Olympus E-300 vs Ricoh GR

The Olympus Evolt E-300 and the Ricoh GR are two digital cameras that were officially introduced, respectively, in September 2004 and April 2013. The E-300 is a DSLR, while the GR is a fixed lens compact. The cameras are based on a Four Thirds (E-300) and an APS-C (GR) sensor. The Olympus has a resolution of 8 megapixels, whereas the Ricoh provides 16.1 MP.

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

Headline Specifications

Olympus E-300		Ricoh GR
Digital single lens reflex		Fixed lens compact camera
Four Thirds lenses		28mm f/2.8
8 MP – Four Thirds sensor		16.1 MP – APS-C sensor
no Video		1080/30p Video
ISO 100-400 (100 - 1,600)		ISO 100-25,600
Optical viewfinder		Viewfinder optional
1.8" LCD – 134k dots		3.0" LCD – 1230k dots
Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)		Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)
2.5 shutter flaps per second		4 shutter flaps per second
750 shots per battery charge		290 shots per battery charge
147 x 85 x 64 mm, 624 g		117 x 61 x 35 mm, 245 g

Check E-300 offers at
ebay.com
Check GR offers at
ebay.com

Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Olympus Evolt E-300 and the Ricoh GR? 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 physical size and weight of the Olympus E-300 and the Ricoh GR are illustrated in the side-by-side display below. 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 size 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 Ricoh GR is considerably smaller (43 percent) than the Olympus E-300. In this context, it is worth noting that neither the E-300 nor the GR are weather-sealed.

The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete and possibly misleading, as the GR has a lens built in, whereas the E-300 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-300 and their specifications in the Four Thirds Lens Catalog.

Concerning battery life, the E-300 gets 750 shots out of its Olympus BLM-1 battery, while the GR can take 290 images on a single charge of its Ricoh DB-65 power pack. The power pack in the GR 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 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.		Olympus E-300	147 mm	85 mm	64 mm	624 g	750	n	Sep 2004	799	ebay.com
2.		Ricoh GR	117 mm	61 mm	35 mm	245 g	290	n	Apr 2013	799	ebay.com
3.		Canon XT	127 mm	94 mm	64 mm	540 g	400	n	Feb 2005	899	ebay.com
4.		Leica Digilux 3	146 mm	87 mm	77 mm	606 g	750	n	Sep 2006	1,499	ebay.com
5.		Nikon Coolpix A	111 mm	64 mm	40 mm	299 g	230	n	Mar 2013	1,099	ebay.com
6.		Olympus E-620	130 mm	94 mm	60 mm	521 g	500	n	Feb 2009	699	ebay.com
7.		Olympus E-520	136 mm	92 mm	68 mm	535 g	750	n	May 2008	699	ebay.com
8.		Olympus E-410	130 mm	91 mm	53 mm	435 g	500	n	Mar 2007	699	ebay.com
9.		Olympus E-510	136 mm	92 mm	68 mm	538 g	750	n	Mar 2007	799	ebay.com
10.		Olympus E-330	140 mm	87 mm	72 mm	637 g	750	n	Jan 2006	999	ebay.com
11.		Olympus E-400	130 mm	91 mm	53 mm	435 g	500	n	Sep 2006	699	ebay.com
12.		Olympus E-500	130 mm	95 mm	66 mm	479 g	750	n	Sep 2005	599	ebay.com
13.		Olympus E-1	141 mm	104 mm	81 mm	738 g	750	Y	Jun 2003	1,699	ebay.com
14.		Panasonic GM1	99 mm	55 mm	30 mm	204 g	230	n	Oct 2013	749	ebay.com
15.		Ricoh GR II	117 mm	63 mm	35 mm	251 g	320	n	Jun 2015	699	ebay.com
16.		Sony NEX-5T	111 mm	59 mm	39 mm	276 g	330	n	Aug 2013	699	ebay.com
17.		Sony NEX-5R	111 mm	59 mm	39 mm	276 g	330	n	Aug 2012	749	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 listed launch prices provide an indication of the market segment that the manufacturer of the cameras have been targeting. 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 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. 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 are more costly to manufacture and tend to lead to bigger and heavier cameras and lenses.

