Olympus E-P1 vs E-M1 II
The Olympus PEN E-P1 and the Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II are two enthusiast cameras that were officially introduced, respectively, in June 2009 and September 2016. Both the E-P1 and the E-M1 II are mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras that are equipped with a Four Thirds sensor. The E-P1 has a resolution of 12.2 megapixels, whereas the E-M1 II provides 20.2 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 PEN E-P1 and the Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II? 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-P1 and the Olympus E-M1 II are illustrated in the side-by-side display below. The two cameras are presented according to their relative size. Three consecutive perspectives from the front, the top, and the back are available. All width, height and depth measures are rounded to the nearest millimeter.
The E-P1 can be obtained in three different colors (black, silver, white), while the E-M1 II is only available in black.
If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Olympus E-M1 II is considerably larger (44 percent) than the Olympus E-P1. Moreover, the E-M1 II is substantially heavier (62 percent) than the E-P1. It is noteworthy in this context that the E-M1 II is splash and dust-proof, while the E-P1 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 compare the optics available in the Micro Four Thirds Lens Catalog. Mirrorless cameras, such as the two under consideration, have the additional advantage of having a short flange to focal plane distance, which makes it possible to mount many lenses from other systems onto the camera via adapters.
Concerning battery life, the E-P1 gets 300 shots out of its Olympus BLS-1 battery, while the E-M1 II can take 440 images on a single charge of its Olympus BLH-1 power pack.
The adjacent table lists the principal physical characteristics of the two cameras alongside a wider set of alternatives. 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-P1 | 121 mm | 70 mm | 36 mm | 355 g | 300 | n | Jun 2009 | 799 | ebay.com | |
2. | Olympus E-M1 II | 134 mm | 91 mm | 67 mm | 574 g | 440 | Y | Sep 2016 | 1,999 | ebay.com | |
3. | Olympus E-520 | 136 mm | 92 mm | 68 mm | 535 g | 750 | n | May 2008 | 699 | ebay.com | |
4. | Olympus E-620 | 130 mm | 94 mm | 60 mm | 521 g | 500 | n | Feb 2009 | 699 | ebay.com | |
5. | Olympus E-M1 | 130 mm | 94 mm | 63 mm | 497 g | 350 | Y | Sep 2013 | 1,399 | ebay.com | |
6. | Olympus E-M1 III | 134 mm | 91 mm | 69 mm | 580 g | 420 | Y | Feb 2020 | 1,799 | ebay.com | |
7. | Olympus E-P2 | 121 mm | 70 mm | 36 mm | 355 g | 300 | n | Nov 2009 | 799 | ebay.com | |
8. | Olympus E-P3 | 122 mm | 69 mm | 34 mm | 369 g | 330 | n | Jun 2011 | 799 | ebay.com | |
9. | Olympus E-PL1 | 115 mm | 72 mm | 42 mm | 334 g | 290 | n | Feb 2010 | 599 | ebay.com | |
10. | Olympus E-PL2 | 114 mm | 72 mm | 42 mm | 362 g | 280 | n | Jan 2011 | 599 | ebay.com | |
11. | Olympus E-PL3 | 110 mm | 64 mm | 37 mm | 313 g | 300 | n | Jun 2011 | 599 | ebay.com | |
12. | Olympus PEN-F | 125 mm | 72 mm | 37 mm | 427 g | 330 | n | Jan 2016 | 1,199 | ebay.com | |
13. | Panasonic G10 | 124 mm | 84 mm | 74 mm | 388 g | 380 | n | Mar 2010 | 499 | ebay.com | |
14. | Panasonic G85 | 128 mm | 89 mm | 74 mm | 505 g | 330 | Y | Sep 2016 | 899 | ebay.com | |
15. | Panasonic GF1 | 119 mm | 71 mm | 36 mm | 385 g | 380 | n | Sep 2009 | 749 | ebay.com | |
16. | Panasonic GH1 | 124 mm | 90 mm | 45 mm | 385 g | 300 | n | Mar 2009 | 899 | ebay.com | |
17. | Panasonic GH5 | 139 mm | 98 mm | 87 mm | 725 g | 410 | Y | Jan 2017 | 1,999 | 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 obviously take relative prices into account. 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-P1 was launched at a markedly lower price (by 60 percent) than the E-M1 II, 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.
