Olympus E-M10 II vs Canon 760D

The Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark II and the Canon EOS 760D (labelled Canon T6s in some countries) are two digital cameras that were announced, respectively, in August 2015 and February 2015. The E-M10 II is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera, while the 760D is a DSLR. The cameras are based on a Four Thirds (E-M10 II) and an APS-C (760D) sensor. The Olympus has a resolution of 15.9 megapixels, whereas the Canon provides 24 MP. Read on to find out how these two cameras compare with respect to their body size, their sensors, their features, their input-output connections, and their reception by expert reviewers.

Headline Specifications

Olympus E-M10 II		Canon 760D
Mirrorless system camera		Digital single lens reflex
Micro Four Thirds lenses		Canon EF mount lenses
15.9 MP, Four Thirds Sensor		24 MP, APS-C Sensor
1080/60p Video		1080/30p Video
ISO 200-25600		ISO 100-12800 (100-25600)
Electronic viewfinder (2360k dots)		Optical viewfinder
3.0" LCD, 1040k dots		3.0" LCD, 1040k dots
Tilting touchscreen		Swivel touchscreen
8 shutter flaps per second		5 shutter flaps per second
In-body stabilization		Lens stabilization only
320 shots per battery charge		440 shots per battery charge
120 x 83 x 47 mm, 390 g		132 x 101 x 78 mm, 565 g

Body comparison: Olympus E-M10 II vs Canon 760D

The physical size and weight of the Olympus E-M10 II and the Canon 760D 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. If you prefer, you can also use the toggle button to switch to a comparison in percentage terms (in this case, the camera on the left side – the E-M10 II – 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 Canon 760D is notably larger (34 percent) than the Olympus E-M10 II. Moreover, the 760D is substantially heavier (45 percent) than the E-M10 II. In this context, it is worth noting that neither the E-M10 II nor the 760D are weather-sealed.

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. A larger imaging sensor will tend to go along with bigger and heavier lenses, although exceptions exist. You can compare the optics available for the two cameras in the Micro Four Thirds Lens Catalog (E-M10 II) and the Canon EF Lens Catalog (760D). Mirrorless cameras, such as the Olympus E-M10 II, have moreover the advantage that they have a relatively short flange to focal plane distance and can thus use many lenses from other systems via adapters.

Concerning battery life, the E-M10 II gets 320 shots out of its BLS-50 battery, while the 760D can take 440 images on a single charge of its LP-E17 power pack.

The table below summarizes the key physical specs of the two cameras alongside a broader set of comparators. In case you want to display and compare another camera duo, just click on the right or left arrow next to the camera that you would like to inspect. Alternatively, you can also use the CAM-parator to select your camera combination among a larger number of options.

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-M10 II»	4.7 in	3.3 in	1.9 in	13.8 oz	320	n	Aug 2015	799	-		Olympus E-M10 II
	Canon 760D«	5.2 in	4.0 in	3.1 in	19.9 oz	440	n	Feb 2015	849	-		Canon 760D
	Canon 77D« »	5.2 in	3.9 in	3.0 in	19.0 oz	600	n	Feb 2017	899			Canon 77D
	Canon M5« »	4.6 in	3.5 in	2.4 in	15.1 oz	295	n	Sep 2016	979			Canon M5
	Canon 750D« »	5.2 in	4.0 in	3.1 in	19.6 oz	440	n	Feb 2015	749	-		Canon 750D
	Canon G1 X Mark II« »	4.6 in	2.9 in	2.6 in	19.5 oz	240	n	Feb 2014	799			Canon G1 X Mark II
	Canon G7 X« »	4.1 in	2.4 in	1.6 in	10.7 oz	210	n	Sep 2014	699	-		Canon G7 X
	Olympus E-PL9« »	4.6 in	2.7 in	1.5 in	13.4 oz	350	n	Feb 2018	549			Olympus E-PL9
	Olympus E-M10 III« »	4.8 in	3.3 in	2.0 in	14.5 oz	330	n	Aug 2017	649			Olympus E-M10 III
	Olympus E-PL8« »	4.5 in	2.6 in	1.5 in	12.6 oz	350	n	Sep 2016	549	-		Olympus E-PL8
	Olympus PEN-F« »	4.9 in	2.8 in	1.5 in	15.1 oz	330	n	Jan 2016	1,199			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			Olympus E-M5 II
	Olympus E-M10« »	4.7 in	3.2 in	1.8 in	14.0 oz	320	n	Jan 2014	699	-		Olympus E-M10
	Olympus E-PL7« »	4.5 in	2.6 in	1.5 in	12.6 oz	350	n	Aug 2014	599	-		Olympus E-PL7
	Olympus E-P5« »	4.8 in	2.7 in	1.5 in	14.8 oz	330	n	May 2013	999	-		Olympus E-P5
	Olympus E-PL5« »	4.4 in	2.5 in	1.5 in	11.5 oz	360	n	Sep 2012	599	-		Olympus E-PL5
	Panasonic GX85« »	4.8 in	2.8 in	1.7 in	15.0 oz	290	n	Apr 2016	799			Panasonic GX85
Convert to Metric