Of the two cameras under consideration, the Olympus E-300 features a Four Thirds sensor and the Ricoh GR an APS-C sensor. The sensor area in the GR is 64 percent bigger. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 2.0 and 1.5. The sensor in the E-300 has a native 4:3 aspect ratio, while the one in the GR offers a 3:2 aspect.

With 16.1MP, the GR offers a higher resolution than the E-300 (8MP), but the GR has smaller individual pixels (pixel pitch of 4.79μm versus 5.30μm for the E-300). Yet, the GR is a much more recent model (by 8 years and 6 months) than the E-300, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that enhance the light gathering capacity of its pixel-units. Coming back to sensor resolution, it should be mentioned that the GR has no anti-alias filter installed, so that it can capture all the detail its sensor resolves.

The resolution advantage of the Ricoh GR implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the GR for good quality output (200 dots per inch) amounts to 24.6 x 16.3 inches or 62.6 x 41.5 cm, for very good quality (250 dpi) 19.7 x 13.1 inches or 50.1 x 33.2 cm, and for excellent quality (300 dpi) 16.4 x 10.9 inches or 41.7 x 27.6 cm. The corresponding values for the Olympus E-300 are 16.3 x 12.2 inches or 41.5 x 31.1 cm for good quality, 13.1 x 9.8 inches or 33.2 x 24.9 cm for very good quality, and 10.9 x 8.2 inches or 27.6 x 20.7 cm for excellent quality prints.

The Olympus Evolt E-300 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 400, which can be extended to ISO 100-1600. The corresponding ISO settings for the Ricoh GR are ISO 100 to ISO 25600 (no boost).

In terms of underlying technology, the E-300 is build around a CCD sensor, while the GR 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 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-300	Four Thirds	8.0	3264	2448	none	20.4	10.1	-40	48
2.		Ricoh GR	APS-C	16.1	4928	3264	1080/30p	23.6	13.5	972	78
3.		Canon XT	APS-C	8.0	3456	2304	none	21.8	10.8	637	60
4.		Leica Digilux 3	Four Thirds	7.4	3136	2352	none	21.0	10.6	127	53
5.		Nikon Coolpix A	APS-C	16.1	4928	3264	1080/30p	23.4	13.8	1164	80
6.		Olympus E-620	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	none	21.3	10.3	536	55
7.		Olympus E-520	Four Thirds	10.0	3648	2736	none	21.4	10.4	548	55
8.		Olympus E-410	Four Thirds	10.0	3648	2736	none	21.1	10.0	494	51
9.		Olympus E-510	Four Thirds	10.0	3648	2736	none	21.2	10.0	442	52
10.		Olympus E-330	Four Thirds	7.4	3136	2352	none	20.8	10.4	73	52
11.		Olympus E-400	Four Thirds	10.0	3648	2736	none	21.0	10.6	127	53
12.		Olympus E-500	Four Thirds	8.0	3264	2448	none	20.7	10.3	45	51
13.		Olympus E-1	Four Thirds	4.9	2560	1920	none	20.0	9.7	-145	44
14.		Panasonic GM1	Four Thirds	15.8	4592	3448	1080/60i	22.3	11.7	660	66
15.		Ricoh GR II	APS-C	16.1	4928	3264	1080/30p	23.6	13.7	1078	80
16.		Sony NEX-5T	APS-C	16.0	4912	3264	1080/60p	23.6	13.0	1015	78
17.		Sony NEX-5R	APS-C	16.0	4912	3264	1080/60i	23.7	13.1	910	78
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 GR indeed provides for movie recording, while the E-300 does not. The highest resolution format that the GR can use is 1080/30p.

