Olympus E-PL1 vs Ricoh WG-6

The Olympus PEN E-PL1 and the Ricoh WG-6 are two digital cameras that were announced, respectively, in February 2010 and February 2019. The E-PL1 is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera, while the WG-6 is a fixed lens compact. The cameras are based on a Four Thirds (E-PL1) and a 1/2.3-inch (WG-6) sensor. The Olympus has a resolution of 12.2 megapixels, whereas the Ricoh provides 20.2 MP.

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

Headline Specifications

Olympus E-PL1		Ricoh WG-6
Mirrorless system camera		Fixed lens compact camera
Micro Four Thirds lenses		28-140mm f/3.5-5.5
12.2 MP – Four Thirds sensor		20.2 MP – 1/2.3" sensor
720/30p Video		4K/30p Video
ISO 200-3,200		ISO 125-6,400
Viewfinder optional		No viewfinder, LCD framing
2.7" LCD – 230k dots		3.0" LCD – 1040k dots
Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)		Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)
3 shutter flaps per second		1 shutter flaps per second
In-body stabilization		no shake reduction
not weather sealed		Waterproof body (20m)
290 shots per battery charge		340 shots per battery charge
115 x 72 x 42 mm, 334 g		118 x 66 x 33 mm, 246 g

Check E-PL1 offers at
ebay.com
Check WG-6 price at
amazon.com

Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Olympus PEN E-PL1 and the Ricoh WG-6? 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 side-by-side display below illustrates the physical size and weight of the Olympus E-PL1 and the Ricoh WG-6. 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 dimensions are rounded to the nearest millimeter.

The E-PL1 can be obtained in four different colors (black, blue, yellow, white), while the WG-6 is available in two color-versions (black, orange).

If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Ricoh WG-6 is notably smaller (6 percent) than the Olympus E-PL1. It is noteworthy in this context that the WG-6 is splash and dust-proof, while the E-PL1 does not feature any corresponding weather-sealing. More than that, the WG-6 is water-proof up to 20m 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-6 has a lens built in, whereas the E-PL1 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-PL1 and their specifications in the Micro Four Thirds Lens Catalog.

Concerning battery life, the E-PL1 gets 290 shots out of its Olympus BLS-1 battery, while the WG-6 can take 340 images on a single charge of its Ricoh DB-110 power pack. The power pack in the WG-6 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.

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-PL1	115 mm	72 mm	42 mm	334 g	290	n	Feb 2010	599	ebay.com
2.		Ricoh WG-6	118 mm	66 mm	33 mm	246 g	340	Y	Feb 2019	399	amazon.com
3.		Canon SX740	110 mm	64 mm	40 mm	299 g	265	n	Jul 2018	399	amazon.com
4.		Olympus E-620	130 mm	94 mm	60 mm	521 g	500	n	Feb 2009	699	ebay.com
5.		Olympus E-P1	121 mm	70 mm	36 mm	355 g	300	n	Jun 2009	799	ebay.com
6.		Olympus E-P2	121 mm	70 mm	36 mm	355 g	300	n	Nov 2009	799	ebay.com
7.		Olympus E-P3	122 mm	69 mm	34 mm	369 g	330	n	Jun 2011	799	ebay.com
8.		Olympus E-PL2	114 mm	72 mm	42 mm	362 g	280	n	Jan 2011	599	ebay.com
9.		Olympus E-PL3	110 mm	64 mm	37 mm	313 g	300	n	Jun 2011	599	ebay.com
10.		Olympus E-PL9	117 mm	68 mm	39 mm	380 g	350	n	Feb 2018	599	ebay.com
11.		Olympus E-PM1	110 mm	64 mm	34 mm	265 g	330	n	Jun 2011	499	ebay.com
12.		Panasonic G10	124 mm	84 mm	74 mm	388 g	380	n	Mar 2010	499	ebay.com
13.		Panasonic GF2	113 mm	68 mm	33 mm	310 g	300	n	Nov 2010	549	ebay.com
14.		Panasonic TS7	117 mm	76 mm	37 mm	319 g	300	Y	May 2018	449	ebay.com
15.		Sony HX95	102 mm	58 mm	36 mm	242 g	370	n	Aug 2018	429	ebay.com
16.		Sony HX99	102 mm	58 mm	36 mm	242 g	370	n	Aug 2018	449	ebay.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.
Convert to Imperial

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. The WG-6 was launched at a lower price than the E-PL1, 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.

Sensor comparison

The size of the imaging sensor is a crucial determinant 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 are more costly to manufacture and tend to lead to bigger and heavier cameras and lenses.

