Olympus E-P3 vs Ricoh GR III
The Olympus PEN E-P3 and the Ricoh GR III are two digital cameras that were revealed to the public, respectively, in June 2011 and February 2019. The E-P3 is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera, while the GR III is a fixed lens compact. The cameras are based on a Four Thirds (E-P3) and an APS-C (GR III) sensor. The Olympus has a resolution of 12.2 megapixels, whereas the Ricoh provides 24 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-P3 and the Ricoh GR III? 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-P3 and the Ricoh GR III are illustrated in the side-by-side display below. The two cameras are presented according to their relative size. Three successive views from the front, the top, and the rear are shown. All width, height and depth measures are rounded to the nearest millimeter.
The E-P3 can be obtained in three different colors (black, silver, white), while the GR III is only available in black.
If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Ricoh GR III is notably smaller (20 percent) than the Olympus E-P3. In this context, it is worth noting that neither the E-P3 nor the GR III are weather-sealed.
The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete and possibly misleading, as the GR III has a lens built in, whereas the E-P3 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-P3 and their specifications in the Micro Four Thirds Lens Catalog.
Concerning battery life, the E-P3 gets 330 shots out of its Olympus BLS-5 battery, while the GR III can take 200 images on a single charge of its Ricoh DB-110 power pack. The power pack in the GR III can be charged via the USB port, which can be very convenient when travelling.
The adjacent table lists the principal physical characteristics of the two cameras alongside a wider set of alternatives. 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.
# | Camera Model |
Camera Width |
Camera Height |
Camera Depth |
Camera Weight |
Battery Life |
Weather Sealing |
Camera Launch |
Launch Price (USD) |
Street Price |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Olympus E-P3 | 122 mm | 69 mm | 34 mm | 369 g | 330 | n | Jun 2011 | 799 | ebay.com | |
2. | Ricoh GR III | 109 mm | 62 mm | 33 mm | 257 g | 200 | n | Feb 2019 | 899 | amazon.com | |
3. | Fujifilm XF10 | 113 mm | 64 mm | 41 mm | 279 g | 330 | n | Jul 2018 | 499 | ebay.com | |
4. | Olympus E-P5 | 122 mm | 69 mm | 37 mm | 420 g | 330 | n | May 2013 | 999 | ebay.com | |
5. | Olympus E-PL5 | 111 mm | 64 mm | 38 mm | 325 g | 360 | n | Sep 2012 | 599 | ebay.com | |
6. | Olympus E-PL2 | 114 mm | 72 mm | 42 mm | 362 g | 280 | n | Jan 2011 | 599 | ebay.com | |
7. | Olympus E-PL3 | 110 mm | 64 mm | 37 mm | 313 g | 300 | n | Jun 2011 | 599 | ebay.com | |
8. | Olympus E-PM1 | 110 mm | 64 mm | 34 mm | 265 g | 330 | n | Jun 2011 | 499 | ebay.com | |
9. | Olympus E-PL1 | 115 mm | 72 mm | 42 mm | 334 g | 290 | n | Feb 2010 | 599 | ebay.com | |
10. | Olympus E-P1 | 121 mm | 70 mm | 36 mm | 355 g | 300 | n | Jun 2009 | 799 | ebay.com | |
11. | Olympus E-P2 | 121 mm | 70 mm | 36 mm | 355 g | 300 | n | Nov 2009 | 799 | ebay.com | |
12. | Panasonic ZS200 | 111 mm | 65 mm | 45 mm | 340 g | 370 | n | Feb 2018 | 799 | amazon.com | |
13. | Panasonic GX1 | 116 mm | 68 mm | 39 mm | 318 g | 320 | n | Nov 2011 | 699 | ebay.com | |
14. | Panasonic G10 | 124 mm | 84 mm | 74 mm | 388 g | 380 | n | Mar 2010 | 499 | ebay.com | |
15. | Ricoh GR IIIx | 109 mm | 62 mm | 35 mm | 262 g | 200 | n | Sep 2021 | 999 | amazon.com | |
16. | Ricoh GR II | 117 mm | 63 mm | 35 mm | 251 g | 320 | n | Jun 2015 | 699 | ebay.com | |
17. | Ricoh GR | 117 mm | 61 mm | 35 mm | 245 g | 290 | n | Apr 2013 | 799 | 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 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. 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 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 more expensive and lead to bigger and heavier cameras and lenses.
