Olympus E-P1 vs E-P2

The Olympus PEN E-P1 and the Olympus PEN E-P2 are two enthusiast cameras that were announced, respectively, in June 2009 and November 2009. Both the E-P1 and the E-P2 are mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras that are equipped with a Four Thirds sensor. Both cameras offer a resolution of 12.2 megapixels.

Below is an overview of the main specs of the two cameras as a starting point for the comparison.

Headline Specifications

Olympus E-P1		Olympus E-P2
Mirrorless system camera		Mirrorless system camera
Micro Four Thirds lenses		Micro Four Thirds lenses
12.2 MP – Four Thirds sensor		12.2 MP – Four Thirds sensor
720/30p Video		720/30p Video
ISO 100-6,400		ISO 100-6,400
No viewfinder, LCD framing		Viewfinder optional
3.0" LCD – 230k dots		3.0" LCD – 230k dots
Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)		Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)
3 shutter flaps per second		3 shutter flaps per second
In-body stabilization		In-body stabilization
300 shots per battery charge		300 shots per battery charge
121 x 70 x 36 mm, 355 g		121 x 70 x 36 mm, 355 g

Check E-P1 offers at
ebay.com
Check E-P2 offers at
ebay.com

Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Olympus PEN E-P1 and the Olympus PEN E-P2? 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-P1 and the Olympus E-P2. The two cameras are presented according to their relative size. Three consecutive perspectives from the front, the top, and the back are available. All size dimensions are rounded to the nearest millimeter.

Both cameras are available in three different colors (black, silver, white).

In this particular case, the Olympus E-P1 and the Olympus E-P2 have exactly the same width and height, and, thus, have identically-sized bodies. Moreover, the two cameras also share the same weight. In this context, it is worth noting that neither the E-P1 nor the E-P2 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. 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.

The following table provides a synthesis of the main physical specifications of the two cameras and other similar ones. If you would like to visualize and compare a different camera combination, you can navigate to the CAM-parator app and make your selection from a broad list of cameras 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-P1	121 mm	70 mm	36 mm	355 g	300	n	Jun 2009	799	ebay.com
2.		Olympus E-P2	121 mm	70 mm	36 mm	355 g	300	n	Nov 2009	799	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-P3	122 mm	69 mm	34 mm	369 g	330	n	Jun 2011	799	ebay.com
6.		Olympus E-PL1	115 mm	72 mm	42 mm	334 g	290	n	Feb 2010	599	ebay.com
7.		Olympus E-PL2	114 mm	72 mm	42 mm	362 g	280	n	Jan 2011	599	ebay.com
8.		Olympus E-PL3	110 mm	64 mm	37 mm	313 g	300	n	Jun 2011	599	ebay.com
9.		Panasonic G10	124 mm	84 mm	74 mm	388 g	380	n	Mar 2010	499	ebay.com
10.		Panasonic GF1	119 mm	71 mm	36 mm	385 g	380	n	Sep 2009	749	ebay.com
11.		Panasonic GH1	124 mm	90 mm	45 mm	385 g	300	n	Mar 2009	899	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

The price is, of course, an important factor in any camera decision. 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 two cameras under review were launched at the same price and fall into the same market segment. 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. 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. Moreover, a large sensor camera will give the photographer more control over depth-of-field in the image and, thus, the ability to better isolate a subject from the background. On the downside, larger sensors tend to be associated with larger, more expensive camera bodies and lenses.

Both cameras under consideration feature a Four Thirds sensor and have a format factor (sometimes also referred to as "crop factor") of 2.0. Within the spectrum of camera sensors, this places the review cameras among the medium-sized sensor cameras that aim to strike a balance between image quality and portability. Both cameras feature a native aspect ratio (sensor width to sensor height) of 4:3.

The two cameras under review do not only share the same sensor size, but also offer an identical resolution of 12.2 megapixels. This similarity in sensor specs implies that both the E-P1 and the E-P2 have the same pixel density, as well as the same pixel size. It should, however, be noted that the E-P2 is a somewhat more recent model (by 4 months) than the E-P1, and its sensor might have benefitted from technological advances during this time.

The Olympus PEN E-P1 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 6400. The Olympus PEN E-P2 offers exactly the same ISO settings.

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 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.

