Olympus E-M1 II vs Ricoh GR

The Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II and the Ricoh GR are two digital cameras that were officially introduced, respectively, in September 2016 and April 2013. The E-M1 II is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera, while the GR is a fixed lens compact. The cameras are based on a Four Thirds (E-M1 II) and an APS-C (GR) sensor. The Olympus has a resolution of 20.2 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-M1 II		Ricoh GR
Mirrorless system camera		Fixed lens compact camera
Micro Four Thirds lenses		28mm f/2.8
20.2 MP – Four Thirds sensor		16.1 MP – APS-C sensor
4K/30p Video		1080/30p Video
ISO 200-25,600		ISO 100-25,600
Electronic viewfinder (2360k dots)		Viewfinder optional
3.0" LCD – 1037k dots		3.0" LCD – 1230k dots
Swivel touchscreen		Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)
18 shutter flaps per second		4 shutter flaps per second
In-body stabilization		no shake reduction
Weathersealed body		not weather sealed
440 shots per battery charge		290 shots per battery charge
134 x 91 x 67 mm, 574 g		117 x 61 x 35 mm, 245 g

Check E-M1 II 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 OM-D E-M1 Mark II 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 side-by-side display below illustrates the physical size and weight of the Olympus E-M1 II and the Ricoh GR. The two cameras are presented according to their relative size. Three successive views from the front, the top, and the rear 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 Ricoh GR is considerably smaller (41 percent) than the Olympus E-M1 II. It is worth mentioning in this context that the E-M1 II is splash and dust resistant, while the GR does not feature any corresponding weather-sealing.

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-M1 II 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-M1 II and their specifications in the Micro Four Thirds Lens Catalog.

Concerning battery life, the E-M1 II gets 440 shots out of its Olympus BLH-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-M1 II	134 mm	91 mm	67 mm	574 g	440	Y	Sep 2016	1,999	ebay.com
2.		Ricoh GR	117 mm	61 mm	35 mm	245 g	290	n	Apr 2013	799	ebay.com
3.		Nikon Coolpix A	111 mm	64 mm	40 mm	299 g	230	n	Mar 2013	1,099	ebay.com
4.		Olympus E-M1 III	134 mm	91 mm	69 mm	580 g	420	Y	Feb 2020	1,799	ebay.com
5.		Olympus PEN-F	125 mm	72 mm	37 mm	427 g	330	n	Jan 2016	1,199	ebay.com
6.		Olympus E-M1	130 mm	94 mm	63 mm	497 g	350	Y	Sep 2013	1,399	ebay.com
7.		OM System OM-1 II	135 mm	92 mm	73 mm	599 g	500	Y	Jan 2024	2,399	amazon.com
8.		OM System OM-1	135 mm	92 mm	73 mm	599 g	520	Y	Feb 2022	2,199	ebay.com
9.		Panasonic GH5 II	139 mm	98 mm	87 mm	727 g	400	Y	May 2021	1,699	amazon.com
10.		Panasonic G9	137 mm	97 mm	92 mm	658 g	400	Y	Nov 2017	1,699	ebay.com
11.		Panasonic GH5	139 mm	98 mm	87 mm	725 g	410	Y	Jan 2017	1,999	ebay.com
12.		Panasonic G85	128 mm	89 mm	74 mm	505 g	330	Y	Sep 2016	899	ebay.com
13.		Panasonic GX8	133 mm	78 mm	63 mm	487 g	330	Y	Jul 2015	1,199	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

Any camera decision will obviously take relative prices into account. The retail prices at the time of the camera’s release place the model in the market relative to other models in the producer’s line-up and the competition. The GR was launched at a lower price than the E-M1 II, 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. Then, after the new model is out, very good deals can frequently be found on the pre-owned market.

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. 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 tend to be more expensive and lead to bigger and heavier cameras and lenses.

