Olympus E-P2 vs E-PL3

The Olympus PEN E-P2 and the Olympus PEN E-PL3 are two digital cameras that were officially introduced, respectively, in November 2009 and June 2011. Both the E-P2 and the E-PL3 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-PL3
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 – 460k dots
Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)		Tilting screen (no touchscreen)
3 shutter flaps per second		5.5 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		110 x 64 x 37 mm, 313 g

Check E-P2 offers at
ebay.com
Check E-PL3 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-PL3? 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-PL3 is provided in the side-by-side display below. 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 size dimensions are rounded to the nearest millimeter.

The E-P2 can be obtained in three different colors (black, silver, white), while the E-PL3 is available in four color-versions (black, silver, red, white).

If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Olympus E-PL3 is notably smaller (17 percent) than the Olympus E-P2. Moreover, the E-PL3 is markedly lighter (12 percent) than the E-P2. In this context, it is worth noting that neither the E-P2 nor the E-PL3 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 table below summarizes the key physical specs of the two cameras alongside a broader set of comparators. 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-P2	121 mm	70 mm	36 mm	355 g	300	n	Nov 2009	799	ebay.com
2.		Olympus E-PL3	110 mm	64 mm	37 mm	313 g	300	n	Jun 2011	599	ebay.com
3.		Olympus E-M10	119 mm	82 mm	46 mm	396 g	320	n	Jan 2014	699	ebay.com
4.		Olympus E-PL5	111 mm	64 mm	38 mm	325 g	360	n	Sep 2012	599	ebay.com
5.		Olympus E-P3	122 mm	69 mm	34 mm	369 g	330	n	Jun 2011	799	ebay.com
6.		Olympus E-PL2	114 mm	72 mm	42 mm	362 g	280	n	Jan 2011	599	ebay.com
7.		Olympus E-PM1	110 mm	64 mm	34 mm	265 g	330	n	Jun 2011	499	ebay.com
8.		Olympus E-PL1	115 mm	72 mm	42 mm	334 g	290	n	Feb 2010	599	ebay.com
9.		Olympus E-620	130 mm	94 mm	60 mm	521 g	500	n	Feb 2009	699	ebay.com
10.		Olympus E-P1	121 mm	70 mm	36 mm	355 g	300	n	Jun 2009	799	ebay.com
11.		Olympus E-520	136 mm	92 mm	68 mm	535 g	750	n	May 2008	699	ebay.com
12.		Panasonic GF1	119 mm	71 mm	36 mm	385 g	380	n	Sep 2009	749	ebay.com
13.		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 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-PL3 was launched at a somewhat lower price (by 25 percent) than the E-P2, which makes it more attractive for photographers on a tight budget. 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

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. 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 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-PL3 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-PL3 have the same pixel density, as well as the same pixel size. It should, however, be noted that the E-PL3 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-PL3 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 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"). Of the two cameras under review, the E-P2 has a notably higher overall DXO score than the E-PL3 (overall score 4 points higher), which gives it an advantage in terms of imaging quality. This advantage is based on 0.6 bits higher color depth, 0.1 EV in additional dynamic range, and 0 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.

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-PL3	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	20.9	10.3	499	52
3.		Olympus E-M10	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	22.8	12.3	884	72
4.		Olympus E-PL5	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	22.8	12.3	889	72
5.		Olympus E-P3	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	20.8	10.1	536	51
6.		Olympus E-PL2	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.4	10.2	573	55
7.		Olympus E-PM1	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	21.0	10.3	499	52
8.		Olympus E-PL1	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.5	10.1	487	54
9.		Olympus E-620	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	none	21.3	10.3	536	55
10.		Olympus E-P1	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.4	10.4	536	55
11.		Olympus E-520	Four Thirds	10.0	3648	2736	none	21.4	10.4	548	55
12.		Panasonic GF1	Four Thirds	12.0	4000	3000	720/30p	21.2	10.3	513	54
13.		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. The two cameras under consideration both have sensors whose read-out speed is fast enough to capture moving pictures, but the E-PL3 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-PL3 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-2 for the E-PL3 – are available as accessories. The adjacent table lists some of the other core features of the Olympus E-P2 and Olympus E-PL3 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-P2	optional	n	3.0 / 230	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	n	Y
2.		Olympus E-PL3	optional	n	3.0 / 460	tilting	n	1/4000s	5.5/s	n	Y
3.		Olympus E-M10	1440	n	3.0 / 1037	tilting	Y	1/4000s	8.0/s	Y	Y
4.		Olympus E-PL5	optional	n	3.0 / 460	tilting	Y	1/4000s	8.0/s	n	Y
5.		Olympus E-P3	optional	n	3.0 / 614	fixed	Y	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
6.		Olympus E-PL2	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
7.		Olympus E-PM1	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/4000s	5.5/s	n	Y
8.		Olympus E-PL1	optional	n	2.7 / 230	fixed	n	1/2000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
9.		Olympus E-620	optical	n	2.7 / 230	swivel	n	1/4000s	4.0/s	Y	Y
10.		Olympus E-P1	none	n	3.0 / 230	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	n	Y
11.		Olympus E-520	optical	n	2.7 / 215	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.5/s	Y	Y
12.		Panasonic GF1	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	n
13.		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.

