Olympus E-P3 vs Ricoh WG-60
The Olympus PEN E-P3 and the Ricoh WG-60 are two digital cameras that were revealed to the public, respectively, in June 2011 and October 2018. The E-P3 is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera, while the WG-60 is a fixed lens compact. The cameras are based on a Four Thirds (E-P3) and a 1/2.3-inch (WG-60) sensor. The Olympus has a resolution of 12.2 megapixels, whereas the Ricoh 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-P3 and the Ricoh WG-60? 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 WG-60 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 size dimensions are rounded to the nearest millimeter.
The E-P3 can be obtained in three different colors (black, silver, white), while the WG-60 is available in two color-versions (black, red).
If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Ricoh WG-60 is notably smaller (9 percent) than the Olympus E-P3. It is noteworthy in this context that the WG-60 is splash and dust-proof, while the E-P3 does not feature any corresponding weather-sealing. More than that, the WG-60 is water-proof up to 14m and can, thus, be used for underwater photography.
The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete and possibly misleading, as the WG-60 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.
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 WG-60 | 123 mm | 62 mm | 30 mm | 193 g | 300 | Y | Oct 2018 | 279 | ebay.com | |
3. | Fujifilm XP120 | 110 mm | 71 mm | 28 mm | 203 g | 210 | Y | Jan 2017 | 229 | ebay.com | |
4. | Fujifilm XP130 | 110 mm | 71 mm | 28 mm | 207 g | 240 | Y | Jan 2018 | 229 | ebay.com | |
5. | Nikon W300 | 112 mm | 66 mm | 29 mm | 231 g | 280 | Y | May 2017 | 389 | ebay.com | |
6. | Olympus E-P1 | 121 mm | 70 mm | 36 mm | 355 g | 300 | n | Jun 2009 | 799 | ebay.com | |
7. | Olympus E-P2 | 121 mm | 70 mm | 36 mm | 355 g | 300 | n | Nov 2009 | 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-PM1 | 110 mm | 64 mm | 34 mm | 265 g | 330 | n | Jun 2011 | 499 | ebay.com | |
14. | Panasonic G10 | 124 mm | 84 mm | 74 mm | 388 g | 380 | n | Mar 2010 | 499 | ebay.com | |
15. | Panasonic GX1 | 116 mm | 68 mm | 39 mm | 318 g | 320 | n | Nov 2011 | 699 | ebay.com | |
16. | Pentax WG-90 | 123 mm | 62 mm | 30 mm | 194 g | 300 | Y | Nov 2023 | 279 | amazon.com | |
17. | Sony WX800 | 102 mm | 58 mm | 36 mm | 233 g | 370 | n | Oct 2018 | 399 | 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 listed launch prices provide an indication of the market segment that the manufacturer of the cameras have been targeting. The WG-60 was launched at a lower price than the E-P3, despite having a lens built in. 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. Then, after the new model is out, very good deals can frequently be found on the pre-owned market.
Sensor comparison
The size of the sensor inside a digital camera is one of the key determinants of image quality. A large sensor will tend to have larger individual pixels that provide better low-light sensitivity, wider dynamic range, and richer color-depth than smaller pixel-units in a sensor of the same technological generation. Furthermore, a large sensor camera will give the photographer more possibilities to use shallow depth-of-field in order to isolate a subject from the background. On the downside, larger sensors tend to be associated with larger, more expensive camera bodies and lenses.
Of the two cameras under consideration, the Olympus E-P3 features a Four Thirds sensor and the Ricoh WG-60 a 1/2.3-inch sensor. The sensor area in the WG-60 is 88 percent smaller. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 2.0 and 5.6. Both cameras feature a native aspect ratio (sensor width to sensor height) of 4:3.
Despite having a smaller sensor, the WG-60 offers a higher resolution of 15.9 megapixels, compared with 12.2 MP of the E-P3. This megapixels advantage comes at the cost of a higher pixel density and a smaller size of the individual pixel (with a pixel pitch of 1.33μm versus 4.29μm for the E-P3). However, it should be noted that the WG-60 is much more recent (by 7 years and 3 months) than the E-P3, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that make it possible to gather light more efficiently. Coming back to sensor resolution, it should be mentioned that the WG-60 has no anti-alias filter installed, so that it can capture all the detail its sensor resolves.