Sensor comparison
The size of the imaging sensor is a crucial determinant of image quality. A large sensor will generally have larger individual pixels that offer better low-light sensitivity, provide wider dynamic range, and have richer color-depth than smaller pixels in a sensor of the same technological generation. Furthermore, a large sensor camera will give the photographer more possibilities to use shallow depth-of-field in order to isolate a subject from the background. On the downside, larger sensors are more costly to manufacture and tend to lead to bigger and heavier cameras 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.
Technology-wise, the E-M1 II uses a more advanced image processing engine (TruePic VIII) than the E-P1 (TruePic V), with benefits for noise reduction, color accuracy, and processing speed.
While the two cameras under review share the same sensor size, the E-M1 II offers a higher resolution of 20.2 megapixels, compared with 12.2 MP of the E-P1. This megapixels advantage translates into a 29 percent gain in linear resolution. On the other hand, these sensor specs imply that the E-M1 II has a higher pixel density and a smaller size of the individual pixel (with a pixel pitch of 3.34μm versus 4.29μm for the E-P1). However, it should be noted that the E-M1 II is much more recent (by 7 years and 3 months) than the E-P1, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that compensate for the smaller pixel size. Coming back to sensor resolution, it should be mentioned that the E-M1 II has no anti-alias filter installed, so that it can capture all the detail its 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 Olympus E-P1 are 20.2 x 15.1 inches or 51.2 x 38.4 cm for good quality, 16.1 x 12.1 inches or 41 x 30.7 cm for very good quality, and 13.4 x 10.1 inches or 34.1 x 25.6 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 E-P1, 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 PEN E-P1 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 6400. The corresponding ISO settings for the Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II are ISO 200 to ISO 25600, with the possibility to increase the ISO range to 64-25600.
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.
Consistent information on actual sensor performance is available from DXO Mark for many cameras. This service determines an overall sensor rating, as well as sub-scores for low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports"), dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), and color depth ("DXO Portrait"). Of the two cameras under consideration, the E-M1 II offers substantially better image quality than the E-P1 (overall score 25 points higher). The advantage is based on 2.3 bits higher color depth, 2.4 EV in additional dynamic range, and 1.3 stops in additional low light sensitivity. The adjacent table reports on the physical sensor characteristics and the outcomes of the DXO sensor quality tests for a sample of comparator-cameras.
Camera Model |
Sensor Class |
Resolution (MP) |
Horiz. Pixels |
Vert. Pixels |
Video Format |
DXO Portrait |
DXO Landscape |
DXO Sports |
DXO Overall |
||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Olympus E-P1 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 720/30p | 21.4 | 10.4 | 536 | 55 | |
2. | Olympus E-M1 II | Four Thirds | 20.2 | 5184 | 3888 | 4K/30p | 23.7 | 12.8 | 1312 | 80 | |
3. | Olympus E-520 | Four Thirds | 10.0 | 3648 | 2736 | none | 21.4 | 10.4 | 548 | 55 | |
4. | Olympus E-620 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | none | 21.3 | 10.3 | 536 | 55 | |
5. | Olympus E-M1 | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/30p | 23.0 | 12.7 | 757 | 73 | |
