Olympus E-P2 vs E-P3

The Olympus PEN E-P2 and the Olympus PEN E-P3 are two enthusiast cameras that were announced, respectively, in November 2009 and June 2011. Both the E-P2 and the E-P3 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-P2		Olympus E-P3
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		1080/60i Video
ISO 100-6,400		ISO 200-12,800
Viewfinder optional		Viewfinder optional
3.0" LCD – 230k dots		3.0" LCD – 614k dots
Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)		Fixed touchscreen
3 shutter flaps per second		3 shutter flaps per second
In-body stabilization		In-body stabilization
300 shots per battery charge		330 shots per battery charge
121 x 70 x 36 mm, 355 g		122 x 69 x 34 mm, 369 g

Check E-P2 offers at
ebay.com
Check E-P3 offers at
ebay.com

Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Olympus PEN E-P2 and the Olympus PEN E-P3? 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

An illustration of the physical size and weight of the Olympus E-P2 and the Olympus E-P3 is provided 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 dimensions are rounded to the nearest millimeter.

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

If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Olympus E-P2 and the Olympus E-P3 are of equal size. However, the E-P3 is slightly heavier (4 percent) than the E-P2. In this context, it is worth noting that neither the E-P2 nor the E-P3 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.

Concerning battery life, the E-P2 gets 300 shots out of its BLS-1 battery, while the E-P3 can take 330 images on a single charge of its BLS-5 power pack.

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-P2	121 mm	70 mm	36 mm	355 g	300	n	Nov 2009	799	ebay.com
2.		Olympus E-P3	122 mm	69 mm	34 mm	369 g	330	n	Jun 2011	799	ebay.com
3.		Olympus E-M10	119 mm	82 mm	46 mm	396 g	320	n	Jan 2014	699	ebay.com
4.		Olympus E-PL2	114 mm	72 mm	42 mm	362 g	280	n	Jan 2011	599	ebay.com
5.		Olympus E-PL3	110 mm	64 mm	37 mm	313 g	300	n	Jun 2011	599	ebay.com
6.		Olympus E-PL1	115 mm	72 mm	42 mm	334 g	290	n	Feb 2010	599	ebay.com
7.		Olympus E-620	130 mm	94 mm	60 mm	521 g	500	n	Feb 2009	699	ebay.com
8.		Olympus E-P1	121 mm	70 mm	36 mm	355 g	300	n	Jun 2009	799	ebay.com
9.		Olympus E-520	136 mm	92 mm	68 mm	535 g	750	n	May 2008	699	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

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 two cameras under review were launched at the same price and fall into the same 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 sensor inside a digital camera is one of the key determinants 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.

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-P3 uses a more advanced image processing engine (TruePic VI) than the E-P2 (TruePic V), with benefits for noise reduction, color accuracy, and processing speed.

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-P2 and the E-P3 have the same pixel density, as well as the same pixel size. It should, however, be noted that the E-P3 is a somewhat more recent model (by 1 year and 7 months) than the E-P2, and its sensor might have benefitted from technological advances during this time.

The Olympus PEN E-P2 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 6400. The corresponding ISO settings for the Olympus PEN E-P3 are ISO 200 to ISO 12800 (no boost).

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.

For many cameras, data on sensor performance has been reported by DXO Mark. 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. Of the two cameras under review, the E-P2 has a notably higher overall DXO score than the E-P3 (overall score 5 points higher), which gives it an advantage in terms of imaging quality. This advantage is based on 0.7 bits higher color depth, 0.3 EV in additional dynamic range, and 0.1 stops of reduced 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.

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-P2	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.5	10.4	505	56
2.		Olympus E-P3	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	20.8	10.1	536	51
3.		Olympus E-M10	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	22.8	12.3	884	72
4.		Olympus E-PL2	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.4	10.2	573	55
5.		Olympus E-PL3	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	20.9	10.3	499	52
6.		Olympus E-PL1	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.5	10.1	487	54
7.		Olympus E-620	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	none	21.3	10.3	536	55
8.		Olympus E-P1	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.4	10.4	536	55
9.		Olympus E-520	Four Thirds	10.0	3648	2736	none	21.4	10.4	548	55
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, but the E-P3 provides a better video resolution than the E-P2. It can shoot movie footage at 1080/60i, while the E-P2 is limited to 720/30p.

Feature comparison

Beyond body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. The E-P2 and the E-P3 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. However, optional viewfinders – the VF-2 for the E-P2 and the VF-3 for the E-P3 – are available as accessories. The following table reports on some other key feature differences and similarities of the Olympus E-P2, the Olympus E-P3, and comparable cameras.

