Olympus E-PL3 vs Ricoh GR

The Olympus PEN E-PL3 and the Ricoh GR are two digital cameras that were officially introduced, respectively, in June 2011 and April 2013. The E-PL3 is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera, while the GR is a fixed lens compact. The cameras are based on a Four Thirds (E-PL3) and an APS-C (GR) sensor. The Olympus has a resolution of 12.2 megapixels, whereas the Ricoh provides 16.1 MP.

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

Headline Specifications

Olympus E-PL3		Ricoh GR
Mirrorless system camera		Fixed lens compact camera
Micro Four Thirds lenses		28mm f/2.8
12.2 MP – Four Thirds sensor		16.1 MP – APS-C sensor
1080/60i Video		1080/30p Video
ISO 200-12,800		ISO 100-25,600
Viewfinder optional		Viewfinder optional
3.0" LCD – 460k dots		3.0" LCD – 1230k dots
Tilting screen (no touchscreen)		Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)
5.5 shutter flaps per second		4 shutter flaps per second
In-body stabilization		no shake reduction
300 shots per battery charge		290 shots per battery charge
110 x 64 x 37 mm, 313 g		117 x 61 x 35 mm, 245 g

Check E-PL3 offers at
ebay.com
Check GR 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 Ricoh GR? 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 Ricoh GR are illustrated 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 size dimensions are rounded to the nearest millimeter.

The E-PL3 can be obtained in four different colors (black, silver, red, white), while the GR is only available in black.

If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Ricoh GR is somewhat larger (1 percent) than the Olympus E-PL3. In this context, it is worth noting that neither the E-PL3 nor the GR are weather-sealed.

The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete and possibly misleading, as the GR has a lens built in, whereas the E-PL3 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-PL3 and their specifications in the Micro Four Thirds Lens Catalog.

Concerning battery life, the E-PL3 gets 300 shots out of its Olympus BLS-5 battery, while the GR can take 290 images on a single charge of its Ricoh DB-65 power pack. The power pack in the GR 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 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.		Ricoh GR	117 mm	61 mm	35 mm	245 g	290	n	Apr 2013	799	ebay.com
3.		Nikon Coolpix A	111 mm	64 mm	40 mm	299 g	230	n	Mar 2013	1,099	ebay.com
4.		Olympus E-P2	121 mm	70 mm	36 mm	355 g	300	n	Nov 2009	799	ebay.com
5.		Olympus E-P3	122 mm	69 mm	34 mm	369 g	330	n	Jun 2011	799	ebay.com
6.		Olympus E-PL1	115 mm	72 mm	42 mm	334 g	290	n	Feb 2010	599	ebay.com
7.		Olympus E-PL2	114 mm	72 mm	42 mm	362 g	280	n	Jan 2011	599	ebay.com
8.		Olympus E-PL5	111 mm	64 mm	38 mm	325 g	360	n	Sep 2012	599	ebay.com
9.		Olympus E-PM1	110 mm	64 mm	34 mm	265 g	330	n	Jun 2011	499	ebay.com
10.		Olympus E-PM2	110 mm	64 mm	34 mm	269 g	360	n	Sep 2012	499	ebay.com
11.		Panasonic GF2	113 mm	68 mm	33 mm	310 g	300	n	Nov 2010	549	ebay.com
12.		Panasonic GF3	108 mm	67 mm	32 mm	264 g	300	n	Jun 2011	549	ebay.com
13.		Panasonic GF5	108 mm	67 mm	37 mm	267 g	360	n	Apr 2012	499	ebay.com
14.		Panasonic GM1	99 mm	55 mm	30 mm	204 g	230	n	Oct 2013	749	ebay.com
15.		Ricoh GR II	117 mm	63 mm	35 mm	251 g	320	n	Jun 2015	699	ebay.com
16.		Sony NEX-5R	111 mm	59 mm	39 mm	276 g	330	n	Aug 2012	749	ebay.com
17.		Sony NEX-5T	111 mm	59 mm	39 mm	276 g	330	n	Aug 2013	699	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 listed launch prices provide an indication of the market segment that the manufacturer of the cameras have been targeting. 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 imaging sensor is at the core of digital cameras and its size is one of the main determining factors 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. 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.

Of the two cameras under consideration, the Olympus E-PL3 features a Four Thirds sensor and the Ricoh GR an APS-C sensor. The sensor area in the GR is 64 percent bigger. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 2.0 and 1.5. The sensor in the E-PL3 has a native 4:3 aspect ratio, while the one in the GR offers a 3:2 aspect.

With 16.1MP, the GR offers a higher resolution than the E-PL3 (12.2MP), but the GR nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 4.79μm versus 4.29μm for the E-PL3) due to its larger sensor. Moreover, the GR is a somewhat more recent model (by 1 year and 9 months) than the E-PL3, and its sensor might have benefitted from technological advances during this time that further enhance the light gathering capacity of its pixel-units. Coming back to sensor resolution, it should be mentioned that the GR has no anti-alias filter installed, so that it can capture all the detail its sensor resolves.