6. | Olympus E-M1 III | Four Thirds | 20.2 | 5184 | 3888 | 4K/30p | 23.3 | 13.1 | 1356 | 76 | |
7. | Olympus E-P2 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 720/30p | 21.5 | 10.4 | 505 | 56 | |
8. | Olympus E-P3 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 1080/60i | 20.8 | 10.1 | 536 | 51 | |
9. | Olympus E-PL1 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 720/30p | 21.5 | 10.1 | 487 | 54 | |
10. | Olympus E-PL2 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 720/30p | 21.4 | 10.2 | 573 | 55 | |
11. | Olympus E-PL3 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 1080/60i | 20.9 | 10.3 | 499 | 52 | |
12. | Olympus PEN-F | Four Thirds | 20.2 | 5184 | 3888 | 1080/60p | 23.1 | 12.4 | 894 | 74 | |
13. | Panasonic G10 | Four Thirds | 12.0 | 4000 | 3000 | 720/30p | 21.2 | 10.1 | 411 | 52 | |
14. | Panasonic G85 | Four Thirds | 15.8 | 4592 | 3448 | 4K/30p | 22.8 | 12.5 | 656 | 71 | |
15. | Panasonic GF1 | Four Thirds | 12.0 | 4000 | 3000 | 720/30p | 21.2 | 10.3 | 513 | 54 | |
16. | Panasonic GH1 | Four Thirds | 12.0 | 4000 | 3000 | 1080/24p | 21.6 | 11.6 | 772 | 64 | |
17. | Panasonic GH5 | Four Thirds | 20.2 | 5184 | 3888 | 4K/60p | 23.9 | 13.0 | 807 | 77 | |
Note: DXO values in italics represent estimates based on sensor size and age. |
Many modern cameras cannot only take still pictures, but also record videos. 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 better video resolution than the E-P1. It can shoot movie footage at 4K/30p, while the E-P1 is limited to 720/30p.
Feature comparison
Beyond body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range 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 E-P1 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-P1, the Olympus E-M1 II, 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-P1 | none | n | 3.0 / 230 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | n | Y | |
2. | Olympus E-M1 II | 2360 | n | 3.0 / 1037 | swivel | Y | 1/8000s | 18.0/s | n | Y | |
3. | Olympus E-520 | optical | n | 2.7 / 215 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.5/s | Y | Y | |
4. | Olympus E-620 | optical | n | 2.7 / 230 | swivel | n | 1/4000s | 4.0/s | Y | Y | |
5. | Olympus E-M1 | 2360 | n | 3.0 / 1037 | tilting | Y | 1/8000s | 10.0/s | n | Y | |
6. | Olympus E-M1 III | 2360 | n | 3.0 / 1037 | swivel | Y | 1/8000s | 18.0/s | n | Y | |
7. | Olympus E-P2 | optional | n | 3.0 / 230 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | n | Y | |
8. | Olympus E-P3 | optional | n | 3.0 / 614 | fixed | Y | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | Y | Y | |
9. | Olympus E-PL1 | optional | n | 2.7 / 230 | fixed | n | 1/2000s | 3.0/s | Y | Y | |
10. | Olympus E-PL2 | optional | n | 3.0 / 460 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | Y | Y | |
11. | Olympus E-PL3 | optional | n | 3.0 / 460 | tilting | n | 1/4000s | 5.5/s | n | Y | |
12. | Olympus PEN-F | 2360 | n | 3.0 / 1037 | swivel | Y | 1/8000s | 10.0/s | n | Y | |
13. | Panasonic G10 | 202 | n | 3.0 / 460 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 2.6/s | Y | n | |
14. | Panasonic G85 | 2360 | n | 3.0 / 1040 | swivel | Y | 1/4000s | 9.0/s | Y | Y | |
15. | Panasonic GF1 | optional | n | 3.0 / 460 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | Y | n | |
16. | Panasonic GH1 | 1440 | n | 3.0 / 460 | swivel | n | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | Y | n | |
17. | Panasonic GH5 | 3680 | n | 3.2 / 1620 | swivel | Y | 1/8000s | 12.0/s | n | Y | |
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 E-P1 has a conventional panel. Touch control can be particularly helpful, for example, for setting the focus point.
