Olympus E-PL2 vs E-P1
The Olympus PEN E-PL2 and the Olympus PEN E-P1 are two digital cameras that were officially introduced, respectively, in January 2011 and June 2009. Both the E-PL2 and the E-P1 are mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras that are equipped with a Four Thirds sensor. Both cameras offer a resolution of 12.2 megapixels.
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-PL2 and the Olympus PEN E-P1? 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-PL2 and the Olympus E-P1 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 width, height and depth dimensions are rounded to the nearest millimeter.
The E-PL2 can be obtained in four different colors (black, silver, red, white), while the E-P1 is available in three color-versions (black, silver, white).
If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Olympus E-P1 is somewhat larger (3 percent) than the Olympus E-PL2. However, the E-P1 is slightly lighter (2 percent) than the E-PL2. In this context, it is worth noting that neither the E-PL2 nor the E-P1 are weather-sealed.
The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete since they do not consider the interchangeable lenses that both of these cameras require. In this particular case, both cameras feature the same lens mount, so that they can use the same lenses. You can compare the optics available in the Micro Four Thirds Lens Catalog. Mirrorless cameras, such as the two under consideration, have the additional advantage of having a short flange to focal plane distance, which makes it possible to mount many lenses from other systems onto the camera via adapters.
Concerning battery life, the E-PL2 gets 280 shots out of its Olympus BLS-5 battery, while the E-P1 can take 300 images on a single charge of its Olympus BLS-1 power pack.
The following table provides a synthesis of the main physical specifications of the two cameras and other similar ones. In case you want to display and compare another camera duo, you can use the CAM-parator app to select your camera combination among a large number of options.
# | Camera Model |
Camera Width |
Camera Height |
Camera Depth |
Camera Weight |
Battery Life |
Weather Sealing |
Camera Launch |
Launch Price (USD) |
Street Price |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Olympus E-PL2 | 114 mm | 72 mm | 42 mm | 362 g | 280 | n | Jan 2011 | 599 | ebay.com | |
2. | Olympus E-P1 | 121 mm | 70 mm | 36 mm | 355 g | 300 | n | Jun 2009 | 799 | ebay.com | |
3. | Olympus E-PL5 | 111 mm | 64 mm | 38 mm | 325 g | 360 | n | Sep 2012 | 599 | ebay.com | |
4. | Olympus XZ-2 | 113 mm | 65 mm | 48 mm | 346 g | 340 | n | Sep 2012 | 599 | ebay.com | |
5. | Olympus E-P3 | 122 mm | 69 mm | 34 mm | 369 g | 330 | n | Jun 2011 | 799 | ebay.com | |
6. | Olympus E-PL3 | 110 mm | 64 mm | 37 mm | 313 g | 300 | n | Jun 2011 | 599 | ebay.com | |
7. | Olympus E-PM1 | 110 mm | 64 mm | 34 mm | 265 g | 330 | n | Jun 2011 | 499 | ebay.com | |
8. | Olympus E-PL1 | 115 mm | 72 mm | 42 mm | 334 g | 290 | n | Feb 2010 | 599 | ebay.com | |
9. | Olympus E-P2 | 121 mm | 70 mm | 36 mm | 355 g | 300 | n | Nov 2009 | 799 | ebay.com | |
10. | Panasonic G10 | 124 mm | 84 mm | 74 mm | 388 g | 380 | n | Mar 2010 | 499 | ebay.com | |
11. | Panasonic GF2 | 113 mm | 68 mm | 33 mm | 310 g | 300 | n | Nov 2010 | 549 | ebay.com | |
12. | Panasonic GH1 | 124 mm | 90 mm | 45 mm | 385 g | 300 | n | Mar 2009 | 899 | 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 manufacturer’s suggested retail prices give an idea on the placement of the camera in the maker’s lineup and the broader market. The E-PL2 was launched at a somewhat lower price (by 25 percent) than the E-P1, which makes it more attractive for photographers on a tight budget. 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. Moreover, a large sensor camera will give the photographer more control over depth-of-field in the image and, thus, the ability to better isolate a subject from the background. On the downside, larger sensors are more costly to manufacture and tend to lead to bigger and heavier cameras and lenses.