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 E-M10 II was somewhat cheaper (by 6 percent) than the 760D at launch, but both cameras fall into the same price category. 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: Olympus E-M10 II vs Canon 760D

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. 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 are more costly to manufacture and tend to lead to bigger and heavier cameras and lenses.

Of the two cameras under consideration, the Olympus E-M10 II features a Four Thirds sensor and the Canon 760D an APS-C sensor. The sensor area in the 760D is 48 percent bigger. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 2.0 and 1.6. The sensor in the E-M10 II has a native 4:3 aspect ratio, while the one in the 760D offers a 3:2 aspect.

Technology-wise, both cameras are equipped with CMOS (Complementary Metal–Oxide–Semiconductor) sensors.

With 24MP, the 760D offers a higher resolution than the E-M10 II (15.9MP), but the 760D has marginally smaller individual pixels (pixel pitch of 3.72μm versus 3.76μm for the E-M10 II). It is noteworthy in this context that the E-M10 II is a somewhat more recent model (by 6 months) than the 760D, and its sensor might 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 E-M10 II has no anti-alias filter installed, so that it can capture all the detail its sensor resolves.

The 760D has on-sensor phase detect pixels, which results in fast and reliable autofocus acquisition even during video recording.

The Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark II has a native sensitivity range from ISO 200 to ISO 25600, which can be extended to ISO 100-25600. The corresponding ISO settings for the Canon EOS 760D are ISO 100 to ISO 12800, with the possibility to increase the ISO range to 100-25600..

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 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.

Many modern cameras cannot only take still pictures, but also record videos. Both cameras under consideration have a sensor with sufficiently fast read-out times for moving pictures, but the E-M10 II provides a higher frame rate than the 760D. It can shoot video footage at 1080/60p, while the Canon is limited to 1080/30p.

Feature comparison: Olympus E-M10 II vs Canon 760D

Beyond body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. For example, the E-M10 II has an electronic viewfinder (2360k dots), while the 760D has an optical one. Both systems have their advantages, with the electronic viewfinder making it possible to project supplementary shooting information into the framing view, whereas the optical viewfinder offers lag-free viewing and a very clear framing image. The table below summarizes some of the other core capabilities of the Olympus E-M10 II and Canon 760D in connection with corresponding information for a sample of similar cameras.

One feature that differentiates the E-M10 II and the 760D is in-body image stabilization (IBIS). The E-M10 II reduces the risk of handshake-induced blur with all attached lenses, while the 760D has to rely on optical image stabilization in OIS-equipped lenses to achieve the same effect.

Concerning the storage of imaging data, both the E-M10 II and the 760D write their files to SDXC cards.

Connectivity comparison: Olympus E-M10 II vs Canon 760D

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-M10 Mark II and Canon EOS 760D and, in particular, the interfaces the cameras (and selected comparators) provide for accessory control and data transfer.

It is notable that the 760D has a microphone port, which can help to improve the quality of audio recordings by attaching an external microphone. The E-M10 II does not feature such a mic input.

Both the E-M10 II and the 760D have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on eBay. The 760D was replaced by the Canon 77D, while the E-M10 II was followed by the Olympus E-M10 III.

Review summary: Olympus E-M10 II vs Canon 760D

So what is the bottom line? Is there a clear favorite between the Olympus E-M10 II and the Canon 760D? A synthesis of the relative strong points of each of the models is listed below.

Advantages of the Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark II:

• Maximized detail: Lacks an anti-alias filter to exploit the sensor's full resolution potential.
• Better video: Provides higher movie framerates (1080/60p versus 1080/30p).
• More framing info: Has an electronic viewfinder that displays shooting data.
• Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (8 vs 5 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
• More compact: Is smaller (120x83mm vs 132x101mm) and thus needs less room in the bag.
• Less heavy: Is lighter (by 175g or 31 percent) and hence easier to carry around.
• Sharper images: Has hand-shake reducing image stabilization built-in.
• More legacy lens friendly: Can take a broad range of non-native lenses via adapters.
• More modern: Is somewhat more recent (announced 6 months after the 760D).

