Kodak AZ901 vs Olympus E-P3

The Kodak PixPro AZ901 and the Olympus PEN E-P3 are two digital cameras that were announced, respectively, in January 2016 and June 2011. The AZ901 is a fixed lens compact, while the E-P3 is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera. The cameras are based on a 1/2.3-inch (AZ901) and a Four Thirds (E-P3) sensor. The Kodak has a resolution of 20.2 megapixels, whereas the Olympus provides 12.2 MP.

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

Headline Specifications

Kodak AZ901		Olympus E-P3
Fixed lens compact camera		Mirrorless system camera
22-1980mm f/3.1-6.8		Micro Four Thirds lenses
20.2 MP – 1/2.3" sensor		12.2 MP – Four Thirds sensor
1080/30p Video		1080/60i Video
ISO 100-3,200		ISO 200-12,800
Electronic viewfinder (202k dots)		Viewfinder optional
3.0" LCD – 920k dots		3.0" LCD – 614k dots
Swivel screen (not touch-sensitive)		Fixed touchscreen
5 shutter flaps per second		3 shutter flaps per second
Lens-based stabilization		In-body stabilization
400 shots per battery charge		330 shots per battery charge
139 x 104 x 119 mm, 777 g		122 x 69 x 34 mm, 369 g

Check AZ901 price at
amazon.com
Check E-P3 offers at
ebay.com

Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Kodak PixPro AZ901 and the Olympus PEN E-P3? 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

The side-by-side display below illustrates the physical size and weight of the Kodak AZ901 and the Olympus E-P3. The two cameras are presented according to their relative size. Three consecutive views from the front, the top, and the rear side are shown. All width, height and depth dimensions are rounded to the nearest millimeter.

The E-P3 can be obtained in three different colors (black, silver, white), while the AZ901 is only available in black.

If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Olympus E-P3 is considerably smaller (42 percent) than the Kodak AZ901. In this context, it is worth noting that neither the AZ901 nor the E-P3 are weather-sealed.

The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete and possibly misleading, as the AZ901 has a lens built in, whereas the E-P3 is an interchangeable lens camera that requires a separate lens. Attaching the latter will add extra weight and bulk to the setup. You can compare the optics available for the E-P3 and their specifications in the Micro Four Thirds Lens Catalog.

Concerning battery life, the AZ901 gets 400 shots out of its Kodak LB-070 battery, while the E-P3 can take 330 images on a single charge of its Olympus BLS-5 power pack.

The following table provides a synthesis of the main physical specifications of the two cameras and other similar ones. If you want to switch the focus of the display and review another camera pair, you can move across to the CAM-parator tool and choose from the broad selection of possible camera comparisons 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.		Kodak AZ901	139 mm	104 mm	119 mm	777 g	400	n	Jan 2016	499	amazon.com
2.		Olympus E-P3	122 mm	69 mm	34 mm	369 g	330	n	Jun 2011	799	ebay.com
3.		Canon G9 X	98 mm	58 mm	31 mm	209 g	220	n	Oct 2015	529	ebay.com
4.		Canon G9 X Mark II	98 mm	58 mm	31 mm	206 g	235	n	Jan 2017	529	ebay.com
5.		Leica Q Typ 116	130 mm	80 mm	93 mm	640 g	300	n	Jun 2015	4,249	ebay.com
6.		Nikon B700	125 mm	85 mm	107 mm	565 g	350	n	Feb 2016	499	ebay.com
7.		Nikon P900	140 mm	103 mm	137 mm	899 g	360	n	Mar 2015	599	ebay.com
8.		Olympus E-P1	121 mm	70 mm	36 mm	355 g	300	n	Jun 2009	799	ebay.com
9.		Olympus E-P2	121 mm	70 mm	36 mm	355 g	300	n	Nov 2009	799	ebay.com
10.		Olympus E-PL1	115 mm	72 mm	42 mm	334 g	290	n	Feb 2010	599	ebay.com
11.		Olympus E-PL2	114 mm	72 mm	42 mm	362 g	280	n	Jan 2011	599	ebay.com
12.		Olympus E-PL3	110 mm	64 mm	37 mm	313 g	300	n	Jun 2011	599	ebay.com
13.		Panasonic FZ2500	138 mm	102 mm	135 mm	915 g	350	n	Sep 2016	1,199	amazon.com
14.		Panasonic ZS70	112 mm	67 mm	41 mm	322 g	380	n	Apr 2017	449	ebay.com
15.		Sony HX90V	102 mm	58 mm	36 mm	245 g	360	n	Apr 2015	429	ebay.com
16.		Sony HX350	130 mm	93 mm	103 mm	652 g	300	n	Dec 2016	449	ebay.com
17.		Sony HX400V	130 mm	93 mm	103 mm	660 g	300	n	Feb 2014	499	ebay.com
Note: Measurements and pricing do not include easily detachable parts, such as add-on or interchangeable lenses or optional viewfinders.
Convert to Imperial