The E-P2 writes its imaging data to SDHC cards, while the E-PL3 uses SDXC 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-PL3 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-PL3	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
3.		Olympus E-M10	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
4.		Olympus E-PL5	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
5.		Olympus E-P3	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
6.		Olympus E-PL2	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
7.		Olympus E-PM1	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
8.		Olympus E-PL1	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
9.		Olympus E-620	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
10.		Olympus E-P1	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
11.		Olympus E-520	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
12.		Panasonic GF1	Y	mono / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
13.		Panasonic GH1	Y	stereo / -	Y	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-

Both the E-P2 and the E-PL3 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The E-P2 was replaced by the Olympus E-P3, while the E-PL3 was followed by the Olympus E-PL5. Further information on the features and operation of the E-P2 and E-PL3 can be found, respectively, in the Olympus E-P2 Manual (free pdf) or the online Olympus E-PL3 Manual.

Review summary

So what conclusions can be drawn? Is the Olympus E-P2 better than the Olympus E-PL3 or vice versa? The listing below highlights the relative strengths of the two models.

Arguments in favor of the Olympus PEN E-P2:

• Better image quality: Scores markedly higher (4 points) in the DXO overall assessment.
• More heavily discounted: Has been on the market for longer (launched in November 2009).

Advantages of the Olympus PEN E-PL3:

• 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 (460k vs 230k dots).
• More flexible LCD: Has a tilting screen for odd-angle shots in landscape orientation.
• More selfie-friendly: Has an articulated screen that can be turned to be front-facing.
• Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (5.5 vs 3 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
• More compact: Is smaller (110x64mm vs 121x70mm) and will fit more readily into a bag.
• Less heavy: Has a lower weight (by 42g or 12 percent) and is thus easier to take along.
• More affordable: Was released into a lower priced segment (25 percent cheaper at launch).
• More modern: Was introduced somewhat (1 year and 7 months) more recently.

If the count of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a measure, the E-PL3 is the clear winner of the contest (10 : 2 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-P2 and the Olympus E-PL3 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 remains partial and cannot reveal, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance when actually working with the E-P2 or the E-PL3. 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 expert reviews 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.

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-PL3	3/5	+ +	..	72/100	4.5/5	4/5	Jun 2011	599	ebay.com
3.		Olympus E-M10	4/5	..	..	80/100	5/5	5/5	Jan 2014	699	ebay.com
4.		Olympus E-PL5	3/5	+ +	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2012	599	ebay.com
5.		Olympus E-P3	..	83/100	..	74/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2011	799	ebay.com
6.		Olympus E-PL2	3/5	83/100	..	71/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jan 2011	599	ebay.com
7.		Olympus E-PM1	..	86/100	..	71/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2011	499	ebay.com
8.		Olympus E-PL1	..	86/100	..	69/100	4/5	4.5/5	Feb 2010	599	ebay.com
9.		Olympus E-620	3/5	88/100	..	72/100	4.5/5	5/5	Feb 2009	699	ebay.com
10.		Olympus E-P1	..	+	..	66/100	4/5	4.5/5	Jun 2009	799	ebay.com
11.		Olympus E-520	..	87/100	..	+ +	4.5/5	4.5/5	May 2008	699	ebay.com
12.		Panasonic GF1	..	85/100	..	69/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2009	749	ebay.com
13.		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 ratings were established in reference to similarly priced cameras that were available in the market at the time of the review. Hence, a score should always be seen in the context of the camera's market launch date and its price, and comparisons of ratings among very different cameras or across long time periods have little meaning. It should also be noted that some of the review sites have over time altered the way they render their verdicts.

Check E-P2 offers at
ebay.com
Check E-PL3 offers at
ebay.com

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 a corresponding selection in the search boxes 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-PL3 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.