Olympus E-P3 vs Sony RX1R II

The Olympus PEN E-P3 and the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX1R II are two enthusiast cameras that were revealed to the public, respectively, in June 2011 and October 2015. The E-P3 is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera, while the RX1R II is a fixed lens compact. The cameras are based on a Four Thirds (E-P3) and a full frame (RX1R II) sensor. The Olympus has a resolution of 12.2 megapixels, whereas the Sony provides 42.2 MP.

Below is an overview of the main specs of the two cameras as a starting point for the comparison.

Headline Specifications

Olympus E-P3		Sony RX1R II
Mirrorless system camera		Fixed lens compact camera
Micro Four Thirds lenses		35mm f/2.0
12.2 MP – Four Thirds sensor		42.2 MP – Full Frame sensor
1080/60i Video		1080/60p Video
ISO 200-12,800		ISO 100-25,600 (50 - 102,400)
Viewfinder optional		Electronic viewfinder (2360k dots)
3.0" LCD – 614k dots		3.0" LCD – 1229k dots
Fixed touchscreen		Tilting screen (no touchscreen)
3 shutter flaps per second		5 shutter flaps per second
In-body stabilization		no shake reduction
330 shots per battery charge		220 shots per battery charge
122 x 69 x 34 mm, 369 g		113 x 65 x 72 mm, 507 g

Check E-P3 offers at
ebay.com
Check RX1R II offers at
ebay.com

Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Olympus PEN E-P3 and the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX1R II? Which one should you buy? Read on to find out how these two cameras compare with respect to their body size, their imaging sensors, their shooting features, their input-output connections, and their reception by expert reviewers.

Body comparison

An illustration of the physical size and weight of the Olympus E-P3 and the Sony RX1R II is provided in the side-by-side display below. The two cameras are presented according to their relative size. Three consecutive views from the front, the top, and the rear side are shown. All 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 RX1R II 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 Sony RX1R II is notably smaller (13 percent) than the Olympus E-P3. In this context, it is worth noting that neither the E-P3 nor the RX1R II are weather-sealed.

The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete and possibly misleading, as the RX1R II 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 RX1R II can take 220 images on a single charge of its Sony NP-BX1 power pack. The power pack in the RX1R II can be charged via the USB port, which can be very convenient when travelling.

The table below summarizes the key physical specs of the two cameras alongside a broader set of comparators. If you would like to visualize and compare a different camera combination, you can navigate to the CAM-parator app and make your selection from a broad list of cameras there.

Body Specifications

		Camera Model	Camera Width	Camera Height	Camera Depth	Camera Weight	Battery Life	Weather Sealing	Camera Launch	Launch Price (USD)	Street Price
1.		Olympus E-P3	122 mm	69 mm	34 mm	369 g	330	n	Jun 2011	799	ebay.com
2.		Sony RX1R II	113 mm	65 mm	72 mm	507 g	220	n	Oct 2015	3,299	ebay.com
3.		Canon 5DS	152 mm	116 mm	76 mm	930 g	700	Y	Feb 2015	3,699	ebay.com
4.		Olympus E-M10	119 mm	82 mm	46 mm	396 g	320	n	Jan 2014	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-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-PM1	110 mm	64 mm	34 mm	265 g	330	n	Jun 2011	499	ebay.com
13.		Olympus XZ-2	113 mm	65 mm	48 mm	346 g	340	n	Sep 2012	599	ebay.com
14.		Sony H300	128 mm	89 mm	92 mm	590 g	350	n	Feb 2014	219	ebay.com
15.		Sony RX1	113 mm	65 mm	70 mm	482 g	270	n	Sep 2012	2,799	ebay.com
16.		Sony RX1R	113 mm	65 mm	70 mm	482 g	270	n	Jun 2013	2,799	ebay.com
17.		Sony RX100 IV	102 mm	58 mm	41 mm	298 g	280	n	Jun 2015	999	ebay.com
Note: Measurements and pricing do not include easily detachable parts, such as add-on or interchangeable lenses or optional viewfinders.
Convert to Imperial

Any camera decision will 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. 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. 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. Further, a large sensor camera will give the photographer additional creative options when using shallow depth-of-field to isolate a subject from its background. On the downside, larger sensors tend to be 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 Sony RX1R II a full frame sensor. The sensor area in the RX1R II is 280 percent bigger. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 2.0 and 1.0. The sensor in the E-P3 has a native 4:3 aspect ratio, while the one in the RX1R II offers a 3:2 aspect.

With 42.2MP, the RX1R II offers a higher resolution than the E-P3 (12.2MP), but the RX1R II nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 4.50μm versus 4.29μm for the E-P3) due to its larger sensor. Moreover, the RX1R II is a much more recent model (by 4 years and 3 months) than the E-P3, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that further enhance the light gathering capacity of its pixel-units. Coming back to sensor resolution, it should be mentioned that the RX1R II has no anti-alias filter installed, so that it can capture all the detail its sensor resolves.