Feature comparison

Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a variety of features. For example, the E-300 has an optical viewfinder, which can be very useful when shooting in bright sunlight. In contrast, the GR relies on live view and the rear LCD for framing. That said, the GR can be equipped with an optional viewfinder – the GV-1. The table below summarizes some of the other core capabilities of the Olympus E-300 and Ricoh GR in connection with corresponding information for a sample of similar 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-300	optical	n	1.8 / 134	fixed	n	1/4000s	2.5/s	Y	n
2.		Ricoh GR	optional	n	3.0 / 1230	fixed	n	1/4000s	4.0/s	Y	n
3.		Canon XT	optical	n	1.8 / 115	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	n
4.		Leica Digilux 3	optical	n	2.5 / 207	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	n
5.		Nikon Coolpix A	optional	n	3.0 / 921	fixed	n	1/2000s	4.0/s	Y	n
6.		Olympus E-620	optical	n	2.7 / 230	swivel	n	1/4000s	4.0/s	Y	Y
7.		Olympus E-520	optical	n	2.7 / 215	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.5/s	Y	Y
8.		Olympus E-410	optical	n	2.5 / 215	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	n
9.		Olympus E-510	optical	n	2.5 / 215	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
10.		Olympus E-330	optical	n	2.5 / 215	tilting	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	n
11.		Olympus E-400	optical	n	2.5 / 215	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	n
12.		Olympus E-500	optical	n	2.5 / 215	fixed	n	1/4000s	2.5/s	Y	n
13.		Olympus E-1	optical	Y	1.8 / 134	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	n	n
14.		Panasonic GM1	none	n	3.0 / 1036	fixed	Y	1/500s	5.0/s	Y	n
15.		Ricoh GR II	optional	n	3.0 / 1230	fixed	n	1/4000s	4.0/s	Y	n
16.		Sony NEX-5T	optional	n	3.0 / 922	tilting	Y	1/4000s	10.0/s	n	n
17.		Sony NEX-5R	optional	n	3.0 / 920	tilting	Y	1/4000s	10.0/s	n	n
Note: *) Information refers to the mechanical shutter, unless the camera only has an electronic one.

The Ricoh GR 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-300 writes its imaging data to Compact Flash or xD Picture cards, while the GR uses SDXC cards. The E-300 features dual card slots, which can be very useful in case a memory card fails. In contrast, the GR 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 Evolt E-300 and Ricoh GR 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-300	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
2.		Ricoh GR	Y	mono / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	-	-	-
3.		Canon XT	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
4.		Leica Digilux 3	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
5.		Nikon Coolpix A	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
6.		Olympus E-620	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
7.		Olympus E-520	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
8.		Olympus E-410	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
9.		Olympus E-510	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
10.		Olympus E-330	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
11.		Olympus E-400	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
12.		Olympus E-500	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
13.		Olympus E-1	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
14.		Panasonic GM1	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
15.		Ricoh GR II	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
16.		Sony NEX-5T	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	Y	Y	-
17.		Sony NEX-5R	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	Y	-	-

Both the E-300 and the GR have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The E-300 was replaced by the Olympus E-330, while the GR was followed by the Ricoh GR II. Further information on the features and operation of the E-300 and GR can be found, respectively, in the Olympus E-300 Manual (free pdf) or the online Ricoh GR Manual.

Review summary

So how do things add up? Is the Olympus E-300 better than the Ricoh GR or vice versa? A synthesis of the relative strong points of each of the models is listed below.

Reasons to prefer the Olympus Evolt E-300:

• Better moiré control: Has an anti-alias filter to avoid artificial patterns to appear in images.
• Easier framing: Has an optical viewfinder for image composition and settings control.
• More flexible: Can take a variety of interchangeable lenses, including specialty optics.
• Longer lasting: Can take more shots (750 versus 290) on a single battery charge.
• 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 September 2004).