Reasons to prefer the Canon EOS 760D:

• More detail: Has more megapixels (24 vs 15.9MP), which boosts linear resolution by 25%.
• Better moiré control: Has an anti-alias filter to avoid artificial patterns to appear in images.
• Better video autofocus: Features on-sensor phase-detection for more confident movie autofocus.
• Better sound: Can connect to an external microphone for higher quality sound recording.
• Brighter framing: Features an optical viewfinder for clear, lag-free composition.
• Easier setting verification: Features a control panel on top to check shooting parameters.
• More flexible LCD: Has swivel screen for odd-angle shots in portrait or landscape orientation.
• More selfie-friendly: Has an articulated screen that can be turned to be front-facing.
• Longer lasting: Gets more shots (440 versus 320) out of a single battery charge.
• Easier device pairing: Supports NFC for fast wireless image transfer over short distances.
• More heavily discounted: Has been on the market for longer (launched in February 2015).

If the number of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the 760D emerges as the winner of the match-up (11 : 9 points). However, the pertinence of the various camera strengths will differ across photographers, so that you might want to weigh individual camera traits according to their importance for your own imaging needs before making a camera decision.

In any case, while the specs-based evaluation of cameras is instructive in revealing their potential as photographic tools, it remains incomplete and does no justice, for example, to the way the E-M10 II or the 760D handle or perform in practice. 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.

Expert reviews: Olympus E-M10 II vs Canon 760D

This is why hands-on reviews by experts are important. The table below summarizes the assessments of some of the best known camera review sites (cameralabs, dpreview, ephotozine, imaging-resource, photographyblog). You can find the full text of the reviews by clicking on the site logo in the table header.

Review Scores

	Camera Model						Camera Launch (announced)	Launch Price (USD)	Street Price (USD)	Used Price (USD)	Camera Model
	Olympus E-M10 II»	HiRec	80/100	5/5	5/5	5/5	Aug 2015	799	-		Olympus E-M10 II
	Canon 760D«	Rec	77/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	4.5/5	Feb 2015	849	-		Canon 760D
	Canon 77D« »	-	82/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	4/5	Feb 2017	899			Canon 77D
	Canon M5« »	Rec	82/100	4/5	4.5/5	4/5	Sep 2016	979			Canon M5
	Canon 750D« »	-	75/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	4.5/5	Feb 2015	749	-		Canon 750D
	Canon G1 X Mark II« »	Rec	77/100	4/5	4/5	4.5/5	Feb 2014	799			Canon G1 X Mark II
	Canon G7 X« »	HiRec	77/100	4.5/5	3.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2014	699	-		Canon G7 X
	Olympus E-PL9« »	Rec	-	4.5/5	-	4/5	Feb 2018	549			Olympus E-PL9
	Olympus E-M10 III« »	Rec	80/100	4.5/5	4/5	4.5/5	Aug 2017	649			Olympus E-M10 III
	Olympus E-PL8« »	-	-	4.5/5	-	4/5	Sep 2016	549	-		Olympus E-PL8
	Olympus PEN-F« »	-	82/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	5/5	Jan 2016	1,199			Olympus PEN-F
	Olympus E-M5 II« »	HiRec	81/100	5/5	4.5/5	5/5	Feb 2015	1,099			Olympus E-M5 II
	Olympus E-M10« »	-	80/100	5/5	4.5/5	5/5	Jan 2014	699	-		Olympus E-M10
	Olympus E-PL7« »	Rec	-	5/5	4.5/5	4/5	Aug 2014	599	-		Olympus E-PL7
	Olympus E-P5« »	HiRec	78/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	5/5	May 2013	999	-		Olympus E-P5
	Olympus E-PL5« »	HiRec	-	4.5/5	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2012	599	-		Olympus E-PL5
	Panasonic GX85« »	HiRec	82/100	5/5	4.5/5	5/5	Apr 2016	799			Panasonic GX85

The review scores listed above should be treated with care, though. The ratings were established in reference to similarly priced cameras that were available in the market at the time of the review. A score, therefore, has to be seen in close connection to the price and market introduction time 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.

Other camera comparisons

Did this review help to inform your camera decision process? If you would like to see a different side-by-side camera review, just make a corresponding selection in the search boxes below. An an alternative, you can also directly jump to any one of the listed comparisons that were previously generated by the CAM-parator tool.

Specifications: Olympus E-M10 II vs Canon 760D

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