The resolution advantage of the Sony RX1R II implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the RX1R II for good quality output (200 dots per inch) amounts to 39.8 x 26.5 inches or 101 x 67.4 cm, for very good quality (250 dpi) 31.8 x 21.2 inches or 80.8 x 53.9 cm, and for excellent quality (300 dpi) 26.5 x 17.7 inches or 67.3 x 44.9 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 Olympus PEN E-P3 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 200 to ISO 12800. The corresponding ISO settings for the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX1R II are ISO 100 to ISO 25600, with the possibility to increase the ISO range to 50-102400.

In terms of underlying technology, the E-P3 is build around a CMOS sensor, while the RX1R II uses a BSI-CMOS imager. Both cameras use a Bayer filter for capturing RGB colors on a square grid of photosensors. This arrangement is found in most digital cameras.

For many cameras, data on sensor performance has been reported by DXO Mark. This service 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 RX1R II offers substantially better image quality than the E-P3 (overall score 46 points higher). The advantage is based on 5 bits higher color depth, 3.8 EV in additional dynamic range, and 2.6 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.

Sensor Characteristics

		Camera Model	Sensor Class	Resolution (MP)	Horiz. Pixels	Vert. Pixels	Video Format	DXO Portrait	DXO Landscape	DXO Sports	DXO Overall
1.		Olympus E-P3	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	20.8	10.1	536	51
2.		Sony RX1R II	Full Frame	42.2	7952	5304	1080/60p	25.8	13.9	3204	97
3.		Canon 5DS	Full Frame	50.3	8688	5792	1080/30p	24.7	12.4	2381	87
4.		Olympus E-M10	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	22.8	12.3	884	72
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-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-PM1	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	21.0	10.3	499	52
13.		Olympus XZ-2	1/1.7	11.8	3968	2976	1080/30p	20.4	11.3	216	49
14.		Sony H300	1/2.3	19.9	5152	3864	720/30p	20.1	11.4	630	45
15.		Sony RX1	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	1080/60p	25.1	14.3	2534	93
16.		Sony RX1R	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	1080/60p	25.0	13.6	2537	91
17.		Sony RX100 IV	1-inch	20.0	5472	3648	4K/30p	22.8	12.6	591	70
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 have a sensor with sufficiently fast read-out times for moving pictures, but the RX1R II 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

Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. For example, the RX1R II has an electronic viewfinder (2360k dots), which can be very helpful when shooting in bright sunlight. In contrast, the E-P3 relies on live view and the rear LCD for framing. That said, the E-P3 can be equipped with an optional viewfinder – the VF-3. The table below summarizes some of the other core capabilities of the Olympus E-P3 and Sony RX1R II in connection with corresponding information for a sample of similar cameras.

Core Features

		Camera Model	Viewfinder (Type or 000 dots)	Control Panel (yes/no)	LCD Specifications (inch/000 dots)	LCD Attach- ment	Touch Screen (yes/no)	Max Shutter Speed *	Max Shutter Flaps *	Built-in Flash (yes/no)	Built-in Image Stab
1.		Olympus E-P3	optional	n	3.0 / 614	fixed	Y	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
2.		Sony RX1R II	2360	n	3.0 / 1229	tilting	n	1/4000s	5.0/s	n	n
3.		Canon 5DS	optical	Y	3.2 / 1040	fixed	n	1/8000s	5.0/s	n	n
4.		Olympus E-M10	1440	n	3.0 / 1037	tilting	Y	1/4000s	8.0/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-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-PM1	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/4000s	5.5/s	n	Y
13.		Olympus XZ-2	optional	n	3.0 / 920	tilting	Y	1/2000s	5.0/s	Y	Y
14.		Sony H300	none	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/1500s	0.8/s	Y	Y
15.		Sony RX1	optional	n	3.0 / 1229	fixed	n	1/4000s	5.0/s	Y	n
16.		Sony RX1R	optional	n	3.0 / 1229	fixed	n	1/4000s	5.0/s	Y	n
17.		Sony RX100 IV	2359	n	3.0 / 1228	tilting	n	1/2000s	16.0/s	Y	Y
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 RX1R II 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 E-P3 writes its imaging data to SDXC cards, while the RX1R II uses SDXC or Memory Stick PRO Duo 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 Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX1R II and, in particular, the interfaces the cameras (and selected comparators) provide for accessory control and data transfer.