Of the two cameras under consideration, the Olympus E-M1 II 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-M1 II has a native 4:3 aspect ratio, while the one in the GR offers a 3:2 aspect.

Despite having a smaller sensor, the Olympus E-M1 II offers a higher resolution of 20.2 megapixels, compared with 16.1 MP of the Ricoh GR. 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 3.34μm versus 4.79μm for the GR). However, it should be noted that the E-M1 II is much more recent (by 3 years and 5 months) than the GR, 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 neither of the two cameras has an anti-alias filter installed, so they are able to capture all the detail the sensor resolves.

The resolution advantage of the Olympus E-M1 II implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the E-M1 II 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 Ricoh GR are 24.6 x 16.3 inches or 62.6 x 41.5 cm for good quality, 19.7 x 13.1 inches or 50.1 x 33.2 cm for very good quality, and 16.4 x 10.9 inches or 41.7 x 27.6 cm for excellent quality prints.

The E-M1 II has on-sensor phase detect pixels, which results in fast and reliable autofocus acquisition even during live view operation.

Unlike the GR, the E-M1 II has the capacity to capture high quality composite images (50MP) by combining multiple shots after shifting its sensor by miniscule distances. This multi-shot, pixel-shift mode is most suitable for photography of stationary objects (landscapes, studio scenes).

The Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II has a native sensitivity range from ISO 200 to ISO 25600, which can be extended to ISO 64-25600. The corresponding ISO settings for the Ricoh GR are ISO 100 to ISO 25600 (no boost).

Technology-wise, both cameras are equipped with CMOS (Complementary Metal–Oxide–Semiconductor) sensors. 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 Overall DXO ratings for the two cameras under consideration are close, suggesting that they provide similar imaging performance. 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
1.		Olympus E-M1 II	Four Thirds	20.2	5184	3888	4K/30p	23.7	12.8	1312	80
2.		Ricoh GR	APS-C	16.1	4928	3264	1080/30p	23.6	13.5	972	78
3.		Nikon Coolpix A	APS-C	16.1	4928	3264	1080/30p	23.4	13.8	1164	80
4.		Olympus E-M1 III	Four Thirds	20.2	5184	3888	4K/30p	23.3	13.1	1356	76
5.		Olympus PEN-F	Four Thirds	20.2	5184	3888	1080/60p	23.1	12.4	894	74
6.		Olympus E-M1	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	23.0	12.7	757	73
7.		OM System OM-1 II	Four Thirds	20.2	5184	3888	4K/60p	23.4	13.6	1749	78
8.		OM System OM-1	Four Thirds	20.2	5184	3888	4K/60p	23.4	13.4	1553	77
9.		Panasonic GH5 II	Four Thirds	20.2	5184	3888	4K/60p	23.7	13.1	1136	79
10.		Panasonic G9	Four Thirds	20.2	5184	3888	4K/60p	23.1	12.8	1138	74
11.		Panasonic GH5	Four Thirds	20.2	5184	3888	4K/60p	23.9	13.0	807	77
12.		Panasonic G85	Four Thirds	15.8	4592	3448	4K/30p	22.8	12.5	656	71
13.		Panasonic GX8	Four Thirds	20.2	5184	3888	4K/30p	23.5	12.6	806	75
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 can also record movies. The two cameras under consideration both have sensors whose read-out speed is fast enough to capture moving pictures, but the E-M1 II provides a higher video resolution than the GR. It can shoot video footage at 4K/30p, while the Ricoh is limited to 1080/30p.

Feature comparison

Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a variety of features. For example, the E-M1 II has an electronic viewfinder (2360k dots), which can be very helpful 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 adjacent table lists some of the other core features of the Olympus E-M1 II and Ricoh GR along with similar information for a selection of comparators.

