Olympus E-600 versus Olympus E-5
The Olympus E-600 and the Olympus E-5 are two digital cameras that were announced, respectively, in August 2009 and September 2010. Both are DSLR (Digital Single Lens Reflex) cameras that are equipped with a Four Thirds sensor. Both cameras offer a resolution of 12.2 megapixel.
The side-by-side display below illustrates the physical size and weight of the Olympus E-600 and the Olympus E-5. 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. You can also toggle the display to switch to a percentage comparison if you prefer that the measures are being expressed in relative terms (in this case, the camera on the left side – the E-600 – represents the basis for the calculations across all the size and weight measures).
If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Olympus E-5 is considerably larger (36 percent) than the Olympus E-600. Moreover, the E-5 is substantially heavier (63 percent) than the E-600. Cameras that are intended for semi-professional or professional use are sometimes a bit bulkier in order to provide them with the necessary ruggedness. It is noteworthy in this context that the E-5 is splash and dust-proof, while the E-600 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 find an overview of suitable optics in the Four Thirds Lens Catalog.
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, just select a new right or left comparator from among the camera models in the table. Alternatively, you can also move across to the CAM-parator tool and choose from the broad selection of possible comparisons there.
|Camera Body Specifications
|Olympus E-600 (⇒ rgt)||5.1 in||3.7 in||2.4 in||18.9 oz||500||no||2009||449||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-5 (⇒ lft)||5.6 in||4.6 in||3.0 in||30.8 oz||750||YES||2010||1,699||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-P2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||4.8 in||2.8 in||1.4 in||12.5 oz||300||no||2009||799||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-P1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||4.8 in||2.8 in||1.4 in||12.5 oz||300||no||2009||799||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-620 (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.1 in||3.7 in||2.4 in||18.4 oz||500||no||2009||699||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-450 (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.1 in||3.6 in||2.1 in||15.5 oz||500||no||2009||499||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-420 (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.1 in||3.6 in||2.1 in||15.5 oz||500||no||2008||599||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-520 (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.4 in||3.6 in||2.7 in||18.9 oz||750||no||2008||699||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-30 (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.6 in||4.3 in||3.0 in||24.7 oz||750||no||2008||1,299||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-410 (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.1 in||3.6 in||2.1 in||15.3 oz||500||no||2007||699||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-510 (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.4 in||3.6 in||2.7 in||19.0 oz||750||no||2007||799||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-3 (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.6 in||4.6 in||3.0 in||30.9 oz||750||YES||2007||1,699||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.6 in||4.1 in||3.2 in||26.0 oz||750||YES||2003||1,699||discont.||check|
The listed prices provide an indication of the market segment that the manufacturer of the cameras have been targeting. The E-600 was launched at a markedly lower price (by 74 percent) than the E-5, 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. Then, after the new model is out, very good deals can frequently be found on the pre-owned market.
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. 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.
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.
The two cameras under review do not only share the same sensor size, but also offer an identical resolution of 12.2 megapixel. This similarity in sensor specs implies that both the E-600 and the E-5 have the same pixel density, as well as the same pixel size. It should, however, be noted that the E-5 is a somewhat more recent model (by 1 year) than the E-600, and its sensor might have benefitted from technological advances during this time.
Since 2007, DXO Mark has published sensor performance measurements that have been derived using a consistent methodology. 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 Overall DXO ratings for the two cameras under consideration are close, suggesting that they provide similar image quality. The table below summarizes the physical sensor characteristics and sensor quality findings and compares them across a set of similar cameras.
|Olympus E-600 (⇒ rgt)||Four Thirds||12.2||4032||3024||no||21.5||10.3||541||55|
|Olympus E-5 (⇒ lft)||Four Thirds||12.2||4032||3024||720/30p||21.6||10.5||519||56|
|Olympus E-P2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Four Thirds||12.2||4032||3024||720/30p||21.5||10.4||505||56|
|Olympus E-P1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Four Thirds||12.2||4032||3024||720/30p||21.4||10.4||536||55|
|Olympus E-620 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Four Thirds||12.2||4032||3024||no||21.3||10.3||536||55|
|Olympus E-450 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Four Thirds||10.0||3648||2736||no||21.5||10.5||512||56|
|Olympus E-420 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Four Thirds||10.0||3648||2736||no||21.5||10.4||527||56|
|Olympus E-520 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Four Thirds||10.0||3648||2736||no||21.4||10.4||548||55|
|Olympus E-30 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Four Thirds||12.2||4032||3024||no||21.3||10.4||530||55|
|Olympus E-410 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Four Thirds||10.0||3648||2736||no||21.1||10.0||494||51|
|Olympus E-510 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Four Thirds||10.0||3648||2736||no||21.2||10.0||442||52|
|Olympus E-3 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Four Thirds||10.0||3648||2736||no||21.6||10.5||571||56|
|Olympus E-1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Four Thirds||4.9||2560||1920||no||-||-||-||-|
Many modern cameras are not only capable of taking still images, but can also record movies. The E-5 indeed provides for movie recording, while the E-600 does not. The highest resolution format that the E-5 can use is 720/30p.
Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. The E-600 and the E-5 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 following table reports on some other key feature differences and similarities of the Olympus E-600, the Olympus E-5, and comparable cameras. If you need more detail on the specs, you can find comprehensive listings, for example, in the dpreview camera hub.
|Olympus E-600 (⇒ rgt)||optical||no||2.7||230||swivel||no||4000||4.0||12||YES|
|Olympus E-5 (⇒ lft)||optical||YES||3.0||920||swivel||no||8000||5.0||13||YES|
|Olympus E-P2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||no||no||3.0||230||fixed||no||4000||3.0||no||YES|
|Olympus E-P1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||no||no||3.0||230||fixed||no||4000||3.0||no||YES|
|Olympus E-620 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||2.7||230||swivel||no||4000||4.0||12||YES|
|Olympus E-450 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||2.7||215||fixed||no||4000||3.5||12||no|
|Olympus E-420 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||2.7||215||fixed||no||4000||3.5||12||no|
|Olympus E-520 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||2.7||215||fixed||no||4000||3.5||12||YES|
|Olympus E-30 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||2.7||230||swivel||no||8000||5.0||13||YES|
|Olympus E-410 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||2.5||215||fixed||no||4000||3.0||10||no|
|Olympus E-510 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||2.5||215||fixed||no||4000||3.0||12||YES|
|Olympus E-3 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||2.5||230||swivel||no||8000||5.0||13||YES|
|Olympus E-1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||1.8||134||fixed||no||4000||3.0||no||no|
Both the E-600 and the E-5 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. Neither of the two has a direct successor, so they represent the end of the respective camera lines from Olympus.
So what is the bottom line? Is the Olympus E-600 better than the Olympus E-5 or vice versa? Below is a summary of the relative strengths of each of the two contestants.
Reasons to prefer the Olympus E-600:
- More compact: Is smaller (130x94mm vs 142x117mm) and thus needs less room in the bag.
- Less heavy: Is lighter (by 338g or 39 percent) and hence easier to carry around.
- More affordable: Was introduced into a lower priced category (74 percent cheaper at launch).
- More heavily discounted: Has been on the market for longer (launched in August 2009).
Arguments in favor of the Olympus E-5:
- Broader imaging potential: Can capture not only stills but also 720/30p video.
- Easier setting verification: Has a control panel on top to check shooting parameters.
- Larger screen: Has a bigger rear LCD (3.0" vs 2.7") for image review and settings control.
- More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (920k vs 230k dots).
- Faster shutter: Has a higher mechanical shutter speed (8000/sec vs 4000/sec) to freeze action.
- Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (5 vs 4 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
- Longer lasting: Gets more shots (750 versus 500) out of a single battery charge.
- Better sealing: Is splash and dust sealed for shooting in inclement weather conditions.
- More modern: Was introduced somewhat (1 year) more recently.
If the count of individual advantages (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the E-5 is the clear winner of the contest (9 : 4 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.
In any case, while the specs-based evaluation of cameras is instructive in revealing their potential as photographic tools, it says nothing about, for example, the handling, responsiveness, and overall imaging quality of the E-600 and the E-5 in practical situations. 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. This is why hands-on reviews by experts are important. The adjacent table relays the overall verdicts of several of the most popular camera review sites. You can find the full text of the reviews, respectively, at cameralabs.com, dpreview.com, ephotozine.com, imaging-resource.com, and photographyblog.com.
|Olympus E-600 (⇒ rgt)||-||-||-||-||4.5/5||2009||449||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-5 (⇒ lft)||-||75/100||4/5||-||4.5/5||2010||1,699||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-P2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||83/100 Rec||69/100 Silver||4/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||2009||799||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-P1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||83/100 Rec||66/100||4/5||4/5||4.5/5||2009||799||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-620 (⇒ lft | rgt)||88/100||72/100 HiRec||4.5/5||reviewed||5/5||2009||699||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-450 (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||-||4/5||-||4/5||2009||499||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-420 (⇒ lft | rgt)||85/100||HiRec||4/5||reviewed||4.5/5||2008||599||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-520 (⇒ lft | rgt)||87/100||HiRec||4.5/5||4/5||4.5/5||2008||699||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-30 (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||71/100 HiRec||4.5/5||-||4/5||2008||1,299||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-410 (⇒ lft | rgt)||86/100||HiRec||4/5||reviewed||4.5/5||2007||699||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-510 (⇒ lft | rgt)||89/100||HiRec||3.5/5||reviewed||4.5/5||2007||799||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-3 (⇒ lft | rgt)||88/100||HiRec||reviewed||reviewed||4/5||2007||1,699||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||Rec||reviewed||reviewed||-||2003||1,699||discont.||check|
The above review scores should be interpreted with care, though. The ratings are only valid when refering 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. Also, please note that some of the review sites have changed their methodology and reporting over time.
If you would like to see a different side-by-side camera review, just make your choice using the following search menu. Alternatively, you can follow any of the listed hyperlinks for comparisons that others found interesting. If you do not see the camera that you are looking for, please send me an email, and I will try to add information on that model to the database.
- Canon 1D C vs Canon 5D Mark III
- Canon 50D vs Canon 80D
- Canon 750D vs Canon M3
- Canon 7D II vs Canon SL1
- Canon 7D vs Canon SL1
- Canon 7D vs Olympus E-500
- Canon G7 X Mark II vs Sony RX100 IV
- Fujifilm X-M1 vs Fujifilm X-T10
- Nikon D610 vs Sony A7
- Olympus E-450 vs Olympus E-510
- Olympus E-M1 II vs Panasonic G80
- Sony A7R II vs Sony A7S II