Canon R5 vs Olympus E-M1 II

The Canon EOS R5 and the Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II are two enthusiast cameras that were revealed to the public, respectively, in July 2020 and September 2016. Both the Canon R5 and the E-M1 II are mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras that are based on a full frame (Canon R5) and a Four Thirds (E-M1 II) sensor. The Canon has a resolution of 44.8 megapixels, whereas the Olympus provides 20.2 MP.

Below is an overview of the main specs of the two cameras as a starting point for the comparison.

Headline Specifications

Canon R5		Olympus E-M1 II
Mirrorless system camera		Mirrorless system camera
Canon RF mount lenses		Micro Four Thirds lenses
44.8 MP, Full Frame Sensor		20.2 MP, Four Thirds Sensor
8k/30p Video		4K/30p Video
ISO 100-51,200 (50 - 102,400)		ISO 200-25,600
Electronic viewfinder (5760k dots)		Electronic viewfinder (2360k dots)
3.2 LCD, 2100k dots		3.0 LCD, 1037k dots
Swivel touchscreen		Swivel touchscreen
10 shutter flaps per second		18 shutter flaps per second
In-body stabilization		In-body stabilization
Weathersealed body		Weathersealed body
320 shots per battery charge		440 shots per battery charge
138 x 98 x 88 mm, 738 g		134 x 91 x 67 mm, 574 g

Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Canon EOS R5 and the Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II? Which one should you buy? Read on to find out how these two cameras compare with respect to their body size, their imaging sensors, their shooting features, their input-output connections, and their reception by expert reviewers.

Body comparison

An illustration of the physical size and weight of the Canon R5 and the Olympus E-M1 II is provided in the side-by-side display below. The two cameras are presented according to their relative size. Three successive views from the front, the top, and the rear are shown. All width, height and depth dimensions are rounded to the nearest millimeter.

If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Olympus E-M1 II is notably smaller (10 percent) than the Canon R5. Moreover, the E-M1 II is markedly lighter (22 percent) than the Canon R5. In this context, it is worth noting that both cameras are splash and dust-proof and can, hence, be used in inclement weather conditions or harsh environments.

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. Hence, you might want to study and compare the specifications of available lenses in order to get the full picture of the size and weight of the two camera systems.

Concerning battery life, the Canon R5 gets 320 shots out of its LP-E6NH battery, while the E-M1 II can take 440 images on a single charge of its BLH-1 power pack. The power pack in the Canon R5 can be charged via the USB port, so that it is not always necessary to take the battery charger along when travelling.

The following table provides a synthesis of the main physical specifications of the two cameras and other similar ones. If you would like to visualize and compare a different camera combination, you can navigate to the CAM-parator app and make your selection from a broad list of cameras there.

Body Specifications

		Camera Model	Camera Width	Camera Height	Camera Depth	Camera Weight	Battery Life	Weather Sealing	Camera Launch	Launch Price (USD)	Street Price
1.		Canon R5	138 mm	98 mm	88 mm	738 g	320	Y	Jul 2020	3,899
2.		Olympus E-M1 II	134 mm	91 mm	67 mm	574 g	440	Y	Sep 2016	1,999
3.		Canon R6	138 mm	98 mm	88 mm	680 g	360	Y	Jul 2020	2,499
4.		Nikon Z7 II	134 mm	101 mm	70 mm	705 g	420	Y	Oct 2020	2,999
5.		Nikon Z7	134 mm	101 mm	67 mm	675 g	330	Y	Aug 2018	3,399
6.		Olympus E-M1 III	134 mm	91 mm	69 mm	580 g	420	Y	Feb 2020	1,799
7.		Olympus E-M1	130 mm	94 mm	63 mm	497 g	350	Y	Sep 2013	1,399
8.		Panasonic S1R	149 mm	110 mm	97 mm	1016 g	380	Y	Feb 2019	3,699
9.		Panasonic G9	137 mm	97 mm	92 mm	658 g	400	Y	Nov 2017	1,699
10.		Panasonic GH5	139 mm	98 mm	87 mm	725 g	410	Y	Jan 2017	1,999
11.		Panasonic GX8	133 mm	78 mm	63 mm	487 g	330	Y	Jul 2015	1,199
12.		Sony A7S III	127 mm	97 mm	81 mm	699 g	600	Y	Jul 2020	3,499
13.		Sony A9 II	129 mm	96 mm	76 mm	678 g	690	Y	Oct 2019	4,499
14.		Sony A7R IV	129 mm	96 mm	78 mm	665 g	670	Y	Jul 2019	3,499
15.		Sony A7R III	127 mm	96 mm	74 mm	650 g	650	Y	Oct 2017	3,199
16.		Sony A99 II	143 mm	104 mm	76 mm	849 g	490	Y	Sep 2016	3,199
17.		Sony A7R II	127 mm	96 mm	60 mm	625 g	290	Y	Jun 2015	3,199
Notes: Measurements and pricing do not include easily detachable parts, such as add-on or interchangeable lenses or optional viewfinders.
Convert to Imperial