The resolution advantage of the Ricoh GR implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the GR for good quality output (200 dots per inch) amounts to 24.6 x 16.3 inches or 62.6 x 41.5 cm, for very good quality (250 dpi) 19.7 x 13.1 inches or 50.1 x 33.2 cm, and for excellent quality (300 dpi) 16.4 x 10.9 inches or 41.7 x 27.6 cm. The corresponding values for the Olympus E-PL3 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-PL3 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 200 to ISO 12800. The corresponding ISO settings for the Ricoh GR are ISO 100 to ISO 25600 (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.

Since 2007, DXO Mark has published sensor performance measurements that have been derived using a consistent methodology. 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. Of the two cameras under consideration, the GR offers substantially better image quality than the E-PL3 (overall score 26 points higher). The advantage is based on 2.7 bits higher color depth, 3.2 EV in additional dynamic range, and 1 stops in additional low light sensitivity. 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-PL3	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	20.9	10.3	499	52
2.		Ricoh GR	APS-C	16.1	4928	3264	1080/30p	23.6	13.5	972	78
3.		Nikon Coolpix A	APS-C	16.1	4928	3264	1080/30p	23.4	13.8	1164	80
4.		Olympus E-P2	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.5	10.4	505	56
5.		Olympus E-P3	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	20.8	10.1	536	51
6.		Olympus E-PL1	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.5	10.1	487	54
7.		Olympus E-PL2	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.4	10.2	573	55
8.		Olympus E-PL5	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	22.8	12.3	889	72
9.		Olympus E-PM1	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	21.0	10.3	499	52
10.		Olympus E-PM2	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	22.7	12.2	932	72
11.		Panasonic GF2	Four Thirds	12.0	4000	3000	1080/60i	21.2	10.3	506	54
12.		Panasonic GF3	Four Thirds	12.0	4000	3000	1080/60i	20.6	10.1	459	50
13.		Panasonic GF5	Four Thirds	12.0	4000	3000	1080/60i	20.5	10.0	573	50
14.		Panasonic GM1	Four Thirds	15.8	4592	3448	1080/60i	22.3	11.7	660	66
15.		Ricoh GR II	APS-C	16.1	4928	3264	1080/30p	23.6	13.7	1078	80
16.		Sony NEX-5R	APS-C	16.0	4912	3264	1080/60i	23.7	13.1	910	78
17.		Sony NEX-5T	APS-C	16.0	4912	3264	1080/60p	23.6	13.0	1015	78

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 frame rate than the GR. It can shoot video footage at 1080/60i, while the Ricoh is limited to 1080/30p.

Feature comparison

Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a variety of features. The E-PL3 and the GR 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 GV-1 for the GR – are available as accessories. The adjacent table lists some of the other core features of the Olympus E-PL3 and Ricoh GR 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-PL3	optional	n	3.0 / 460	tilting	n	1/4000s	5.5/s	n	Y
2.		Ricoh GR	optional	n	3.0 / 1230	fixed	n	1/4000s	4.0/s	Y	n
3.		Nikon Coolpix A	optional	n	3.0 / 921	fixed	n	1/2000s	4.0/s	Y	n
4.		Olympus E-P2	optional	n	3.0 / 230	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	n	Y
5.		Olympus E-P3	optional	n	3.0 / 614	fixed	Y	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
6.		Olympus E-PL1	optional	n	2.7 / 230	fixed	n	1/2000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
7.		Olympus E-PL2	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
8.		Olympus E-PL5	optional	n	3.0 / 460	tilting	Y	1/4000s	8.0/s	n	Y
9.		Olympus E-PM1	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/4000s	5.5/s	n	Y
10.		Olympus E-PM2	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	Y	1/4000s	8.0/s	n	Y
11.		Panasonic GF2	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	Y	1/4000s	2.6/s	Y	n
12.		Panasonic GF3	none	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	Y	1/4000s	3.2/s	Y	n
13.		Panasonic GF5	none	n	3.0 / 920	fixed	Y	1/4000s	4.0/s	Y	n
14.		Panasonic GM1	none	n	3.0 / 1036	fixed	Y	1/500s	5.0/s	Y	n
15.		Ricoh GR II	optional	n	3.0 / 1230	fixed	n	1/4000s	4.0/s	Y	n
16.		Sony NEX-5R	optional	n	3.0 / 920	tilting	Y	1/4000s	10.0/s	n	n
17.		Sony NEX-5T	optional	n	3.0 / 922	tilting	Y	1/4000s	10.0/s	n	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 GR has one, while the E-PL3 does not. While the built-in flash of the GR is not very powerful, it can at times be useful as a fill-in light.

