Olympus E-PL3 vs E-PL2

The Olympus PEN E-PL3 and the Olympus PEN E-PL2 are two digital cameras that were announced, respectively, in June 2011 and January 2011. Both the E-PL3 and the E-PL2 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-PL3		Olympus E-PL2
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
1080/60i Video		720/30p Video
ISO 200-12,800		ISO 200-6,400
Viewfinder optional		Viewfinder optional
3.0" LCD – 460k dots		3.0" LCD – 460k dots
Tilting screen (no touchscreen)		Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)
5.5 shutter flaps per second		3 shutter flaps per second
In-body stabilization		In-body stabilization
300 shots per battery charge		280 shots per battery charge
110 x 64 x 37 mm, 313 g		114 x 72 x 42 mm, 362 g

Check E-PL3 offers at
ebay.com
Check E-PL2 offers at
ebay.com

Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Olympus PEN E-PL3 and the Olympus PEN E-PL2? 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-PL3 and the Olympus E-PL2 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.

Both cameras are available in four different colors (black, silver, red, white).

If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Olympus E-PL2 is notably larger (17 percent) than the Olympus E-PL3. Moreover, the E-PL2 is markedly heavier (16 percent) than the E-PL3. In this context, it is worth noting that neither the E-PL3 nor the E-PL2 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 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-PL3	110 mm	64 mm	37 mm	313 g	300	n	Jun 2011	599	ebay.com
2.		Olympus E-PL2	114 mm	72 mm	42 mm	362 g	280	n	Jan 2011	599	ebay.com
3.		Olympus E-P2	121 mm	70 mm	36 mm	355 g	300	n	Nov 2009	799	ebay.com
4.		Olympus E-P3	122 mm	69 mm	34 mm	369 g	330	n	Jun 2011	799	ebay.com
5.		Olympus E-PL1	115 mm	72 mm	42 mm	334 g	290	n	Feb 2010	599	ebay.com
6.		Olympus E-PL5	111 mm	64 mm	38 mm	325 g	360	n	Sep 2012	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-PM2	110 mm	64 mm	34 mm	269 g	360	n	Sep 2012	499	ebay.com
9.		Panasonic G10	124 mm	84 mm	74 mm	388 g	380	n	Mar 2010	499	ebay.com
10.		Panasonic GF2	113 mm	68 mm	33 mm	310 g	300	n	Nov 2010	549	ebay.com
11.		Panasonic GF3	108 mm	67 mm	32 mm	264 g	300	n	Jun 2011	549	ebay.com
12.		Panasonic GF5	108 mm	67 mm	37 mm	267 g	360	n	Apr 2012	499	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 obviously take relative prices into account. 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 two cameras under review were launched at the same price and fall into the same market segment. 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. 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 associated with larger, more expensive camera bodies 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.

In terms of chip-set technology, the E-PL3 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-PL3 and the E-PL2 have the same pixel density, as well as the same pixel size. It should, however, be noted that the E-PL3 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-PL3 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 200 to ISO 12800. The corresponding ISO settings for the Olympus PEN E-PL2 are ISO 200 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 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-PL3	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	20.9	10.3	499	52
2.		Olympus E-PL2	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.4	10.2	573	55
3.		Olympus E-P2	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.5	10.4	505	56
4.		Olympus E-P3	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	20.8	10.1	536	51
5.		Olympus E-PL1	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.5	10.1	487	54
6.		Olympus E-PL5	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	22.8	12.3	889	72
7.		Olympus E-PM1	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	21.0	10.3	499	52
8.		Olympus E-PM2	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	22.7	12.2	932	72
9.		Panasonic G10	Four Thirds	12.0	4000	3000	720/30p	21.2	10.1	411	52
10.		Panasonic GF2	Four Thirds	12.0	4000	3000	1080/60i	21.2	10.3	506	54
11.		Panasonic GF3	Four Thirds	12.0	4000	3000	1080/60i	20.6	10.1	459	50
12.		Panasonic GF5	Four Thirds	12.0	4000	3000	1080/60i	20.5	10.0	573	50

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 E-PL3 provides a higher video resolution than the E-PL2. It can shoot video footage at 1080/60i, while the E-PL2 is limited to 720/30p.