The resolution advantage of the Ricoh WG-60 implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the WG-60 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-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 Olympus PEN E-P3 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 200 to ISO 12800. The corresponding ISO settings for the Ricoh WG-60 are ISO 125 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 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"). 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-P3 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 1080/60i | 20.8 | 10.1 | 536 | 51 | |
2. | Ricoh WG-60 | 1/2.3 | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/60p | 20.6 | 12.2 | 1072 | 51 | |
3. | Fujifilm XP120 | 1/2.3 | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/60p | 20.5 | 11.9 | 900 | 49 | |
4. | Fujifilm XP130 | 1/2.3 | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/60p | 20.6 | 12.1 | 1000 | 51 | |
5. | Nikon W300 | 1/2.3 | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 4K/30p | 20.5 | 12.0 | 938 | 50 | |
6. | Olympus E-P1 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 720/30p | 21.4 | 10.4 | 536 | 55 | |
7. | Olympus E-P2 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 720/30p | 21.5 | 10.4 | 505 | 56 | |
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-PM1 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 1080/60i | 21.0 | 10.3 | 499 | 52 | |
14. | Panasonic G10 | Four Thirds | 12.0 | 4000 | 3000 | 720/30p | 21.2 | 10.1 | 411 | 52 | |
15. | Panasonic GX1 | Four Thirds | 15.8 | 4592 | 3448 | 1080/60p | 20.8 | 10.6 | 703 | 55 | |
16. | Pentax WG-90 | 1/2.3 | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/60p | 20.9 | 12.8 | 1570 | 54 | |
17. | Sony WX800 | 1/2.3 | 18.0 | 4896 | 3672 | 4K/30p | 20.6 | 12.2 | 1070 | 51 | |
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 can also record movies. Both cameras under consideration are equipped with sensors that have a sufficiently high read-out speed for moving images, but the E-P3 provides a higher frame rate than the WG-60. It can shoot video footage at 1080/60i, while the Ricoh is limited to 1080/60p.
Feature comparison
Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a variety of features. The E-P3 and the WG-60 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-P3 can be equipped with an optional viewfinder – the VF-3. The adjacent table lists some of the other core features of the Olympus E-P3 and Ricoh WG-60 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-P3 | optional | n | 3.0 / 614 | fixed | Y | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | Y | Y | |
2. | Ricoh WG-60 | none | n | 2.7 / 230 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 8.0/s | Y | n | |
3. | Fujifilm XP120 | none | n | 3.0 / 920 | fixed | n | 1/2000s | 10.0/s | Y | Y | |
4. | Fujifilm XP130 | none | n | 3.0 / 920 | fixed | n | 1/2000s | 10.0/s | Y | Y | |
5. | Nikon W300 | none | n | 3.0 / 921 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 7.0/s | Y | Y | |
6. | Olympus E-P1 | none | n | 3.0 / 230 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | n | Y | |
7. | Olympus E-P2 | optional | n | 3.0 / 230 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | n | 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-PM1 | optional | n | 3.0 / 460 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 5.5/s | n | Y | |
14. | Panasonic G10 | 202 | n | 3.0 / 460 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 2.6/s | Y | n | |
15. | Panasonic GX1 | optional | n | 3.0 / 460 | fixed | Y | 1/4000s | 4.2/s | Y | n | |
16. | Pentax WG-90 | none | n | 2.7 / 230 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 8.0/s | Y | n | |
17. | Sony WX800 | none | n | 3.0 / 922 | tilting | Y | 1/2000s | 10.0/s | Y | Y | |
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-P3 has a touchscreen, while the WG-60 has a conventional panel. Touch control can be particularly helpful, for example, for setting the focus point.
The Ricoh WG-60 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 WG-60 write their files to SDXC cards. The E-P3 supports UHS-I cards (Ultra High Speed data transfer of up to 104 MB/s), while the WG-60 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-P3 and Ricoh WG-60 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 WG-60 | - | mono / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
3. | Fujifilm XP120 | - | mono / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
4. | Fujifilm XP130 | - | mono / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | Y | |
5. | Nikon W300 | - | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | Y | |
6. | Olympus E-P1 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
7. | Olympus E-P2 | 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-PM1 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
14. | Panasonic G10 | Y | mono / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
15. | Panasonic GX1 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
16. | Pentax WG-90 | - | mono / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
17. | Sony WX800 | - | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | Y | - |
It is notable that the E-P3 has a hotshoe, while the WG-60 does not. This socket makes it possible to easily attach optional accessories, such as an external flash gun.
