PW

Olympus E-M1 II vs Ricoh WG-60

The Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II and the Ricoh WG-60 are two digital cameras that were announced, respectively, in September 2016 and October 2018. The E-M1 II is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera, while the WG-60 is a fixed lens compact. The cameras are based on a Four Thirds (E-M1 II) and a 1/2.3-inch (WG-60) sensor. The Olympus has a resolution of 20.2 megapixels, whereas the Ricoh provides 15.9 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 WG-60
Olympus E-M1 II Ricoh WG-60
Mirrorless system camera Fixed lens compact camera
Micro Four Thirds lenses 28-140mm f/3.5-5.5
20.2 MP, Four Thirds Sensor 15.9 MP, 1/2.3" Sensor
4K/30p Video 1080/60p Video
ISO 200-25600 ISO 125-6400
Electronic viewfinder (2360k dots) No viewfinder, LCD framing
3.0" LCD, 1037k dots 2.7" LCD, 230k dots
Swivel touchscreen Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)
18 shutter flaps per second 8 shutter flaps per second
In-body stabilizationNo shake reduction
Weathersealed bodyWaterproof body (14m)
440 shots per battery charge300 shots per battery charge
134 x 91 x 67 mm, 574 g 123 x 62 x 30 mm, 193 g

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 WG-60? 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-M1 II and the Ricoh WG-60 are illustrated in the side-by-side display below. 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 measures are rounded to the nearest millimeter.

The WG-60 can be obtained in two different colors (black, red), while the E-M1 II is only available in black.

Size Olympus E-M1 II vs Ricoh WG-60
Compare E-M1 II versus WG-60 top
Comparison E-M1 II or WG-60 rear

If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Ricoh WG-60 is considerably smaller (37 percent) than the Olympus E-M1 II. 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-60 is water-proof up to 14m 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-60 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.

The following table provides a synthesis of the main physical specifications of the two cameras and other similar ones. 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 camera comparisons there.

Camera Body Specifications
  Camera
Model
Camera
Width
Camera
Height
Camera
Depth
Camera
Weight
Battery
Life
(CIPA)
Weather
Sealing
(yes/no)
Camera
Launch
(announced)
Launch
Price
(USD)
Street
Price
(USD)
Used
Price
(USD)
Camera
Model
 
Olympus E-M1 II» 5.3 in 3.6 in 2.6 in 20.2 oz 440 Y Sep 2016 1,999 i i Olympus E-M1 II
 
Ricoh WG-60« 4.8 in 2.4 in 1.2 in 6.8 oz 300 Y Oct 2018 279 i i Ricoh WG-60
 
Fujifilm XP140« » 4.3 in 2.8 in 1.1 in 7.3 oz 240 Y Feb 2019 229 i i Fujifilm XP140
 
Fujifilm XP130« » 4.3 in 2.8 in 1.1 in 7.3 oz 240 n Jan 2018 229- i Fujifilm XP130
 
Fujifilm XP120« » 4.3 in 2.8 in 1.1 in 7.2 oz 210 Y Jan 2017 229- i Fujifilm XP120
 
Nikon W300« » 4.4 in 2.6 in 1.1 in 8.1 oz 280 Y May 2017 389 i i Nikon W300
 
Olympus PEN-F« » 4.9 in 2.8 in 1.5 in 15.1 oz 330 n Jan 2016 1,199 i i Olympus PEN-F
 
Olympus E-M5 II« » 4.9 in 3.3 in 1.8 in 16.5 oz 310 Y Feb 2015 1,099 i i Olympus E-M5 II
 
Olympus E-M1« » 5.1 in 3.7 in 2.5 in 17.5 oz 350 Y Sep 2013 1,399- i Olympus E-M1
 
Panasonic G9« » 5.4 in 3.8 in 3.6 in 23.2 oz 400 Y Nov 2017 1,699 i i Panasonic G9
 
Panasonic GH5« » 5.5 in 3.9 in 3.4 in 25.6 oz 410 Y Jan 2017 1,999 i i Panasonic GH5
 
Panasonic G85« » 5.0 in 3.5 in 2.9 in 17.8 oz 330 Y Sep 2016 899- i Panasonic G85
 
Panasonic GX8« » 5.2 in 3.1 in 2.5 in 17.2 oz 330 Y Jul 2015 1,199- i Panasonic GX8
 
Sony A7 III« » 5.0 in 3.8 in 2.9 in 22.9 oz 610 Y Feb 2018 1,999 i i Sony A7 III
 
Sony WX800« » 4.0 in 2.3 in 1.4 in 8.2 oz 370 n Oct 2018 399 i i Sony WX800
 
Sony A9« » 5.0 in 3.8 in 2.5 in 23.7 oz 650 Y Apr 2017 4,499 i i Sony A9
 
Sony A7 II« » 5.0 in 3.8 in 2.4 in 21.1 oz 350 Y Nov 2014 1,999- i Sony A7 II
Note: Measurements and pricing do not include easily detachable parts, such as 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 WG-60 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.

