Olympus E-3 vs Ricoh WG-6

The Olympus E-3 and the Ricoh WG-6 are two digital cameras that were announced, respectively, in October 2007 and February 2019. The E-3 is a DSLR, while the WG-6 is a fixed lens compact. The cameras are based on a Four Thirds (E-3) and a 1/2.3-inch (WG-6) sensor. The Olympus has a resolution of 10 megapixels, whereas the Ricoh 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

Olympus E-3		Ricoh WG-6
Digital single lens reflex		Fixed lens compact camera
Four Thirds lenses		28-140mm f/3.5-5.5
10 MP – Four Thirds sensor		20.2 MP – 1/2.3" sensor
no Video		4K/30p Video
ISO 100-3,200		ISO 125-6,400
Optical viewfinder		No viewfinder, LCD framing
2.5" LCD – 230k dots		3.0" LCD – 1040k dots
Swivel screen (not touch-sensitive)		Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)
5 shutter flaps per second		1 shutter flaps per second
In-body stabilization		no shake reduction
Weathersealed body		Waterproof body (20m)
750 shots per battery charge		340 shots per battery charge
142 x 116 x 75 mm, 876 g		118 x 66 x 33 mm, 246 g

Check E-3 offers at
ebay.com
Check WG-6 price at
amazon.com

Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Olympus E-3 and the Ricoh WG-6? 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-3 and the Ricoh WG-6. 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.

The WG-6 can be obtained in two different colors (black, orange), while the E-3 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 Ricoh WG-6 is considerably smaller (53 percent) than the Olympus E-3. 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. More than that, the WG-6 is water-proof up to 20m and can, thus, be used for underwater photography.

The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete and possibly misleading, as the WG-6 has a lens built in, whereas the E-3 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-3 and their specifications in the Four Thirds Lens Catalog.

Concerning battery life, the E-3 gets 750 shots out of its Olympus BLM-1 battery, while the WG-6 can take 340 images on a single charge of its Ricoh DB-110 power pack. The power pack in the WG-6 can be charged via the USB port, which can be very convenient when travelling.

The table below summarizes the key physical specs of the two cameras alongside a broader set of comparators. 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.		Olympus E-3	142 mm	116 mm	75 mm	876 g	750	Y	Oct 2007	1,699	ebay.com
2.		Ricoh WG-6	118 mm	66 mm	33 mm	246 g	340	Y	Feb 2019	399	amazon.com
3.		Canon SX740	110 mm	64 mm	40 mm	299 g	265	n	Jul 2018	399	amazon.com
4.		Nikon D300	147 mm	114 mm	74 mm	925 g	1000	Y	Aug 2007	1,799	ebay.com
5.		Olympus E-5	142 mm	117 mm	75 mm	873 g	750	Y	Sep 2010	1,699	ebay.com
6.		Olympus E-600	130 mm	94 mm	60 mm	535 g	500	n	Aug 2009	449	ebay.com
7.		Olympus E-620	130 mm	94 mm	60 mm	521 g	500	n	Feb 2009	699	ebay.com
8.		Olympus E-30	142 mm	108 mm	75 mm	701 g	750	n	Nov 2008	1,299	ebay.com
9.		Olympus E-420	130 mm	91 mm	53 mm	440 g	500	n	Mar 2008	599	ebay.com
10.		Olympus E-520	136 mm	92 mm	68 mm	535 g	750	n	May 2008	699	ebay.com
11.		Olympus E-410	130 mm	91 mm	53 mm	435 g	500	n	Mar 2007	699	ebay.com
12.		Olympus E-510	136 mm	92 mm	68 mm	538 g	750	n	Mar 2007	799	ebay.com
13.		Olympus E-1	141 mm	104 mm	81 mm	738 g	750	Y	Jun 2003	1,699	ebay.com
14.		Panasonic TS7	117 mm	76 mm	37 mm	319 g	300	Y	May 2018	449	ebay.com
15.		Sony HX99	102 mm	58 mm	36 mm	242 g	370	n	Aug 2018	449	ebay.com
16.		Sony HX95	102 mm	58 mm	36 mm	242 g	370	n	Aug 2018	429	ebay.com
17.		Sony WX800	102 mm	58 mm	36 mm	233 g	370	n	Oct 2018	399	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

Any camera decision will naturally be influenced heavily by the price. 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 WG-6 was launched at a lower price than the E-3, despite having a lens built in. 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 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. 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 Olympus E-3 features a Four Thirds sensor and the Ricoh WG-6 a 1/2.3-inch sensor. The sensor area in the WG-6 is 88 percent smaller. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 2.0 and 5.6. Both cameras feature a native aspect ratio (sensor width to sensor height) of 4:3.