Of the two cameras under consideration, the Olympus E-P3 features a Four Thirds sensor and the Ricoh GR III an APS-C sensor. The sensor area in the GR III is 63 percent bigger. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 2.0 and 1.5. The sensor in the E-P3 has a native 4:3 aspect ratio, while the one in the GR III offers a 3:2 aspect.
With 24MP, the GR III offers a higher resolution than the E-P3 (12.2MP), but the GR III has smaller individual pixels (pixel pitch of 3.91μm versus 4.29μm for the E-P3). Yet, the GR III is a much more recent model (by 7 years and 7 months) than the E-P3, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that enhance the light gathering capacity of its pixel-units. Coming back to sensor resolution, it should be mentioned that the GR III has no anti-alias filter installed, so that it can capture all the detail its sensor resolves.
The resolution advantage of the Ricoh GR III implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the GR III for good quality output (200 dots per inch) amounts to 30 x 20 inches or 76.2 x 50.8 cm, for very good quality (250 dpi) 24 x 16 inches or 61 x 40.6 cm, and for excellent quality (300 dpi) 20 x 13.3 inches or 50.8 x 33.9 cm. The corresponding values for the Olympus E-P3 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 GR III has on-sensor phase detect pixels, which results in fast and reliable autofocus acquisition even during live view operation.
The Olympus PEN E-P3 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 200 to ISO 12800. The corresponding ISO settings for the Ricoh GR III are ISO 100 to ISO 102400 (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 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.
# | Camera Model |
Sensor Class |
Resolution (MP) |
Horiz. Pixels |
Vert. Pixels |
Video Format |
DXO Portrait |
DXO Landscape |
DXO Sports |
DXO Overall |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Olympus E-P3 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 1080/60i | 20.8 | 10.1 | 536 | 51 | |
2. | Ricoh GR III | APS-C | 24.0 | 6000 | 4000 | 1080/60p | 24.1 | 13.5 | 1897 | 83 | |
3. | Fujifilm XF10 | APS-C | 24.0 | 6000 | 4000 | 4K/15p | 24.0 | 13.4 | 1844 | 83 | |
4. | Olympus E-P5 | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/30p | 22.8 | 12.4 | 895 | 72 | |
5. | Olympus E-PL5 | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/30p | 22.8 | 12.3 | 889 | 72 | |
6. | Olympus E-PL2 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 720/30p | 21.4 | 10.2 | 573 | 55 | |
7. | Olympus E-PL3 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 1080/60i | 20.9 | 10.3 | 499 | 52 | |
8. | Olympus E-PM1 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 1080/60i | 21.0 | 10.3 | 499 | 52 | |
9. | Olympus E-PL1 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 720/30p | 21.5 | 10.1 | 487 | 54 | |
10. | Olympus E-P1 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 720/30p | 21.4 | 10.4 | 536 | 55 | |
11. | Olympus E-P2 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 720/30p | 21.5 | 10.4 | 505 | 56 | |
12. | Panasonic ZS200 | 1-inch | 20.0 | 5472 | 3648 | 4K/30p | 22.0 | 12.2 | 449 | 64 | |
13. | Panasonic GX1 | Four Thirds | 15.8 | 4592 | 3448 | 1080/60p | 20.8 | 10.6 | 703 | 55 | |
14. | Panasonic G10 | Four Thirds | 12.0 | 4000 | 3000 | 720/30p | 21.2 | 10.1 | 411 | 52 | |
15. | Ricoh GR IIIx | APS-C | 24.0 | 6000 | 4000 | 1080/60p | 24.2 | 13.8 | 2146 | 85 | |
16. | Ricoh GR II | APS-C | 16.1 | 4928 | 3264 | 1080/30p | 23.6 | 13.7 | 1078 | 80 | |
17. | Ricoh GR | APS-C | 16.1 | 4928 | 3264 | 1080/30p | 23.6 | 13.5 | 972 | 78 | |
Note: DXO values in italics represent estimates based on sensor size and age. |
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 GR III provides a faster frame rate than the E-P3. It can shoot movie footage at 1080/60p, while the Olympus is limited to 1080/60i.
