Olympus E-400 vs Sigma fp
The Olympus E-400 and the Sigma fp are two digital cameras that were officially introduced, respectively, in September 2006 and July 2019. The E-400 is a DSLR, while the fp is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera. The cameras are based on a Four Thirds (E-400) and a full frame (fp) sensor. The Olympus has a resolution of 10 megapixels, whereas the Sigma provides 24 MP.
Below is an overview of the main specs of the two cameras as a starting point for the comparison.
Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Olympus E-400 and the Sigma fp? 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-400 and the Sigma fp. 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.
If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Sigma fp is considerably smaller (33 percent) than the Olympus E-400. Moreover, the fp is slightly lighter (3 percent) than the E-400. It is noteworthy in this context that the fp is splash and dust-proof, while the E-400 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. 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 E-400 gets 500 shots out of its Olympus BLS-1 battery, while the fp can take 280 images on a single charge of its Sigma BP-51 power pack. The power pack in the fp 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.
# | Camera Model |
Camera Width |
Camera Height |
Camera Depth |
Camera Weight |
Battery Life |
Weather Sealing |
Camera Launch |
Launch Price (USD) |
Street Price |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Olympus E-400 | 130 mm | 91 mm | 53 mm | 435 g | 500 | n | Sep 2006 | 699 | ebay.com | |
2. | Sigma fp | 113 mm | 70 mm | 45 mm | 422 g | 280 | Y | Jul 2019 | 1,899 | amazon.com | |
3. | Fujifilm X-Pro3 | 141 mm | 83 mm | 46 mm | 497 g | 440 | Y | Oct 2019 | 1,799 | amazon.com | |
4. | Nikon D780 | 144 mm | 116 mm | 76 mm | 840 g | 2260 | Y | Jan 2020 | 2,299 | amazon.com | |
5. | Nikon D40X | 124 mm | 94 mm | 64 mm | 522 g | 520 | n | Mar 2007 | 729 | ebay.com | |
6. | Olympus E-P3 | 122 mm | 69 mm | 34 mm | 369 g | 330 | n | Jun 2011 | 799 | ebay.com | |
7. | Olympus E-PL2 | 114 mm | 72 mm | 42 mm | 362 g | 280 | n | Jan 2011 | 599 | ebay.com | |
8. | Olympus E-450 | 130 mm | 91 mm | 53 mm | 440 g | 500 | n | Mar 2009 | 499 | ebay.com | |
9. | Olympus E-620 | 130 mm | 94 mm | 60 mm | 521 g | 500 | n | Feb 2009 | 699 | ebay.com | |
10. | Olympus E-420 | 130 mm | 91 mm | 53 mm | 440 g | 500 | n | Mar 2008 | 599 | 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-500 | 130 mm | 95 mm | 66 mm | 479 g | 750 | n | Sep 2005 | 599 | ebay.com | |
14. | Panasonic S5 | 133 mm | 98 mm | 82 mm | 714 g | 440 | Y | Sep 2020 | 1,999 | amazon.com | |
15. | Panasonic S1 | 149 mm | 110 mm | 97 mm | 1017 g | 400 | Y | Feb 2019 | 2,499 | amazon.com | |
16. | Panasonic S1H | 151 mm | 114 mm | 110 mm | 1052 g | 400 | Y | May 2019 | 3,999 | amazon.com | |
17. | Panasonic L10 | 135 mm | 96 mm | 78 mm | 556 g | 450 | n | Aug 2007 | 599 | ebay.com | |
Note: Measurements and pricing do not include easily detachable parts, such as add-on or interchangeable lenses or optional viewfinders. | |||||||||||
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 E-400 was launched at a markedly lower price (by 63 percent) than the fp, which puts it into a different market segment. 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.
Sensor comparison
The size of the sensor inside a digital camera is one of the key determinants 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. 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 associated with larger, more expensive camera bodies and lenses.
Of the two cameras under consideration, the Olympus E-400 features a Four Thirds sensor and the Sigma fp a full frame sensor. The sensor area in the fp is 281 percent bigger. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 2.0 and 1.0. The sensor in the E-400 has a native 4:3 aspect ratio, while the one in the fp offers a 3:2 aspect.