 

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. 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-M1 II features a Four Thirds sensor and the Ricoh WG-60 a 1/2.3-inch sensor. The sensor area in the WG-60 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.

Olympus E-M1 II and Ricoh WG-60 sensor measures

With 20.2MP, the E-M1 II offers a higher resolution than the WG-60 (15.9MP), but the E-M1 II nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 3.34μm versus 1.33μm for the WG-60) due to its larger sensor. However, the WG-60 is a much more recent model (by 2 years and 1 month) than the E-M1 II, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that further enhance the light gathering capacity of its pixels. 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 inch or 65.8 x 49.4 cm, for very good quality (250 dpi) 20.7 x 15.6 inch or 52.7 x 39.5 cm, and for excellent quality (300 dpi) 17.3 x 13 inch or 43.9 x 32.9 cm. The corresponding values for the Ricoh WG-60 are 23 x 17.3 inch or 58.5 x 43.9 cm for good quality, 18.4 x 13.8 inch or 46.8 x 35.1 cm for very good quality, and 15.4 x 11.5 inch or 39 x 29.3 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 WG-60, 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 WG-60 are ISO 125 to ISO 6400 (no boost).

E-M1 II versus WG-60 MP

Consistent information on actual sensor performance is available from DXO Mark for many cameras. 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 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
Camera
Model
 
Olympus E-M1 II» Four Thirds 20.2 5184 38884K/30p23.712.8131280Olympus E-M1 II
 
Ricoh WG-60« 1/2.3 15.9 4608 34561080/60p----Ricoh WG-60
 
Fujifilm XP140« » 1/2.3 15.9 4608 34564K/15p----Fujifilm XP140
 
Fujifilm XP130« » 1/2.3 15.9 4608 34561080/60p----Fujifilm XP130
 
Fujifilm XP120« » 1/2.3 15.9 4608 34561080/60p----Fujifilm XP120
 
Nikon W300« » 1/2.3 15.9 4608 34564K/30p----Nikon W300
 
Olympus PEN-F« » Four Thirds 20.2 5184 38881080/60p23.112.489474Olympus PEN-F
 
Olympus E-M5 II« » Four Thirds 15.9 4608 34561080/60p23.012.584273Olympus E-M5 II
 
Olympus E-M1« » Four Thirds 15.9 4608 34561080/30p23.012.775773Olympus E-M1
 
Panasonic G9« » Four Thirds 20.2 5184 38884K/60p----Panasonic G9
 
Panasonic GH5« » Four Thirds 20.2 5184 38884K/60p23.913.080777Panasonic GH5
 
Panasonic G85« » Four Thirds 15.8 4592 34484K/30p22.812.565671Panasonic G85
 
Panasonic GX8« » Four Thirds 20.2 5184 38884K/30p23.512.680675Panasonic GX8
 
Sony A7 III« » Full Frame 24.0 6000 40004K/30p25.014.7373096Sony A7 III
 
Sony WX800« » 1/2.3 18.0 4896 36724K/30p----Sony WX800
 
Sony A9« » Full Frame 24.0 6000 40004K/30p24.913.3351792Sony A9
 
Sony A7 II« » Full Frame 24.0 6000 40001080/60p24.913.6244990Sony A7 II

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 WG-60. It can shoot video footage at 4K/30p, while the Ricoh is limited to 1080/60p.

 

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 WG-60 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-M1 II, the Ricoh WG-60, and comparable cameras.