Feature comparison
Beyond body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. The E-P3 and the GR III 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-3 for the E-P3 and the GV-1 for the GR III – are available as accessories. The table below summarizes some of the other core capabilities of the Olympus E-P3 and Ricoh GR III 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-P3 | optional | n | 3.0 / 614 | fixed | Y | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | Y | Y | |
2. | Ricoh GR III | optional | n | 3.0 / 1037 | fixed | Y | 1/4000s | 4.0/s | n | Y | |
3. | Fujifilm XF10 | none | n | 3.0 / 1040 | fixed | Y | 1/4000s | 6.0/s | Y | n | |
4. | Olympus E-P5 | optional | n | 3.0 / 1037 | tilting | Y | 1/8000s | 9.0/s | Y | Y | |
5. | Olympus E-PL5 | optional | n | 3.0 / 460 | tilting | Y | 1/4000s | 8.0/s | n | Y | |
6. | Olympus E-PL2 | optional | n | 3.0 / 460 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | Y | Y | |
7. | Olympus E-PL3 | optional | n | 3.0 / 460 | tilting | n | 1/4000s | 5.5/s | n | Y | |
8. | Olympus E-PM1 | optional | n | 3.0 / 460 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 5.5/s | n | Y | |
9. | Olympus E-PL1 | optional | n | 2.7 / 230 | fixed | n | 1/2000s | 3.0/s | Y | Y | |
10. | Olympus E-P1 | none | n | 3.0 / 230 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | n | Y | |
11. | Olympus E-P2 | optional | n | 3.0 / 230 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | n | Y | |
12. | Panasonic ZS200 | 2330 | n | 3.0 / 1240 | fixed | Y | 1/2000s | 10.0/s | Y | Y | |
13. | Panasonic GX1 | optional | n | 3.0 / 460 | fixed | Y | 1/4000s | 4.2/s | Y | n | |
14. | Panasonic G10 | 202 | n | 3.0 / 460 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 2.6/s | Y | n | |
15. | Ricoh GR IIIx | optional | n | 3.0 / 1037 | fixed | Y | 1/4000s | 4.0/s | n | Y | |
16. | Ricoh GR II | optional | n | 3.0 / 1230 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 4.0/s | Y | n | |
17. | Ricoh GR | optional | n | 3.0 / 1230 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 4.0/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 E-P3 has one, while the GR III does not. While the built-in flash of the E-P3 is not very powerful, it can at times be useful as a fill-in light.
The Ricoh GR III 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.
Concerning the storage of imaging data, both the E-P3 and the GR III write their files to SDXC cards. Both cameras can use UHS-I cards, which provide for Ultra High Speed data transfer of up to 104 MB/s.
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-P3 and Ricoh GR III 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-P3 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
2. | Ricoh GR III | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | - | 3.0 | Y | - | Y | |
3. | Fujifilm XF10 | - | stereo / mono | Y | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | Y | |
4. | Olympus E-P5 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
5. | Olympus E-PL5 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
6. | Olympus E-PL2 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
7. | Olympus E-PL3 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
8. | Olympus E-PM1 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
9. | Olympus E-PL1 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
10. | Olympus E-P1 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
11. | Olympus E-P2 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
12. | Panasonic ZS200 | - | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | Y | |
13. | Panasonic GX1 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
14. | Panasonic G10 | Y | mono / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
15. | Ricoh GR IIIx | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | - | 3.0 | Y | - | Y | |
16. | Ricoh GR II | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | Y | - | |
17. | Ricoh GR | Y | mono / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | - | - | - |
It is notable that the GR III offers wifi support, which can be a very convenient means to transfer image data to an off-camera location. In contrast, the E-P3 does not provide wifi capability.
The GR III is a recent model that features in the current product line-up of Ricoh. In contrast, the E-P3 has been discontinued (but can be found pre-owned on ebay). As a replacement in the same line of cameras, the E-P3 was succeeded by the Olympus E-P5. Further information on the features and operation of the E-P3 and GR III can be found, respectively, in the Olympus E-P3 Manual (free pdf) or the online Ricoh GR III Manual.
Review summary
So what conclusions can be drawn? Is the Olympus E-P3 better than the Ricoh GR III or vice versa? The listing below highlights the relative strengths of the two models.
Reasons to prefer the Olympus PEN E-P3:
- Better moiré control: Has an anti-alias filter to avoid artificial patterns to appear in images.
