Olympus E-PL2 vs E-P3

The Olympus PEN E-PL2 and the Olympus PEN E-P3 are two digital cameras that were officially introduced, respectively, in January 2011 and June 2011. Both the E-PL2 and the E-P3 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.

Headline Specifications

Olympus E-PL2		Olympus E-P3
Mirrorless system camera		Mirrorless system camera
Micro Four Thirds lenses		Micro Four Thirds lenses
12.2 MP – Four Thirds sensor		12.2 MP – Four Thirds sensor
720/30p Video		1080/60i Video
ISO 200-6,400		ISO 200-12,800
Viewfinder optional		Viewfinder optional
3.0" LCD – 460k dots		3.0" LCD – 614k dots
Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)		Fixed touchscreen
3 shutter flaps per second		3 shutter flaps per second
In-body stabilization		In-body stabilization
280 shots per battery charge		330 shots per battery charge
114 x 72 x 42 mm, 362 g		122 x 69 x 34 mm, 369 g

Check E-PL2 offers at
ebay.com
Check E-P3 offers at
ebay.com

Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Olympus PEN E-PL2 and the Olympus PEN E-P3? 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-PL2 and the Olympus E-P3. 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-PL2 can be obtained in four different colors (black, silver, red, white), while the E-P3 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-P3 is somewhat larger (3 percent) than the Olympus E-PL2. Moreover, the E-P3 is slightly heavier (2 percent) than the E-PL2. In this context, it is worth noting that neither the E-PL2 nor the E-P3 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.

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-PL2	114 mm	72 mm	42 mm	362 g	280	n	Jan 2011	599	ebay.com
2.		Olympus E-P3	122 mm	69 mm	34 mm	369 g	330	n	Jun 2011	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-PL3	110 mm	64 mm	37 mm	313 g	300	n	Jun 2011	599	ebay.com
6.		Olympus E-PM1	110 mm	64 mm	34 mm	265 g	330	n	Jun 2011	499	ebay.com
7.		Olympus E-PL1	115 mm	72 mm	42 mm	334 g	290	n	Feb 2010	599	ebay.com
8.		Olympus E-P1	121 mm	70 mm	36 mm	355 g	300	n	Jun 2009	799	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
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 listed launch prices provide an indication of the market segment that the manufacturer of the cameras have been targeting. The E-PL2 was launched at a somewhat lower price (by 25 percent) than the E-P3, which makes it more attractive for photographers on a tight budget. Usually, retail prices stay at first close to the launch price, but after several months, discounts become available. 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 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.

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.

Technology-wise, the E-P3 uses a more advanced image processing engine (TruePic VI) than the E-PL2 (Truepic V), with benefits for noise reduction, color accuracy, and processing speed.

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-P3 have the same pixel density, as well as the same pixel size. It should, however, be noted that the E-P3 is a somewhat more recent model (by 5 months) than the E-PL2, 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-P3 are ISO 200 to ISO 12800 (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 determines an overall sensor rating, as well as sub-scores for low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports"), dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), and color depth ("DXO Portrait"). Of the two cameras under review, the E-PL2 has a notably higher overall DXO score than the E-P3 (overall score 4 points higher), which gives it an advantage in terms of imaging quality. This advantage is based on 0.6 bits higher color depth, 0.1 EV in additional dynamic range, and 0.1 stops in additional low light sensitivity. The table below summarizes the physical sensor characteristics and sensor quality findings and compares them across a set of similar cameras.

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-PL2	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.4	10.2	573	55
2.		Olympus E-P3	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	20.8	10.1	536	51
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-PL3	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	20.9	10.3	499	52
6.		Olympus E-PM1	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	21.0	10.3	499	52
7.		Olympus E-PL1	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.5	10.1	487	54
8.		Olympus E-P1	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.4	10.4	536	55
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

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 E-P3 provides a better video resolution than the E-PL2. It can shoot movie footage at 1080/60i, while the E-PL2 is limited to 720/30p.