With 24MP, the fp offers a higher resolution than the E-400 (10MP), but the fp nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 5.98μm versus 4.74μm for the E-400) due to its larger sensor. Moreover, the fp is a much more recent model (by 12 years and 9 months) than the E-400, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that further enhance the light gathering capacity of its pixel-units. Coming back to sensor resolution, it should be mentioned that the fp has no anti-alias filter installed, so that it can capture all the detail its sensor resolves.
The resolution advantage of the Sigma fp implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the fp for good quality output (200 dots per inch) amounts to 30 x 20 inches or 76.2 x 50.8 cm, for very good quality (250 dpi) 24 x 16 inches or 61 x 40.6 cm, and for excellent quality (300 dpi) 20 x 13.3 inches or 50.8 x 33.9 cm. The corresponding values for the Olympus E-400 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-400 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 1600. The corresponding ISO settings for the Sigma fp are ISO 100 to ISO 25600, with the possibility to increase the ISO range to 6-102400.
In terms of underlying technology, the E-400 is build around a CMOS sensor, while the fp 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.
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 table below summarizes the physical sensor characteristics and sensor quality findings and compares them across a set of similar cameras.
# | Camera Model |
Sensor Class |
Resolution (MP) |
Horiz. Pixels |
Vert. Pixels |
Video Format |
DXO Portrait |
DXO Landscape |
DXO Sports |
DXO Overall |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Olympus E-400 | Four Thirds | 10.0 | 3648 | 2736 | none | 21.0 | 10.6 | 127 | 53 | |
2. | Sigma fp | Full Frame | 24.0 | 6000 | 4000 | 4K/30p | 25.2 | 14.2 | 2829 | 94 | |
3. | Fujifilm X-Pro3 | APS-C | 26.0 | 6240 | 4160 | 4K/30p | 24.1 | 13.6 | 1968 | 84 | |
4. | Nikon D780 | Full Frame | 24.3 | 6048 | 4024 | 4K/30p | 25.3 | 14.3 | 2877 | 95 | |
5. | Nikon D40X | APS-C | 10.0 | 3872 | 2592 | none | 22.4 | 11.4 | 516 | 63 | |
6. | Olympus E-P3 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 1080/60i | 20.8 | 10.1 | 536 | 51 | |
7. | Olympus E-PL2 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 720/30p | 21.4 | 10.2 | 573 | 55 | |
8. | Olympus E-450 | Four Thirds | 10.0 | 3648 | 2736 | none | 21.5 | 10.5 | 512 | 56 | |
9. | Olympus E-620 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | none | 21.3 | 10.3 | 536 | 55 | |
10. | Olympus E-420 | Four Thirds | 10.0 | 3648 | 2736 | none | 21.5 | 10.4 | 527 | 56 | |
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-500 | Four Thirds | 8.0 | 3264 | 2448 | none | 20.7 | 10.3 | 45 | 51 | |
14. | Panasonic S5 | Full Frame | 24.0 | 6000 | 4000 | 4K/60p | 25.1 | 14.5 | 2697 | 94 | |
15. | Panasonic S1 | Full Frame | 24.0 | 6000 | 4000 | 4K/60p | 25.2 | 14.5 | 3333 | 95 | |
16. | Panasonic S1H | Full Frame | 24.0 | 6000 | 4000 | 6K/30p | 25.2 | 14.2 | 2805 | 94 | |
17. | Panasonic L10 | Four Thirds | 10.0 | 3648 | 2736 | none | 21.3 | 10.8 | 429 | 55 | |
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 fp indeed provides for movie recording, while the E-400 does not. The highest resolution format that the fp 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-400 has an optical viewfinder, which can be very useful when shooting in bright sunlight. In contrast, the fp relies on live view and the rear LCD for framing. That said, the fp can be equipped with an optional viewfinder – the EVF-11. The following table reports on some other key feature differences and similarities of the Olympus E-400, the Sigma fp, and comparable cameras.
