Olympus E-1 vs E-620

The Olympus E-1 and the Olympus E-620 are two digital cameras that were officially introduced, respectively, in June 2003 and February 2009. Both are DSLR (Digital Single Lens Reflex) cameras that are equipped with a Four Thirds sensor. The E-1 has a resolution of 4.9 megapixels, whereas the E-620 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

Olympus E-1		Olympus E-620
Digital single lens reflex		Digital single lens reflex
Four Thirds lenses		Four Thirds lenses
4.9 MP, Four Thirds Sensor		12.2 MP, Four Thirds Sensor
no Video		no Video
ISO 100-800 (100 - 3,200)		ISO 100-3,200
Optical viewfinder		Optical viewfinder
1.8 LCD, 134k dots		2.7 LCD, 230k dots
Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)		Swivel screen (not touch-sensitive)
3 shutter flaps per second		4 shutter flaps per second
Lens stabilization only		In-body stabilization
Weathersealed body		not weather sealed
750 shots per battery charge		500 shots per battery charge
141 x 104 x 81 mm, 738 g		130 x 94 x 60 mm, 521 g

Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Olympus E-1 and the Olympus E-620? 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 Olympus E-1 and the Olympus E-620. 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 measures 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-620 is notably smaller (17 percent) than the Olympus E-1. Moreover, the E-620 is markedly lighter (29 percent) than the E-1. It is worth mentioning in this context that the E-1 is splash and dust resistant, while the E-620 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. In this particular case, both cameras feature the same lens mount, so that they can use the same lenses. You can compare the optics available in the Four Thirds Lens Catalog.

Concerning battery life, the E-1 gets 750 shots out of its BLM-1 battery, while the E-620 can take 500 images on a single charge of its BLS-1 power pack.

The table below summarizes the key physical specs of the two cameras alongside a broader set of comparators. In case you want to display and compare another camera duo, you can use the CAM-parator app to select your camera combination among a large number of options.

Body Specifications

	Camera Model	Camera Width	Camera Height	Camera Depth	Camera Weight	Battery Life	Weather Sealing	Camera Launch	Launch Price (USD)	Street Price
	Olympus E-1	5.6 in	4.1 in	3.2 in	26.0 oz	750	Y	Jun 2003	1,699
	Olympus E-620	5.1 in	3.7 in	2.4 in	18.4 oz	500	n	Feb 2009	699
	Canon 6D Mark II	5.7 in	4.4 in	3.0 in	27.0 oz	1200	Y	Jun 2017	1,999
	Canon 7D	5.8 in	4.4 in	2.9 in	30.3 oz	800	Y	Sep 2009	1,699
	Leica Digilux 3	5.7 in	3.4 in	3.0 in	21.4 oz	750	n	Sep 2006	1,499
	Nikon D500	5.8 in	4.5 in	3.2 in	30.3 oz	1240	Y	Jan 2016	1,999
	Nikon D610	5.6 in	4.4 in	3.2 in	30.0 oz	900	Y	Oct 2013	1,999
	Nikon D7000	5.2 in	4.1 in	3.0 in	27.5 oz	1050	Y	Sep 2010	1,499
	Olympus E-5	5.6 in	4.6 in	3.0 in	30.8 oz	750	Y	Sep 2010	1,699
	Olympus E-600	5.1 in	3.7 in	2.4 in	18.9 oz	500	n	Aug 2009	449
	Olympus E-420	5.1 in	3.6 in	2.1 in	15.5 oz	500	n	Mar 2008	599
	Olympus E-520	5.4 in	3.6 in	2.7 in	18.9 oz	750	n	May 2008	699
	Olympus E-3	5.6 in	4.6 in	3.0 in	30.9 oz	750	Y	Oct 2007	1,699
	Olympus E-410	5.1 in	3.6 in	2.1 in	15.3 oz	500	n	Mar 2007	699
	Olympus E-510	5.4 in	3.6 in	2.7 in	19.0 oz	750	n	Mar 2007	799
	Olympus E-330	5.5 in	3.4 in	2.8 in	22.5 oz	750	n	Jan 2006	999
	Olympus E-300	5.8 in	3.3 in	2.5 in	22.0 oz	750	n	Sep 2004	799
Notes: Measurements and pricing do not include easily detachable parts, such as add-on or interchangeable lenses or optional viewfinders.
Convert to Metric

The price is, of course, an important factor in any camera decision. The manufacturer’s suggested retail prices give an idea on the placement of the camera in the maker’s lineup and the broader market. The E-620 was launched at a markedly lower price (by 59 percent) than the E-1, 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. 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. 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 are more costly to manufacture and tend to lead to bigger and heavier cameras and lenses.