Both cameras under consideration feature a Four Thirds sensor and have a format factor (sometimes also referred to as "crop factor") of 2.0. Within the spectrum of camera sensors, this places the review cameras among the medium-sized sensor cameras that aim to strike a balance between image quality and portability. Both cameras feature a native aspect ratio (sensor width to sensor height) of 4:3.
The two cameras under review do not only share the same sensor size, but also offer an identical resolution of 12.2 megapixels. This similarity in sensor specs implies that both the E-PL2 and the E-P1 have the same pixel density, as well as the same pixel size. It should, however, be noted that the E-PL2 is a somewhat more recent model (by 1 year and 6 months) than the E-P1, and its sensor might have benefitted from technological advances during this time.
The Olympus PEN E-PL2 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 200 to ISO 6400. The corresponding ISO settings for the Olympus PEN E-P1 are ISO 100 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.
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. The Overall DXO ratings for the two cameras under consideration are close, suggesting that they provide similar imaging performance. The following table provides an overview of the physical sensor characteristics, as well as the sensor quality measurements for a selection of comparators.
# | Camera Model |
Sensor Class |
Resolution (MP) |
Horiz. Pixels |
Vert. Pixels |
Video Format |
DXO Portrait |
DXO Landscape |
DXO Sports |
DXO Overall |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Olympus E-PL2 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 720/30p | 21.4 | 10.2 | 573 | 55 | |
2. | Olympus E-P1 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 720/30p | 21.4 | 10.4 | 536 | 55 | |
3. | Olympus E-PL5 | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/30p | 22.8 | 12.3 | 889 | 72 | |
4. | Olympus XZ-2 | 1/1.7 | 11.8 | 3968 | 2976 | 1080/30p | 20.4 | 11.3 | 216 | 49 | |
5. | Olympus E-P3 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 1080/60i | 20.8 | 10.1 | 536 | 51 | |
6. | Olympus E-PL3 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 1080/60i | 20.9 | 10.3 | 499 | 52 | |
7. | Olympus E-PM1 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 1080/60i | 21.0 | 10.3 | 499 | 52 | |
8. | Olympus E-PL1 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 720/30p | 21.5 | 10.1 | 487 | 54 | |
9. | Olympus E-P2 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 720/30p | 21.5 | 10.4 | 505 | 56 | |
10. | Panasonic G10 | Four Thirds | 12.0 | 4000 | 3000 | 720/30p | 21.2 | 10.1 | 411 | 52 | |
11. | Panasonic GF2 | Four Thirds | 12.0 | 4000 | 3000 | 1080/60i | 21.2 | 10.3 | 506 | 54 | |
12. | Panasonic GH1 | Four Thirds | 12.0 | 4000 | 3000 | 1080/24p | 21.6 | 11.6 | 772 | 64 |
Many modern cameras are not only capable of taking still images, but also of capturing video footage. Both cameras under consideration are equipped with sensors that have a sufficiently high read-out speed for moving images, and both provide the same movie specifications (720/30p).
Feature comparison
Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a variety of features. The E-PL2 and the E-P1 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-PL2 can be equipped with an optional viewfinder – the VF-2. The adjacent table lists some of the other core features of the Olympus E-PL2 and Olympus E-P1 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-PL2 | optional | n | 3.0 / 460 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | Y | Y | |
2. | Olympus E-P1 | none | n | 3.0 / 230 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | n | Y | |
3. | Olympus E-PL5 | optional | n | 3.0 / 460 | tilting | Y | 1/4000s | 8.0/s | n | Y | |
4. | Olympus XZ-2 | optional | n | 3.0 / 920 | tilting | Y | 1/2000s | 5.0/s | Y | Y | |
5. | Olympus E-P3 | optional | n | 3.0 / 614 | fixed | Y | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | Y | Y | |
6. | Olympus E-PL3 | optional | n | 3.0 / 460 | tilting | n | 1/4000s | 5.5/s | n | Y | |
7. | Olympus E-PM1 | optional | n | 3.0 / 460 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 5.5/s | n | Y | |
8. | Olympus E-PL1 | optional | n | 2.7 / 230 | fixed | n | 1/2000s | 3.0/s | Y | Y | |
9. | Olympus E-P2 | optional | n | 3.0 / 230 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | n | Y | |
10. | Panasonic G10 | 202 | n | 3.0 / 460 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 2.6/s | Y | n | |
11. | Panasonic GF2 | optional | n | 3.0 / 460 | fixed | Y | 1/4000s | 2.6/s | Y | n | |
12. | Panasonic GH1 | 1440 | n | 3.0 / 460 | swivel | n | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | Y | n | |
Note: *) Information refers to the mechanical shutter, unless the camera only has an electronic one. |
One difference between the cameras concerns the presence of an on-board flash. The E-PL2 has one, while the E-P1 does not. While the built-in flash of the E-PL2 is not very powerful, it can at times be useful as a fill-in light.