The price is, of course, an important factor in any camera decision. 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 AZ901 was launched at a lower price than the E-P3, despite having a lens built in. Normally, street prices remain initially close to the MSRP, but after a couple of months, the first discounts appear. 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

The size of the sensor inside a digital camera is one of the key determinants 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. Further, a large sensor camera will give the photographer additional creative options when using shallow depth-of-field to isolate a subject from its 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 Kodak AZ901 features a 1/2.3-inch sensor and the Olympus E-P3 a Four Thirds sensor. The sensor area in the E-P3 is 704 percent bigger. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 5.6 and 2.0. Both cameras feature a native aspect ratio (sensor width to sensor height) of 4:3.

Despite having a smaller sensor, the Kodak AZ901 offers a higher resolution of 20.2 megapixels, compared with 12.2 MP of the Olympus E-P3. This megapixels advantage comes at the cost of a higher pixel density and a smaller size of the individual pixel (with a pixel pitch of 1.18μm versus 4.29μm for the E-P3). However, it should be noted that the AZ901 is much more recent (by 4 years and 6 months) than the E-P3, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that make it possible to gather light more efficiently.

The resolution advantage of the Kodak AZ901 implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the AZ901 for good quality output (200 dots per inch) amounts to 25.9 x 19.4 inches or 65.8 x 49.4 cm, for very good quality (250 dpi) 20.7 x 15.6 inches or 52.7 x 39.5 cm, and for excellent quality (300 dpi) 17.3 x 13 inches or 43.9 x 32.9 cm. The corresponding values for the Olympus E-P3 are 20.2 x 15.1 inches or 51.2 x 38.4 cm for good quality, 16.1 x 12.1 inches or 41 x 30.7 cm for very good quality, and 13.4 x 10.1 inches or 34.1 x 25.6 cm for excellent quality prints.

The Kodak PixPro AZ901 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 3200. The corresponding ISO settings for the Olympus PEN E-P3 are ISO 200 to ISO 12800 (no boost).

In terms of underlying technology, the AZ901 is build around a BSI-CMOS sensor, while the E-P3 uses a CMOS imager. Both cameras use a Bayer filter for capturing RGB colors on a square grid of photosensors. This arrangement is found in most digital cameras.

For many cameras, data on sensor performance has been reported by DXO Mark. 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"). 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.		Kodak AZ901	1/2.3	20.2	5184	3888	1080/30p	20.3	11.7	806	48
2.		Olympus E-P3	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	20.8	10.1	536	51
3.		Canon G9 X	1-inch	20.0	5472	3648	1080/60p	21.5	12.3	495	63
4.		Canon G9 X Mark II	1-inch	20.0	5472	3648	1080/60p	21.9	12.5	522	65
5.		Leica Q Typ 116	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	1080/60p	24.3	12.7	2221	85
6.		Nikon B700	1/2.3	20.2	5184	3888	4K/30p	20.4	11.8	818	48
7.		Nikon P900	1/2.3	15.9	4608	3456	1080/60p	20.2	11.6	727	47
8.		Olympus E-P1	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.4	10.4	536	55
9.		Olympus E-P2	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.5	10.4	505	56
10.		Olympus E-PL1	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.5	10.1	487	54
11.		Olympus E-PL2	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.4	10.2	573	55
12.		Olympus E-PL3	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	20.9	10.3	499	52
13.		Panasonic FZ2500	1-inch	20.0	5472	3648	4K/30p	23.0	12.6	538	70
14.		Panasonic ZS70	1/2.3	20.2	5184	3888	4K/30p	19.1	10.6	106	36
15.		Sony HX90V	1/2.3	18.0	4896	3672	1080/60p	20.2	11.6	738	47
16.		Sony HX350	1/2.3	19.9	5152	3864	1080/60p	20.5	11.9	896	49
17.		Sony HX400V	1/2.3	20.2	5184	3888	1080/60p	20.1	11.4	629	45
Note: DXO values in italics represent estimates based on sensor size and age.

Many modern cameras are not only capable of taking still images, but also of capturing video footage. The two cameras under consideration both have sensors whose read-out speed is fast enough to capture moving pictures, but the E-P3 provides a faster frame rate than the AZ901. It can shoot movie footage at 1080/60i, while the Kodak is limited to 1080/30p.

Feature comparison

Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. For example, the AZ901 has an electronic viewfinder (202k dots), which can be very helpful when shooting in bright sunlight. In contrast, the E-P3 relies on live view and the rear LCD for framing. That said, the E-P3 can be equipped with an optional viewfinder – the VF-3. The adjacent table lists some of the other core features of the Kodak AZ901 and Olympus E-P3 along with similar information for a selection of comparators.