Both cameras under consideration feature a Four Thirds sensor and have a format factor (sometimes also referred to as "crop factor") of 2.0. Within the spectrum of camera sensors, this places the review cameras among the medium-sized sensor cameras that aim to strike a balance between image quality and portability. Both cameras feature a native aspect ratio (sensor width to sensor height) of 4:3.

Technology-wise, the E-620 uses a more advanced image processing engine (TruePic III+) than the E-1 (TruePic), with benefits for noise reduction, color accuracy, and processing speed.

While the two cameras under review share the same sensor size, the E-620 offers a higher resolution of 12.2 megapixels, compared with 4.9 MP of the E-1. This megapixels advantage translates into a 58 percent gain in linear resolution. On the other hand, these sensor specs imply that the E-620 has a higher pixel density and a smaller size of the individual pixel (with a pixel pitch of 4.29μm versus 6.78μm for the E-1). However, it should be noted that the E-620 is much more recent (by 5 years and 8 months) than the E-1, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that compensate for the smaller pixel size.

The resolution advantage of the Olympus E-620 implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the E-620 for good quality output (200 dots per inch) amounts to 20.2 x 15.1 inches or 51.2 x 38.4 cm, for very good quality (250 dpi) 16.1 x 12.1 inches or 41 x 30.7 cm, and for excellent quality (300 dpi) 13.4 x 10.1 inches or 34.1 x 25.6 cm. The corresponding values for the Olympus E-1 are 12.8 x 9.6 inches or 32.5 x 24.4 cm for good quality, 10.2 x 7.7 inches or 26 x 19.5 cm for very good quality, and 8.5 x 6.4 inches or 21.7 x 16.3 cm for excellent quality prints.

The Olympus E-1 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 800, which can be extended to ISO 100-3200. The corresponding ISO settings for the Olympus E-620 are ISO 100 to ISO 3200 (no boost).

Since 2007, DXO Mark has published sensor performance measurements that have been derived using a consistent methodology. This service assesses and scores the color depth ("DXO Portrait"), dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), and low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports") of camera sensors, and also publishes an overall camera score. 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
	Olympus E-1	Four Thirds	4.9	2560	1920	none	..	..	..	..
	Olympus E-620	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	none	21.3	10.3	536	55
	Canon 6D Mark II	Full Frame	26.0	6240	4160	1080/60p	24.4	11.9	2862	85
	Canon 7D	APS-C	17.9	5184	3456	1080/30p	22.0	11.7	854	66
	Leica Digilux 3	Four Thirds	7.4	3136	2352	none	..	..	..	..
	Nikon D500	APS-C	20.7	5568	3712	4K/30p	24.0	14.0	1324	83
	Nikon D610	Full Frame	24.2	6016	4016	1080/30p	25.1	14.4	2925	94
	Nikon D7000	APS-C	16.1	4928	3264	10800/24p	23.5	13.9	1167	80
	Olympus E-5	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.6	10.5	519	56
	Olympus E-600	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	none	21.5	10.3	541	55
	Olympus E-420	Four Thirds	10.0	3648	2736	none	21.5	10.4	527	56
	Olympus E-520	Four Thirds	10.0	3648	2736	none	21.4	10.4	548	55
	Olympus E-3	Four Thirds	10.0	3648	2736	none	21.6	10.5	571	56
	Olympus E-410	Four Thirds	10.0	3648	2736	none	21.1	10.0	494	51
	Olympus E-510	Four Thirds	10.0	3648	2736	none	21.2	10.0	442	52
	Olympus E-330	Four Thirds	7.4	3136	2352	none	..	..	..	..
	Olympus E-300	Four Thirds	8.0	3264	2448	none	..	..	..	..