Any camera decision will obviously take relative prices into account. The retail prices at the time of the camera’s release place the model in the market relative to other models in the producer’s line-up and the competition. The E-M1 II was launched at a markedly lower price (by 49 percent) than the Canon R5, 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.

Sensor comparison

The imaging sensor is at the core of digital cameras and its size is one of the main determining factors of image quality. A large sensor will generally have larger individual pixels that offer better low-light sensitivity, provide wider dynamic range, and have 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 more expensive and lead to bigger and heavier cameras and lenses.

Of the two cameras under consideration, the Canon R5 features a full frame sensor and the Olympus E-M1 II a Four Thirds sensor. The sensor area in the E-M1 II is 74 percent smaller. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 1.0 and 2.0. The sensor in the Canon R5 has a native 3:2 aspect ratio, while the one in the E-M1 II offers a 4:3 aspect.

In terms of underlying technology, both cameras are build around CMOS sensors.

With 44.8MP, the Canon R5 offers a higher resolution than the E-M1 II (20.2MP), but the Canon R5 nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 4.39μm versus 3.34μm for the E-M1 II) due to its larger sensor. Moreover, the Canon R5 is a much more recent model (by 3 years and 9 months) than the E-M1 II, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that further enhance the light gathering capacity of its pixels. Coming back to sensor resolution, it should be mentioned that the E-M1 II has no anti-alias filter installed, so that it can capture all the detail its sensor resolves.

The resolution advantage of the Canon R5 implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the Canon R5 for good quality output (200 dots per inch) amounts to 41 x 27.3 inches or 104 x 69.4 cm, for very good quality (250 dpi) 32.8 x 21.9 inches or 83.2 x 55.5 cm, and for excellent quality (300 dpi) 27.3 x 18.2 inches or 69.4 x 46.3 cm. The corresponding values for the Olympus E-M1 II are 25.9 x 19.4 inches or 65.8 x 49.4 cm for good quality, 20.7 x 15.6 inches or 52.7 x 39.5 cm for very good quality, and 17.3 x 13 inches or 43.9 x 32.9 cm for excellent quality prints.

Unlike the Canon R5, the E-M1 II has the capacity to capture high quality composite images (50MP) 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).

The Canon EOS R5 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 51200, which can be extended to ISO 50-102400. The corresponding ISO settings for the Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II are ISO 200 to ISO 25600, with the possibility to increase the ISO range to 64-25600.

Since 2007, DXO Mark has published sensor performance measurements that have been derived using a consistent methodology. 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 Canon R5 provides substantially higher image quality than the E-M1 II, with an overall score that is 15 points higher. This advantage is based on 1.6 bits higher color depth, 1.8 EV in additional dynamic range, and 1.2 stops in additional low light sensitivity. The following table provides an overview of the physical sensor characteristics, as well as the sensor quality measurements for a selection of comparators.

Sensor Characteristics

		Camera Model	Sensor Class	Resolution (MP)	Horiz. Pixels	Vert. Pixels	Video Format	DXO Portrait	DXO Landscape	DXO Sports	DXO Overall
1.		Canon R5	Full Frame	44.8	8192	5464	8k/30p	25.3	14.6	3042	95
2.		Olympus E-M1 II	Four Thirds	20.2	5184	3888	4K/30p	23.7	12.8	1312	80
3.		Canon R6	Full Frame	20.0	5472	3648	4k/60p	24.2	14.3	3394	90
4.		Nikon Z7 II	Full Frame	45.4	8256	5504	4K/60p	..	..	..	..
5.		Nikon Z7	Full Frame	45.4	8256	5504	4K/30p	26.3	14.6	2668	99
6.		Olympus E-M1 III	Four Thirds	20.2	5184	3888	4K/30p	..	..	..	..
7.		Olympus E-M1	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	23.0	12.7	757	73
8.		Panasonic S1R	Full Frame	46.7	8368	5584	4K/60p	26.4	14.1	3525	100
9.		Panasonic G9	Four Thirds	20.2	5184	3888	4K/60p	..	..	..	..
10.		Panasonic GH5	Four Thirds	20.2	5184	3888	4K/60p	23.9	13.0	807	77
11.		Panasonic GX8	Four Thirds	20.2	5184	3888	4K/30p	23.5	12.6	806	75
12.		Sony A7S III	Full Frame	12.0	4240	2832	4K/120p	23.7	13.9	2520	86
13.		Sony A9 II	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	4K/30p	25.0	14.0	3434	93
14.		Sony A7R IV	Full Frame	60.2	9504	6336	4K/30p	26.0	14.8	3344	99
15.		Sony A7R III	Full Frame	42.2	7952	5304	4K/30p	26.0	14.7	3523	100
16.		Sony A99 II	Full Frame	42.2	7952	5304	4K/30p	25.4	13.4	2317	92
17.		Sony A7R II	Full Frame	42.2	7952	5304	4K/30p	26.0	13.9	3434	98