Of the two cameras under consideration, the Olympus E-PL1 features a Four Thirds sensor and the Ricoh WG-6 a 1/2.3-inch sensor. The sensor area in the WG-6 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-6 offers a higher resolution of 20.2 megapixels, compared with 12.2 MP of the E-PL1. 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 1.18μm versus 4.29μm for the E-PL1). However, it should be noted that the WG-6 is much more recent (by 9 years) than the E-PL1, 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-6 has no anti-alias filter installed, so that it can capture all the detail its sensor resolves.

The resolution advantage of the Ricoh WG-6 implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the WG-6 for good quality output (200 dots per inch) amounts to 25.9 x 19.4 inches or 65.8 x 49.4 cm, for very good quality (250 dpi) 20.7 x 15.6 inches or 52.7 x 39.5 cm, and for excellent quality (300 dpi) 17.3 x 13 inches or 43.9 x 32.9 cm. The corresponding values for the Olympus E-PL1 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-PL1 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 200 to ISO 3200. The corresponding ISO settings for the Ricoh WG-6 are ISO 125 to ISO 6400 (no boost).

In terms of underlying technology, the E-PL1 is build around a CMOS sensor, while the WG-6 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.

Consistent information on actual sensor performance is available from DXO Mark for many cameras. 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 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-PL1	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.5	10.1	487	54
2.		Ricoh WG-6	1/2.3	20.2	5184	3888	4K/30p	20.7	12.2	1104	52
3.		Canon SX740	1/2.3	20.2	5184	3888	4K/30p	20.6	12.1	1050	51
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-P2	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.5	10.4	505	56
7.		Olympus E-P3	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	20.8	10.1	536	51
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.		Olympus E-PL9	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	4K/30p	23.1	12.8	1162	74
11.		Olympus E-PM1	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	21.0	10.3	499	52
12.		Panasonic G10	Four Thirds	12.0	4000	3000	720/30p	21.2	10.1	411	52
13.		Panasonic GF2	Four Thirds	12.0	4000	3000	1080/60i	21.2	10.3	506	54
14.		Panasonic TS7	1/2.3	20.2	5184	3888	4K/30p	20.6	12.1	1028	51
15.		Sony HX95	1/2.3	18.0	4896	3672	4K/30p	20.6	12.1	1057	51
16.		Sony HX99	1/2.3	18.0	4896	3672	4K/30p	20.6	12.1	1058	51
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 cannot only take still pictures, but also record videos. Both cameras under consideration have a sensor with sufficiently fast read-out times for moving pictures, but the WG-6 provides a better video resolution than the E-PL1. It can shoot movie footage at 4K/30p, while the Olympus is limited to 720/30p.

Feature comparison

Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a variety of features. The E-PL1 and the WG-6 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-PL1 can be equipped with an optional viewfinder – the VF-2. The following table reports on some other key feature differences and similarities of the Olympus E-PL1, the Ricoh WG-6, and comparable 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-PL1	optional	n	2.7 / 230	fixed	n	1/2000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
2.		Ricoh WG-6	none	n	3.0 / 1040	fixed	n	1/4000s	1.0/s	Y	n
3.		Canon SX740	none	n	3.0 / 922	tilting	n	1/3200s	10.0/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-P2	optional	n	3.0 / 230	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	n	Y
7.		Olympus E-P3	optional	n	3.0 / 614	fixed	Y	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
8.		Olympus E-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.		Olympus E-PL9	none	n	3.0 / 1040	tilting	Y	1/4000s	8.6/s	Y	Y
11.		Olympus E-PM1	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/4000s	5.5/s	n	Y
12.		Panasonic G10	202	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/4000s	2.6/s	Y	n
13.		Panasonic GF2	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	Y	1/4000s	2.6/s	Y	n
14.		Panasonic TS7	1170	n	3.0 / 1040	fixed	n	1/1300s	10.0/s	Y	Y
15.		Sony HX95	638	n	3.0 / 922	tilting	n	1/2000s	10.0/s	Y	Y
16.		Sony HX99	638	n	3.0 / 922	tilting	Y	1/2000s	10.0/s	Y	Y
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.

The Ricoh WG-6 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.

The E-PL1 writes its imaging data to SDHC cards, while the WG-6 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-PL1 and Ricoh WG-6 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-PL1	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
2.		Ricoh WG-6	-	mono / mono	-	-	micro	3.0	-	-	-
3.		Canon SX740	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	Y
4.		Olympus E-620	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
5.		Olympus E-P1	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
6.		Olympus E-P2	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
7.		Olympus E-P3	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
8.		Olympus E-PL2	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
9.		Olympus E-PL3	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
10.		Olympus E-PL9	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	Y
11.		Olympus E-PM1	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
12.		Panasonic G10	Y	mono / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
13.		Panasonic GF2	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
14.		Panasonic TS7	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
15.		Sony HX95	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	Y
16.		Sony HX99	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	Y
17.		Sony WX800	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-

It is notable that the E-PL1 has a hotshoe, while the WG-6 does not. This socket makes it possible to easily attach optional accessories, such as an external flash gun.

