Olympus E-P1 vs TG-4

The Olympus PEN E-P1 and the Olympus Tough TG-4 are two digital cameras that were announced, respectively, in June 2009 and April 2015. The E-P1 is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera, while the TG-4 is a fixed lens compact. The cameras are based on a Four Thirds (E-P1) and a 1/2.3-inch (TG-4) sensor. The E-P1 has a resolution of 12.2 megapixels, whereas the TG-4 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-P1		Olympus TG-4
Mirrorless system camera		Fixed lens compact camera
Micro Four Thirds lenses		25-100mm f/2.0-4.9
12.2 MP – Four Thirds sensor		15.9 MP – 1/2.3" sensor
720/30p Video		1080/30p Video
ISO 100-6,400		ISO 100-6,400
No viewfinder, LCD framing		No viewfinder, LCD framing
3.0" LCD – 230k dots		3.0" LCD – 460k dots
Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)		Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)
3 shutter flaps per second		5 shutter flaps per second
In-body stabilization		In-body stabilization
not weather sealed		Waterproof body (15m)
300 shots per battery charge		380 shots per battery charge
121 x 70 x 36 mm, 355 g		112 x 66 x 31 mm, 247 g

Check E-P1 offers at
ebay.com
Check TG-4 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 Tough TG-4? 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 TG-4. The two cameras are presented according to their relative size. Three consecutive views from the front, the top, and the rear side are shown. All width, height and depth dimensions are rounded to the nearest millimeter.

The E-P1 can be obtained in three different colors (black, silver, white), while the TG-4 is available in two color-versions (black, red).

If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Olympus TG-4 is notably smaller (13 percent) than the Olympus E-P1. It is noteworthy in this context that the TG-4 is splash and dust-proof, while the E-P1 does not feature any corresponding weather-sealing. More than that, the TG-4 is water-proof up to 15m and can, thus, be used for underwater photography.

The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete and possibly misleading, as the TG-4 has a lens built in, whereas the E-P1 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-P1 and their specifications in the Micro Four Thirds Lens Catalog.

Concerning battery life, the E-P1 gets 300 shots out of its Olympus BLS-1 battery, while the TG-4 can take 380 images on a single charge of its Olympus LI-92B power pack. The power pack in the TG-4 can be charged via the USB port, which can be very convenient when travelling.

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, 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-P1	121 mm	70 mm	36 mm	355 g	300	n	Jun 2009	799	ebay.com
2.		Olympus TG-4	112 mm	66 mm	31 mm	247 g	380	Y	Apr 2015	379	ebay.com
3.		Fujifilm XP130	110 mm	71 mm	28 mm	207 g	240	Y	Jan 2018	229	ebay.com
4.		Fujifilm XP140	110 mm	71 mm	28 mm	207 g	240	Y	Feb 2019	229	ebay.com
5.		Nikon W300	112 mm	66 mm	29 mm	231 g	280	Y	May 2017	389	ebay.com
6.		Olympus E-520	136 mm	92 mm	68 mm	535 g	750	n	May 2008	699	ebay.com
7.		Olympus E-620	130 mm	94 mm	60 mm	521 g	500	n	Feb 2009	699	ebay.com
8.		Olympus E-P2	121 mm	70 mm	36 mm	355 g	300	n	Nov 2009	799	ebay.com
9.		Olympus E-P3	122 mm	69 mm	34 mm	369 g	330	n	Jun 2011	799	ebay.com
10.		Olympus E-PL1	115 mm	72 mm	42 mm	334 g	290	n	Feb 2010	599	ebay.com
11.		Olympus E-PL2	114 mm	72 mm	42 mm	362 g	280	n	Jan 2011	599	ebay.com
12.		Olympus E-PL3	110 mm	64 mm	37 mm	313 g	300	n	Jun 2011	599	ebay.com
13.		Olympus TG-5	113 mm	66 mm	32 mm	250 g	340	Y	May 2017	449	ebay.com
14.		Olympus TG-6	113 mm	66 mm	32 mm	253 g	340	Y	May 2019	449	ebay.com
15.		Panasonic G10	124 mm	84 mm	74 mm	388 g	380	n	Mar 2010	499	ebay.com
16.		Panasonic GF1	119 mm	71 mm	36 mm	385 g	380	n	Sep 2009	749	ebay.com
17.		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

