Olympus E-P2 vs E-PM2
The Olympus PEN E-P2 and the Olympus PEN E-PM2 are two digital cameras that were announced, respectively, in November 2009 and September 2012. Both the E-P2 and the E-PM2 are mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras that are equipped with a Four Thirds sensor. The E-P2 has a resolution of 12.2 megapixels, whereas the E-PM2 provides 15.9 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-P2 and the Olympus PEN E-PM2? 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-P2 and the Olympus E-PM2 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-P2 can be obtained in three different colors (black, silver, white), while the E-PM2 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-PM2 is notably smaller (17 percent) than the Olympus E-P2. Moreover, the E-PM2 is markedly lighter (24 percent) than the E-P2. In this context, it is worth noting that neither the E-P2 nor the E-PM2 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 Olympus BLS-1 battery, while the E-PM2 can take 360 images on a single charge of its Olympus BLS-5 power pack.
The table below summarizes the key physical specs of the two cameras alongside a broader set of comparators. 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-P2 | 121 mm | 70 mm | 36 mm | 355 g | 300 | n | Nov 2009 | 799 | ebay.com | |
2. | Olympus E-PM2 | 110 mm | 64 mm | 34 mm | 269 g | 360 | n | Sep 2012 | 499 | 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-M10 II | 120 mm | 83 mm | 47 mm | 390 g | 320 | n | Aug 2015 | 649 | ebay.com | |
6. | Olympus E-P1 | 121 mm | 70 mm | 36 mm | 355 g | 300 | n | Jun 2009 | 799 | ebay.com | |
7. | Olympus E-P3 | 122 mm | 69 mm | 34 mm | 369 g | 330 | n | Jun 2011 | 799 | ebay.com | |
8. | Olympus E-P5 | 122 mm | 69 mm | 37 mm | 420 g | 330 | n | May 2013 | 999 | 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 E-PL5 | 111 mm | 64 mm | 38 mm | 325 g | 360 | n | Sep 2012 | 599 | ebay.com | |
13. | Olympus E-PL6 | 111 mm | 64 mm | 38 mm | 325 g | 360 | n | May 2013 | 599 | ebay.com | |
14. | Olympus E-PM1 | 110 mm | 64 mm | 34 mm | 265 g | 330 | n | Jun 2011 | 499 | 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. | |||||||||||
The price is, of course, an important factor in any camera decision. The listed launch prices provide an indication of the market segment that the manufacturer of the cameras have been targeting. The E-PM2 was launched at a markedly lower price (by 38 percent) than the E-P2, 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 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. 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-PM2 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.
While the two cameras under review share the same sensor size, the E-PM2 offers a higher resolution of 15.9 megapixels, compared with 12.2 MP of the E-P2. This megapixels advantage translates into a 14 percent gain in linear resolution. On the other hand, these sensor specs imply that the E-PM2 has a higher pixel density and a smaller size of the individual pixel (with a pixel pitch of 3.76μm versus 4.29μm for the E-P2). However, it should be noted that the E-PM2 is much more recent (by 2 years and 10 months) than the E-P2, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that compensate for the smaller pixel size.
The resolution advantage of the Olympus E-PM2 implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the E-PM2 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-P2 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-P2 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 6400. The corresponding ISO settings for the Olympus PEN E-PM2 are ISO 100 to ISO 25600 (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.
Consistent information on actual sensor performance is available from DXO Mark for many cameras. 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 consideration, the E-PM2 offers substantially better image quality than the E-P2 (overall score 16 points higher). The advantage is based on 1.2 bits higher color depth, 1.8 EV in additional dynamic range, and 0.9 stops in additional low light sensitivity. The table below summarizes the physical sensor characteristics and sensor quality findings and compares them across a set of similar cameras.
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-PM2 | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/30p | 22.7 | 12.2 | 932 | 72 | |
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-M10 II | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/60p | 23.1 | 12.5 | 842 | 73 | |
6. | Olympus E-P1 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 720/30p | 21.4 | 10.4 | 536 | 55 | |
7. | Olympus E-P3 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 1080/60i | 20.8 | 10.1 | 536 | 51 | |
8. | Olympus E-P5 | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/30p | 22.8 | 12.4 | 895 | 72 | |
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 E-PL5 | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/30p | 22.8 | 12.3 | 889 | 72 | |
13. | Olympus E-PL6 | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/30p | 22.5 | 12.0 | 717 | 68 | |
14. | Olympus E-PM1 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 1080/60i | 21.0 | 10.3 | 499 | 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 also of capturing video footage. Both cameras under consideration have a sensor with sufficiently fast read-out times for moving pictures, but the E-PM2 provides a better video resolution than the E-P2. It can shoot movie footage at 1080/30p, while the E-P2 is limited to 720/30p.