The Ricoh GR 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.

Concerning the storage of imaging data, both the E-PL3 and the GR write their files to SDXC cards. The GR supports UHS-I cards (Ultra High Speed data transfer of up to 104 MB/s), while the E-PL3 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-PL3 and Ricoh GR 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.		Ricoh GR	Y	mono / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	-	-	-
3.		Nikon Coolpix A	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
4.		Olympus E-P2	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
5.		Olympus E-P3	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
6.		Olympus E-PL1	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
7.		Olympus E-PL2	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
8.		Olympus E-PL5	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
9.		Olympus E-PM1	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
10.		Olympus E-PM2	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
11.		Panasonic GF2	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
12.		Panasonic GF3	-	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
13.		Panasonic GF5	-	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
14.		Panasonic GM1	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
15.		Ricoh GR II	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
16.		Sony NEX-5R	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	Y	-	-
17.		Sony NEX-5T	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	Y	Y	-

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

Review summary

So what is the bottom line? Is the Olympus E-PL3 better than the Ricoh GR or vice versa? The listing below highlights the relative strengths of the two models.

Advantages of the Olympus PEN E-PL3:

• Better moiré control: Has an anti-alias filter to avoid artificial patterns to appear in images.
• Better video: Provides higher movie framerates (1080/60i versus 1080/30p).
• 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 4 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.
• More heavily discounted: Has been on the market for longer (launched in June 2011).

Arguments in favor of the Ricoh GR:

• More detail: Has more megapixels (16.1 vs 12.2MP), which boosts linear resolution by 17%.
• Maximized detail: Lacks an anti-alias filter to exploit the sensor's full resolution potential.
• Better image quality: Scores substantially higher (26 points) in the DXO overall evaluation.
• Richer colors: Generates noticeably more natural colors (2.7 bits more color depth).
• More dynamic range: Captures a broader range of light and dark details (3.2 EV of extra DR).
• Better low-light sensitivity: Can shoot in dim conditions (1 stops ISO advantage).
• More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1230k vs 460k dots).
• Easier time-lapse photography: Has an intervalometer built-in for low frequency shooting.
• Ready to shoot: Has an integrated lens, whereas the E-PL3 necessitates an extra lens.
• Less heavy: Has a lower weight even though it has a lens built in (unlike the E-PL3).
• Easier travel charging: Can be conveniently charged via its USB port.
• Easier fill-in: Has a small integrated flash to brighten shadows of backlit subjects.
• Faster buffer clearing: Has an SD card interface that supports the UHS-I standard.
• More modern: Was introduced somewhat (1 year and 9 months) more recently.

If the count of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a measure, the GR is the clear winner of the contest (14 : 8 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-PL3 and the Ricoh GR place the cameras among the top in their class? Find out in the latest Best Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera and Best Prime Lens Compact 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 partial and cannot reveal, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance when actually working with the E-PL3 or the GR. 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 following table reports the overall ratings of the cameras as published by some of the major 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-PL3	3/5	+ +	..	72/100	4.5/5	4/5	Jun 2011	599	ebay.com
2.		Ricoh GR	5/5	..	..	79/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Apr 2013	799	ebay.com
3.		Nikon Coolpix A	4/5	+	..	75/100	4/5	4/5	Mar 2013	1,099	ebay.com
4.		Olympus E-P2	3/5	+	..	69/100	4/5	4.5/5	Nov 2009	799	ebay.com
5.		Olympus E-P3	..	83/100	..	74/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2011	799	ebay.com
6.		Olympus E-PL1	..	86/100	..	69/100	4/5	4.5/5	Feb 2010	599	ebay.com
7.		Olympus E-PL2	3/5	83/100	..	71/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jan 2011	599	ebay.com
8.		Olympus E-PL5	3/5	+ +	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2012	599	ebay.com
9.		Olympus E-PM1	..	86/100	..	71/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2011	499	ebay.com
10.		Olympus E-PM2	3/5	..	..	77/100	5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2012	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 GF3	3/5	82/100	..	71/100	4.5/5	4/5	Jun 2011	549	ebay.com
13.		Panasonic GF5	3/5	..	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Apr 2012	499	ebay.com
14.		Panasonic GM1	3/5	+	..	78/100	5/5	4.5/5	Oct 2013	749	ebay.com
15.		Ricoh GR II	..	..	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2015	699	ebay.com
16.		Sony NEX-5R	..	..	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Aug 2012	749	ebay.com
17.		Sony NEX-5T	..	..	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Aug 2013	699	ebay.com
Note: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available.

The review scores listed above should be treated with care, though. The assessments were made in relation to similar cameras of the same technological generation. 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 GR 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. Alternatively, you can follow any of the listed hyperlinks for comparisons that others found interesting.

~

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