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-P2	optional	n	3.0 / 230	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	n	Y
2.		Olympus E-P3	optional	n	3.0 / 614	fixed	Y	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
3.		Olympus E-M10	1440	n	3.0 / 1037	tilting	Y	1/4000s	8.0/s	Y	Y
4.		Olympus E-PL2	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
5.		Olympus E-PL3	optional	n	3.0 / 460	tilting	n	1/4000s	5.5/s	n	Y
6.		Olympus E-PL1	optional	n	2.7 / 230	fixed	n	1/2000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
7.		Olympus E-620	optical	n	2.7 / 230	swivel	n	1/4000s	4.0/s	Y	Y
8.		Olympus E-P1	none	n	3.0 / 230	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	n	Y
9.		Olympus E-520	optical	n	2.7 / 215	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.5/s	Y	Y
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
Notes: *) 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-P3 has a touchscreen, while the E-P2 has a conventional panel. Touch control can be particularly helpful, for example, for setting the focus point.

The E-P2 writes its imaging data to SDHC cards, while the E-P3 uses SDXC cards. The E-P3 supports UHS-I cards (Ultra High Speed data transfer of up to 104 MB/s), while the E-P2 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-P2 and Olympus PEN E-P3 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-P2	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
2.		Olympus E-P3	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
3.		Olympus E-M10	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
4.		Olympus E-PL2	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
5.		Olympus E-PL3	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
6.		Olympus E-PL1	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
7.		Olympus E-620	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
8.		Olympus E-P1	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
9.		Olympus E-520	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
10.		Panasonic GF1	Y	mono / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
11.		Panasonic GH1	Y	stereo / -	Y	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-

Both the E-P2 and the E-P3 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The E-P2 was replaced by the Olympus E-P3, while the E-P3 was followed by the Olympus E-P5. Further information on the features and operation of the E-P2 and E-P3 can be found, respectively, in the Olympus E-P2 Manual (free pdf) or the online Olympus E-P3 Manual.

Review summary

So what conclusions can be drawn? Which of the two cameras – the Olympus E-P2 or the Olympus E-P3 – 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.

Arguments in favor of the Olympus PEN E-P2:

• Better image quality: Scores markedly higher (5 points) in the DXO overall assessment.
• More heavily discounted: Has been on the market for longer (launched in November 2009).

Reasons to prefer the Olympus PEN E-P3:

• Better jpgs: Has a more modern image processing engine (TruePic VI vs TruePic V).
• Better video: Provides higher definition movie capture (1080/60i vs 720/30p).
• More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (614k vs 230k dots).
• Fewer buttons to press: Has a touchscreen to facilitate handling and shooting adjustments.
• Easier fill-in: Has a small integrated flash to brighten shadows of backlit subjects.
• Faster buffer clearing: Has an SD card interface that supports the UHS-I standard.
• More modern: Was introduced somewhat (1 year and 7 months) more recently.

If the number of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the E-P3 is the clear winner of the contest (7 : 2 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 wedding photographer will view the differences between cameras in a way that diverges from the perspective of a travel photog, and a person interested in cityscapes has distinct needs from a macro 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-P2 and the Olympus E-P3 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-P2 and the E-P3 in practical situations. 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-P2	3/5	+	..	69/100	4/5	4.5/5	Nov 2009	799	ebay.com
2.		Olympus E-P3	..	83/100	..	74/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2011	799	ebay.com
3.		Olympus E-M10	4/5	..	..	80/100	5/5	5/5	Jan 2014	699	ebay.com
4.		Olympus E-PL2	3/5	83/100	..	71/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jan 2011	599	ebay.com
5.		Olympus E-PL3	3/5	+ +	..	72/100	4.5/5	4/5	Jun 2011	599	ebay.com
6.		Olympus E-PL1	..	86/100	..	69/100	4/5	4.5/5	Feb 2010	599	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-P1	..	+	..	66/100	4/5	4.5/5	Jun 2009	799	ebay.com
9.		Olympus E-520	..	87/100	..	+ +	4.5/5	4.5/5	May 2008	699	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
Notes: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available.

The review scores listed above should be treated 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 rating-comparisons among cameras that span long time periods or concern very differently equipped models make little sense. Also, please note that some of the review sites have changed their methodology and reporting over time.

Check E-P2 offers at
ebay.com
Check E-P3 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 use the search menu below. There is also a set of direct links to comparison reviews that other users of the CAM-parator app explored.

~

Check E-P2 offers at
ebay.com
Check E-P3 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.