Feature comparison
Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a variety of features. The E-P2 and the E-PM2 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-4 for the E-PM2 – are available as accessories. The table below summarizes some of the other core capabilities of the Olympus E-P2 and Olympus E-PM2 in connection with corresponding information for a sample of similar 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-P2 | optional | n | 3.0 / 230 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | n | Y | |
2. | Olympus E-PM2 | optional | n | 3.0 / 460 | fixed | Y | 1/4000s | 8.0/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-M10 II | 2360 | n | 3.0 / 1040 | tilting | Y | 1/4000s | 8.0/s | Y | Y | |
6. | Olympus E-P1 | none | n | 3.0 / 230 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | n | Y | |
7. | Olympus E-P3 | optional | n | 3.0 / 614 | fixed | Y | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | Y | Y | |
8. | Olympus E-P5 | optional | n | 3.0 / 1037 | tilting | Y | 1/8000s | 9.0/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 E-PL5 | optional | n | 3.0 / 460 | tilting | Y | 1/4000s | 8.0/s | n | Y | |
13. | Olympus E-PL6 | optional | n | 3.0 / 460 | tilting | Y | 1/4000s | 8.0/s | n | Y | |
14. | Olympus E-PM1 | optional | n | 3.0 / 460 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 5.5/s | n | 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 differentiating feature between the two cameras concerns the touch sensitivity of the rear screen. The E-PM2 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-PM2 uses SDXC cards. The E-PM2 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-PM2 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-P2 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
2. | Olympus E-PM2 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
3. | Olympus E-520 | Y | - / - | - | - | - | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
4. | Olympus E-620 | Y | - / - | - | - | - | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
5. | Olympus E-M10 II | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
6. | Olympus E-P1 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
7. | Olympus E-P3 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
8. | Olympus E-P5 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
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 E-PL5 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
13. | Olympus E-PL6 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
14. | Olympus E-PM1 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
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 | - | - | - |
Both the E-P2 and the E-PM2 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The E-P2 was replaced by the Olympus E-P3, while the E-PM2 does not have a direct successor. Further information on the features and operation of the E-P2 and E-PM2 can be found, respectively, in the Olympus E-P2 Manual (free pdf) or the online Olympus E-PM2 Manual.
Review summary
So what is the bottom line? Which of the two cameras – the Olympus E-P2 or the Olympus E-PM2 – 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.
Advantages of the Olympus PEN E-P2:
- More heavily discounted: Has been available for much longer (launched in November 2009).
Reasons to prefer the Olympus PEN E-PM2:
- More detail: Has more megapixels (15.9 vs 12.2MP), which boosts linear resolution by 14%.
- Better image quality: Scores substantially higher (16 points) in the DXO overall evaluation.
- Richer colors: Generates noticeably more natural colors (1.2 bits more color depth).
- More dynamic range: Captures a broader range of light and dark details (1.8 EV of extra DR).
- Better low-light sensitivity: Can shoot in dim conditions (0.9 stops ISO advantage).
- Better jpgs: Has a more modern image processing engine (TruePic VI 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).
- Fewer buttons to press: Has a touchscreen to facilitate handling and shooting adjustments.
- Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (8 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 86g or 24 percent) and is thus easier to take along.
- Longer lasting: Gets more shots (360 versus 300) out of a single battery charge.
- Faster buffer clearing: Has an SD card interface that supports the UHS-I standard.
- More affordable: Was introduced into a lower priced category (38 percent cheaper at launch).
- More modern: Reflects 2 years and 10 months of technical progress since the E-P2 launch.