Arguments in favor of the Ricoh GR:

• More detail: Has more megapixels (16.1 vs 8MP), which boosts linear resolution by 45%.
• Maximized detail: Lacks an anti-alias filter to exploit the sensor's full resolution potential.
• Better image quality: Is equipped with a larger and more technologically advanced sensor.
• Richer colors: The sensor size advantage translates into images with better, more accurate colors.
• More dynamic range: Larger sensor captures a wider spectrum of light and dark details.
• Better low-light sensitivity: Larger sensor produces good images even in poorly lit environments.
• Broader imaging potential: Can capture not only stills but also 1080/30p video.
• Larger screen: Has a bigger rear LCD (3.0" vs 1.8") for image review and settings control.
• More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1230k vs 134k dots).
• Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (4 vs 2.5 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
• Easier time-lapse photography: Has an intervalometer built-in for low frequency shooting.
• Ready to shoot: Comes with an integrated lens, while the E-300 requires a separate lens.
• More compact: Is smaller (117x61mm vs 147x85mm) 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-300).
• Easier travel charging: Can be conveniently charged via its USB port.
• More modern: Reflects 8 years and 6 months of technical progress since the E-300 launch.

If the number of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the GR is the clear winner of the contest (16 : 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-300 and the Ricoh GR place the cameras among the top in their class? Find out in the latest Best DSLR Camera and Best Prime Lens Compact Camera listings whether the two cameras rank among the cream of the crop.

In any case, while the comparison of the spec-sheets of cameras can offer a general idea of their imaging potential, it remains partial and cannot reveal, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance when actually working with the E-300 or the GR. 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 why expert reviews are important. 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.		Olympus E-300	..	..	..	+	o	4.5/5	Sep 2004	799	ebay.com
2.		Ricoh GR	5/5	..	..	79/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Apr 2013	799	ebay.com
3.		Canon XT	..	80/100	..	+ +	o	..	Feb 2005	899	ebay.com
4.		Leica Digilux 3	..	..	..	..	..	..	Sep 2006	1,499	ebay.com
5.		Nikon Coolpix A	4/5	+	..	75/100	4/5	4/5	Mar 2013	1,099	ebay.com
6.		Olympus E-620	3/5	88/100	..	72/100	4.5/5	5/5	Feb 2009	699	ebay.com
7.		Olympus E-520	..	87/100	..	+ +	4.5/5	4.5/5	May 2008	699	ebay.com
8.		Olympus E-410	..	86/100	..	+ +	4/5	4.5/5	Mar 2007	699	ebay.com
9.		Olympus E-510	..	89/100	..	+ +	3.5/5	4.5/5	Mar 2007	799	ebay.com
10.		Olympus E-330	..	..	..	+	o	..	Jan 2006	999	ebay.com
11.		Olympus E-400	..	85/100	..	..	4/5	4/5	Sep 2006	699	ebay.com
12.		Olympus E-500	..	76/100	..	+ +	..	..	Sep 2005	599	ebay.com
13.		Olympus E-1	..	..	..	+	o	..	Jun 2003	1,699	ebay.com
14.		Panasonic GM1	3/5	+	..	78/100	5/5	4.5/5	Oct 2013	749	ebay.com
15.		Ricoh GR II	..	..	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2015	699	ebay.com
16.		Sony NEX-5T	..	..	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Aug 2013	699	ebay.com
17.		Sony NEX-5R	..	..	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Aug 2012	749	ebay.com
Note: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available.

Care should be taken when interpreting the review scores above, though. The ratings are only valid when referring to cameras in the same category and of the same age. Thus, a score needs to be put into the context of the launch date and the launch price of the camera, and comparing ratings of very distinct cameras or ones that are far apart in terms of their release date have little meaning. It should also be noted that some of the review sites have over time altered the way they render their verdicts.

Check E-300 offers at
ebay.com
Check GR 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 use the search menu below. As an alternative, you can also directly jump to any one of the listed comparisons that were previously generated by the CAM-parator tool.

~

Check E-300 offers at
ebay.com
Check GR 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.