The E-M1 II has an articulated screen that can be turned to be front-facing. This characteristic will be appreciated by vloggers and photographers who are interested in taking selfies. In contrast, the E-P1 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 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-P1 writes its imaging data to SDHC cards, while the E-M1 II uses SDXC cards. The E-M1 II features dual card slots, which can be very useful in case a memory card fails. In contrast, the E-P1 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 E-P1 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 PEN E-P1 and Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II 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-P1 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
2. | Olympus E-M1 II | Y | stereo / mono | Y | Y | micro | 3.0 | Y | - | - | |
3. | Olympus E-520 | Y | - / - | - | - | - | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
4. | Olympus E-620 | Y | - / - | - | - | - | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
5. | Olympus E-M1 | Y | stereo / mono | Y | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
6. | Olympus E-M1 III | Y | stereo / mono | Y | Y | micro | 3.1 | Y | - | Y | |
7. | Olympus E-P2 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
8. | Olympus E-P3 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
9. | Olympus E-PL1 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
10. | Olympus E-PL2 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
11. | Olympus E-PL3 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
12. | Olympus PEN-F | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
13. | Panasonic G10 | Y | mono / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
14. | Panasonic G85 | Y | stereo / mono | Y | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
15. | Panasonic GF1 | Y | mono / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
16. | Panasonic GH1 | Y | stereo / - | Y | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
17. | Panasonic GH5 | Y | stereo / mono | Y | Y | full | 3.1 | Y | - | Y |
It is notable that the E-M1 II offers wifi support, which can be a very convenient means to transfer image data to an off-camera location. In contrast, the E-P1 does not provide wifi capability.
Studio photographers will appreciate that the Olympus E-M1 II (unlike the E-P1) features a PC Sync socket, so that professional strobe lights can be controlled by the camera.
Both the E-P1 and the E-M1 II have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The E-P1 was replaced by the Olympus E-P2, while the E-M1 II was followed by the Olympus E-M1 III. Further information on the features and operation of the E-P1 and E-M1 II can be found, respectively, in the Olympus E-P1 Manual (free pdf) or the online Olympus E-M1 II Manual.
Review summary
So how do things add up? Is the Olympus E-P1 better than the Olympus E-M1 II or vice versa? The listing below highlights the relative strengths of the two models.
Arguments in favor of the Olympus PEN E-P1:
- Better moiré control: Has an anti-alias filter to avoid artificial patterns to appear in images.
- More compact: Is smaller (121x70mm vs 134x91mm) and thus needs less room in the bag.
- Less heavy: Is lighter (by 219g or 38 percent) and hence easier to carry around.
- More affordable: Was introduced into a lower priced category (60 percent cheaper at launch).
- More heavily discounted: Has been available for much longer (launched in June 2009).
Reasons to prefer the Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II:
- More detail: Has more megapixels (20.2 vs 12.2MP), which boosts linear resolution by 29%.
- Maximized detail: Lacks an anti-alias filter to exploit the sensor's full resolution potential.
- High quality composites: Can combine several shots after pixel-shifting its sensor.
- Better image quality: Scores substantially higher (25 points) in the DXO overall evaluation.
- Richer colors: Generates noticeably more natural colors (2.3 bits more color depth).
- More dynamic range: Captures a broader range of light and dark details (2.4 EV of extra DR).
- Better low-light sensitivity: Can shoot in dim conditions (1.3 stops ISO advantage).
- Better jpgs: Has a more modern image processing engine (TruePic VIII vs TruePic V).
- Better video: Provides higher definition movie capture (4K/30p vs 720/30p).
- 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 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: Has a touchscreen to facilitate handling and shooting adjustments.
- 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 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.
- Longer lasting: Gets more shots (440 versus 300) out of a single battery charge.
- Better sealing: Is splash and dust sealed for shooting in inclement weather conditions.