Many modern cameras are not only capable of taking still images, but can also record movies. The two cameras under consideration both have sensors whose read-out speed is fast enough to capture moving pictures, but the Canon R5 provides a higher video resolution than the E-M1 II. It can shoot video footage at 8k/30p, while the Olympus is limited to 4K/30p.

Feature comparison

Beyond body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. The two cameras under consideration are similar with respect to both having an electronic viewfinder. However, the one in the Canon R5 offers a substantially higher resolution than the one in the E-M1 II (5760k vs 2360k dots). The adjacent table lists some of the other core features of the Canon R5 and Olympus E-M1 II along with similar information for a selection of comparators.

Core Features

		Camera Model	Viewfinder (Type or 000 dots)	Control Panel (yes/no)	LCD Size (inch)	LCD Resolution (000 dots)	LCD Attach- ment	Touch Screen (yes/no)	Mech Shutter Speed	Shutter Flaps (1/sec)	Built-in Flash (yes/no)	Built-in Image Stab
1.		Canon R5	5760	Y	3.2	2100	swivel	Y	1/8000s	10.0	n	Y
2.		Olympus E-M1 II	2360	n	3.0	1037	swivel	Y	1/8000s	18.0	n	Y
3.		Canon R6	5760	n	3.0	1620	swivel	Y	1/8000s	12.0	n	Y
4.		Nikon Z7 II	3690	Y	3.2	2100	tilting	Y	1/8000s	10.0	n	Y
5.		Nikon Z7	3690	Y	3.2	2100	tilting	Y	1/8000s	9.0	n	Y
6.		Olympus E-M1 III	2360	n	3.0	1037	swivel	Y	1/8000s	18.0	n	Y
7.		Olympus E-M1	2360	n	3.0	1037	tilting	Y	1/8000s	10.0	n	Y
8.		Panasonic S1R	5760	Y	3.2	2100	full-flex	Y	1/8000s	9.0	n	Y
9.		Panasonic G9	3680	Y	3.0	1040	swivel	Y	1/8000s	20.0	n	Y
10.		Panasonic GH5	3680	n	3.2	1620	swivel	Y	1/8000s	12.0	n	Y
11.		Panasonic GX8	2360	n	3.0	1040	swivel	Y	1/8000s	10.0	n	Y
12.		Sony A7S III	9440	n	3.0	1440	swivel	Y	1/8000s	10.0	n	Y
13.		Sony A9 II	3686	n	3.0	1440	tilting	Y	1/8000s	10.0	n	Y
14.		Sony A7R IV	5760	n	3.0	1440	tilting	Y	1/8000s	10.0	n	Y
15.		Sony A7R III	3686	n	3.0	1440	tilting	Y	1/8000s	10.0	n	Y
16.		Sony A99 II	2400	Y	3.0	1229	full-flex	n	1/8000s	12.0	n	Y
17.		Sony A7R II	2400	n	3.0	1229	tilting	n	1/8000s	5.0	n	Y

One feature that is present on the Canon R5, but is missing on the E-M1 II is a top-level LCD. While being, of course, smaller than the rear screen, the control panel conveys some of the essential shooting information and can be convenient for quick and easy settings verification.

The reported shutter speed information refers to the use of the mechanical shutter. Yet, some cameras only have an electronic shutter, while others have an electronic shutter in addition to a mechanical one. In fact, both cameras under consideration feature an electronic shutter, which makes completely silent shooting possible. However, this mode is less suitable for photographing moving objects (risk of rolling shutter) or shooting under artificial light sources (risk of flickering).