# | 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-400 | optical | n | 2.5 / 215 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | Y | n | |
2. | Sigma fp | optional | n | 3.2 / 2100 | fixed | Y | 1/8000s | 12.0/s | n | n | |
3. | Fujifilm X-Pro3 | 3690 | n | 3.0 / 1620 | tilting | Y | 1/8000s | 8.0/s | n | n | |
4. | Nikon D780 | optical | Y | 3.2 / 2359 | tilting | Y | 1/8000s | 12.0/s | n | n | |
5. | Nikon D40X | optical | n | 2.5 / 230 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | Y | n | |
6. | Olympus E-P3 | optional | n | 3.0 / 614 | fixed | Y | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | Y | Y | |
7. | Olympus E-PL2 | optional | n | 3.0 / 460 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | Y | Y | |
8. | Olympus E-450 | optical | n | 2.7 / 215 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.5/s | Y | n | |
9. | Olympus E-620 | optical | n | 2.7 / 230 | swivel | n | 1/4000s | 4.0/s | Y | Y | |
10. | Olympus E-420 | optical | n | 2.7 / 215 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.5/s | Y | n | |
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-500 | optical | n | 2.5 / 215 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 2.5/s | Y | n | |
14. | Panasonic S5 | 2360 | n | 3.0 / 1840 | swivel | Y | 1/8000s | 7.0/s | n | Y | |
15. | Panasonic S1 | 5760 | Y | 3.2 / 2100 | full-flex | Y | 1/8000s | 9.0/s | n | Y | |
16. | Panasonic S1H | 5760 | Y | 3.2 / 2330 | swivel | Y | 1/8000s | 9.0/s | n | Y | |
17. | Panasonic L10 | optical | n | 2.5 / 207 | swivel | n | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | Y | n | |
Note: *) Information refers to the mechanical shutter, unless the camera only has an electronic one. |
One difference between the cameras concerns the presence of an on-board flash. The E-400 has one, while the fp does not. While the built-in flash of the E-400 is not very powerful, it can at times be useful as a fill-in light.
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, the fp is one of those camera that have an additional 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 Sigma fp 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-400 writes its imaging data to Compact Flash or xD Picture cards, while the fp uses SDXC cards. The E-400 features dual card slots, which can be very useful in case a memory card fails. In contrast, the fp 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-400 and Sigma fp and, in particular, the interfaces the cameras (and selected comparators) provide for accessory control and data transfer.
# | Camera Model |
Hotshoe Port |
Internal Mic / Speaker |
Microphone Port |
Headphone Port |
HDMI Port |
USB Port |
WiFi Support |
NFC Support |
Bluetooth Support |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Olympus E-400 | Y | - / - | - | - | - | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
2. | Sigma fp | Y | stereo / mono | Y | - | micro | 3.1 | - | - | - | |
3. | Fujifilm X-Pro3 | Y | stereo / mono | Y | - | - | 3.1 | Y | - | Y | |
4. | Nikon D780 | Y | stereo / mono | Y | Y | mini | 3.1 | Y | - | Y | |
5. | Nikon D40X | Y | - / - | - | - | - | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
6. | Olympus E-P3 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
7. | Olympus E-PL2 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
8. | Olympus E-450 | Y | - / - | - | - | - | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
9. | Olympus E-620 | Y | - / - | - | - | - | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
10. | Olympus E-420 | Y | - / - | - | - | - | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
11. | Olympus E-410 | Y | - / - | - | - | - | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
12. | Olympus E-510 | Y | - / - | - | - | - | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
13. | Olympus E-500 | Y | - / - | - | - | - | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
14. | Panasonic S5 | Y | stereo / mono | Y | Y | micro | 3.2 | Y | - | Y | |
15. | Panasonic S1 | Y | stereo / mono | Y | Y | full | 3.1 | Y | - | Y | |
16. | Panasonic S1H | Y | stereo / mono | Y | Y | full | 3.1 | Y | - | Y | |
17. | Panasonic L10 | Y | - / - | - | - | - | 2.0 | - | - | - |
The fp is a recent model that features in the current product line-up of Sigma. In contrast, the E-400 has been discontinued (but can be found pre-owned on ebay). As a replacement in the same line of cameras, the E-400 was succeeded by the Olympus E-410. Further information on the features and operation of the E-400 and fp can be found, respectively, in the Olympus E-400 Manual (free pdf) or the online Sigma fp Manual.
Review summary
So how do things add up? Is the Olympus E-400 better than the Sigma fp or vice versa? Below is a summary of the relative strengths of each of the two contestants.
Arguments in favor of the Olympus E-400:
- 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.
- Longer lasting: Can take more shots (500 versus 280) on a single battery charge.
- Easier fill-in: Is equipped with a small onboard flash to brighten deep shadow areas.
- Greater peace of mind: Features a second card slot as a backup in case of memory card failure.
