Olympus E-P2 vs Panasonic GF3
The Olympus PEN E-P2 and the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF3 are two digital cameras that were officially introduced, respectively, in November 2009 and June 2011. Both the E-P2 and the GF3 are mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras that are equipped with a Four Thirds sensor. The Olympus has a resolution of 12.2 megapixels, whereas the Panasonic provides 12 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 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF3? 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 Panasonic GF3 are illustrated 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 GF3 is available in five color-versions (black, brown, pink, red, white).
If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Panasonic GF3 is notably smaller (15 percent) than the Olympus E-P2. Moreover, the GF3 is markedly lighter (26 percent) than the E-P2. In this context, it is worth noting that neither the E-P2 nor the GF3 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 adjacent table lists the principal physical characteristics of the two cameras alongside a wider set of alternatives. In case you want to display and compare another camera duo, you can use the CAM-parator app to select your camera combination among a large number of options.
Camera Model |
Camera Width |
Camera Height |
Camera Depth |
Camera Weight |
Battery Life |
Weather Sealing |
Camera Launch |
Launch Price |
Street Price |
||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Olympus E-P2 | 121 mm | 70 mm | 36 mm | 355 g | 300 | n | Nov 2009 | US$ 799 | ebay.com | |
2. | Panasonic GF3 | 108 mm | 67 mm | 32 mm | 264 g | 300 | n | Jun 2011 | US$ 549 | ebay.com | |
3. | Olympus E-520 | 136 mm | 92 mm | 68 mm | 535 g | 750 | n | May 2008 | US$ 699 | ebay.com | |
4. | Olympus E-620 | 130 mm | 94 mm | 60 mm | 521 g | 500 | n | Feb 2009 | US$ 699 | ebay.com | |
5. | Olympus E-P1 | 121 mm | 70 mm | 36 mm | 355 g | 300 | n | Jun 2009 | US$ 799 | ebay.com | |
6. | Olympus E-P3 | 122 mm | 69 mm | 34 mm | 369 g | 330 | n | Jun 2011 | US$ 799 | ebay.com | |
7. | Olympus E-PL1 | 115 mm | 72 mm | 42 mm | 334 g | 290 | n | Feb 2010 | US$ 599 | ebay.com | |
8. | Olympus E-PL2 | 114 mm | 72 mm | 42 mm | 362 g | 280 | n | Jan 2011 | US$ 599 | ebay.com | |
9. | Olympus E-PL3 | 110 mm | 64 mm | 37 mm | 313 g | 300 | n | Jun 2011 | US$ 599 | ebay.com | |
10. | Panasonic G2 | 124 mm | 84 mm | 74 mm | 428 g | 360 | n | Mar 2010 | US$ 599 | ebay.com | |
11. | Panasonic G3 | 115 mm | 84 mm | 47 mm | 336 g | 270 | n | May 2011 | US$ 599 | ebay.com | |
12. | Panasonic G10 | 124 mm | 84 mm | 74 mm | 388 g | 380 | n | Mar 2010 | US$ 499 | ebay.com | |
13. | Panasonic GF1 | 119 mm | 71 mm | 36 mm | 385 g | 380 | n | Sep 2009 | US$ 749 | ebay.com | |
14. | Panasonic GF2 | 113 mm | 68 mm | 33 mm | 310 g | 300 | n | Nov 2010 | US$ 549 | ebay.com | |
15. | Panasonic GF5 | 108 mm | 67 mm | 37 mm | 267 g | 360 | n | Apr 2012 | US$ 499 | ebay.com | |
16. | Panasonic GH1 | 124 mm | 90 mm | 45 mm | 385 g | 300 | n | Mar 2009 | US$ 899 | ebay.com | |
Note: Measurements and pricing do not include easily detachable parts, such as add-on or interchangeable lenses or optional viewfinders. | |||||||||||
Any camera decision will naturally be influenced heavily by the price. 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 GF3 was launched at a markedly lower price (by 31 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.
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 generally have larger individual pixels that offer better low-light sensitivity, provide wider dynamic range, and have 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 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.
While the two cameras under review share the same sensor size, the E-P2 offers a slightly higher resolution of 12.2 megapixels, compared with 12 MP of the GF3. This megapixels advantage translates into a 0.8 percent gain in linear resolution. On the other hand, these sensor specs imply that the E-P2 has a higher pixel density and a smaller size of the individual pixel (with a pixel pitch of 4.29μm versus 4.33μm for the GF3). Moreover, it should be noted that the GF3 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 that further enhance the light gathering capacity of individual pixels.