- More flexible: Accepts interchangeable lenses, so that lens characteristics can be altered.
- Longer lasting: Can take more shots (330 versus 200) on a single battery charge.
- Easier fill-in: Is equipped with a small onboard flash to brighten deep shadow areas.
- More heavily discounted: Has been available for much longer (launched in June 2011).
Advantages of the Ricoh GR III:
- More detail: Has more megapixels (24 vs 12.2MP), which boosts linear resolution by 43%.
- Maximized detail: Lacks an anti-alias filter to exploit the sensor's full resolution potential.
- Better image quality: Is equipped with a larger and more technologically advanced sensor.
- Richer colors: The sensor size advantage translates into images with better, more accurate colors.
- More dynamic range: Larger sensor captures a wider spectrum of light and dark details.
- Better low-light sensitivity: Larger sensor produces good images even in poorly lit environments.
- Better video: Provides higher movie framerates (1080/60p versus 1080/60i).
- Better live-view autofocus: Features on-sensor phase-detection for more confident autofocus.
- More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1037k vs 614k dots).
- Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (4 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-P3 necessitates an extra lens.
- More compact: Is smaller (109x62mm vs 122x69mm) 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-P3).
- Easier travel charging: Can be conveniently charged via its USB port.
- Faster data transfer: Supports a more advanced USB protocol (3.0 vs 2.0).
- Easier file upload: Has wifi built in for automatic backup or image transfer to the web.
- Easier wireless transfer: Supports Bluetooth for image sharing without cables.
- More modern: Reflects 7 years and 7 months of technical progress since the E-P3 launch.
If the count of individual advantages (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the GR III is the clear winner of the contest (19 : 5 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 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-P3 and the Ricoh GR III place the cameras among the top in their class? Find out in the latest Best Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera and Best Prime Lens Compact Camera listings 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 partial and cannot reveal, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance when actually working with the E-P3 or the GR III. 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 why hands-on reviews by experts 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.
# | Camera Model |
AP score |
CL score |
DCW score |
DPR score |
EPZ score |
PB score |
Camera Launch |
Launch Price (USD) |
Street Price |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Olympus E-P3 | .. | 83/100 | .. | 74/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jun 2011 | 799 | ebay.com | |
2. | Ricoh GR III | 4/5 | .. | 3.5/5 | 81/100 | 4/5 | .. | Feb 2019 | 899 | amazon.com | |
3. | Fujifilm XF10 | .. | .. | 4/5 | 75/100 | 4/5 | 4.5/5 | Jul 2018 | 499 | ebay.com | |
4. | Olympus E-P5 | 5/5 | + + | .. | 78/100 | 4.5/5 | 5/5 | May 2013 | 999 | ebay.com | |
5. | Olympus E-PL5 | 3/5 | + + | .. | .. | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Sep 2012 | 599 | 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-PL3 | 3/5 | + + | .. | 72/100 | 4.5/5 | 4/5 | Jun 2011 | 599 | ebay.com | |
8. | Olympus E-PM1 | .. | 86/100 | .. | 71/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jun 2011 | 499 | ebay.com | |
9. | Olympus E-PL1 | .. | 86/100 | .. | 69/100 | 4/5 | 4.5/5 | Feb 2010 | 599 | ebay.com | |
10. | Olympus E-P1 | .. | + | .. | 66/100 | 4/5 | 4.5/5 | Jun 2009 | 799 | ebay.com | |
11. | Olympus E-P2 | 3/5 | + | .. | 69/100 | 4/5 | 4.5/5 | Nov 2009 | 799 | ebay.com | |
12. | Panasonic ZS200 | .. | + + | 4.5/5 | 81/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Feb 2018 | 799 | amazon.com | |
13. | Panasonic GX1 | 3/5 | + | .. | 77/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Nov 2011 | 699 | ebay.com | |
14. | Panasonic G10 | 3/5 | .. | .. | 70/100 | 4/5 | 4/5 | Mar 2010 | 499 | ebay.com | |
15. | Ricoh GR IIIx | .. | .. | 4.5/5 | .. | .. | .. | Sep 2021 | 999 | amazon.com | |
16. | Ricoh GR II | .. | .. | .. | .. | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jun 2015 | 699 | ebay.com | |
17. | Ricoh GR | 5/5 | .. | .. | 79/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Apr 2013 | 799 | 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 rating-comparisons among cameras that span long time periods or concern very differently equipped models make little sense. It should also be noted that some of the review sites have over time altered the way they render their verdicts.
