Olympus E-PL2 vs Panasonic GF3

The Olympus PEN E-PL2 and the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF3 are two digital cameras that were revealed to the public, respectively, in January 2011 and June 2011. Both the E-PL2 and the GF3 are mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras that are equipped with a Four Thirds sensor. The Olympus has a resolution of 12.2 megapixels, whereas the Panasonic provides 12 MP.

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

Headline Specifications

Olympus E-PL2		Panasonic GF3
Mirrorless system camera		Mirrorless system camera
Micro Four Thirds lenses		Micro Four Thirds lenses
12.2 MP – Four Thirds sensor		12 MP – Four Thirds sensor
720/30p Video		1080/60i Video
ISO 200-6,400		ISO 160-6,400
Viewfinder optional		No viewfinder, LCD framing
3.0" LCD – 460k dots		3.0" LCD – 460k dots
Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)		Fixed touchscreen
3 shutter flaps per second		3.2 shutter flaps per second
In-body stabilization		Lens stabilization only
280 shots per battery charge		300 shots per battery charge
114 x 72 x 42 mm, 362 g		108 x 67 x 32 mm, 264 g

Check E-PL2 offers at
ebay.com
Check GF3 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 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF3? 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-PL2 and the Panasonic GF3 is provided in the side-by-side display below. The two cameras are presented according to their relative size. Three successive views from the front, the top, and the rear are shown. All width, height and depth measures are rounded to the nearest millimeter.

The E-PL2 can be obtained in four different colors (black, silver, red, white), while the GF3 is available in five color-versions (black, brown, pink, red, white).

If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Panasonic GF3 is notably smaller (12 percent) than the Olympus E-PL2. Moreover, the GF3 is markedly lighter (27 percent) than the E-PL2. In this context, it is worth noting that neither the E-PL2 nor the GF3 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 BLS-5 battery, while the GF3 can take 300 images on a single charge of its DMW-BLE9 power pack.

The following table provides a synthesis of the main physical specifications of the two cameras and other similar ones. If you want to switch the focus of the display and review another camera pair, you can move across to the CAM-parator tool and choose from the broad selection of possible camera comparisons 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.		Panasonic GF3	108 mm	67 mm	32 mm	264 g	300	n	Jun 2011	549	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-P1	121 mm	70 mm	36 mm	355 g	300	n	Jun 2009	799	ebay.com
10.		Olympus E-P2	121 mm	70 mm	36 mm	355 g	300	n	Nov 2009	799	ebay.com
11.		Panasonic GF5	108 mm	67 mm	37 mm	267 g	360	n	Apr 2012	499	ebay.com
12.		Panasonic G3	115 mm	84 mm	47 mm	336 g	270	n	May 2011	599	ebay.com
13.		Panasonic G10	124 mm	84 mm	74 mm	388 g	380	n	Mar 2010	499	ebay.com
14.		Panasonic G2	124 mm	84 mm	74 mm	428 g	360	n	Mar 2010	599	ebay.com
15.		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 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 GF3 was somewhat cheaper (by 8 percent) than the E-PL2 at launch, but both cameras fall into the same price category. 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.

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. 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.

While the two cameras under review share the same sensor size, the E-PL2 offers a slightly higher resolution of 12.2 megapixels, compared with 12 MP of the GF3. This megapixels advantage translates into a 0.8 percent gain in linear resolution. On the other hand, these sensor specs imply that the E-PL2 has a higher pixel density and a smaller size of the individual pixel (with a pixel pitch of 4.29μm versus 4.33μm for the GF3). Moreover, it should be noted that the GF3 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 that further enhance the light gathering capacity of individual pixels.

The Olympus PEN E-PL2 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 200 to ISO 6400. The corresponding ISO settings for the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF3 are ISO 160 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 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"). Of the two cameras under review, the E-PL2 has a notably higher overall DXO score than the GF3 (overall score 5 points higher), which gives it an advantage in terms of imaging quality. This advantage is based on 0.8 bits higher color depth, 0.1 EV in additional dynamic range, and 0.3 stops in additional low light sensitivity. The adjacent table reports on the physical sensor characteristics and the outcomes of the DXO sensor quality tests for a sample of comparator-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.		Panasonic GF3	Four Thirds	12.0	4000	3000	1080/60i	20.6	10.1	459	50
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-P1	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.4	10.4	536	55
10.		Olympus E-P2	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.5	10.4	505	56
11.		Panasonic GF5	Four Thirds	12.0	4000	3000	1080/60i	20.5	10.0	573	50
12.		Panasonic G3	Four Thirds	15.8	4592	3448	1080/60i	21.0	10.6	667	56
13.		Panasonic G10	Four Thirds	12.0	4000	3000	720/30p	21.2	10.1	411	52
14.		Panasonic G2	Four Thirds	12.0	4000	3000	720/30p	21.2	10.3	493	53
15.		Panasonic GF2	Four Thirds	12.0	4000	3000	1080/60i	21.2	10.3	506	54

Many modern cameras are not only capable of taking still images, but also of capturing video footage. Both cameras under consideration have a sensor with sufficiently fast read-out times for moving pictures, but the GF3 provides a better video resolution than the E-PL2. It can shoot movie footage at 1080/60i, while the Olympus is limited to 720/30p.