Despite having a smaller sensor, the WG-6 offers a higher resolution of 20.2 megapixels, compared with 10 MP of the E-3. 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 4.74μm for the E-3). However, it should be noted that the WG-6 is much more recent (by 11 years and 4 months) than the E-3, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that make it possible to gather light more efficiently. Coming back to sensor resolution, it should be mentioned that the WG-6 has no anti-alias filter installed, so that it can capture all the detail its sensor resolves.

The resolution advantage of the Ricoh WG-6 implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the WG-6 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-3 are 18.2 x 13.7 inches or 46.3 x 34.7 cm for good quality, 14.6 x 10.9 inches or 37.1 x 27.8 cm for very good quality, and 12.2 x 9.1 inches or 30.9 x 23.2 cm for excellent quality prints.

The Olympus E-3 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 3200. The corresponding ISO settings for the Ricoh WG-6 are ISO 125 to ISO 6400 (no boost).

In terms of underlying technology, the E-3 is build around a CMOS sensor, while the WG-6 uses a BSI-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 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 adjacent table reports on the physical sensor characteristics and the outcomes of the DXO sensor quality tests for a sample of comparator-cameras.

Sensor Characteristics

#		Camera Model	Sensor Class	Resolution (MP)	Horiz. Pixels	Vert. Pixels	Video Format	DXO Portrait	DXO Landscape	DXO Sports	DXO Overall
1.		Olympus E-3	Four Thirds	10.0	3648	2736	none	21.6	10.5	571	56
2.		Ricoh WG-6	1/2.3	20.2	5184	3888	4K/30p	20.7	12.2	1104	52
3.		Canon SX740	1/2.3	20.2	5184	3888	4K/30p	20.6	12.1	1050	51
4.		Nikon D300	APS-C	12.2	4288	2848	none	22.1	12.0	679	67
5.		Olympus E-5	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.6	10.5	519	56
6.		Olympus E-600	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	none	21.5	10.3	541	55
7.		Olympus E-620	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	none	21.3	10.3	536	55
8.		Olympus E-30	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	none	21.3	10.4	530	55
9.		Olympus E-420	Four Thirds	10.0	3648	2736	none	21.5	10.4	527	56
10.		Olympus E-520	Four Thirds	10.0	3648	2736	none	21.4	10.4	548	55
11.		Olympus E-410	Four Thirds	10.0	3648	2736	none	21.1	10.0	494	51
12.		Olympus E-510	Four Thirds	10.0	3648	2736	none	21.2	10.0	442	52
13.		Olympus E-1	Four Thirds	4.9	2560	1920	none	20.0	9.7	-145	44
14.		Panasonic TS7	1/2.3	20.2	5184	3888	4K/30p	20.6	12.1	1028	51
15.		Sony HX99	1/2.3	18.0	4896	3672	4K/30p	20.6	12.1	1058	51
16.		Sony HX95	1/2.3	18.0	4896	3672	4K/30p	20.6	12.1	1057	51
17.		Sony WX800	1/2.3	18.0	4896	3672	4K/30p	20.6	12.2	1070	51
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 WG-6 indeed provides for movie recording, while the E-3 does not. The highest resolution format that the WG-6 can use is 4K/30p.

Feature comparison

Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a variety of features. For example, the E-3 has an optical viewfinder, which can be very useful when shooting in bright sunlight. In contrast, the WG-6 relies on live view and the rear LCD for framing. The following table reports on some other key feature differences and similarities of the Olympus E-3, the Ricoh WG-6, and comparable cameras.