Core Features

		Camera Model	Viewfinder (Type or 000 dots)	Control Panel (yes/no)	LCD Specifications (inch/000 dots)	LCD Attach- ment	Touch Screen (yes/no)	Max Shutter Speed *	Max Shutter Flaps *	Built-in Flash (yes/no)	Built-in Image Stab
1.		Kodak AZ901	202	n	3.0 / 920	swivel	n	1/2000s	5.0/s	Y	Y
2.		Olympus E-P3	optional	n	3.0 / 614	fixed	Y	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
3.		Canon G9 X	none	n	3.0 / 1040	fixed	Y	1/2000s	6.0/s	Y	Y
4.		Canon G9 X Mark II	none	n	3.0 / 1040	fixed	Y	1/2000s	8.2/s	Y	Y
5.		Leica Q Typ 116	3680	n	3.0 / 1040	fixed	Y	1/2000s	10.0/s	n	Y
6.		Nikon B700	921	n	3.0 / 921	swivel	n	1/4000s	5.0/s	Y	Y
7.		Nikon P900	921	n	3.0 / 921	swivel	n	1/4000s	7.0/s	Y	Y
8.		Olympus E-P1	none	n	3.0 / 230	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	n	Y
9.		Olympus E-P2	optional	n	3.0 / 230	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	n	Y
10.		Olympus E-PL1	optional	n	2.7 / 230	fixed	n	1/2000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
11.		Olympus E-PL2	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
12.		Olympus E-PL3	optional	n	3.0 / 460	tilting	n	1/4000s	5.5/s	n	Y
13.		Panasonic FZ2500	2360	n	3.0 / 1040	swivel	Y	1/4000s	12.0/s	Y	Y
14.		Panasonic ZS70	1166	n	3.0 / 1040	tilting	Y	1/2000s	10.0/s	Y	Y
15.		Sony HX90V	638	n	3.0 / 921	tilting	n	1/2000s	10.0/s	Y	Y
16.		Sony HX350	202	n	3.0 / 922	tilting	n	1/4000s	10.0/s	Y	Y
17.		Sony HX400V	210	n	3.0 / 921	tilting	n	1/4000s	10.0/s	Y	Y
Note: *) Information refers to the mechanical shutter, unless the camera only has an electronic one.

One differentiating feature between the two cameras concerns the touch sensitivity of the rear screen. The E-P3 has a touchscreen, while the AZ901 has a conventional panel. Touch control can be particularly helpful, for example, for setting the focus point.

Concerning the storage of imaging data, both the AZ901 and the E-P3 write their files to SDXC cards. The E-P3 supports UHS-I cards (Ultra High Speed data transfer of up to 104 MB/s), while the AZ901 cannot take advantage of Ultra High Speed SD cards.

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 Kodak PixPro AZ901 and Olympus PEN E-P3 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 Mic / Speaker	Microphone Port	Headphone Port	HDMI Port	USB Port	WiFi Support	NFC Support	Bluetooth Support
1.		Kodak AZ901	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
2.		Olympus E-P3	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
3.		Canon G9 X	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
4.		Canon G9 X Mark II	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	Y
5.		Leica Q Typ 116	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
6.		Nikon B700	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	Y
7.		Nikon P900	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
8.		Olympus E-P1	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
9.		Olympus E-P2	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
10.		Olympus E-PL1	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
11.		Olympus E-PL2	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
12.		Olympus E-PL3	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
13.		Panasonic FZ2500	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
14.		Panasonic ZS70	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
15.		Sony HX90V	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
16.		Sony HX350	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	-	-	-
17.		Sony HX400V	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-

It is notable that the AZ901 offers wifi support, while the E-P3 does not. Wifi can be a very convenient means to transfer image data to an off-camera location.

The AZ901 is a recent model that features in the current product line-up of Kodak. In contrast, the E-P3 has been discontinued (but can be found pre-owned on ebay). As a replacement in the same line of cameras, the E-P3 was succeeded by the Olympus E-P5. Further information on the features and operation of the AZ901 and E-P3 can be found, respectively, in the Kodak AZ901 Manual (free pdf) or the online Olympus E-P3 Manual.

Review summary

So what is the bottom line? Which of the two cameras – the Kodak AZ901 or the Olympus E-P3 – has the upper hand? Is one clearly better than the other? The listing below highlights the relative strengths of the two models.