Feature comparison

Beyond body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. The E-1 and the E-620 are similar in the sense that both have an optical viewfinder. The latter is useful for getting a clear image for framing even in brightly lit environments. The viewfinder in the E-1 offers a wider field of view (100%) than the one in the E-620 (95%), so that a larger proportion of the captured image is visible in the finder. The following table reports on some other key feature differences and similarities of the Olympus E-1, the Olympus E-620, and comparable cameras.

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
	Olympus E-1	optical	Y	1.8	134	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0	n	n
	Olympus E-620	optical	n	2.7	230	swivel	n	1/4000s	4.0	Y	Y
	Canon 6D Mark II	optical	Y	3.0	1040	swivel	Y	1/4000s	6.5	n	n
	Canon 7D	optical	Y	3.0	920	fixed	n	1/8000s	8.0	Y	n
	Leica Digilux 3	optical	n	2.5	207	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0	Y	n
	Nikon D500	optical	Y	3.2	2359	tilting	Y	1/8000s	10.0	n	n
	Nikon D610	optical	Y	3.2	921	fixed	n	1/4000s	6.0	Y	n
	Nikon D7000	optical	Y	3.0	921	fixed	n	1/8000s	6.0	Y	n
	Olympus E-5	optical	Y	3.0	920	swivel	n	1/8000s	5.0	Y	Y
	Olympus E-600	optical	n	2.7	230	swivel	n	1/4000s	4.0	Y	Y
	Olympus E-420	optical	n	2.7	215	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.5	Y	n
	Olympus E-520	optical	n	2.7	215	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.5	Y	Y
	Olympus E-3	optical	Y	2.5	230	swivel	n	1/8000s	5.0	Y	Y
	Olympus E-410	optical	n	2.5	215	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0	Y	n
	Olympus E-510	optical	n	2.5	215	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0	Y	Y
	Olympus E-330	optical	n	2.5	215	tilting	n	1/4000s	3.0	Y	n
	Olympus E-300	optical	n	1.8	134	fixed	n	1/4000s	2.5	Y	n

One feature that is present on the E-1, but is missing on the E-620 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.

Concerning the storage of imaging data, both the E-1 and the E-620 write their files to Compact Flash or xD Picture cards. Both cameras feature dual card slots, which can be very useful in case a memory card fails.

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 Olympus E-1 and Olympus E-620 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
	Olympus E-1	Y	-	-	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
	Olympus E-620	Y	-	-	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
	Canon 6D Mark II	Y	stereo	mono	Y	-	mini	2.0	Y	Y	Y
	Canon 7D	Y	mono	-	Y	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
	Leica Digilux 3	Y	stereo	mono	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
	Nikon D500	Y	stereo	mono	Y	Y	mini	3.0	Y	Y	Y
	Nikon D610	Y	mono	mono	Y	Y	mini	2.0	-	-	-
	Nikon D7000	Y	mono	mono	Y	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
	Olympus E-5	Y	stereo	-	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
	Olympus E-600	Y	-	-	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
	Olympus E-420	Y	-	-	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
	Olympus E-520	Y	-	-	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
	Olympus E-3	Y	-	-	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
	Olympus E-410	Y	-	-	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
	Olympus E-510	Y	-	-	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
	Olympus E-330	Y	-	-	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
	Olympus E-300	Y	-	-	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-

Studio photographers will appreciate that the Olympus E-1 (unlike the E-620) features a PC Sync socket, so that professional strobe lights can be controlled by the camera.

Both the E-1 and the E-620 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on eBay. The E-1 was replaced by the Olympus E-3, while the E-620 was followed by the Olympus E-600. Further information on the two cameras (e.g. user guides, manuals), as well as related accessories, can be found on the official Olympus website.

Review summary

So what conclusions can be drawn? Which of the two cameras – the Olympus E-1 or the Olympus E-620 – has the upper hand? Is one clearly better than the other? A synthesis of the relative strong points of each of the models is listed below.