If the count of individual advantages (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the E-PM2 is the clear winner of the contest (16 : 1 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-P2 and the Olympus E-PM2 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-PM2. 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 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-P2 | 3/5 | + | .. | 69/100 | 4/5 | 4.5/5 | Nov 2009 | 799 | ebay.com | |
2. | Olympus E-PM2 | 3/5 | .. | .. | 77/100 | 5/5 | 4.5/5 | Sep 2012 | 499 | 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-M10 II | 4.5/5 | + + | .. | 80/100 | 5/5 | 5/5 | Aug 2015 | 649 | ebay.com | |
6. | Olympus E-P1 | .. | + | .. | 66/100 | 4/5 | 4.5/5 | Jun 2009 | 799 | ebay.com | |
7. | Olympus E-P3 | .. | 83/100 | .. | 74/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jun 2011 | 799 | ebay.com | |
8. | Olympus E-P5 | 5/5 | + + | .. | 78/100 | 4.5/5 | 5/5 | May 2013 | 999 | 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 E-PL5 | 3/5 | + + | .. | .. | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Sep 2012 | 599 | ebay.com | |
13. | Olympus E-PL6 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | May 2013 | 599 | ebay.com | |
14. | Olympus E-PM1 | .. | 86/100 | .. | 71/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jun 2011 | 499 | 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. |
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. Also, please note that some of the review sites have changed their methodology and reporting over time.
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.
- Canon 1D Mark II N vs Olympus E-PM2
- Canon 7D vs Olympus E-PM2
- Canon 80D vs Olympus E-P2
- Canon G5 X vs Olympus E-PM2
- Fujifilm X-T100 vs Olympus E-PM2
- Fujifilm XP140 vs Olympus E-P2
- Nikon D100 vs Olympus E-PM2
- Nikon D7000 vs Olympus E-P2
- Nikon D70s vs Olympus E-PM2
- Olympus E-P2 vs Sony A7
- Olympus E-P2 vs Sony A7R
- Olympus E-P2 vs Sony H400
Specifications: Olympus E-P2 vs Olympus E-PM2
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-P2 | Olympus E-PM2 |
---|---|---|
Camera Type | Mirrorless system camera | Mirrorless system camera |
Camera Lens | Micro Four Thirds lenses | Micro Four Thirds lenses |
Launch Date | November 2009 | September 2012 |
Launch Price | USD 799 | USD 499 |
Sensor Specs | Olympus E-P2 | Olympus E-PM2 |
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 | 15.9 Megapixels |
Image Resolution | 4032 x 3024 pixels | 4608 x 3456 pixels |
Pixel Pitch | 4.29 μm | 3.76 μm |
Pixel Density | 5.42 MP/cm2 | 7.08 MP/cm2 |
Moiré control | Anti-Alias filter | Anti-Alias filter |
Movie Capability | 720/30p Video | 1080/30p Video |
ISO Setting | 100 - 6,400 ISO | 100 - 25,600 ISO |
Image Processor | TruePic V | TruePic VI |
DXO Sensor Quality (score) | 56 | 72 |
DXO Color Depth (bits) | 21.5 | 22.7 |
DXO Dynamic Range (EV) | 10.4 | 12.2 |
DXO Low Light (ISO) | 505 | 932 |
Screen Specs | Olympus E-P2 | Olympus E-PM2 |
Viewfinder Type | Viewfinder optional | Viewfinder optional |
LCD Framing | Live View | Live View |
Rear LCD Size | 3.0inch | 3.0inch |
LCD Resolution | 230k dots | 460k dots |
LCD Attachment | Fixed screen | Fixed screen |
Touch Input | no Touchscreen | Touchscreen |
Shooting Specs | Olympus E-P2 | Olympus E-PM2 |
Focus System | Contrast-detect AF | Contrast-detect AF |
Continuous Shooting | 3 shutter flaps/s | 8 shutter flaps/s |
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 | Single card slot |
UHS card support | no | UHS-I |
Connectivity Specs | Olympus E-P2 | Olympus E-PM2 |
External Flash | Hotshoe | Hotshoe |
USB Connector | USB 2.0 | USB 2.0 |
HDMI Port | mini HDMI | mini HDMI |
Wifi Support | no Wifi | no Wifi |
Body Specs | Olympus E-P2 | Olympus E-PM2 |
Battery Type | Olympus BLS-1 | Olympus BLS-5 |
Battery Life (CIPA) | 300 shots per charge | 360 shots per charge |
Body Dimensions |
121 x 70 x 36 mm (4.8 x 2.8 x 1.4 in) |
110 x 64 x 34 mm (4.3 x 2.5 x 1.3 in) |
Camera Weight | 355 g (12.5 oz) | 269 g (9.5 oz) |
Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.