Core Features
  Camera
Model
Viewfinder
(Type or
'000 dots)
Control
Panel
(yes/no)
LCD
Size
(inch)
LCD
Resolution
('000 dots)
LCD
Attach-
ment
Touch
Screen
(yes/no)
Mech
Shutter
Speed
Shutter
Flaps
(1/sec)
Built-in
Flash
(yes/no)
Built-in
Image
Stab
Camera
Model
 
Olympus E-M1 II»2360 n 3.0 1037 swivel Y 1/8000s 18.0 n Y Olympus E-M1 II
 
Ricoh WG-60«- n 2.7 230 fixed n 1/4000s 8.0 Y n Ricoh WG-60
 
Fujifilm XP140« »- n 3.0 920 fixed n 1/2000s 10.0 Y Y Fujifilm XP140
 
Fujifilm XP130« »- n 3.0 920 fixed n 1/2000s 10.0 Y Y Fujifilm XP130
 
Fujifilm XP120« »- n 3.0 920 fixed n 1/2000s 10.0 Y Y Fujifilm XP120
 
Nikon W300« »- n 3.0 921 fixed n 1/4000s 7.0 Y Y Nikon W300
 
Olympus PEN-F« »2360 n 3.0 1037 swivel Y 1/8000s 10.0 n Y Olympus PEN-F
 
Olympus E-M5 II« »2360 n 3.0 1037 swivel Y 1/8000s 10.0 n Y Olympus E-M5 II
 
Olympus E-M1« »2360 n 3.0 1037 tilting Y 1/8000s 10.0 n Y Olympus E-M1
 
Panasonic G9« »3680 Y 3.0 1040 swivel Y 1/8000s 20.0 n Y Panasonic G9
 
Panasonic GH5« »3680 n 3.2 1620 swivel Y 1/8000s 12.0 n Y Panasonic GH5
 
Panasonic G85« »2360 n 3.0 1040 swivel Y 1/4000s 9.0 Y Y Panasonic G85
 
Panasonic GX8« »2360 n 3.0 1040 swivel Y 1/8000s 10.0 n Y Panasonic GX8
 
Sony A7 III« »2359 n 3.0 922 tilting Y 1/8000s 10.0 n Y Sony A7 III
 
Sony WX800« »- n 3.0 922 tilting Y 1/2000s 10.0 Y Y Sony WX800
 
Sony A9« »3686 n 3.0 1440 tilting Y 1/8000s 20.0 n Y Sony A9
 
Sony A7 II« »2400 n 3.0 1230 tilting n 1/8000s 5.0 n Y Sony A7 II

One differentiating feature between the two cameras concerns the touch sensitivity of the rear screen. The E-M1 II has a touchscreen, while the WG-60 has a conventional panel. Touch control can be particularly helpful, for example, for setting the focus point.

The E-M1 II has an articulated LCD that can be turned to be front-facing. This characteristic will be appreciated by vloggers and photographers who are interested in snapping selfies. In contrast, the WG-60 does not have a selfie-screen.

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 WG-60 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 WG-60 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 WG-60 only has one slot. The E-M1 II supports UHS-II cards on its first slot and UHS-I on its second one, while the WG-60 cannot take advantage of Ultra High Speed SD 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 WG-60 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
Microphone
Internal
Speaker
Microphone
Port
Headphone
Port
HDMI
Port
USB
Type
WiFi
Support
NFC
Support
Bluetooth
Support
Camera
Model
 
Olympus E-M1 II»YstereomonoYYmicro3.0Y--Olympus E-M1 II
 
Ricoh WG-60«-monomono--micro2.0---Ricoh WG-60
 
Fujifilm XP140« »-monomono--micro2.0Y-YFujifilm XP140
 
Fujifilm XP130« »-monomono--micro2.0Y-YFujifilm XP130
 
Fujifilm XP120« »-monomono--micro2.0Y--Fujifilm XP120
 
Nikon W300« »-stereomono--micro2.0Y-YNikon W300
 
Olympus PEN-F« »Ystereomono--micro2.0Y--Olympus PEN-F
 
Olympus E-M5 II« »YstereomonoY-micro2.0Y--Olympus E-M5 II
 
Olympus E-M1« »YstereomonoY-micro2.0Y--Olympus E-M1
 
Panasonic G9« »YstereomonoYYfull3.0Y-YPanasonic G9
 
Panasonic GH5« »YstereomonoYYfull3.1Y-YPanasonic GH5
 
Panasonic G85« »YstereomonoY-micro2.0Y--Panasonic G85
 
Panasonic GX8« »YstereomonoY-micro2.0YY-Panasonic GX8
 
Sony A7 III« »YstereomonoYYmicro3.1YYYSony A7 III
 
Sony WX800« »-stereomono--micro2.0YY-Sony WX800
 
Sony A9« »YstereomonoYYmicro2.0YYYSony A9
 
Sony A7 II« »YstereomonoYYmicro2.0YY-Sony A7 II

It is notable that the E-M1 II has a hotshoe, while the WG-60 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-M1 II (unlike the WG-60) features a PC Sync socket, so that professional strobe lights can be controlled by the camera.