Arguments in favor of the Olympus E-1:

• More complete view: Has a viewfinder with a larger field of view (100% vs 95%).
• Easier setting verification: Features an LCD display on top to control shooting parameters.
• Longer lasting: Can take more shots (750 versus 500) on a single battery charge.
• Better sealing: Is weather sealed to enable shooting in dusty or wet environments.
• Better studio light control: Has a PC Sync socket to connect to professional strobe lights.
• More heavily discounted: Has been available for much longer (launched in June 2003).

Reasons to prefer the Olympus E-620:

• More detail: Has more megapixels (12.2 vs 4.9MP), which boosts linear resolution by 58%.
• Better jpgs: Has a more modern image processing engine (TruePic III+ vs TruePic).
• Larger screen: Has a bigger rear LCD (2.7" vs 1.8") for image review and settings control.
• More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (230k vs 134k 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 (4 vs 3 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
• More compact: Is smaller (130x94mm vs 141x104mm) and will fit more readily into a bag.
• Less heavy: Has a lower weight (by 217g or 29 percent) and is thus easier to take along.
• Sharper images: Has stabilization technology built-in to reduce the impact of hand-shake.
• Easier fill-in: Has a small integrated flash to brighten shadows of backlit subjects.
• More affordable: Was introduced into a lower priced category (59 percent cheaper at launch).
• More modern: Reflects 5 years and 8 months of technical progress since the E-1 launch.

If the count of individual advantages (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the E-620 is the clear winner of the contest (13 : 6 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. A professional wedding photographer will view the differences between cameras in a way that diverges from the perspective of a travel photog, and a person interested in cityscapes has distinct needs from a macro 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 Olympus E-1 and the Olympus E-620 place the cameras among the top in their class? Find out in the latest Best DSLR 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 E-1 or the E-620 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 why expert reviews are important. The table below provides a synthesis of the camera assessments of some of the best known photo-gear review sites (cameralabs, dpreview, ephotozine, imaging-resource, and photographyblog). 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.

Review Scores

	Camera Model	camera   labs	dp review	ephoto   zine	imaging resource	photography   blog	Camera Launch	Launch Price (USD)	Street Price
	Olympus E-1	..	+	o	o	..	Jun 2003	1,699
	Olympus E-620	88/100	72/100	4.5/5	o	5/5	Feb 2009	699
	Canon 6D Mark II	+	80/100	4.5/5	4/5	4/5	Jun 2017	1,999
	Canon 7D	+ +	84/100	4.5/5	5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2009	1,699
	Leica Digilux 3	..	..	..	..	..	Sep 2006	1,499
	Nikon D500	+ +	91/100	4.5/5	5/5	5/5	Jan 2016	1,999
	Nikon D610	+ +	87/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	4.5/5	Oct 2013	1,999
	Nikon D7000	..	80/100	4.5/5	5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2010	1,499
	Olympus E-5	..	75/100	4/5	..	4.5/5	Sep 2010	1,699
	Olympus E-600	..	..	..	..	4.5/5	Aug 2009	449
	Olympus E-420	85/100	+ +	4/5	o	4.5/5	Mar 2008	599
	Olympus E-520	87/100	+ +	4.5/5	4/5	4.5/5	May 2008	699
	Olympus E-3	88/100	+ +	o	o	4/5	Oct 2007	1,699
	Olympus E-410	86/100	+ +	4/5	o	4.5/5	Mar 2007	699
	Olympus E-510	89/100	+ +	3.5/5	o	4.5/5	Mar 2007	799
	Olympus E-330	..	+	o	3.5/5	..	Jan 2006	999
	Olympus E-300	..	+	o	o	4.5/5	Sep 2004	799
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. Hence, a score should always be seen in the context of the camera's market launch date and its price, 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? If you would like to see a different side-by-side camera review, just use the search menu below. There is also a set of direct links to comparison reviews that other users of the CAM-parator app explored.

~

Specifications: Olympus E-1 vs Olympus E-620

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.