Concerning the storage of imaging data, both the E-PL2 and the E-P1 write their files to SDHC 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-PL2 and Olympus PEN E-P1 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-PL2 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
2. | Olympus E-P1 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
3. | Olympus E-PL5 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
4. | Olympus XZ-2 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
5. | Olympus E-P3 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
6. | Olympus E-PL3 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
7. | Olympus E-PM1 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
8. | Olympus E-PL1 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
9. | Olympus E-P2 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
10. | Panasonic G10 | Y | mono / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
11. | Panasonic GF2 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
12. | Panasonic GH1 | Y | stereo / - | Y | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - |
Both the E-PL2 and the E-P1 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The E-P1 was replaced by the Olympus E-P2, while the E-PL2 was followed by the Olympus E-PL3. Further information on the features and operation of the E-PL2 and E-P1 can be found, respectively, in the Olympus E-PL2 Manual (free pdf) or the online Olympus E-P1 Manual.
Review summary
So what is the bottom line? Which of the two cameras – the Olympus E-PL2 or the Olympus E-P1 – has the upper hand? Is one clearly better than the other? A synthesis of the relative strong points of each of the models is listed below.
Arguments in favor of the Olympus PEN E-PL2:
- More framing options: Can be equipped with a hotshoe-mounted accessory-viewfinder.
- More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (460k vs 230k dots).
- Easier fill-in: Is equipped with a small onboard flash to brighten deep shadow areas.
- More affordable: Was introduced into a lower priced segment (25 percent cheaper at launch).
- More modern: Is somewhat more recent (announced 1 year and 6 months after the E-P1).
Advantages of the Olympus PEN E-P1:
- More heavily discounted: Has been on the market for longer (launched in June 2009).
If the count of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a measure, the E-PL2 is the clear winner of the match-up (5 : 1 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-PL2 and the Olympus E-P1 place the cameras among the top in their class? Find out in the latest Best Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera listing whether the two cameras rank among the cream of the crop.
In any case, while the comparison of the spec-sheets of cameras can offer a general idea of their imaging potential, it says little about, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance of the E-PL2 and the E-P1 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.
# | Camera Model |
AP score |
CL score |
DCW score |
DPR score |
EPZ score |
PB score |
Camera Launch |
Launch Price (USD) |
Street Price |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Olympus E-PL2 | 3/5 | 83/100 | .. | 71/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jan 2011 | 599 | ebay.com | |
2. | Olympus E-P1 | .. | + | .. | 66/100 | 4/5 | 4.5/5 | Jun 2009 | 799 | ebay.com | |
3. | Olympus E-PL5 | 3/5 | + + | .. | .. | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Sep 2012 | 599 | ebay.com | |
4. | Olympus XZ-2 | 4/5 | + | .. | .. | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Sep 2012 | 599 | ebay.com | |
5. | Olympus E-P3 | .. | 83/100 | .. | 74/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jun 2011 | 799 | ebay.com | |
6. | Olympus E-PL3 | 3/5 | + + | .. | 72/100 | 4.5/5 | 4/5 | Jun 2011 | 599 | ebay.com | |
7. | Olympus E-PM1 | .. | 86/100 | .. | 71/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jun 2011 | 499 | ebay.com | |
8. | Olympus E-PL1 | .. | 86/100 | .. | 69/100 | 4/5 | 4.5/5 | Feb 2010 | 599 | ebay.com | |
9. | Olympus E-P2 | 3/5 | + | .. | 69/100 | 4/5 | 4.5/5 | Nov 2009 | 799 | ebay.com | |
10. | Panasonic G10 | 3/5 | .. | .. | 70/100 | 4/5 | 4/5 | Mar 2010 | 499 | ebay.com | |
11. | Panasonic GF2 | 3/5 | 82/100 | .. | 70/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Nov 2010 | 549 | ebay.com | |
12. | Panasonic GH1 | .. | + + | .. | 72/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Mar 2009 | 899 | 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. 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? 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.