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.		Olympus E-3	optical	Y	2.5 / 230	swivel	n	1/8000s	5.0/s	Y	Y
2.		Ricoh WG-6	none	n	3.0 / 1040	fixed	n	1/4000s	1.0/s	Y	n
3.		Canon SX740	none	n	3.0 / 922	tilting	n	1/3200s	10.0/s	Y	Y
4.		Nikon D300	optical	Y	3.0 / 922	fixed	n	1/8000s	6.0/s	Y	n
5.		Olympus E-5	optical	Y	3.0 / 920	swivel	n	1/8000s	5.0/s	Y	Y
6.		Olympus E-600	optical	n	2.7 / 230	swivel	n	1/4000s	4.0/s	Y	Y
7.		Olympus E-620	optical	n	2.7 / 230	swivel	n	1/4000s	4.0/s	Y	Y
8.		Olympus E-30	optical	Y	2.7 / 230	swivel	n	1/8000s	5.0/s	Y	Y
9.		Olympus E-420	optical	n	2.7 / 215	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.5/s	Y	n
10.		Olympus E-520	optical	n	2.7 / 215	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.5/s	Y	Y
11.		Olympus E-410	optical	n	2.5 / 215	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	n
12.		Olympus E-510	optical	n	2.5 / 215	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
13.		Olympus E-1	optical	Y	1.8 / 134	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	n	n
14.		Panasonic TS7	1170	n	3.0 / 1040	fixed	n	1/1300s	10.0/s	Y	Y
15.		Sony HX99	638	n	3.0 / 922	tilting	Y	1/2000s	10.0/s	Y	Y
16.		Sony HX95	638	n	3.0 / 922	tilting	n	1/2000s	10.0/s	Y	Y
17.		Sony WX800	none	n	3.0 / 922	tilting	Y	1/2000s	10.0/s	Y	Y
Note: *) Information refers to the mechanical shutter, unless the camera only has an electronic one.

One feature that is present on the E-3, but is missing on the WG-6 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 Ricoh WG-6 has 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 E-3 writes its imaging data to Compact Flash or xD Picture cards, while the WG-6 uses SDXC cards. The E-3 features dual card slots, which can be very useful in case a memory card fails. In contrast, the WG-6 only has one slot.

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-3 and Ricoh WG-6 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.		Olympus E-3	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
2.		Ricoh WG-6	-	mono / mono	-	-	micro	3.0	-	-	-
3.		Canon SX740	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	Y
4.		Nikon D300	Y	- / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
5.		Olympus E-5	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
6.		Olympus E-600	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
7.		Olympus E-620	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
8.		Olympus E-30	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
9.		Olympus E-420	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
10.		Olympus E-520	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
11.		Olympus E-410	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
12.		Olympus E-510	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
13.		Olympus E-1	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
14.		Panasonic TS7	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
15.		Sony HX99	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	Y
16.		Sony HX95	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	Y
17.		Sony WX800	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-

It is notable that the E-3 has a hotshoe, while the WG-6 does not. This socket makes it possible to easily attach optional accessories, such as an external flash gun.

Studio photographers will appreciate that the Olympus E-3 (unlike the WG-6) features a PC Sync socket, so that professional strobe lights can be controlled by the camera.

Travel and landscape photographers will find it useful that the WG-6 has an internal geolocalization sensor and can record GPS coordinates in its EXIF data.

The WG-6 is a recent model that features in the current product line-up of Ricoh. In contrast, the E-3 has been discontinued (but can be found pre-owned on ebay). As a replacement in the same line of cameras, the E-3 was succeeded by the Olympus E-5. Further information on the features and operation of the E-3 and WG-6 can be found, respectively, in the Olympus E-3 Manual (free pdf) or the online Ricoh WG-6 Manual.

Review summary

So how do things add up? Is the Olympus E-3 better than the Ricoh WG-6 or vice versa? The listing below highlights the relative strengths of the two models.

Reasons to prefer the Olympus E-3:

• Better moiré control: Has an anti-alias filter to avoid artificial patterns to appear in images.
• 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.
• Easier framing: Has an optical viewfinder for image composition and settings control.
• Easier setting verification: Features an LCD display on top to control shooting parameters.
• 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 shutter: Has higher mechanical shutter speed (1/8000s vs 1/4000s) to freeze action.
• Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (5 vs 1 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
• More flexible: Can take a variety of interchangeable lenses, including specialty optics.
• Longer lasting: Can take more shots (750 versus 340) on a single battery charge.
• Sharper images: Has hand-shake reducing image stabilization built-in.
• Better lighting: Features a hotshoe and can thus hold and trigger an external flash gun.
• Better studio light control: Has a PC Sync socket to connect to professional strobe lights.
• Greater peace of mind: Features a second card slot as a backup in case of memory card failure.
• More heavily discounted: Has been available for much longer (launched in October 2007).