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-P1	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.4	10.4	536	55
2.		Olympus E-P2	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.5	10.4	505	56
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-P3	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	20.8	10.1	536	51
6.		Olympus E-PL1	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.5	10.1	487	54
7.		Olympus E-PL2	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.4	10.2	573	55
8.		Olympus E-PL3	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	20.9	10.3	499	52
9.		Panasonic G10	Four Thirds	12.0	4000	3000	720/30p	21.2	10.1	411	52
10.		Panasonic GF1	Four Thirds	12.0	4000	3000	720/30p	21.2	10.3	513	54
11.		Panasonic GH1	Four Thirds	12.0	4000	3000	1080/24p	21.6	11.6	772	64

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, and both provide the same movie specifications (720/30p).

Feature comparison

Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. The E-P1 and the E-P2 are similar in the sense that neither of the two has a viewfinder. The images are, thus, framed using live view on the rear LCD. That said, the E-P2 can be equipped with an optional viewfinder – the VF-2. The adjacent table lists some of the other core features of the Olympus E-P1 and Olympus E-P2 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-P1	none	n	3.0 / 230	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	n	Y
2.		Olympus E-P2	optional	n	3.0 / 230	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/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-P3	optional	n	3.0 / 614	fixed	Y	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
6.		Olympus E-PL1	optional	n	2.7 / 230	fixed	n	1/2000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
7.		Olympus E-PL2	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
8.		Olympus E-PL3	optional	n	3.0 / 460	tilting	n	1/4000s	5.5/s	n	Y
9.		Panasonic G10	202	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/4000s	2.6/s	Y	n
10.		Panasonic GF1	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	n
11.		Panasonic GH1	1440	n	3.0 / 460	swivel	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	n
Note: *) Information refers to the mechanical shutter, unless the camera only has an electronic one.

Concerning the storage of imaging data, both the E-P1 and the E-P2 write their files to SDHC 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 PEN E-P2 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-P1	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
2.		Olympus E-P2	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
3.		Olympus E-520	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
4.		Olympus E-620	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
5.		Olympus E-P3	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
6.		Olympus E-PL1	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
7.		Olympus E-PL2	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
8.		Olympus E-PL3	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
9.		Panasonic G10	Y	mono / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
10.		Panasonic GF1	Y	mono / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
11.		Panasonic GH1	Y	stereo / -	Y	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-

Both the E-P1 and the E-P2 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The E-P1 was replaced by the Olympus E-P2, while the E-P2 was followed by the Olympus E-P3. Further information on the features and operation of the E-P1 and E-P2 can be found, respectively, in the Olympus E-P1 Manual (free pdf) or the online Olympus E-P2 Manual.

Review summary

So what is the bottom line? Which of the two cameras – the Olympus E-P1 or the Olympus E-P2 – has the upper hand? Is one clearly better than the other? Below is a summary of the relative strengths of each of the two contestants.

Arguments in favor of the Olympus PEN E-P1:

• More heavily discounted: Has been on the market for longer (launched in June 2009).

Advantages of the Olympus PEN E-P2:

• More framing options: Can be equipped with a hotshoe-mounted accessory-viewfinder.
• More modern: Was introduced somewhat (4 months) more recently.

If the number of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the E-P2 comes out slightly ahead of the E-P1 (2 : 1 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. 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-P2 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 technical specifications can provide a useful overview of the capabilities of different cameras, it says little about, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance of the E-P1 and the E-P2 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 where reviews by experts come in. 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.

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-P1	..	+	..	66/100	4/5	4.5/5	Jun 2009	799	ebay.com
2.		Olympus E-P2	3/5	+	..	69/100	4/5	4.5/5	Nov 2009	799	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-P3	..	83/100	..	74/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2011	799	ebay.com
6.		Olympus E-PL1	..	86/100	..	69/100	4/5	4.5/5	Feb 2010	599	ebay.com
7.		Olympus E-PL2	3/5	83/100	..	71/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jan 2011	599	ebay.com
8.		Olympus E-PL3	3/5	+ +	..	72/100	4.5/5	4/5	Jun 2011	599	ebay.com
9.		Panasonic G10	3/5	..	..	70/100	4/5	4/5	Mar 2010	499	ebay.com
10.		Panasonic GF1	..	85/100	..	69/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2009	749	ebay.com
11.		Panasonic GH1	..	+ +	..	72/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Mar 2009	899	ebay.com
Note: (+ +) 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, please note that some of the review sites have changed their methodology and reporting over time.

Check E-P1 offers at
ebay.com
Check E-P2 offers at
ebay.com

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.

~

Check E-P1 offers at
ebay.com
Check E-P2 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.