Any camera decision will naturally be influenced heavily by the price. The listed launch prices provide an indication of the market segment that the manufacturer of the cameras have been targeting. The TG-4 was launched at a lower price than the E-P1, 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 imaging sensor is at the core of digital cameras and its size is one of the main determining factors of image quality. A large sensor will tend to have larger individual pixels that provide better low-light sensitivity, wider dynamic range, and richer color-depth than smaller pixel-units 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 tend to be associated with larger, more expensive camera bodies and lenses.

Of the two cameras under consideration, the Olympus E-P1 features a Four Thirds sensor and the Olympus TG-4 a 1/2.3-inch sensor. The sensor area in the TG-4 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.

Technology-wise, the TG-4 uses a more advanced image processing engine (TruePic VII) than the E-P1 (TruePic V), with benefits for noise reduction, color accuracy, and processing speed.

Despite having a smaller sensor, the TG-4 offers a higher resolution of 15.9 megapixels, compared with 12.2 MP of the E-P1. 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 1.33μm versus 4.29μm for the E-P1). However, it should be noted that the TG-4 is much more recent (by 5 years and 9 months) than the E-P1, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that make it possible to gather light more efficiently.

The resolution advantage of the Olympus TG-4 implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the TG-4 for good quality output (200 dots per inch) amounts to 23 x 17.3 inches or 58.5 x 43.9 cm, for very good quality (250 dpi) 18.4 x 13.8 inches or 46.8 x 35.1 cm, and for excellent quality (300 dpi) 15.4 x 11.5 inches or 39 x 29.3 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 Olympus PEN E-P1 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 6400. The Olympus Tough TG-4 offers exactly the same ISO settings.

In terms of underlying technology, the E-P1 is build around a CMOS sensor, while the TG-4 uses a BSI-CMOS imager. Both cameras use a Bayer filter for capturing RGB colors on a square grid of photosensors. This arrangement is found in most digital cameras.

Since 2007, DXO Mark has published sensor performance measurements that have been derived using a consistent methodology. 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 adjacent table reports on the physical sensor characteristics and the outcomes of the DXO sensor quality tests for a sample of comparator-cameras.

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 TG-4	1/2.3	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	20.2	11.6	737	47
3.		Fujifilm XP130	1/2.3	15.9	4608	3456	1080/60p	20.6	12.1	1000	51
4.		Fujifilm XP140	1/2.3	15.9	4608	3456	4K/15p	20.7	12.2	1102	52
5.		Nikon W300	1/2.3	15.9	4608	3456	4K/30p	20.5	12.0	938	50
6.		Olympus E-520	Four Thirds	10.0	3648	2736	none	21.4	10.4	548	55
7.		Olympus E-620	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	none	21.3	10.3	536	55
8.		Olympus E-P2	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.5	10.4	505	56
9.		Olympus E-P3	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	20.8	10.1	536	51
10.		Olympus E-PL1	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.5	10.1	487	54
11.		Olympus E-PL2	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.4	10.2	573	55
12.		Olympus E-PL3	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	20.9	10.3	499	52
13.		Olympus TG-5	1/2.3	12.0	4000	3000	4K/30p	20.5	11.9	934	50
14.		Olympus TG-6	1/2.3	12.0	4000	3000	4K/30p	20.7	12.2	1127	52
15.		Panasonic G10	Four Thirds	12.0	4000	3000	720/30p	21.2	10.1	411	52
16.		Panasonic GF1	Four Thirds	12.0	4000	3000	720/30p	21.2	10.3	513	54
17.		Panasonic GH1	Four Thirds	12.0	4000	3000	1080/24p	21.6	11.6	772	64
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. Both cameras under consideration are equipped with sensors that have a sufficiently high read-out speed for moving images, but the TG-4 provides a better video resolution than the E-P1. It can shoot movie footage at 1080/30p, while the E-P1 is limited to 720/30p.