The Olympus PEN E-P2 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 6400. The corresponding ISO settings for the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF3 are ISO 160 to ISO 6400 (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.
Since 2007, DXO Mark has published sensor performance measurements that have been derived using a consistent methodology. This service determines an overall sensor rating, as well as sub-scores for low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports"), dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), and color depth ("DXO Portrait"). Of the two cameras under review, the E-P2 has a notably higher overall DXO score than the GF3 (overall score 6 points higher), which gives it an advantage in terms of imaging quality. This advantage is based on 0.9 bits higher color depth, 0.3 EV in additional dynamic range, and 0.1 stops in additional low light sensitivity. The following table provides an overview of the physical sensor characteristics, as well as the sensor quality measurements for a selection of comparators.
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. | Panasonic GF3 | Four Thirds | 12.0 | 4000 | 3000 | 1080/60i | 20.6 | 10.1 | 459 | 50 | |
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-P1 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 720/30p | 21.4 | 10.4 | 536 | 55 | |
6. | Olympus E-P3 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 1080/60i | 20.8 | 10.1 | 536 | 51 | |
7. | Olympus E-PL1 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 720/30p | 21.5 | 10.1 | 487 | 54 | |
8. | Olympus E-PL2 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 720/30p | 21.4 | 10.2 | 573 | 55 | |
9. | Olympus E-PL3 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 1080/60i | 20.9 | 10.3 | 499 | 52 | |
10. | Panasonic G2 | Four Thirds | 12.0 | 4000 | 3000 | 720/30p | 21.2 | 10.3 | 493 | 53 | |
11. | Panasonic G3 | Four Thirds | 15.8 | 4592 | 3448 | 1080/60i | 21.0 | 10.6 | 667 | 56 | |
12. | Panasonic G10 | Four Thirds | 12.0 | 4000 | 3000 | 720/30p | 21.2 | 10.1 | 411 | 52 | |
13. | Panasonic GF1 | Four Thirds | 12.0 | 4000 | 3000 | 720/30p | 21.2 | 10.3 | 513 | 54 | |
14. | Panasonic GF2 | Four Thirds | 12.0 | 4000 | 3000 | 1080/60i | 21.2 | 10.3 | 506 | 54 | |
15. | Panasonic GF5 | Four Thirds | 12.0 | 4000 | 3000 | 1080/60i | 20.5 | 10.0 | 573 | 50 | |
16. | Panasonic GH1 | Four Thirds | 12.0 | 4000 | 3000 | 1080/24p | 21.6 | 11.6 | 772 | 64 |
Many modern cameras are not only capable of taking still images, but can also record movies. The two cameras under consideration both have sensors whose read-out speed is fast enough to capture moving pictures, but the GF3 provides a better video resolution than the E-P2. It can shoot movie footage at 1080/60i, while the Olympus 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 GF3 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-P2 and Panasonic GF3 along with similar information for a selection of comparators.
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. | Panasonic GF3 | none | n | 3.0 / 460 | fixed | Y | 1/4000s | 3.2/s | Y | n | |
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-P1 | none | n | 3.0 / 230 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | n | Y | |
6. | Olympus E-P3 | optional | n | 3.0 / 614 | fixed | Y | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | Y | Y | |
7. | Olympus E-PL1 | optional | n | 2.7 / 230 | fixed | n | 1/2000s | 3.0/s | Y | Y | |
8. | Olympus E-PL2 | optional | n | 3.0 / 460 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | Y | Y | |
9. | Olympus E-PL3 | optional | n | 3.0 / 460 | tilting | n | 1/4000s | 5.5/s | n | Y | |
10. | Panasonic G2 | 1440 | n | 3.0 / 460 | swivel | Y | 1/4000s | 2.6/s | Y | n | |
11. | Panasonic G3 | 1440 | n | 3.0 / 460 | swivel | Y | 1/4000s | 4.0/s | Y | n | |
12. | Panasonic G10 | 202 | n | 3.0 / 460 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 2.6/s | Y | n | |
13. | Panasonic GF1 | optional | n | 3.0 / 460 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | Y | n | |
14. | Panasonic GF2 | optional | n | 3.0 / 460 | fixed | Y | 1/4000s | 2.6/s | Y | n | |
15. | Panasonic GF5 | none | n | 3.0 / 920 | fixed | Y | 1/4000s | 4.0/s | Y | n | |
16. | 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 feature that differentiates the E-P2 and the GF3 is in-body image stabilization (IBIS). The E-P2 reduces the risk of handshake-induced blur with all attached lenses, while the GF3 offers no blur reduction with lenses that themselves do not provide optical image stabilization.