Feature comparison

Beyond body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. The E-PL2 and the GF3 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 table below summarizes some of the other core capabilities of the Olympus E-PL2 and Panasonic GF3 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-PL2	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
2.		Panasonic GF3	none	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	Y	1/4000s	3.2/s	Y	n
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-P1	none	n	3.0 / 230	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	n	Y
10.		Olympus E-P2	optional	n	3.0 / 230	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	n	Y
11.		Panasonic GF5	none	n	3.0 / 920	fixed	Y	1/4000s	4.0/s	Y	n
12.		Panasonic G3	1440	n	3.0 / 460	swivel	Y	1/4000s	4.0/s	Y	n
13.		Panasonic G10	202	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/4000s	2.6/s	Y	n
14.		Panasonic G2	1440	n	3.0 / 460	swivel	Y	1/4000s	2.6/s	Y	n
15.		Panasonic GF2	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	Y	1/4000s	2.6/s	Y	n
Notes: *) Information refers to the mechanical shutter, unless the camera only has an electronic one.

One feature that differentiates the E-PL2 and the GF3 is in-body image stabilization (IBIS). The E-PL2 reduces the risk of handshake-induced blur with all attached lenses, while the GF3 offers no blur reduction with lenses that themselves do not provide optical image stabilization.

The E-PL2 writes its imaging data to SDHC cards, while the GF3 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-PL2 and Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF3 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.		Panasonic GF3	-	stereo / mono	-	-	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-P1	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
10.		Olympus E-P2	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
11.		Panasonic GF5	-	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
12.		Panasonic G3	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
13.		Panasonic G10	Y	mono / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
14.		Panasonic G2	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
15.		Panasonic GF2	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-

It is notable that the E-PL2 has a hotshoe, while the GF3 does not. This socket makes it possible to easily attach optional accessories, such as an external flash gun.

Both the E-PL2 and the GF3 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The E-PL2 was replaced by the Olympus E-PL3, while the GF3 was followed by the Panasonic GF5. Further information on the features and operation of the E-PL2 and GF3 can be found, respectively, in the Olympus E-PL2 Manual (free pdf) or the online Panasonic GF3 Manual.

Review summary

So how do things add up? Is there a clear favorite between the Olympus E-PL2 and the Panasonic GF3? Which camera is better? The listing below highlights the relative strengths of the two models.

Reasons to prefer the Olympus PEN E-PL2:

• Better image quality: Scores markedly higher (5 points) in the DXO overall assessment.
• More framing options: Can be equipped with a hotshoe-mounted accessory-viewfinder.
• 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 on the market for longer (launched in January 2011).

Advantages of the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF3:

• Better video: Provides higher definition movie capture (1080/60i vs 720/30p).
• Fewer buttons to press: Has a touchscreen to facilitate handling and shooting adjustments.
• More compact: Is smaller (108x67mm vs 114x72mm) and will fit more readily into a bag.
• Less heavy: Has a lower weight (by 98g or 27 percent) and is thus easier to take along.
• More modern: Was introduced somewhat (5 months) more recently.

If the number of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the match-up finishes in a tie (5 points each). However, the relative importance of the various individual camera aspects will vary according to personal preferences and needs, so that you might like to apply corresponding weights to the particular features before making a decision 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-PL2 and the Panasonic GF3 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 GF3. 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 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-PL2	3/5	83/100	..	71/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jan 2011	599	ebay.com
2.		Panasonic GF3	3/5	82/100	..	71/100	4.5/5	4/5	Jun 2011	549	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-P1	..	+	..	66/100	4/5	4.5/5	Jun 2009	799	ebay.com
10.		Olympus E-P2	3/5	+	..	69/100	4/5	4.5/5	Nov 2009	799	ebay.com
11.		Panasonic GF5	3/5	..	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Apr 2012	499	ebay.com
12.		Panasonic G3	3/5	+ +	..	75/100	4.5/5	5/5	May 2011	599	ebay.com
13.		Panasonic G10	3/5	..	..	70/100	4/5	4/5	Mar 2010	499	ebay.com
14.		Panasonic G2	..	..	..	72/100	4/5	4.5/5	Mar 2010	599	ebay.com
15.		Panasonic GF2	3/5	82/100	..	70/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Nov 2010	549	ebay.com
Notes: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available.

The review scores listed above should be treated with care, though. The ratings were established in reference to similarly priced cameras that were available in the market at the time of the review. 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. Also, kindly note that some of the listed sites have over time developped their review approaches and their reporting style.

Check E-PL2 offers at
ebay.com
Check GF3 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 use the search menu below. Alternatively, you can follow any of the listed hyperlinks for comparisons that others found interesting.

~

Check E-PL2 offers at
ebay.com
Check GF3 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.