Input-Output Connections

		Camera Model	Hotshoe Port	Internal Mic / Speaker	Microphone Port	Headphone Port	HDMI Port	USB Port	WiFi Support	NFC Support	Bluetooth Support
1.		Olympus E-P3	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
2.		Sony RX1R II	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
3.		Canon 5DS	Y	mono / mono	Y	-	mini	3.0	-	-	-
4.		Olympus E-M10	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
5.		Olympus E-M10 II	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	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-PM1	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
13.		Olympus XZ-2	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
14.		Sony H300	-	mono / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
15.		Sony RX1	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
16.		Sony RX1R	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
17.		Sony RX100 IV	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-

It is notable that the RX1R II 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.

Both the E-P3 and the RX1R II have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The E-P3 was replaced by the Olympus E-P5, while the RX1R II does not have a direct successor. Further information on the features and operation of the E-P3 and RX1R II can be found, respectively, in the Olympus E-P3 Manual (free pdf) or the online Sony RX1R II Manual.

Review summary

So what is the bottom line? Which of the two cameras – the Olympus E-P3 or the Sony RX1R II – 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.

Reasons to prefer the Olympus PEN E-P3:

• Better moiré control: Has an anti-alias filter to avoid artificial patterns to appear in images.
• 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.
• Longer lasting: Can take more shots (330 versus 220) on a single battery charge.
• Sharper images: Has hand-shake reducing image stabilization built-in.
• 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 Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX1R II:

• More detail: Has more megapixels (42.2 vs 12.2MP), which boosts linear resolution by 90%.
• Maximized detail: Lacks an anti-alias filter to exploit the sensor's full resolution potential.
• Better image quality: Scores substantially higher (46 points) in the DXO overall evaluation.
• Richer colors: Generates noticeably more natural colors (5 bits more color depth).
• More dynamic range: Captures a broader range of light and dark details (3.8 EV of extra DR).
• Better low-light sensitivity: Can shoot in dim conditions (2.6 stops ISO advantage).
• Better video: Provides higher movie framerates (1080/60p versus 1080/60i).
• Better sound: Can connect to an external microphone for higher quality sound recording.
• Easier framing: Has an electronic viewfinder for image composition and settings control.
• More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1229k vs 614k dots).
• More flexible LCD: Has a tilting screen for odd-angle shots in landscape orientation.
• Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (5 vs 3 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
• Ready to shoot: Has an integrated lens, whereas the E-P3 necessitates an extra lens.
• More compact: Is smaller (113x65mm vs 122x69mm) and will fit more readily into a bag.
• Easier travel charging: Can be conveniently charged via its USB port.
• Easier file upload: Has wifi built in for automatic backup or image transfer to the web.
• Easier device pairing: Supports NFC for fast wireless image transfer over short distances.
• More modern: Reflects 4 years and 3 months of technical progress since the E-P3 launch.

If the count of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a measure, the RX1R II is the clear winner of the contest (18 : 7 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 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 Sony RX1R II 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 says little about, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance of the E-P3 and the RX1R II in practical situations. 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 expert reviews 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.

Expert Camera Reviews

		Camera   Model	AP   score	CL   score	DCW   score	DPR   score	EPZ   score	PB   score	Camera Launch	Launch Price (USD)	Street Price
1.		Olympus E-P3	..	83/100	..	74/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2011	799	ebay.com
2.		Sony RX1R II	5/5	..	..	82/100	..	4.5/5	Oct 2015	3,299	ebay.com
3.		Canon 5DS	..	+	..	83/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Feb 2015	3,699	ebay.com
4.		Olympus E-M10	4/5	..	..	80/100	5/5	5/5	Jan 2014	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-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-PM1	..	86/100	..	71/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2011	499	ebay.com
13.		Olympus XZ-2	4/5	+	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2012	599	ebay.com
14.		Sony H300	..	+	..	..	4.5/5	4/5	Feb 2014	219	ebay.com
15.		Sony RX1	5/5	..	..	79/100	4/5	4.5/5	Sep 2012	2,799	ebay.com
16.		Sony RX1R	5/5	..	..	..	4/5	4.5/5	Jun 2013	2,799	ebay.com
17.		Sony RX100 IV	4.5/5	+ +	..	85/100	4/5	4.5/5	Jun 2015	999	ebay.com
Note: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available.

Care should be taken when interpreting the review scores above, though. The ratings were established in reference to similarly priced cameras that were available in the market at the time of the review. Thus, a score needs to be put into the context of the launch date and the launch price of the camera, and rating-comparisons among cameras that span long time periods or concern very differently equipped models make little sense. Also, please note that some of the review sites have changed their methodology and reporting over time.

Check E-P3 offers at
ebay.com
Check RX1R II offers at
ebay.com

Other camera comparisons

Did this review help to inform your camera decision process? In case you are interested in seeing how other cameras pair up, just make your choice using the following search menu. As an alternative, you can also directly jump to any one of the listed comparisons that were previously generated by the CAM-parator tool.

~

Check E-P3 offers at
ebay.com
Check RX1R II offers at
ebay.com

Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.