- 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 modern: Reflects 7 years and 3 months of technical progress since the E-P1 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 contest (29 : 5 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-P1 and the Olympus E-M1 II place the cameras among the top in their class? Find out in the latest Best Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera listing 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 says little about, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance of the E-P1 and the E-M1 II in practical situations. 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 why hands-on reviews by experts are important. The following table reports the overall ratings of the cameras as published by some of the major 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.
Camera Model |
AP score |
CL score |
DCW score |
DPR score |
EPZ score |
PB score |
Camera Launch |
Launch Price (USD) |
Street Price |
||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Olympus E-P1 | .. | + | .. | 66/100 | 4/5 | 4.5/5 | Jun 2009 | 799 | ebay.com | |
2. | Olympus E-M1 II | 5/5 | + + | 5/5 | 85/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Sep 2016 | 1,999 | ebay.com | |
3. | Olympus E-520 | .. | 87/100 | .. | + + | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | May 2008 | 699 | ebay.com | |
4. | Olympus E-620 | 3/5 | 88/100 | .. | 72/100 | 4.5/5 | 5/5 | Feb 2009 | 699 | ebay.com | |
5. | Olympus E-M1 | 5/5 | + + | .. | 84/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Sep 2013 | 1,399 | ebay.com | |
6. | Olympus E-M1 III | 5/5 | .. | 5/5 | 83/100 | 4.5/5 | 4/5 | Feb 2020 | 1,799 | ebay.com | |
7. | Olympus E-P2 | 3/5 | + | .. | 69/100 | 4/5 | 4.5/5 | Nov 2009 | 799 | ebay.com | |
8. | Olympus E-P3 | .. | 83/100 | .. | 74/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jun 2011 | 799 | ebay.com | |
9. | Olympus E-PL1 | .. | 86/100 | .. | 69/100 | 4/5 | 4.5/5 | Feb 2010 | 599 | ebay.com | |
10. | Olympus E-PL2 | 3/5 | 83/100 | .. | 71/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jan 2011 | 599 | ebay.com | |
11. | Olympus E-PL3 | 3/5 | + + | .. | 72/100 | 4.5/5 | 4/5 | Jun 2011 | 599 | ebay.com | |
12. | Olympus PEN-F | .. | .. | 4/5 | 82/100 | 4.5/5 | 5/5 | Jan 2016 | 1,199 | ebay.com | |
13. | Panasonic G10 | 3/5 | .. | .. | 70/100 | 4/5 | 4/5 | Mar 2010 | 499 | ebay.com | |
14. | Panasonic G85 | .. | + + | .. | 84/100 | 5/5 | 4.5/5 | Sep 2016 | 899 | ebay.com | |
15. | Panasonic GF1 | .. | 85/100 | .. | 69/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Sep 2009 | 749 | ebay.com | |
16. | Panasonic GH1 | .. | + + | .. | 72/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Mar 2009 | 899 | ebay.com | |
17. | Panasonic GH5 | 4.5/5 | + + | .. | 85/100 | 4.5/5 | 5/5 | Jan 2017 | 1,999 | ebay.com | |
Note: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available. |
The above review scores should be interpreted 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. 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.
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. Alternatively, you can follow any of the listed hyperlinks for comparisons that others found interesting.