Travel and landscape photographers will find it useful that the WG-6 has an internal geolocalization sensor and can record GPS coordinates in its EXIF data.

The WG-6 is a recent model that features in the current product line-up of Ricoh. In contrast, the E-PL1 has been discontinued (but can be found pre-owned on ebay). As a replacement in the same line of cameras, the E-PL1 was succeeded by the Olympus E-PL2. Further information on the features and operation of the E-PL1 and WG-6 can be found, respectively, in the Olympus E-PL1 Manual (free pdf) or the online Ricoh WG-6 Manual.

Review summary

So what is the bottom line? Is the Olympus E-PL1 better than the Ricoh WG-6 or vice versa? Below is a summary of the relative strengths of each of the two contestants.

Arguments in favor of the Olympus PEN E-PL1:

• 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.
• More framing options: Can be equipped with a hotshoe-mounted accessory-viewfinder.
• Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (3 vs 1 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
• 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.
• More heavily discounted: Has been available for much longer (launched in February 2010).

Reasons to prefer the Ricoh WG-6:

• More detail: Has more megapixels (20.2 vs 12.2MP), which boosts linear resolution by 29%.
• Maximized detail: Lacks an anti-alias filter to exploit the sensor's full resolution potential.
• Better video: Provides higher definition movie capture (4K/30p vs 720/30p).
• 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 (1040k vs 230k dots).
• Faster shutter: Has higher mechanical shutter speed (1/4000s vs 1/2000s) to freeze action.
• Easier time-lapse photography: Has an intervalometer built-in for low frequency shooting.
• Ready to shoot: Has an integrated lens, whereas the E-PL1 necessitates an extra lens.
• Less heavy: Has a lower weight even though it has a lens built in (unlike the E-PL1).
• Longer lasting: Gets more shots (340 versus 290) out of a single battery charge.
• Easier travel charging: Can be conveniently charged via its USB port.
• 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 20m).
• Easier geotagging: Features an internal GPS sensor to log localization data.
• Faster data transfer: Supports a more advanced USB protocol (3.0 vs 2.0).
• More affordable: Was introduced at a lower price, despite coming with a built-in lens.
• More modern: Reflects 9 years of technical progress since the E-PL1 launch.

If the number of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the WG-6 is the clear winner of the contest (17 : 11 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 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-PL1 and the Ricoh WG-6 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 specs-based evaluation of cameras can be instructive in revealing their potential as photographic tools, it remains incomplete and does no justice, for example, to the way the E-PL1 or the WG-6 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 why expert reviews are important. The adjacent summary-table relays the overall verdicts of several of the most popular 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.

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-PL1	..	86/100	..	69/100	4/5	4.5/5	Feb 2010	599	ebay.com
2.		Ricoh WG-6	..	..	..	..	3.5/5	3.5/5	Feb 2019	399	amazon.com
3.		Canon SX740	..	+	3.5/5	..	4/5	4/5	Jul 2018	399	amazon.com
4.		Olympus E-620	3/5	88/100	..	72/100	4.5/5	5/5	Feb 2009	699	ebay.com
5.		Olympus E-P1	..	+	..	66/100	4/5	4.5/5	Jun 2009	799	ebay.com
6.		Olympus E-P2	3/5	+	..	69/100	4/5	4.5/5	Nov 2009	799	ebay.com
7.		Olympus E-P3	..	83/100	..	74/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2011	799	ebay.com
8.		Olympus E-PL2	3/5	83/100	..	71/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jan 2011	599	ebay.com
9.		Olympus E-PL3	3/5	+ +	..	72/100	4.5/5	4/5	Jun 2011	599	ebay.com
10.		Olympus E-PL9	..	+	..	..	4.5/5	4/5	Feb 2018	599	ebay.com
11.		Olympus E-PM1	..	86/100	..	71/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2011	499	ebay.com
12.		Panasonic G10	3/5	..	..	70/100	4/5	4/5	Mar 2010	499	ebay.com
13.		Panasonic GF2	3/5	82/100	..	70/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Nov 2010	549	ebay.com
14.		Panasonic TS7	..	+	..	..	..	3.5/5	May 2018	449	ebay.com
15.		Sony HX95	..	..	..	..	..	..	Aug 2018	429	ebay.com
16.		Sony HX99	..	..	..	..	4/5	4.5/5	Aug 2018	449	ebay.com
17.		Sony WX800	..	..	..	..	..	..	Oct 2018	399	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.

Check E-PL1 offers at
ebay.com
Check WG-6 price at
amazon.com

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.

~

Check E-PL1 offers at
ebay.com
Check WG-6 price at
amazon.com

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