Arguments in favor of the Ricoh WG-6:

• More detail: Has more megapixels (20.2 vs 10MP), which boosts linear resolution by 42%.
• Maximized detail: Lacks an anti-alias filter to exploit the sensor's full resolution potential.
• Broader imaging potential: Can capture not only stills but also 4K/30p video.
• Larger screen: Has a bigger rear LCD (3.0" vs 2.5") for image review and settings control.
• More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1040k vs 230k dots).
• Easier time-lapse photography: Has an intervalometer built-in for low frequency shooting.
• Ready to shoot: Comes with an integrated lens, while the E-3 requires a separate lens.
• More compact: Is smaller (118x66mm vs 142x116mm) and will fit more readily into a bag.
• Less heavy: Has a lower weight even though it has a lens built in (unlike the E-3).
• Easier travel charging: Can be conveniently charged via its USB port.
• Water-proof: Is rugged and sealed and can thus be used for underwater photography (up to 20m).
• Easier geotagging: Features an internal GPS sensor to log localization data.
• Faster data transfer: Supports a more advanced USB protocol (3.0 vs 2.0).
• More affordable: Was introduced at a lower price, despite coming with a built-in lens.
• More modern: Reflects 11 years and 4 months of technical progress since the E-3 launch.

If the count of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a measure, the E-3 emerges as the winner of the contest (18 : 15 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-3 and the Ricoh WG-6 place the cameras among the top in their class? Find out in the latest Best DSLR Camera and Best Travel-Zoom 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 remains incomplete and does no justice, for example, to the way the E-3 or the WG-6 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 hands-on reviews by experts are important. The table below provides a synthesis of the camera assessments of some of the best known photo-gear 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.		Olympus E-3	..	88/100	..	+ +	o	4/5	Oct 2007	1,699	ebay.com
2.		Ricoh WG-6	..	..	..	..	3.5/5	3.5/5	Feb 2019	399	amazon.com
3.		Canon SX740	..	+	3.5/5	..	4/5	4/5	Jul 2018	399	amazon.com
4.		Nikon D300	..	+ +	..	+ +	5/5	4.5/5	Aug 2007	1,799	ebay.com
5.		Olympus E-5	4/5	..	..	75/100	4/5	4.5/5	Sep 2010	1,699	ebay.com
6.		Olympus E-600	..	..	..	..	..	4.5/5	Aug 2009	449	ebay.com
7.		Olympus E-620	3/5	88/100	..	72/100	4.5/5	5/5	Feb 2009	699	ebay.com
8.		Olympus E-30	..	..	..	71/100	4.5/5	4/5	Nov 2008	1,299	ebay.com
9.		Olympus E-420	..	85/100	..	+ +	4/5	4.5/5	Mar 2008	599	ebay.com
10.		Olympus E-520	..	87/100	..	+ +	4.5/5	4.5/5	May 2008	699	ebay.com
11.		Olympus E-410	..	86/100	..	+ +	4/5	4.5/5	Mar 2007	699	ebay.com
12.		Olympus E-510	..	89/100	..	+ +	3.5/5	4.5/5	Mar 2007	799	ebay.com
13.		Olympus E-1	..	..	..	+	o	..	Jun 2003	1,699	ebay.com
14.		Panasonic TS7	..	+	..	..	..	3.5/5	May 2018	449	ebay.com
15.		Sony HX99	..	..	..	..	4/5	4.5/5	Aug 2018	449	ebay.com
16.		Sony HX95	..	..	..	..	..	..	Aug 2018	429	ebay.com
17.		Sony WX800	..	..	..	..	..	..	Oct 2018	399	ebay.com
Note: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available.

Care should be taken when interpreting the review scores above, 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.

Check E-3 offers at
ebay.com
Check WG-6 price at
amazon.com

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. Alternatively, you can follow any of the listed hyperlinks for comparisons that others found interesting.

~

Check E-3 offers at
ebay.com
Check WG-6 price at
amazon.com

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