Both the E-P3 and the WG-60 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The E-P3 was replaced by the Olympus E-P5, while the WG-60 does not have a direct successor. Further information on the features and operation of the E-P3 and WG-60 can be found, respectively, in the Olympus E-P3 Manual (free pdf) or the online Ricoh WG-60 Manual.
Review summary
So how do things add up? Is there a clear favorite between the Olympus E-P3 and the Ricoh WG-60? Which camera is better? A synthesis of the relative strong points of each of the models is listed below.
Arguments in favor of the Olympus PEN E-P3:
- Better moiré control: Has an anti-alias filter to avoid artificial patterns to appear in images.
- Better image quality: Features bigger pixels on a larger sensor for higher quality imaging.
- Richer colors: The pixel size advantage translates into images with better, more accurate colors.
- More dynamic range: Larger pixels capture a wider spectrum of light and dark details.
- Better low-light sensitivity: Larger pixels means good image quality even under poor lighting.
- Better video: Provides higher movie framerates (1080/60i versus 1080/60p).
- More framing options: Can be equipped with a hotshoe-mounted accessory-viewfinder.
- Larger screen: Has a bigger rear LCD (3.0" vs 2.7") for image review and settings control.
- More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (614k vs 230k dots).
- Fewer buttons to press: Is equipped with a touch-sensitive rear screen to facilitate handling.
- More flexible: Accepts interchangeable lenses, so that lens characteristics can be altered.
- 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.
- Faster buffer clearing: Has an SD card interface that supports the UHS-I standard.
- More heavily discounted: Has been available for much longer (launched in June 2011).
Advantages of the Ricoh WG-60:
- More detail: Has more megapixels (15.9 vs 12.2MP), which boosts linear resolution by 14%.
- Maximized detail: Lacks an anti-alias filter to exploit the sensor's full resolution potential.
- Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (8 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.
- Less heavy: Has a lower weight even though it has a lens built in (unlike the E-P3).
- Better sealing: Is splash and dust sealed for shooting in inclement weather conditions.
- Water-proof: Is rugged and sealed and can thus be used for underwater photography (up to 14m).
- More affordable: Was introduced at a lower price, despite coming with a built-in lens.
- More modern: Reflects 7 years and 3 months of technical progress since the E-P3 launch.
If the count of individual advantages (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the E-P3 is the clear winner of the match-up (15 : 10 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 wedding photographer will view the differences between cameras in a way that diverges from the perspective of a travel photog, and a person interested in cityscapes has distinct needs from a macro shooter. Hence, the decision which camera is best and worth buying is often a very personal one.
How about other alternatives? Do the specifications of the Olympus E-P3 and the Ricoh WG-60 place the cameras among the top in their class? Find out in the latest Best Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera and Best Travel-Zoom Camera listings 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 incomplete and does no justice, for example, to the way the E-P3 or the WG-60 perform in practice. 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 hands-on reviews by experts 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-P3 | .. | 83/100 | .. | 74/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jun 2011 | 799 | ebay.com | |
2. | Ricoh WG-60 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | Oct 2018 | 279 | ebay.com | |
3. | Fujifilm XP120 | .. | o | .. | .. | 3.5/5 | 4/5 | Jan 2017 | 229 | ebay.com | |
4. | Fujifilm XP130 | .. | o | .. | .. | 3.5/5 | 4/5 | Jan 2018 | 229 | ebay.com | |
5. | Nikon W300 | .. | + | .. | .. | 4/5 | 4/5 | May 2017 | 389 | ebay.com | |
6. | Olympus E-P1 | .. | + | .. | 66/100 | 4/5 | 4.5/5 | Jun 2009 | 799 | ebay.com | |
7. | Olympus E-P2 | 3/5 | + | .. | 69/100 | 4/5 | 4.5/5 | Nov 2009 | 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-PM1 | .. | 86/100 | .. | 71/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jun 2011 | 499 | ebay.com | |
14. | Panasonic G10 | 3/5 | .. | .. | 70/100 | 4/5 | 4/5 | Mar 2010 | 499 | ebay.com | |
15. | Panasonic GX1 | 3/5 | + | .. | 77/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Nov 2011 | 699 | ebay.com | |
16. | Pentax WG-90 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | Nov 2023 | 279 | amazon.com | |
17. | Sony WX800 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | Oct 2018 | 399 | ebay.com | |
Note: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available. |
The above review scores should be interpreted with care, though. The ratings are only valid when referring to cameras in the same category and of the same age. A score, therefore, has to be seen in close connection to the price and market introduction time of the camera, and comparisons of ratings among very different cameras or across long time periods have little meaning. 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? If you would like to see a different side-by-side camera review, just use the search menu below. There is also a set of direct links to comparison reviews that other users of the CAM-parator app explored.