Feature comparison

Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. The E-P1 and the TG-4 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. The adjacent table lists some of the other core features of the Olympus E-P1 and Olympus TG-4 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 TG-4	none	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/2000s	5.0/s	Y	Y
3.		Fujifilm XP130	none	n	3.0 / 920	fixed	n	1/2000s	10.0/s	Y	Y
4.		Fujifilm XP140	none	n	3.0 / 920	fixed	n	1/2000s	10.0/s	Y	Y
5.		Nikon W300	none	n	3.0 / 921	fixed	n	1/4000s	7.0/s	Y	Y
6.		Olympus E-520	optical	n	2.7 / 215	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.5/s	Y	Y
7.		Olympus E-620	optical	n	2.7 / 230	swivel	n	1/4000s	4.0/s	Y	Y
8.		Olympus E-P2	optional	n	3.0 / 230	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	n	Y
9.		Olympus E-P3	optional	n	3.0 / 614	fixed	Y	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
10.		Olympus E-PL1	optional	n	2.7 / 230	fixed	n	1/2000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
11.		Olympus E-PL2	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
12.		Olympus E-PL3	optional	n	3.0 / 460	tilting	n	1/4000s	5.5/s	n	Y
13.		Olympus TG-5	none	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/2000s	20.0/s	Y	Y
14.		Olympus TG-6	none	n	3.0 / 1040	fixed	n	1/2000s	20.0/s	Y	Y
15.		Panasonic G10	202	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/4000s	2.6/s	Y	n
16.		Panasonic GF1	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	n
17.		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.

One difference between the cameras concerns the presence of an on-board flash. The TG-4 has one, while the E-P1 does not. While the built-in flash of the TG-4 is not very powerful, it can at times be useful as a fill-in light.

The Olympus TG-4 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 TG-4 uses SDXC cards. The TG-4 supports UHS-I cards (Ultra High Speed data transfer of up to 104 MB/s), 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 Tough TG-4 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 TG-4	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
3.		Fujifilm XP130	-	mono / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	Y
4.		Fujifilm XP140	-	mono / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	Y
5.		Nikon W300	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	Y
6.		Olympus E-520	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
7.		Olympus E-620	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
8.		Olympus E-P2	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
9.		Olympus E-P3	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
10.		Olympus E-PL1	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
11.		Olympus E-PL2	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
12.		Olympus E-PL3	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
13.		Olympus TG-5	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
14.		Olympus TG-6	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
15.		Panasonic G10	Y	mono / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
16.		Panasonic GF1	Y	mono / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
17.		Panasonic GH1	Y	stereo / -	Y	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-

It is notable that the E-P1 has a hotshoe, while the TG-4 does not. This socket makes it possible to easily attach optional accessories, such as an external flash gun.

Travel and landscape photographers will find it useful that the TG-4 has an internal geolocalization sensor and can record GPS coordinates in its EXIF data.

Both the E-P1 and the TG-4 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The E-P1 was replaced by the Olympus E-P2, while the TG-4 was followed by the Olympus TG-5. Further information on the features and operation of the E-P1 and TG-4 can be found, respectively, in the Olympus E-P1 Manual (free pdf) or the online Olympus TG-4 Manual.

Review summary

So how do things add up? Which of the two cameras – the Olympus E-P1 or the Olympus TG-4 – has the upper hand? Is one clearly better than the other? A synthesis of the relative strong points of each of the models is listed below.

Advantages of the Olympus PEN E-P1:

• 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.
• Faster shutter: Has higher mechanical shutter speed (1/4000s vs 1/2000s) to freeze action.
• More flexible: Accepts interchangeable lenses, so that lens characteristics can be altered.
• Better lighting: Features a hotshoe and can thus hold and trigger an external flash gun.
• More heavily discounted: Has been available for much longer (launched in June 2009).