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-M1 II	2360	n	3.0 / 1037	swivel	Y	1/8000s	18.0/s	n	Y
2.		Ricoh GR	optional	n	3.0 / 1230	fixed	n	1/4000s	4.0/s	Y	n
3.		Nikon Coolpix A	optional	n	3.0 / 921	fixed	n	1/2000s	4.0/s	Y	n
4.		Olympus E-M1 III	2360	n	3.0 / 1037	swivel	Y	1/8000s	18.0/s	n	Y
5.		Olympus PEN-F	2360	n	3.0 / 1037	swivel	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
6.		Olympus E-M1	2360	n	3.0 / 1037	tilting	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
7.		OM System OM-1 II	5760	n	3.0 / 1640	swivel	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
8.		OM System OM-1	5760	n	3.0 / 1640	swivel	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
9.		Panasonic GH5 II	3680	n	3.0 / 1840	swivel	Y	1/8000s	12.0/s	n	Y
10.		Panasonic G9	3680	Y	3.0 / 1040	swivel	Y	1/8000s	20.0/s	n	Y
11.		Panasonic GH5	3680	n	3.2 / 1620	swivel	Y	1/8000s	12.0/s	n	Y
12.		Panasonic G85	2360	n	3.0 / 1040	swivel	Y	1/4000s	9.0/s	Y	Y
13.		Panasonic GX8	2360	n	3.0 / 1040	swivel	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
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.

One differentiating feature between the two cameras concerns the touch sensitivity of the rear screen. The E-M1 II has a touchscreen, while the GR has a conventional panel. Touch control can be particularly helpful, for example, for setting the focus point.

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 E-M1 II 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 Olympus E-M1 II and the Ricoh GR both have 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.

Concerning the storage of imaging data, both the E-M1 II and the GR write their files to SDXC cards. The E-M1 II features dual card slots, which can be very useful in case a memory card fails. In contrast, the GR only has one slot. The E-M1 II supports UHS-II cards (on its first slot), while the GR can use UHS-I cards.

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 OM-D E-M1 Mark II 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-M1 II	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.0	Y	-	-
2.		Ricoh GR	Y	mono / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	-	-	-
3.		Nikon Coolpix A	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
4.		Olympus E-M1 III	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.1	Y	-	Y
5.		Olympus PEN-F	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
6.		Olympus E-M1	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
7.		OM System OM-1 II	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.0	Y	-	Y
8.		OM System OM-1	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.0	Y	-	Y
9.		Panasonic GH5 II	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	full	3.2	Y	-	Y
10.		Panasonic G9	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	full	3.0	Y	-	Y
11.		Panasonic GH5	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	full	3.1	Y	-	Y
12.		Panasonic G85	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
13.		Panasonic GX8	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
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	-	-

It is notable that the E-M1 II has a microphone port, which is missing on the GR. Such an external microphone input can help to substantially improve the quality of audio recordings when a good external microphone is used.

Studio photographers will appreciate that the Olympus E-M1 II (unlike the GR) features a PC Sync socket, so that professional strobe lights can be controlled by the camera.

Both the E-M1 II and the GR have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The GR was replaced by the Ricoh GR II, while the E-M1 II was followed by the Olympus E-M1 III. Further information on the features and operation of the E-M1 II and GR can be found, respectively, in the Olympus E-M1 II Manual (free pdf) or the online Ricoh GR Manual.

Review summary

So what conclusions can be drawn? Is there a clear favorite between the Olympus E-M1 II and the Ricoh GR? Which camera is better? The listing below highlights the relative strengths of the two models.