Feature comparison

Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. The E-PL2 and the E-P3 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-2 for the E-PL2 and the VF-3 for the E-P3 – are available as accessories. The adjacent table lists some of the other core features of the Olympus E-PL2 and Olympus E-P3 along with similar information for a selection of comparators.

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-PL2	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
2.		Olympus E-P3	optional	n	3.0 / 614	fixed	Y	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	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-PL3	optional	n	3.0 / 460	tilting	n	1/4000s	5.5/s	n	Y
6.		Olympus E-PM1	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/4000s	5.5/s	n	Y
7.		Olympus E-PL1	optional	n	2.7 / 230	fixed	n	1/2000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
8.		Olympus E-P1	none	n	3.0 / 230	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	n	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
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 E-PL2 has a conventional panel. Touch control can be particularly helpful, for example, for setting the focus point.

The E-PL2 writes its imaging data to SDHC cards, while the E-P3 uses SDXC cards. The E-P3 supports UHS-I cards (Ultra High Speed data transfer of up to 104 MB/s), while the E-PL2 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-PL2 and Olympus PEN E-P3 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-PL2	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
2.		Olympus E-P3	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-PL3	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
6.		Olympus E-PM1	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
7.		Olympus E-PL1	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
8.		Olympus E-P1	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	-	-	-

Both the E-PL2 and the E-P3 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The E-PL2 was replaced by the Olympus E-PL3, while the E-P3 was followed by the Olympus E-P5. Further information on the features and operation of the E-PL2 and E-P3 can be found, respectively, in the Olympus E-PL2 Manual (free pdf) or the online Olympus E-P3 Manual.

Review summary

So how do things add up? Is there a clear favorite between the Olympus E-PL2 and the Olympus E-P3? Which camera is better? A synthesis of the relative strong points of each of the models is listed below.

Advantages of the Olympus PEN E-PL2:

• Better image quality: Scores markedly higher (4 points) in the DXO overall assessment.
• More affordable: Was introduced into a lower priced segment (25 percent cheaper at launch).
• More heavily discounted: Has been on the market for longer (launched in January 2011).

Arguments in favor of the Olympus PEN E-P3:

• Better jpgs: Has a more modern image processing engine (TruePic VI vs Truepic V).
• Better video: Provides higher definition movie capture (1080/60i vs 720/30p).
• More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (614k vs 460k dots).
• Fewer buttons to press: Has a touchscreen to facilitate handling and shooting adjustments.
• Longer lasting: Gets more shots (330 versus 280) out of a single battery charge.
• Faster buffer clearing: Has an SD card interface that supports the UHS-I standard.
• More modern: Was introduced somewhat (5 months) more recently.

If the count of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a measure, the E-P3 is the clear winner of the contest (7 : 3 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-PL2 and the Olympus E-P3 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 technical specifications can provide a useful overview of the capabilities of different cameras, it remains partial and cannot reveal, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance when actually working with the E-PL2 or the E-P3. 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.

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-PL2	3/5	83/100	..	71/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jan 2011	599	ebay.com
2.		Olympus E-P3	..	83/100	..	74/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2011	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-PL3	3/5	+ +	..	72/100	4.5/5	4/5	Jun 2011	599	ebay.com
6.		Olympus E-PM1	..	86/100	..	71/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2011	499	ebay.com
7.		Olympus E-PL1	..	86/100	..	69/100	4/5	4.5/5	Feb 2010	599	ebay.com
8.		Olympus E-P1	..	+	..	66/100	4/5	4.5/5	Jun 2009	799	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
Note: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available.

The review scores listed above should be treated with care, 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-PL2 offers at
ebay.com
Check E-P3 offers at
ebay.com

Other camera comparisons

Did this review help to inform your camera decision process? In case you would like to check on the differences and similarities of other camera models, just make your choice using the following search menu. There is also a set of direct links to comparison reviews that other users of the CAM-parator app explored.

~

Check E-PL2 offers at
ebay.com
Check E-P3 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.