Arguments in favor of the Olympus Tough TG-4:

• More detail: Has more megapixels (15.9 vs 12.2MP), which boosts linear resolution by 14%.
• Better jpgs: Has a more modern image processing engine (TruePic VII vs TruePic V).
• Better video: Provides higher definition movie capture (1080/30p vs 720/30p).
• More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (460k vs 230k dots).
• Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (5 vs 3 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
• Easier time-lapse photography: Has an intervalometer built-in for low frequency shooting.
• Ready to shoot: Has an integrated lens, whereas the E-P1 necessitates an extra lens.
• More compact: Is smaller (112x66mm vs 121x70mm) 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-P1).
• Longer lasting: Gets more shots (380 versus 300) out of a single battery charge.
• Easier travel charging: Can be conveniently charged via its USB port.
• Better sealing: Is splash and dust sealed for shooting in inclement weather conditions.
• Water-proof: Is rugged and sealed and can thus be used for underwater photography (up to 15m).
• Easier fill-in: Has a small integrated flash to brighten shadows of backlit subjects.
• Easier geotagging: Features an internal GPS sensor to log localization data.
• Easier file upload: Has wifi built in for automatic backup or image transfer to the web.
• Faster buffer clearing: Has an SD card interface that supports the UHS-I standard.
• More affordable: Was introduced at a lower price, despite coming with a built-in lens.
• More modern: Reflects 5 years and 9 months of technical progress since the E-P1 launch.

If the count of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a measure, the TG-4 is the clear winner of the contest (19 : 8 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 sports photographer will view the differences between cameras in a way that diverges from the perspective of a street photog, and a person interested in family portraits has distinct needs from a landscape 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 TG-4 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 specs-based evaluation of cameras can be instructive in revealing their potential as photographic tools, it remains incomplete and does no justice, for example, to the way the E-P1 or the TG-4 perform in practice. 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 expert reviews are important. The table below provides a synthesis of the camera assessments of some of the best known photo-gear 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 TG-4	..	+	..	79/100	4/5	4/5	Apr 2015	379	ebay.com
3.		Fujifilm XP130	..	o	..	..	3.5/5	4/5	Jan 2018	229	ebay.com
4.		Fujifilm XP140	..	+	..	..	3.5/5	4/5	Feb 2019	229	ebay.com
5.		Nikon W300	..	+	..	..	4/5	4/5	May 2017	389	ebay.com
6.		Olympus E-520	..	87/100	..	+ +	4.5/5	4.5/5	May 2008	699	ebay.com
7.		Olympus E-620	3/5	88/100	..	72/100	4.5/5	5/5	Feb 2009	699	ebay.com
8.		Olympus E-P2	3/5	+	..	69/100	4/5	4.5/5	Nov 2009	799	ebay.com
9.		Olympus E-P3	..	83/100	..	74/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2011	799	ebay.com
10.		Olympus E-PL1	..	86/100	..	69/100	4/5	4.5/5	Feb 2010	599	ebay.com
11.		Olympus E-PL2	3/5	83/100	..	71/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jan 2011	599	ebay.com
12.		Olympus E-PL3	3/5	+ +	..	72/100	4.5/5	4/5	Jun 2011	599	ebay.com
13.		Olympus TG-5	..	+ +	4.5/5	..	4/5	4/5	May 2017	449	ebay.com
14.		Olympus TG-6	4/5	+ +	4.5/5	76/100	4/5	4/5	May 2019	449	ebay.com
15.		Panasonic G10	3/5	..	..	70/100	4/5	4/5	Mar 2010	499	ebay.com
16.		Panasonic GF1	..	85/100	..	69/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2009	749	ebay.com
17.		Panasonic GH1	..	+ +	..	72/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Mar 2009	899	ebay.com
Note: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available.

Care should be taken when interpreting the review scores above, though. The ratings are only valid when referring to cameras in the same category and of the same age. Hence, a score should always be seen in the context of the camera's market launch date and its price, and comparing ratings of very distinct cameras or ones that are far apart in terms of their release date 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 TG-4 offers at
ebay.com

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. 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-P1 offers at
ebay.com
Check TG-4 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.