- Canon 20D vs Ricoh WG-60
- Canon 550D vs Olympus E-P3
- Canon 6D Mark II vs Olympus E-P3
- Fujifilm X-T30 vs Olympus E-P3
- Fujifilm X100 vs Ricoh WG-60
- Leica X2 vs Olympus E-P3
- Nikon Df vs Olympus E-P3
- Nikon Z fc vs Olympus E-P3
- Nikon Z30 vs Ricoh WG-60
- Olympus E-P5 vs Ricoh WG-60
- Olympus E-PL10 vs Ricoh WG-60
- Ricoh WG-60 vs Sony RX100 III
Specifications: Olympus E-P3 vs Ricoh WG-60
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 WG-60 |
---|---|---|
Camera Type | Mirrorless system camera | Fixed lens compact camera |
Camera Lens | Micro Four Thirds lenses | 28-140mm f/3.5-5.5 |
Launch Date | June 2011 | October 2018 |
Launch Price | USD 799 | USD 279 |
Sensor Specs | Olympus E-P3 | Ricoh WG-60 |
Sensor Technology | CMOS | CMOS |
Sensor Format | Four Thirds Sensor | 1/2.3" Sensor |
Sensor Size | 17.3 x 13.0 mm | 6.17 x 4.55 mm |
Sensor Area | 224.9 mm2 | 28.0735 mm2 |
Sensor Diagonal | 21.6 mm | 7.7 mm |
Crop Factor | 2.0x | 5.6x |
Sensor Resolution | 12.2 Megapixels | 15.9 Megapixels |
Image Resolution | 4032 x 3024 pixels | 4608 x 3456 pixels |
Pixel Pitch | 4.29 μm | 1.33 μm |
Pixel Density | 5.42 MP/cm2 | 56.73 MP/cm2 |
Moiré control | Anti-Alias filter | no AA filter |
Movie Capability | 1080/60i Video | 1080/60p Video |
ISO Setting | 200 - 12,800 ISO | 125 - 6,400 ISO |
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 WG-60 |
Viewfinder Type | Viewfinder optional | no viewfinder |
LCD Framing | Live View | Live View |
Rear LCD Size | 3.0inch | 2.7inch |
LCD Resolution | 614k dots | 230k dots |
LCD Attachment | Fixed screen | Fixed screen |
Touch Input | Touchscreen | no Touchscreen |
Shooting Specs | Olympus E-P3 | Ricoh WG-60 |
Focus System | Contrast-detect AF | Contrast-detect AF |
Continuous Shooting | 3 shutter flaps/s | 8 shutter flaps/s |
Time-Lapse Photography | no Intervalometer | Intervalometer built-in |
Image Stabilization | In-body stabilization | no handshake reduction |
Fill Flash | Built-in Flash | Built-in Flash |
Storage Medium | SDXC cards | SDXC cards |
Single or Dual Card Slots | Single card slot | Single card slot |
UHS card support | UHS-I | no |
Connectivity Specs | Olympus E-P3 | Ricoh WG-60 |
External Flash | Hotshoe | no Hotshoe |
USB Connector | USB 2.0 | USB 2.0 |
HDMI Port | mini HDMI | micro HDMI |
Wifi Support | no Wifi | no Wifi |
Body Specs | Olympus E-P3 | Ricoh WG-60 |
Environmental Sealing | not weather sealed | Waterproof body (14m) |
Battery Type | Olympus BLS-5 | Ricoh D-LI92 |
Battery Life (CIPA) | 330 shots per charge | 300 shots per charge |
Body Dimensions |
122 x 69 x 34 mm (4.8 x 2.7 x 1.3 in) |
123 x 62 x 30 mm (4.8 x 2.4 x 1.2 in) |
Camera Weight | 369 g (13.0 oz) | 193 g (6.8 oz) |
Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.