The Canon R5 and the Olympus E-M1 II both have an intervalometer built-in. This enables the photographer to capture time lapse sequences, such as flower blooming, a sunset or moon rise, without purchasing an external camera trigger and related software.

The Canon R5 writes its imaging data to CFexpress or SDXC cards, while the E-M1 II uses SDXC cards. Both cameras feature dual card slots, which can be very useful in case a memory card fails. Both the Canon R5 and the E-M1 II support UHS-II cards, which provide for Ultra High Speed data transfer of up to 312 MB/s (the second slot of the E-M1 II only offers slower UHS-I transfer rates, though).

Connectivity comparison

For some imaging applications, the extent to which a camera can communicate with its environment can be an important aspect in the camera decision process. The table below provides an overview of the connectivity of the Canon EOS R5 and Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II and, in particular, the interfaces the cameras (and selected comparators) provide for accessory control and data transfer.

Input-Output Connections

		Camera Model	Hotshoe Port	Internal Microphone	Internal Speaker	Microphone Port	Headphone Port	HDMI Port	USB Port	WiFi Support	NFC Support	Bluetooth Support
1.		Canon R5	Y	mono	mono	Y	Y	micro	3.2	Y	-	Y
2.		Olympus E-M1 II	Y	stereo	mono	Y	Y	micro	3.0	Y	-	-
3.		Canon R6	Y	mono	mono	Y	Y	micro	3.2	Y	-	Y
4.		Nikon Z7 II	Y	stereo	mono	Y	Y	micro	3.2	Y	-	Y
5.		Nikon Z7	Y	stereo	mono	Y	Y	micro	3.1	Y	-	Y
6.		Olympus E-M1 III	Y	stereo	mono	Y	Y	micro	3.1	Y	-	Y
7.		Olympus E-M1	Y	stereo	mono	Y	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
8.		Panasonic S1R	Y	stereo	mono	Y	Y	full	3.1	Y	-	Y
9.		Panasonic G9	Y	stereo	mono	Y	Y	full	3.0	Y	-	Y
10.		Panasonic GH5	Y	stereo	mono	Y	Y	full	3.1	Y	-	Y
11.		Panasonic GX8	Y	stereo	mono	Y	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
12.		Sony A7S III	Y	stereo	mono	Y	Y	full	3.2	Y	-	Y
13.		Sony A9 II	Y	stereo	mono	Y	Y	micro	3.1	Y	Y	Y
14.		Sony A7R IV	Y	stereo	mono	Y	Y	micro	3.1	Y	Y	Y
15.		Sony A7R III	Y	stereo	mono	Y	Y	micro	3.1	Y	Y	Y
16.		Sony A99 II	Y	stereo	mono	Y	Y	micro	2.0	Y	Y	Y
17.		Sony A7R II	Y	stereo	mono	Y	Y	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-

Studio photographers will appreciate that the Olympus E-M1 II (unlike the Canon R5) features a PC Sync socket, so that professional strobe lights can be controlled by the camera.

Both the Canon R5 and the E-M1 II are recent models that are part of the current product line-up. The E-M1 II replaced the earlier Olympus E-M1, while the Canon R5 does not have a direct predecessor. Further information on the two cameras (e.g. user guides, manuals), as well as related accessories, can be found on the official Canon and Olympus websites.

Review summary

So what is the bottom line? Which of the two cameras – the Canon R5 or the Olympus E-M1 II – has the upper hand? Is one clearly better than the other? Below is a summary of the relative strengths of each of the two contestants.

Advantages of the Canon EOS R5:

• More detail: Offers more megapixels (44.8 vs 20.2MP) with a 52% higher linear resolution.
• Better moiré control: Has an anti-alias filter to avoid artificial patterns to appear in images.
• Better image quality: Scores substantially higher (15 points) in the DXO overall assessment.
• Richer colors: Generates images with noticeably better colors (1.6 bits more color depth).
• More dynamic range: Captures a larger spectrum of light and dark details (1.8 EV of extra DR).
• Better low-light sensitivity: Requires less light for good images (1.2 stops ISO advantage).
• Better video: Provides higher definition movie capture (8k/30p vs 4K/30p).
• More detailed viewfinder: Has higher resolution electronic viewfinder (5760k vs 2360k dots).
• Larger viewfinder image: Features a viewfinder with a higher magnification (0.76x vs 0.74x).
• Easier setting verification: Features an LCD display on top to control shooting parameters.
• Larger screen: Has a bigger rear LCD (3.2" vs 3.0") for image review and settings control.
• More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (2100k vs 1037k dots).
• Easier travel charging: Can be conveniently charged via its USB port.
• Easier wireless transfer: Supports Bluetooth for image sharing without cables.
• More modern: Reflects 3 years and 9 months of technical progress since the E-M1 II launch.

