II, 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-M5 II
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. Moreover, a large sensor camera will give the photographer more control over depth-of-field in the image and, thus, the ability to better isolate a subject from the background. On the downside, larger sensors tend to be associated with larger, more expensive camera bodies and lenses.
Of the two cameras under consideration, the Canon 200D features an APS-C sensor and the Olympus E-M5 II a Four Thirds sensor. The sensor area in the E-M5 II 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-M5 II offers a 4:3 aspect.
With 24MP, the 200D offers a higher resolution than the E-M5 II (15.9MP), but the 200D has marginally smaller individual pixels (pixel pitch of 3.72μm versus 3.76μm for the E-M5 II). However, the 200D is a somewhat more recent model (by 2 years and 4 months) than the E-M5 II, and its sensor might have benefitted from technological advances during this time that enhance the light gathering capacity of its pixels.
Unlike the 200D, the E-M5 II has the capacity to capture high quality composite images (40MP) by combining multiple shots after shifting its sensor by miniscule distances. This multi-shot, pixel-shift mode is most suitable for photography of stationary objects (landscapes, studio scenes).
For most cameras, data on sensor performance has been reported by DXO Mark. This service determines an overall sensor rating, as well as sub-scores for low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports"), dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), and color depth ("DXO Portrait"). Of the two cameras under review, the 200D has a notably higher overall DXO score than the E-M5 II (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, 0.9 EV in additional dynamic range, and 0.3 stops in additional low light sensitivity. The table below summarizes the physical sensor characteristics and sensor quality findings and compares them across a set of similar cameras.
|Canon 200D (⇒ rgt)||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||23.6||13.4||1041||79|
|Olympus E-M5 II (⇒ lft)||Four Thirds||15.9||4608||3456||1080/60p||23.0||12.5||842||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-M10 II (⇒ lft | rgt)||Four Thirds||15.9||4608||3456||1080/60p||23.1||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-M1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Four Thirds||15.9||4608||3456||1080/30p||23.0||12.7||757||73|
|Olympus E-M5 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Four Thirds||15.9||4608||3456||1080/60i||22.8||12.3||826||71|
Many modern cameras are not only capable of taking still images, but can also record movies. Both cameras under consideration are equipped with sensors that have a sufficiently high read-out speed for moving images, and both provide the same movie specifications (1080/60p).
Feature comparison: Canon 200D vs Olympus E-M5 II
Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. For example, the E-M5 II 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-M5 II along with similar information for a selection of comparators. The full specs-sheets can be found in the camera manual or, 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-M5 II (⇒ lft)||2360||no||3.0||1037||swivel||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-M10 II (⇒ lft | rgt)||2360||no||3.0||1040||tilting||YES||4000||8.0||5.8||YES|
|Olympus E-M10 (⇒ lft | rgt)||1440||no||3.0||1037||tilting||YES||4000||8.0||5.8||YES|
|Olympus E-M1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||2360||no||3.0||1037||tilting||YES||8000||10.0||no||YES|
|Olympus E-M5 (⇒ lft | rgt)||1440||no||3.0||610||tilting||YES||4000||9.0||no||YES|
Both the 200D and the E-M5 II are current models that good online retailers will have in stock. You can check the latest prices, for example, at amazon. The E-M5 II replaced the earlier Olympus E-M5, while the 200D followed on from the Canon 100D.
Review summary: Canon 200D vs Olympus E-M5 II
So what is the bottom line? Is the Canon 200D better than the Olympus E-M5 II or vice versa? 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 image quality: Scores markedly higher (6 points) in the DXO overall assessment.
- More dynamic range: Captures a larger spectrum of light and dark details (0.9 EV of extra DR).
- Brighter framing: Features an optical viewfinder for clear, lag-free composition.
- Longer lasting: Can take more shots (650 versus 310) 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 (50 percent cheaper at launch).
- More modern: Reflects 2 years and 4 months of technical progress since the E-M5 II launch.
Advantages of the Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark II:
- High quality composites: Can combine several shots after pixel-shifting its sensor.
- 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 February 2015).
If the number of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the match-up finishes in a tie (8 points each). 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 specs-based evaluation of cameras is instructive in revealing their potential as photographic tools, it remains incomplete and does no justice, for example, to the way the 200D or the E-M5 II handle or perform in practice. User reviews, such as those found at amazon, can sometimes inform about these issues, but such feedback is often incomplete, inconsistent, and biased. This is why hands-on reviews by experts are important. 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-M5 II (⇒ lft)||HiRec||81/100 Silver||5/5||4.5/5||5/5||2015||1,099||latest||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-M10 II (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||80/100 Silver||5/5||5/5||5/5||2015||799||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-M10 (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||80/100 Gold||5/5||4.5/5||5/5||2014||699||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-M1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||84/100 Gold||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||2013||1,399||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-M5 (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||80/100 Gold||4.5/5||5/5||5/5||2012||1,299||discont.||check|
The review scores listed above should be treated with care, though. The ratings were established in reference to similarly priced cameras that were available in the market at the time of the review. A score, therefore, has to be seen in close connection to the price and market introduction time of the camera, and comparisons of ratings among very different cameras or across long time periods have little meaning. Also, kindly note that some of the listed sites have over time developped their review approaches and their reporting style.
Other camera comparisons
Did this review help to inform your camera decision process? If you would like to see a different side-by-side camera review, just make a corresponding selection in the search boxes below. An an alternative, you can also directly jump to any one of the listed comparisons that were previously generated by the CAM-parator tool. If you do not see the camera that you are looking for, please send me an email, and I will try to locate and add the respective data to the application.
- Canon 1D vs Canon 5D Mark III
- Canon 1Ds vs Sony A5000
- Canon 200D vs Canon SX60
- Canon 200D vs Leica X Typ 113
- Canon G5 X vs Canon 5DS R
- Canon M10 vs Fujifilm X30
- Leica D-LUX Typ 109 vs Fujifilm X-A5
- Nikon D5300 vs Olympus E-M1 II
- Olympus E-PL9 vs Pentax K-3 II
- Panasonic GX80 vs Olympus E-P2
- Sony NEX-6 vs Sony NEX-7
- Sony RX100 V vs Panasonic FZ2500