- More affordable: Was introduced into a lower priced category (63 percent cheaper at launch).
- More heavily discounted: Has been available for much longer (launched in September 2006).
Reasons to prefer the Sigma fp:
- More detail: Has more megapixels (24 vs 10MP), which boosts linear resolution by 58%.
- 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 4K/30p video.
- Larger screen: Has a bigger rear LCD (3.2" vs 2.5") for image review and settings control.
- More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (2100k vs 215k dots).
- Fewer buttons to press: Has a touchscreen to facilitate handling and shooting adjustments.
- Faster shutter: Has higher mechanical shutter speed (1/8000s vs 1/4000s) to freeze action.
- Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (12 vs 3 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
- Less disturbing: Has an electronic shutter option for completely silent shooting.
- Easier time-lapse photography: Has an intervalometer built-in for low frequency shooting.
- More compact: Is smaller (113x70mm vs 130x91mm) and will fit more readily into a bag.
- Easier travel charging: Can be conveniently charged via its USB port.
- Better sealing: Is splash and dust sealed for shooting in inclement weather conditions.
- More legacy lens friendly: Can use many non-native lenses via adapters.
- Faster data transfer: Supports a more advanced USB protocol (3.1 vs 2.0).
- More modern: Reflects 12 years and 9 months of technical progress since the E-400 launch.
If the count of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a measure, the fp is the clear winner of the contest (20 : 7 points). However, the relevance of individual strengths will vary across photographers, so that you might want to apply your own weighing scheme to the summary points when reflecting and deciding on a new camera. 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 Olympus E-400 and the Sigma fp place the cameras among the top in their class? Find out in the latest Best DSLR Camera and Best Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera listings 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 partial and cannot reveal, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance when actually working with the E-400 or the fp. User reviews, such as those found at amazon, can sometimes inform about these issues, but such feedback is often incomplete, inconsistent, and biased.
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.
# | Camera Model |
AP score |
CL score |
DCW score |
DPR score |
EPZ score |
PB score |
Camera Launch |
Launch Price (USD) |
Street Price |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Olympus E-400 | .. | 85/100 | .. | .. | 4/5 | 4/5 | Sep 2006 | 699 | ebay.com | |
2. | Sigma fp | 4/5 | .. | 4/5 | .. | 4/5 | 4.5/5 | Jul 2019 | 1,899 | amazon.com | |
3. | Fujifilm X-Pro3 | 4/5 | + | 4/5 | 85/100 | 4/5 | .. | Oct 2019 | 1,799 | amazon.com | |
4. | Nikon D780 | 5/5 | .. | 5/5 | 87/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jan 2020 | 2,299 | amazon.com | |
5. | Nikon D40X | .. | 79/100 | .. | + + | 4/5 | 4/5 | Mar 2007 | 729 | ebay.com | |
6. | Olympus E-P3 | .. | 83/100 | .. | 74/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jun 2011 | 799 | ebay.com | |
7. | Olympus E-PL2 | 3/5 | 83/100 | .. | 71/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jan 2011 | 599 | ebay.com | |
8. | Olympus E-450 | .. | .. | .. | .. | 4/5 | 4/5 | Mar 2009 | 499 | ebay.com | |
9. | Olympus E-620 | 3/5 | 88/100 | .. | 72/100 | 4.5/5 | 5/5 | Feb 2009 | 699 | ebay.com | |
10. | Olympus E-420 | .. | 85/100 | .. | + + | 4/5 | 4.5/5 | Mar 2008 | 599 | 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-500 | .. | 76/100 | .. | + + | .. | .. | Sep 2005 | 599 | ebay.com | |
14. | Panasonic S5 | 4.5/5 | + + | 4.5/5 | 88/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Sep 2020 | 1,999 | amazon.com | |
15. | Panasonic S1 | 4.5/5 | + + | 4.5/5 | 88/100 | 4.5/5 | 4/5 | Feb 2019 | 2,499 | amazon.com | |
16. | Panasonic S1H | .. | .. | 4/5 | 90/100 | .. | .. | May 2019 | 3,999 | amazon.com | |
17. | Panasonic L10 | .. | 85/100 | .. | + | 3.5/5 | 4/5 | Aug 2007 | 599 | ebay.com | |
Note: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available. |
The review scores listed above should be treated with care, though. The ratings are only valid when referring to cameras in the same category and of the same age. Hence, a score should always be seen in the context of the camera's market launch date and its price, 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 would like to check on the differences and similarities of other camera models, just make your choice using the following search menu. Alternatively, you can follow any of the listed hyperlinks for comparisons that others found interesting.