The E-P2 writes its imaging data to SDHC cards, while the GF3 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 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF3 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. | Panasonic GF3 | - | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
3. | Olympus E-520 | Y | - / - | - | - | - | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
4. | Olympus E-620 | Y | - / - | - | - | - | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
5. | Olympus E-P1 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
6. | Olympus E-P3 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
7. | Olympus E-PL1 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
8. | Olympus E-PL2 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
9. | Olympus E-PL3 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
10. | Panasonic G2 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
11. | Panasonic G3 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
12. | Panasonic G10 | Y | mono / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
13. | Panasonic GF1 | Y | mono / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
14. | Panasonic GF2 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
15. | Panasonic GF5 | - | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
16. | Panasonic GH1 | Y | stereo / - | Y | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - |
It is notable that the E-P2 has a hotshoe, while the GF3 does not. This socket makes it possible to easily attach optional accessories, such as an external flash gun.
Both the E-P2 and the GF3 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The E-P2 was replaced by the Olympus E-P3, while the GF3 was followed by the Panasonic GF5. Further information on the features and operation of the E-P2 and GF3 can be found, respectively, in the Olympus E-P2 Manual (free pdf) or the online Panasonic GF3 Manual.
Review summary
So what is the bottom line? Which of the two cameras – the Olympus E-P2 or the Panasonic GF3 – 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:
- Better image quality: Scores markedly higher (6 points) in the DXO overall assessment.
- More framing options: Can be equipped with a hotshoe-mounted accessory-viewfinder.
- Sharper images: Has hand-shake reducing image stabilization built-in.
- Better lighting: Features a hotshoe and can thus hold and trigger an external flash gun.
- More heavily discounted: Has been on the market for longer (launched in November 2009).
Arguments in favor of the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF3:
- 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).
- Fewer buttons to press: Has a touchscreen to facilitate handling and shooting adjustments.
- More compact: Is smaller (108x67mm vs 121x70mm) and will fit more readily into a bag.
- Less heavy: Has a lower weight (by 91g or 26 percent) and is thus easier to take along.
- Easier fill-in: Has a small integrated flash to brighten shadows of backlit subjects.
- More affordable: Was introduced into a lower priced category (31 percent cheaper at launch).
- More modern: Was introduced somewhat (1 year and 7 months) more recently.
If the count of individual advantages (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the GF3 emerges as the winner of the match-up (8 : 5 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 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 Panasonic GF3 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 the spec-sheets of cameras can offer a general idea of their imaging potential, it remains incomplete and does no justice, for example, to the way the E-P2 or the GF3 perform in practice. At times, user reviews, such as those published at amazon, address these issues in a useful manner, but such feedback is on many occasions incomplete, inconsistent, and unreliable.
Expert reviews
This is where reviews by experts come in. 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.
Camera Model |
AP score |
CL score |
DCW score |
DPR score |
EPZ score |
PB score |
Camera Launch |
Launch Price |
Street Price |
||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Olympus E-P2 | 3/5 | + | .. | 69/100 | 4/5 | 4.5/5 | Nov 2009 | US$ 799 | ebay.com | |
2. | Panasonic GF3 | 3/5 | 82/100 | .. | 71/100 | 4.5/5 | 4/5 | Jun 2011 | US$ 549 | ebay.com | |
3. | Olympus E-520 | .. | 87/100 | .. | + + | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | May 2008 | US$ 699 | ebay.com | |