Both the E-M1 II and the WG-60 are recent models that are part of the current product line-up. The E-M1 II replaced the earlier Olympus E-M1, while the WG-60 followed on from the Ricoh WG-50. Further information on the two cameras (e.g. user guides, manuals), as well as related accessories, can be found on the official Olympus and Ricoh websites.


Review summary

So what conclusions can be drawn? Is there a clear favorite between the Olympus E-M1 II and the Ricoh WG-60? Which camera is better? The listing below highlights the relative strengths of the two models.

ilogo

Reasons to prefer the Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II:

  • More detail: Offers more megapixels (20.2 vs 15.9MP) with a 13% higher linear resolution.
  • High quality composites: Can combine several shots after pixel-shifting its sensor.
  • 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.
  • Better video: Provides higher definition movie capture (4K/30p vs 1080/60p).
  • 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.
  • 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 (1037k vs 230k dots).
  • 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 8 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 300) 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.
  • 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 Ultra High Speed (UHS-II and UHS-I) SDXC cards.
  • More heavily discounted: Has been available for much longer (launched in September 2016).

ilogo

Arguments in favor of the Ricoh WG-60:

  • Ready to shoot: Has an integrated lens, whereas the E-M1 II necessitates an extra lens.
  • More compact: Is smaller (123x62mm 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).
  • Water-proof: Is rugged and sealed and can thus be used for underwater photography (up to 14m).
  • 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 modern: Reflects 2 years and 1 month of technical progress since the E-M1 II launch.

If the count of individual advantages (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the E-M1 II is the clear winner of the match-up (29 : 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.

E-M1 II 29:07 WG-60

How about other alternatives? Do the specifications of the Olympus E-M1 II and the Ricoh WG-60 place the cameras among the top in their class? Find out in the latest Best Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera and Best Travel-Zoom 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-M1 II or the WG-60. 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 (cameralabs, dpreview, ephotozine, imaging-resource, and photographyblog). 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.

Review Scores
  Camera
Model
cameralabs dpreview ephotozine imaging-resource photographyblog Camera
Launch
(announced)
Launch
Price
(USD)
Street
Price
(USD)
Used
Price
(USD)
Camera
Model
 
Olympus E-M1 II»+ +85/1004.5/55/54.5/5 Sep 2016 1,999 i i Olympus E-M1 II
 
Ricoh WG-60«----- Oct 2018 279 i i Ricoh WG-60
 
Fujifilm XP140« »+-3.5/5-4/5 Feb 2019 229 i i Fujifilm XP140
 
Fujifilm XP130« »o-3.5/5-4/5 Jan 2018 229- i Fujifilm XP130
 
Fujifilm XP120« »o-3.5/5-4/5 Jan 2017 229- i Fujifilm XP120
 
Nikon W300« »+-4/5-4/5 May 2017 389 i i Nikon W300
 
Olympus PEN-F« »-82/1004.5/54.5/55/5 Jan 2016 1,199 i i Olympus PEN-F
 
Olympus E-M5 II« »+ +81/1005/54.5/55/5 Feb 2015 1,099 i i Olympus E-M5 II
 
Olympus E-M1« »+ +84/1004.5/54.5/54.5/5 Sep 2013 1,399- i Olympus E-M1
 
Panasonic G9« »+ +85/1005/55/55/5 Nov 2017 1,699 i i Panasonic G9
 
Panasonic GH5« »+ +85/1004.5/55/55/5 Jan 2017 1,999 i i Panasonic GH5
 
Panasonic G85« »+ +84/1005/54.5/54.5/5 Sep 2016 899- i Panasonic G85
 
Panasonic GX8« »+82/1004.5/55/54.5/5 Jul 2015 1,199- i Panasonic GX8
 
Sony A7 III« »+ +89/1005/55/55/5 Feb 2018 1,999 i i Sony A7 III
 
Sony WX800« »----- Oct 2018 399 i i Sony WX800
 
Sony A9« »+ +89/1005/55/55/5 Apr 2017 4,499 i i Sony A9
 
Sony A7 II« »+82/1004.5/55/55/5 Nov 2014 1,999- i Sony A7 II
Notes: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (-) not available.