Arguments in favor of the Kodak PixPro AZ901:

• More detail: Offers more megapixels (20.2 vs 12.2MP) with a 29% higher linear resolution.
• Easier framing: Has an electronic viewfinder for image composition and settings control.
• More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (920k vs 614k dots).
• More flexible LCD: Has a swivel screen for odd-angle shots in portrait or landscape orientation.
• More selfie-friendly: Has an articulated screen that can be turned to be front-facing.
• Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (5 vs 3 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
• Ready to shoot: Has a lens built-in, whereas the E-P3 requires a separate lens.
• Longer lasting: Can take more shots (400 versus 330) on a single battery charge.
• Easier file upload: Has wifi built in for automatic backup or image transfer to the web.
• More affordable: Was introduced at a lower price, despite coming with a built-in lens.
• More modern: Reflects 4 years and 6 months of technical progress since the E-P3 launch.

Advantages of the Olympus PEN E-P3:

• Better image quality: Features bigger pixels on a larger sensor for higher quality imaging.
• Richer colors: The pixel size advantage translates into images with better, more accurate colors.
• More dynamic range: Larger pixels capture a wider spectrum of light and dark details.
• Better low-light sensitivity: Larger pixels means good image quality even under poor lighting.
• Better video: Provides higher movie framerates (1080/60i versus 1080/30p).
• Fewer buttons to press: Has a touchscreen to facilitate handling and shooting adjustments.
• Faster shutter: Has higher mechanical shutter speed (1/4000s vs 1/2000s) to freeze action.
• More flexible: Takes interchangeable lenses and can thus be used with specialty optics.
• More compact: Is smaller (122x69mm vs 139x104mm) and will fit more readily into a bag.
• Better lighting: Features a hotshoe and can thus hold and trigger an external flash gun.
• Faster buffer clearing: Has an SD card interface that supports the UHS-I standard.
• More heavily discounted: Has been around for much longer (launched in June 2011).

If the number of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the E-P3 comes out slightly ahead of the AZ901 (12 : 11 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 wildlife photographer will view the differences between cameras in a way that diverges from the perspective of a family photog, and a person interested in architecture has distinct needs from a sports 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 Kodak AZ901 and the Olympus E-P3 place the cameras among the top in their class? Find out in the latest Best Superzoom Camera and Best Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera listings whether the two cameras rank among the cream of the crop.

In any case, while the specs-based evaluation of cameras can be instructive in revealing their potential as photographic tools, it says little about, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance of the AZ901 and the E-P3 in practical situations. User reviews that are available, for instance, at amazon can sometimes shed light on these issues, but such feedback is all too often partial, inconsistent, and inaccurate.

Expert reviews

This is where reviews by experts come in. The following table reports the overall ratings of the cameras as published by some of the major camera review sites (amateurphotographer [AP], cameralabs [CL], digitalcameraworld [DCW], 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	DCW   score	DPR   score	EPZ   score	PB   score	Camera Launch	Launch Price (USD)	Street Price
1.		Kodak AZ901	..	..	..	..	3.5/5	3/5	Jan 2016	499	amazon.com
2.		Olympus E-P3	..	83/100	..	74/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2011	799	ebay.com
3.		Canon G9 X	3.5/5	+ +	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Oct 2015	529	ebay.com
4.		Canon G9 X Mark II	4/5	..	4/5	75/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jan 2017	529	ebay.com
5.		Leica Q Typ 116	5/5	..	..	80/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2015	4,249	ebay.com
6.		Nikon B700	..	+	..	..	4/5	4/5	Feb 2016	499	ebay.com
7.		Nikon P900	..	..	..	77/100	4/5	4/5	Mar 2015	599	ebay.com
8.		Olympus E-P1	..	+	..	66/100	4/5	4.5/5	Jun 2009	799	ebay.com
9.		Olympus E-P2	3/5	+	..	69/100	4/5	4.5/5	Nov 2009	799	ebay.com
10.		Olympus E-PL1	..	86/100	..	69/100	4/5	4.5/5	Feb 2010	599	ebay.com
11.		Olympus E-PL2	3/5	83/100	..	71/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jan 2011	599	ebay.com
12.		Olympus E-PL3	3/5	+ +	..	72/100	4.5/5	4/5	Jun 2011	599	ebay.com
13.		Panasonic FZ2500	..	+	..	82/100	4.5/5	5/5	Sep 2016	1,199	amazon.com
14.		Panasonic ZS70	..	+ +	..	..	4/5	4/5	Apr 2017	449	ebay.com
15.		Sony HX90V	4/5	+ +	..	..	4/5	4.5/5	Apr 2015	429	ebay.com
16.		Sony HX350	..	..	..	..	..	4/5	Dec 2016	449	ebay.com
17.		Sony HX400V	4/5	+ +	..	..	4/5	4/5	Feb 2014	499	ebay.com
Note: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available.

Care should be taken when interpreting the review scores above, though. The assessments were made in relation to similar cameras of the same technological generation. Thus, a score needs to be put into the context of the launch date and the launch price 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.

Check AZ901 price at
amazon.com
Check E-P3 offers at
ebay.com

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.

~

Check AZ901 price at
amazon.com
Check E-P3 offers at
ebay.com

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