- Canon 50D vs Sigma fp
- Canon SX430 vs Sigma fp
- Fujifilm X-A2 vs Sigma fp
- Leica TL vs Olympus E-400
- Nikon Coolpix A vs Olympus E-400
- Nikon D1 vs Olympus E-400
- Olympus E-400 vs Olympus E-410
- Olympus E-400 vs Samsung NX500
- Olympus E-400 vs Sony RX10 III
- Sigma fp vs Sony A7C R
- Sigma fp vs Sony A7S III
- Sigma fp vs Sony NEX-5N
Specifications: Olympus E-400 vs Sigma fp
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.
Camera Model | Olympus E-400 | Sigma fp |
---|---|---|
Camera Type | Digital single lens reflex | Mirrorless system camera |
Camera Lens | Four Thirds lenses | Leica L mount lenses |
Launch Date | September 2006 | July 2019 |
Launch Price | USD 699 | USD 1,899 |
Sensor Specs | Olympus E-400 | Sigma fp |
Sensor Technology | CMOS | BSI-CMOS |
Sensor Format | Four Thirds Sensor | Full Frame Sensor |
Sensor Size | 17.3 x 13.0 mm | 35.9 x 23.9 mm |
Sensor Area | 224.9 mm2 | 858.01 mm2 |
Sensor Diagonal | 21.6 mm | 43.1 mm |
Crop Factor | 2.0x | 1.0x |
Sensor Resolution | 10 Megapixels | 24 Megapixels |
Image Resolution | 3648 x 2736 pixels | 6000 x 4000 pixels |
Pixel Pitch | 4.74 μm | 5.98 μm |
Pixel Density | 4.44 MP/cm2 | 2.80 MP/cm2 |
Moiré control | Anti-Alias filter | no AA filter |
Movie Capability | no Video | 4K/30p Video |
ISO Setting | 100 - 1,600 ISO | 100 - 25,600 ISO |
ISO Boost | no Enhancement | 6 - 102,400 ISO |
Screen Specs | Olympus E-400 | Sigma fp |
Viewfinder Type | Optical viewfinder | Viewfinder optional |
Viewfinder Field of View | 95% | |
Viewfinder Magnification | 0.46x | |
LCD Framing | Live View | |
Rear LCD Size | 2.5inch | 3.2inch |
LCD Resolution | 215k dots | 2100k dots |
LCD Attachment | Fixed screen | Fixed screen |
Touch Input | no Touchscreen | Touchscreen |
Shooting Specs | Olympus E-400 | Sigma fp |
Focus System | Phase-detect AF | Contrast-detect AF |
Manual Focusing Aid | no Peaking Feature | Focus Peaking |
Max Shutter Speed (mechanical) | 1/4000s | 1/8000s |
Continuous Shooting | 3 shutter flaps/s | 12 shutter flaps/s |
Electronic Shutter | no E-Shutter | up to 1/8000s |
Time-Lapse Photography | no Intervalometer | Intervalometer built-in |
Fill Flash | Built-in Flash | no On-Board Flash |
Storage Medium | CF or XD cards | SDXC cards |
Single or Dual Card Slots | Dual card slots | Single card slot |
Connectivity Specs | Olympus E-400 | Sigma fp |
External Flash | Hotshoe | Hotshoe |
USB Connector | USB 2.0 | USB 3.1 |
HDMI Port | no HDMI | micro HDMI |
Microphone Port | no MIC socket | External MIC port |
Wifi Support | no Wifi | no Wifi |
Body Specs | Olympus E-400 | Sigma fp |
Environmental Sealing | not weather sealed | Weathersealed body |
Battery Type | Olympus BLS-1 | Sigma BP-51 |
Battery Life (CIPA) | 500 shots per charge | 280 shots per charge |
In-Camera Charging | no USB charging | USB charging |
Body Dimensions |
130 x 91 x 53 mm (5.1 x 3.6 x 2.1 in) |
113 x 70 x 45 mm (4.4 x 2.8 x 1.8 in) |
Camera Weight | 435 g (15.3 oz) | 422 g (14.9 oz) |
Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.