Advantages of the Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II:

• More detail: Offers more megapixels (20.2 vs 16.1MP) with a 10% higher linear resolution.
• High quality composites: Can combine several shots after pixel-shifting its sensor.
• Better low-light sensitivity: Requires less light for good images (0.4 stops ISO advantage).
• Better video: Provides higher definition movie capture (4K/30p vs 1080/30p).
• Better live-view autofocus: Features on-sensor phase-detection for more confident autofocus.
• Better sound: Can connect to an external microphone for higher quality sound recording.
• Better sound control: Has a headphone port that enables audio monitoring while recording.
• Easier framing: Has an electronic viewfinder for image composition and settings control.
• More flexible LCD: Has a swivel screen for odd-angle shots in portrait or landscape orientation.
• Fewer buttons to press: Is equipped with a touch-sensitive rear screen to facilitate handling.
• 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 (18 vs 4 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
• Less disturbing: Has an electronic shutter option for completely silent shooting.
• More flexible: Accepts interchangeable lenses, so that lens characteristics can be altered.
• Longer lasting: Can take more shots (440 versus 290) on a single battery charge.
• Better sealing: Is weather sealed to enable shooting in dusty or wet environments.
• Sharper images: Has hand-shake reducing image stabilization built-in.
• Faster data transfer: Supports a more advanced USB protocol (3.0 vs 2.0).
• Easier file upload: Has wifi built in for automatic backup or image transfer to the web.
• 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.
• Faster buffer clearing: Supports a more advanced SD data transfer standard (UHS-II vs UHS-I).
• More modern: Reflects 3 years and 5 months of technical progress since the GR launch.

Arguments in favor of the Ricoh GR:

• More dynamic range: Captures a broader range of light and dark details (0.7 EV of extra DR).
• More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1230k vs 1037k dots).
• Ready to shoot: Has an integrated lens, whereas the E-M1 II necessitates an extra lens.
• More compact: Is smaller (117x61mm vs 134x91mm) 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-M1 II).
• Easier travel charging: Can be conveniently charged via its USB port.
• Easier fill-in: Has a small integrated flash to brighten shadows of backlit subjects.
• More affordable: Was introduced at a lower price, despite coming with a built-in lens.
• More heavily discounted: Has been around for much longer (launched in April 2013).

If the number of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the E-M1 II is the clear winner of the match-up (24 : 9 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 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-M1 II and the Ricoh GR place the cameras among the top in their class? Find out in the latest Best Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera and Best Prime Lens Compact 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 partial and cannot reveal, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance when actually working with the E-M1 II 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 where reviews by experts come in. The adjacent summary-table relays the overall verdicts of several of the most popular 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-M1 II	5/5	+ +	5/5	85/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2016	1,999	ebay.com
2.		Ricoh GR	5/5	..	..	79/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Apr 2013	799	ebay.com
3.		Nikon Coolpix A	4/5	+	..	75/100	4/5	4/5	Mar 2013	1,099	ebay.com
4.		Olympus E-M1 III	5/5	..	5/5	83/100	4.5/5	4/5	Feb 2020	1,799	ebay.com
5.		Olympus PEN-F	..	..	4/5	82/100	4.5/5	5/5	Jan 2016	1,199	ebay.com
6.		Olympus E-M1	5/5	+ +	..	84/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2013	1,399	ebay.com
7.		OM System OM-1 II	..	..	..	..	..	..	Jan 2024	2,399	amazon.com
8.		OM System OM-1	5/5	..	..	87/100	5/5	4.5/5	Feb 2022	2,199	ebay.com
9.		Panasonic GH5 II	4.5/5	..	4.5/5	85/100	4.5/5	5/5	May 2021	1,699	amazon.com
10.		Panasonic G9	..	+ +	5/5	85/100	5/5	5/5	Nov 2017	1,699	ebay.com
11.		Panasonic GH5	4.5/5	+ +	..	85/100	4.5/5	5/5	Jan 2017	1,999	ebay.com
12.		Panasonic G85	..	+ +	..	84/100	5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2016	899	ebay.com
13.		Panasonic GX8	5/5	+	..	82/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jul 2015	1,199	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 were established in reference to similarly priced cameras that were available in the market at the time of the review. Thus, a score needs to be put into the context of the launch date and the launch price of the camera, 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.

Check E-M1 II 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 are interested in seeing how other cameras pair up, just make your choice using the following search menu. 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-M1 II 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.