Arguments in favor of the Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II:

• Maximized detail: Lacks an anti-alias filter to exploit the sensor's full resolution potential.
• High quality composites: Can combine several shots after pixel-shifting its sensor.
• Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (18 vs 10 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
• Less heavy: Has a lower weight (by 164g or 22 percent) and is thus easier to take along.
• Longer lasting: Gets more shots (440 versus 320) out of a single battery charge.
• Better studio light control: Has a PC Sync socket to connect to professional strobe lights.
• More affordable: Was introduced into a lower priced category (49 percent cheaper at launch).
• More heavily discounted: Has been around for much longer (launched in September 2016).

If the count of individual advantages (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the Canon R5 is the clear winner of the match-up (15 : 8 points). However, the pertinence of the various camera strengths will differ across photographers, so that you might want to weigh individual camera traits according to their importance for your own imaging needs before making a camera decision. A professional sports photographer will view the differences between cameras in a way that diverges from the perspective of a street photog, and a person interested in family portraits has distinct needs from a landscape shooter. Hence, the decision which camera is best and worth buying is often a very personal one.

How about other alternatives? Do the specifications of the Canon R5 and the Olympus E-M1 II place the cameras among the top in their class? Find out in the latest Best Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera listing whether the two cameras rank among the cream of the crop.

In any case, while the comparison of technical specifications can provide a useful overview of the capabilities of different cameras, it remains incomplete and does no justice, for example, to the way the Canon R5 or the E-M1 II perform in practice. 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.

Expert reviews

This is where reviews by experts come in. The table below provides a synthesis of the camera assessments of some of the best known photo-gear review sites (amateurphotographer [AP], cameralabs [CL], dpreview [DPR], ephotozine [EPZ], photographyblog [PB]). As can be seen, the professional reviewers agree in many cases on the quality of different cameras, but sometimes their assessments diverge, reinforcing the earlier point that a camera decision is often a very personal choice.

Expert Camera Reviews

		Camera   Model	AP   score	CL   score	DPR   score	EPZ   score	PB   score	Camera Launch	Launch Price (USD)	Street Price
1.		Canon R5	4.5/5	..	91/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jul 2020	3,899
2.		Olympus E-M1 II	5/5	+ +	85/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2016	1,999
3.		Canon R6	5/5	+ +	90/100	4.5/5	5/5	Jul 2020	2,499
4.		Nikon Z7 II	4.5/5	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Oct 2020	2,999
5.		Nikon Z7	5/5	+	89/100	4.5/5	5/5	Aug 2018	3,399
6.		Olympus E-M1 III	5/5	..	83/100	4.5/5	4/5	Feb 2020	1,799
7.		Olympus E-M1	5/5	+ +	84/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2013	1,399
8.		Panasonic S1R	4.5/5	..	89/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Feb 2019	3,699
9.		Panasonic G9	..	+ +	85/100	5/5	5/5	Nov 2017	1,699
10.		Panasonic GH5	4.5/5	+ +	85/100	4.5/5	5/5	Jan 2017	1,999
11.		Panasonic GX8	5/5	+	82/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jul 2015	1,199
12.		Sony A7S III	..	+ +	91/100	4.5/5	5/5	Jul 2020	3,499
13.		Sony A9 II	..	..	90/100	5/5	5/5	Oct 2019	4,499
14.		Sony A7R IV	5/5	+	91/100	4.5/5	5/5	Jul 2019	3,499
15.		Sony A7R III	..	+ +	90/100	4.5/5	5/5	Oct 2017	3,199
16.		Sony A99 II	..	..	85/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2016	3,199
17.		Sony A7R II	5/5	+ +	90/100	5/5	5/5	Jun 2015	3,199
Notes: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available.

The review scores listed above should be treated 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 rating-comparisons among cameras that span long time periods or concern very differently equipped models make little sense. 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? In case you are interested in seeing how other cameras pair up, just make a corresponding selection in the search boxes below. There is also a set of direct links to comparison reviews that other users of the CAM-parator app explored.

~

Specifications: Canon R5 vs Olympus E-M1 II

Below is a side-by-side comparison of the specs of the two cameras to facilitate a quick review of their differences and common features.

Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.