4. | Olympus E-620 | 3/5 | 88/100 | .. | 72/100 | 4.5/5 | 5/5 | Feb 2009 | US$ 699 | ebay.com | |
5. | Olympus E-P1 | .. | + | .. | 66/100 | 4/5 | 4.5/5 | Jun 2009 | US$ 799 | ebay.com | |
6. | Olympus E-P3 | .. | 83/100 | .. | 74/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jun 2011 | US$ 799 | ebay.com | |
7. | Olympus E-PL1 | .. | 86/100 | .. | 69/100 | 4/5 | 4.5/5 | Feb 2010 | US$ 599 | ebay.com | |
8. | Olympus E-PL2 | 3/5 | 83/100 | .. | 71/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jan 2011 | US$ 599 | ebay.com | |
9. | Olympus E-PL3 | 3/5 | + + | .. | 72/100 | 4.5/5 | 4/5 | Jun 2011 | US$ 599 | ebay.com | |
10. | Panasonic G2 | .. | .. | .. | 72/100 | 4/5 | 4.5/5 | Mar 2010 | US$ 599 | ebay.com | |
11. | Panasonic G3 | 3/5 | + + | .. | 75/100 | 4.5/5 | 5/5 | May 2011 | US$ 599 | ebay.com | |
12. | Panasonic G10 | 3/5 | .. | .. | 70/100 | 4/5 | 4/5 | Mar 2010 | US$ 499 | ebay.com | |
13. | Panasonic GF1 | .. | 85/100 | .. | 69/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Sep 2009 | US$ 749 | ebay.com | |
14. | Panasonic GF2 | 3/5 | 82/100 | .. | 70/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Nov 2010 | US$ 549 | ebay.com | |
15. | Panasonic GF5 | 3/5 | .. | .. | .. | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Apr 2012 | US$ 499 | ebay.com | |
16. | Panasonic GH1 | .. | + + | .. | 72/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Mar 2009 | US$ 899 | ebay.com | |
Note: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available. |
Care should be taken when interpreting the review scores above, though. The assessments were made in relation to similar cameras of the same technological generation. A score, therefore, has to be seen in close connection to the price and market introduction time of the camera, and rating-comparisons among cameras that span long time periods or concern very differently equipped models make little sense. Also, kindly note that some of the listed sites have over time developped their review approaches and their reporting style.
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 5D Mark IV vs Olympus E-P2
- Canon 600D vs Panasonic GF3
- Canon D60 vs Panasonic GF3
- Fujifilm X-E3 vs Olympus E-P2
- Fujifilm X20 vs Olympus E-P2
- Fujifilm XF10 vs Olympus E-P2
- Fujifilm XQ1 vs Panasonic GF3
- Nikon D800 vs Olympus E-P2
- Olympus E-P2 vs Sony NEX-3
- Olympus E-P3 vs Panasonic GF3
- Panasonic GF3 vs Sony A9
- Panasonic GF3 vs Sony NEX-3
Specifications: Olympus E-P2 vs Panasonic GF3
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 | Panasonic GF3 |
---|---|---|
Camera Type | Mirrorless system camera | Mirrorless system camera |
Camera Lens | Micro Four Thirds lenses | Micro Four Thirds lenses |
Launch Date | November 2009 | June 2011 |
Launch Price | USD 799 | USD 549 |
Sensor Specs | Olympus E-P2 | Panasonic GF3 |
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 | 12 Megapixels |
Image Resolution | 4032 x 3024 pixels | 4000 x 3000 pixels |
Pixel Pitch | 4.29 μm | 4.33 μm |
Pixel Density | 5.42 MP/cm2 | 5.34 MP/cm2 |
Moiré control | Anti-Alias filter | Anti-Alias filter |
Movie Capability | 720/30p Video | 1080/60i Video |
ISO Setting | 100 - 6,400 ISO | 160 - 6,400 ISO |
Image Processor | TruePic V | Venus FHD |
DXO Sensor Quality (score) | 56 | 50 |
DXO Color Depth (bits) | 21.5 | 20.6 |
DXO Dynamic Range (EV) | 10.4 | 10.1 |
DXO Low Light (ISO) | 505 | 459 |
Screen Specs | Olympus E-P2 | Panasonic GF3 |
Viewfinder Type | Viewfinder optional | no viewfinder |
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 | Panasonic GF3 |
Focus System | Contrast-detect AF | Contrast-detect AF |
Continuous Shooting | 3 shutter flaps/s | 3.2 shutter flaps/s |
Image Stabilization | In-body stabilization | Lens stabilization only |
Fill Flash | no On-Board Flash | Built-in Flash |
Storage Medium | SDHC cards | SDXC cards |
Single or Dual Card Slots | Single card slot | Single card slot |
UHS card support | no | no |
Connectivity Specs | Olympus E-P2 | Panasonic GF3 |
External Flash | Hotshoe | no 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 | Panasonic GF3 |
Battery Type | Olympus BLS-1 | Panasonic DMW-BLE9 |
Battery Life (CIPA) | 300 shots per charge | 300 shots per charge |
Body Dimensions |
121 x 70 x 36 mm (4.8 x 2.8 x 1.4 in) |
108 x 67 x 32 mm (4.3 x 2.6 x 1.3 in) |
Camera Weight | 355 g (12.5 oz) | 264 g (9.3 oz) |
Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.