- Canon SX620 vs Olympus E-P1
- Fujifilm GFX 100 vs Olympus E-PL2
- Leica V-LUX Typ 114 vs Olympus E-P1
- Leica X Vario vs Olympus E-PL2
- Nikon 1 J4 vs Olympus E-PL2
- Nikon D3 vs Olympus E-P1
- Nikon D3400 vs Olympus E-PL2
- Nikon L840 vs Olympus E-PL2
- Olympus E-P1 vs Olympus E-PL3
- Olympus E-P1 vs Olympus E-PL6
- Olympus E-P1 vs Panasonic LX10
- Olympus E-PL1 vs Olympus E-PL2
Specifications: Olympus E-PL2 vs Olympus E-P1
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-PL2 | Olympus E-P1 |
---|---|---|
Camera Type | Mirrorless system camera | Mirrorless system camera |
Camera Lens | Micro Four Thirds lenses | Micro Four Thirds lenses |
Launch Date | January 2011 | June 2009 |
Launch Price | USD 599 | USD 799 |
Sensor Specs | Olympus E-PL2 | Olympus E-P1 |
Sensor Technology | CMOS | CMOS |
Sensor Format | Four Thirds Sensor | Four Thirds Sensor |
Sensor Size | 17.3 x 13.0 mm | 17.3 x 13.0 mm |
Sensor Area | 224.9 mm2 | 224.9 mm2 |
Sensor Diagonal | 21.6 mm | 21.6 mm |
Crop Factor | 2.0x | 2.0x |
Sensor Resolution | 12.2 Megapixels | 12.2 Megapixels |
Image Resolution | 4032 x 3024 pixels | 4032 x 3024 pixels |
Pixel Pitch | 4.29 μm | 4.29 μm |
Pixel Density | 5.42 MP/cm2 | 5.42 MP/cm2 |
Moiré control | Anti-Alias filter | Anti-Alias filter |
Movie Capability | 720/30p Video | 720/30p Video |
ISO Setting | 200 - 6,400 ISO | 100 - 6,400 ISO |
Image Processor | Truepic V | TruePic V |
DXO Sensor Quality (score) | 55 | 55 |
DXO Color Depth (bits) | 21.4 | 21.4 |
DXO Dynamic Range (EV) | 10.2 | 10.4 |
DXO Low Light (ISO) | 573 | 536 |
Screen Specs | Olympus E-PL2 | Olympus E-P1 |
Viewfinder Type | Viewfinder optional | no viewfinder |
LCD Framing | Live View | Live View |
Rear LCD Size | 3.0inch | 3.0inch |
LCD Resolution | 460k dots | 230k dots |
LCD Attachment | Fixed screen | Fixed screen |
Shooting Specs | Olympus E-PL2 | Olympus E-P1 |
Focus System | Contrast-detect AF | Contrast-detect AF |
Continuous Shooting | 3 shutter flaps/s | 3 shutter flaps/s |
Image Stabilization | In-body stabilization | In-body stabilization |
Fill Flash | Built-in Flash | no On-Board Flash |
Storage Medium | SDHC cards | SDHC cards |
Single or Dual Card Slots | Single card slot | Single card slot |
UHS card support | no | no |
Connectivity Specs | Olympus E-PL2 | Olympus E-P1 |
External Flash | Hotshoe | Hotshoe |
USB Connector | USB 2.0 | USB 2.0 |
HDMI Port | mini HDMI | mini HDMI |
Wifi Support | no Wifi | no Wifi |
Body Specs | Olympus E-PL2 | Olympus E-P1 |
Battery Type | Olympus BLS-5 | Olympus BLS-1 |
Battery Life (CIPA) | 280 shots per charge | 300 shots per charge |
Body Dimensions |
114 x 72 x 42 mm (4.5 x 2.8 x 1.7 in) |
121 x 70 x 36 mm (4.8 x 2.8 x 1.4 in) |
Camera Weight | 362 g (12.8 oz) | 355 g (12.5 oz) |
Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.