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.
- Canon 4000D vs Olympus E-P3
- Canon 600D vs Ricoh GR III
- Leica S Typ 006 vs Olympus E-P3
- Nikon D300S vs Olympus E-P3
- Nikon D4 vs Olympus E-P3
- Nikon D780 vs Ricoh GR III
- Nikon D90 vs Ricoh GR III
- Olympus E-P3 vs Sony A7 IV
- Olympus E-P3 vs Sony HX350
- Olympus E-PM2 vs Ricoh GR III
- Panasonic GX800 vs Ricoh GR III
- Ricoh GR III vs Sony A58
Specifications: Olympus E-P3 vs Ricoh GR III
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-P3 | Ricoh GR III |
---|---|---|
Camera Type | Mirrorless system camera | Fixed lens compact camera |
Camera Lens | Micro Four Thirds lenses | 28mm f/2.8 |
Launch Date | June 2011 | February 2019 |
Launch Price | USD 799 | USD 899 |
Sensor Specs | Olympus E-P3 | Ricoh GR III |
Sensor Technology | CMOS | CMOS |
Sensor Format | Four Thirds Sensor | APS-C Sensor |
Sensor Size | 17.3 x 13.0 mm | 23.5 x 15.6 mm |
Sensor Area | 224.9 mm2 | 366.6 mm2 |
Sensor Diagonal | 21.6 mm | 28.2 mm |
Crop Factor | 2.0x | 1.5x |
Sensor Resolution | 12.2 Megapixels | 24 Megapixels |
Image Resolution | 4032 x 3024 pixels | 6000 x 4000 pixels |
Pixel Pitch | 4.29 μm | 3.91 μm |
Pixel Density | 5.42 MP/cm2 | 6.55 MP/cm2 |
Moiré control | Anti-Alias filter | no AA filter |
Movie Capability | 1080/60i Video | 1080/60p Video |
ISO Setting | 200 - 12,800 ISO | 100 - 102,400 ISO |
Image Processor | TruePic VI | GR Engine VI |
DXO Sensor Quality (score) | 51 | .. |
DXO Color Depth (bits) | 20.8 | .. |
DXO Dynamic Range (EV) | 10.1 | .. |
DXO Low Light (ISO) | 536 | .. |
Screen Specs | Olympus E-P3 | Ricoh GR III |
Viewfinder Type | Viewfinder optional | Viewfinder optional |
LCD Framing | Live View | Live View |
Rear LCD Size | 3.0inch | 3.0inch |
LCD Resolution | 614k dots | 1037k dots |
LCD Attachment | Fixed screen | Fixed screen |
Touch Input | Touchscreen | Touchscreen |
Shooting Specs | Olympus E-P3 | Ricoh GR III |
Focus System | Contrast-detect AF | On-Sensor Phase-detect |
Continuous Shooting | 3 shutter flaps/s | 4 shutter flaps/s |
Time-Lapse Photography | no Intervalometer | Intervalometer built-in |
Image Stabilization | In-body stabilization | In-body stabilization |
Fill Flash | Built-in Flash | no On-Board Flash |
Storage Medium | SDXC cards | SDXC cards |
Single or Dual Card Slots | Single card slot | Single card slot |
UHS card support | UHS-I | UHS-I |
Connectivity Specs | Olympus E-P3 | Ricoh GR III |
External Flash | Hotshoe | Hotshoe |
USB Connector | USB 2.0 | USB 3.0 |
HDMI Port | mini HDMI | no HDMI |
Wifi Support | no Wifi | Wifi built-in |
Bluetooth Support | no Bluetooth | Bluetooth built-in |
Body Specs | Olympus E-P3 | Ricoh GR III |
Battery Type | Olympus BLS-5 | Ricoh DB-110 |
Battery Life (CIPA) | 330 shots per charge | 200 shots per charge |
In-Camera Charging | no USB charging | USB charging |
Body Dimensions |
122 x 69 x 34 mm (4.8 x 2.7 x 1.3 in) |
109 x 62 x 33 mm (4.3 x 2.4 x 1.3 in) |
Camera Weight | 369 g (13.0 oz) | 257 g (9.1 oz) |
Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.