The above review scores should be interpreted with care, though. The assessments were made in relation to similar cameras of the same technological generation. Thus, a score needs to be put into the context of the launch date and the launch price 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.

Olympus E-M1 II:
Check Amazon price
Ricoh WG-60:
Check Amazon price

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. There is also a set of direct links to comparison reviews that other users of the CAM-parator app explored.

~

    Specifications: Olympus E-M1 II vs Ricoh WG-60

    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 Specifications
    Camera Model Olympus E-M1 II Ricoh WG-60
    Camera Type Mirrorless system camera Fixed lens compact camera
    Camera Lens Micro Four Thirds lenses 28-140mm f/3.5-5.5
    Launch Date September 2016 October 2018
    Launch Price USD 1999 USD 279
    Sensor Specs Olympus E-M1 II Ricoh WG-60
    Sensor Technology CMOS CMOS
    Sensor Format Four Thirds Sensor 1/2.3" Sensor
    Sensor Size 17.3 x 13.0 mm 6.17 x 4.55 mm
    Sensor Area 224.9 mm2 28.0735 mm2
    Sensor Diagonal 21.6 mm 7.7 mm
    Crop Factor 2.0x 5.6x
    Sensor Resolution 20.2 Megapixels 15.9 Megapixels
    Image Resolution 5184 x 3888 pixels 4608 x 3456 pixels
    Pixel Pitch 3.34 μm 1.33 μm
    Pixel Density 8.96 MP/cm2 56.73 MP/cm2
    Moiré control no AA filter no AA filter
    Movie Capability 4K/30p Video 1080/60p Video
    ISO Setting 200-25600 ISO 125-6400 ISO
    ISO Boost 64-25600 ISO no Enhancement
    DXO Sensor Quality (score) 80 ..
    DXO Color Depth (bits) 23.7 ..
    DXO Dynamic Range (EV) 12.8 ..
    DXO Low Light (ISO) 1312 ..
    Screen Specs Olympus E-M1 II Ricoh WG-60
    Viewfinder Type Electronic viewfinder No viewfinder
    Viewfinder Field of View 100%
    Viewfinder Magnification 0.74x
    Viewfinder Resolution 2360k dots
    LCD Framing Live View Live View
    Rear LCD Size 3.0 inch 2.7 inch
    LCD Resolution 1037k dots 230k dots
    LCD Attachment Swivel screen Fixed screen
    Touch Input Touchscreen no Touchscreen
    Shooting Specs Olympus E-M1 II Ricoh WG-60
    Autofocus System On-Sensor Phase-detect Contrast-detect AF
    Manual Focusing AidFocus PeakingNo Peaking Feature
    Continuous Shooting 18 shutter flaps/s 8 shutter flaps/s
    Electronic Shutterup to 1/32000sno E-Shutter
    Time-Lapse PhotographyIntervalometer built-inIntervalometer built-in
    Image StabilizationIn-body stabilizationNo handshake reduction
    Fill Flash no On-Board Flash Build-in Flash
    Storage Medium SDXC cards SDXC cards
    Second Storage Option Dual card slots Single card slot
    UHS card support Single UHS-II no
    Connectivity Specs Olympus E-M1 II Ricoh WG-60
    External Flash Hotshoe no Hotshoe
    Studio Flash PC Sync socket no PC Sync
    USB Connector USB 3.0 USB 2.0
    HDMI Port micro HDMI micro HDMI
    Microphone Port External MIC port no MIC socket
    Headphone Socket Headphone port no Headphone port
    Wifi Support Wifi built-in no Wifi
    Body Specs Olympus E-M1 II Ricoh WG-60
    Environmental SealingWeathersealed bodyWaterproof body (14m)
    Battery Type BLH-1 D-LI92
    Battery Life (CIPA)440 shots per charge300 shots per charge
    Body Dimensions 134 x 91 x 67 mm
    (5.3 x 3.6 x 2.6 in)
    123 x 62 x 30 mm
    (4.8 x 2.4 x 1.2 in)
    Camera Weight 574 g (20.2 oz) 193 g (6.8 oz)

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

    You are here Home  »  CAM-parator  »  Olympus E-M1 II vs Ricoh WG-60