Feature comparison

Beyond body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. The E-PL3 and the E-PL2 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-PL3 and the VF-2 for the E-PL2 – are available as accessories. The following table reports on some other key feature differences and similarities of the Olympus E-PL3, the Olympus E-PL2, 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-PL3	optional	n	3.0 / 460	tilting	n	1/4000s	5.5/s	n	Y
2.		Olympus E-PL2	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
3.		Olympus E-P2	optional	n	3.0 / 230	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	n	Y
4.		Olympus E-P3	optional	n	3.0 / 614	fixed	Y	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
5.		Olympus E-PL1	optional	n	2.7 / 230	fixed	n	1/2000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
6.		Olympus E-PL5	optional	n	3.0 / 460	tilting	Y	1/4000s	8.0/s	n	Y
7.		Olympus E-PM1	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/4000s	5.5/s	n	Y
8.		Olympus E-PM2	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	Y	1/4000s	8.0/s	n	Y
9.		Panasonic G10	202	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/4000s	2.6/s	Y	n
10.		Panasonic GF2	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	Y	1/4000s	2.6/s	Y	n
11.		Panasonic GF3	none	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	Y	1/4000s	3.2/s	Y	n
12.		Panasonic GF5	none	n	3.0 / 920	fixed	Y	1/4000s	4.0/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-PL3 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.

The E-PL3 writes its imaging data to SDXC cards, while the E-PL2 uses 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-PL3 and Olympus PEN E-PL2 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-PL3	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
2.		Olympus E-PL2	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
3.		Olympus E-P2	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
4.		Olympus E-P3	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
5.		Olympus E-PL1	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
6.		Olympus E-PL5	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
7.		Olympus E-PM1	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
8.		Olympus E-PM2	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
9.		Panasonic G10	Y	mono / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
10.		Panasonic GF2	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
11.		Panasonic GF3	-	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
12.		Panasonic GF5	-	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-

Both the E-PL3 and the E-PL2 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The E-PL2 was replaced by the Olympus E-PL3, while the E-PL3 was followed by the Olympus E-PL5. Further information on the features and operation of the E-PL3 and E-PL2 can be found, respectively, in the Olympus E-PL3 Manual (free pdf) or the online Olympus E-PL2 Manual.

Review summary

So what conclusions can be drawn? Which of the two cameras – the Olympus E-PL3 or the Olympus E-PL2 – 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-PL3:

• 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 flexible LCD: Has a tilting screen for odd-angle shots in landscape orientation.
• More selfie-friendly: Has an articulated screen that can be turned to be front-facing.
• Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (5.5 vs 3 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
• More compact: Is smaller (110x64mm vs 114x72mm) and thus needs less room in the bag.
• Less heavy: Is lighter (by 49g or 14 percent) and hence easier to carry around.
• More modern: Is somewhat more recent (announced 5 months after the E-PL2).

Reasons to prefer the Olympus PEN E-PL2:

• Easier fill-in: Has a small integrated flash to brighten shadows of backlit subjects.
• More heavily discounted: Has been on the market for longer (launched in January 2011).

If the number of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the E-PL3 is the clear winner of the match-up (8 : 2 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-PL3 and the Olympus E-PL2 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 says little about, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance of the E-PL3 and the E-PL2 in practical situations. User reviews, such as those found at amazon, can sometimes inform about these issues, but such feedback is often incomplete, inconsistent, and biased.

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-PL3	3/5	+ +	..	72/100	4.5/5	4/5	Jun 2011	599	ebay.com
2.		Olympus E-PL2	3/5	83/100	..	71/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jan 2011	599	ebay.com
3.		Olympus E-P2	3/5	+	..	69/100	4/5	4.5/5	Nov 2009	799	ebay.com
4.		Olympus E-P3	..	83/100	..	74/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2011	799	ebay.com
5.		Olympus E-PL1	..	86/100	..	69/100	4/5	4.5/5	Feb 2010	599	ebay.com
6.		Olympus E-PL5	3/5	+ +	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2012	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-PM2	3/5	..	..	77/100	5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2012	499	ebay.com
9.		Panasonic G10	3/5	..	..	70/100	4/5	4/5	Mar 2010	499	ebay.com
10.		Panasonic GF2	3/5	82/100	..	70/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Nov 2010	549	ebay.com
11.		Panasonic GF3	3/5	82/100	..	71/100	4.5/5	4/5	Jun 2011	549	ebay.com
12.		Panasonic GF5	3/5	..	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Apr 2012	499	ebay.com
Note: (+ +) 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. 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. It should also be noted that some of the review sites have over time altered the way they render their verdicts.

Check E-PL3 offers at
ebay.com
Check E-PL2 offers at
ebay.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 use the search menu below. There is also a set of direct links to comparison reviews that other users of the CAM-parator app explored.

~

Check E-PL3 offers at
ebay.com
Check E-PL2 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.