- Canon G1 X vs Olympus E-P1
- Canon SX730 vs Olympus E-P1
- Canon T3i vs Olympus E-P1
- Epson R-D1 vs Olympus E-M1 II
- Fujifilm X-T2 vs Olympus E-M1 II
- Fujifilm X-T5 vs Olympus E-M1 II
- Fujifilm X30 vs Olympus E-P1
- Leica S Typ 007 vs Olympus E-M1 II
- Leica SL vs Olympus E-P1
- Olympus E-M1 II vs Panasonic GX7
- Olympus E-M1 II vs Panasonic S1H
- Olympus E-P1 vs Ricoh GR II
Specifications: Olympus E-P1 vs Olympus E-M1 II
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-P1 | Olympus E-M1 II |
---|---|---|
Camera Type | Mirrorless system camera | Mirrorless system camera |
Camera Lens | Micro Four Thirds lenses | Micro Four Thirds lenses |
Launch Date | June 2009 | September 2016 |
Launch Price | USD 799 | USD 1,999 |
Sensor Specs | Olympus E-P1 | Olympus E-M1 II |
Sensor Technology | CMOS | CMOS |
Sensor Format | Four Thirds Sensor | Four Thirds Sensor |
Sensor Size | 17.3 x 13.0 mm | 17.3 x 13.0 mm |
Sensor Area | 224.9 mm2 | 224.9 mm2 |
Sensor Diagonal | 21.6 mm | 21.6 mm |
Crop Factor | 2.0x | 2.0x |
Sensor Resolution | 12.2 Megapixels | 20.2 Megapixels |
Image Resolution | 4032 x 3024 pixels | 5184 x 3888 pixels |
Pixel Pitch | 4.29 μm | 3.34 μm |
Pixel Density | 5.42 MP/cm2 | 8.96 MP/cm2 |
Moiré control | Anti-Alias filter | no AA filter |
Movie Capability | 720/30p Video | 4K/30p Video |
ISO Setting | 100 - 6,400 ISO | 200 - 25,600 ISO |
ISO Boost | no Enhancement | 64 - 25,600 ISO |
Image Processor | TruePic V | TruePic VIII |
DXO Sensor Quality (score) | 55 | 80 |
DXO Color Depth (bits) | 21.4 | 23.7 |
DXO Dynamic Range (EV) | 10.4 | 12.8 |
DXO Low Light (ISO) | 536 | 1312 |
Screen Specs | Olympus E-P1 | Olympus E-M1 II |
Viewfinder Type | no viewfinder | Electronic viewfinder |
Viewfinder Field of View | 100% | |
Viewfinder Magnification | 0.74x | |
Viewfinder Resolution | 2360k dots | |
LCD Framing | Live View | Live View |
Rear LCD Size | 3.0inch | 3.0inch |
LCD Resolution | 230k dots | 1037k dots |
LCD Attachment | Fixed screen | Swivel screen |
Touch Input | no Touchscreen | Touchscreen |
Shooting Specs | Olympus E-P1 | Olympus E-M1 II |
Focus System | Contrast-detect AF | On-Sensor Phase-detect |
Manual Focusing Aid | no Peaking Feature | Focus Peaking |
Max Shutter Speed (mechanical) | 1/4000s | 1/8000s |
Continuous Shooting | 3 shutter flaps/s | 18 shutter flaps/s |
Electronic Shutter | no E-Shutter | up to 1/32000s |
Time-Lapse Photography | no Intervalometer | Intervalometer built-in |
Image Stabilization | In-body stabilization | In-body stabilization |
Fill Flash | no On-Board Flash | no On-Board Flash |
Storage Medium | SDHC cards | SDXC cards |
Single or Dual Card Slots | Single card slot | Dual card slots |
UHS card support | no | Single UHS-II |
Connectivity Specs | Olympus E-P1 | Olympus E-M1 II |
External Flash | Hotshoe | Hotshoe |
Studio Flash | no PC Sync | PC Sync socket |
USB Connector | USB 2.0 | USB 3.0 |
HDMI Port | mini HDMI | micro HDMI |
Microphone Port | no MIC socket | External MIC port |
Headphone Socket | no Headphone port | Headphone port |
Wifi Support | no Wifi | Wifi built-in |
Body Specs | Olympus E-P1 | Olympus E-M1 II |
Environmental Sealing | not weather sealed | Weathersealed body |
Battery Type | Olympus BLS-1 | Olympus BLH-1 |
Battery Life (CIPA) | 300 shots per charge | 440 shots per charge |
Body Dimensions |
121 x 70 x 36 mm (4.8 x 2.8 x 1.4 in) |
134 x 91 x 67 mm (5.3 x 3.6 x 2.6 in) |
Camera Weight | 355 g (12.5 oz) | 574 g (20.2 oz) |
Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.