Olympus E-PL3 vs Ricoh GR III

The Olympus PEN E-PL3 and the Ricoh GR III are two digital cameras that were officially introduced, respectively, in June 2011 and February 2019. The E-PL3 is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera, while the GR III is a fixed lens compact. The cameras are based on a Four Thirds (E-PL3) and an APS-C (GR III) sensor. The Olympus has a resolution of 12.2 megapixels, whereas the Ricoh provides 24 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 III
Mirrorless system camera		Fixed lens compact camera
Micro Four Thirds lenses		28mm f/2.8
12.2 MP – Four Thirds sensor		24 MP – APS-C sensor
1080/60i Video		1080/60p Video
ISO 200-12,800		ISO 100-102,400
Viewfinder optional		Viewfinder optional
3.0" LCD – 460k dots		3.0" LCD – 1037k dots
Tilting screen (no touchscreen)		Fixed touchscreen
5.5 shutter flaps per second		4 shutter flaps per second
In-body stabilization		In-body stabilization
300 shots per battery charge		200 shots per battery charge
110 x 64 x 37 mm, 313 g		109 x 62 x 33 mm, 257 g

Check E-PL3 offers at
ebay.com
Check GR III price at
amazon.com

Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Olympus PEN E-PL3 and the Ricoh GR III? 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-PL3 and the Ricoh GR III. 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-PL3 can be obtained in four different colors (black, silver, red, white), while the GR III 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 III is somewhat smaller (4 percent) than the Olympus E-PL3. In this context, it is worth noting that neither the E-PL3 nor the GR III are weather-sealed.

The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete and possibly misleading, as the GR III 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 III can take 200 images on a single charge of its Ricoh DB-110 power pack. The power pack in the GR III 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 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-PL3	110 mm	64 mm	37 mm	313 g	300	n	Jun 2011	599	ebay.com
2.		Ricoh GR III	109 mm	62 mm	33 mm	257 g	200	n	Feb 2019	899	amazon.com
3.		Fujifilm XF10	113 mm	64 mm	41 mm	279 g	330	n	Jul 2018	499	ebay.com
4.		Olympus E-PL5	111 mm	64 mm	38 mm	325 g	360	n	Sep 2012	599	ebay.com
5.		Olympus E-PM2	110 mm	64 mm	34 mm	269 g	360	n	Sep 2012	499	ebay.com
6.		Olympus E-P3	122 mm	69 mm	34 mm	369 g	330	n	Jun 2011	799	ebay.com
7.		Olympus E-PL2	114 mm	72 mm	42 mm	362 g	280	n	Jan 2011	599	ebay.com
8.		Olympus E-PM1	110 mm	64 mm	34 mm	265 g	330	n	Jun 2011	499	ebay.com
9.		Olympus E-PL1	115 mm	72 mm	42 mm	334 g	290	n	Feb 2010	599	ebay.com
10.		Olympus E-P2	121 mm	70 mm	36 mm	355 g	300	n	Nov 2009	799	ebay.com
11.		Panasonic ZS200	111 mm	65 mm	45 mm	340 g	370	n	Feb 2018	799	amazon.com
12.		Panasonic GF5	108 mm	67 mm	37 mm	267 g	360	n	Apr 2012	499	ebay.com
13.		Panasonic GF3	108 mm	67 mm	32 mm	264 g	300	n	Jun 2011	549	ebay.com
14.		Panasonic GF2	113 mm	68 mm	33 mm	310 g	300	n	Nov 2010	549	ebay.com
15.		Ricoh GR IIIx	109 mm	62 mm	35 mm	262 g	200	n	Sep 2021	999	amazon.com
16.		Ricoh GR II	117 mm	63 mm	35 mm	251 g	320	n	Jun 2015	699	ebay.com
17.		Ricoh GR	117 mm	61 mm	35 mm	245 g	290	n	Apr 2013	799	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. 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 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.

Of the two cameras under consideration, the Olympus E-PL3 features a Four Thirds sensor and the Ricoh GR III an APS-C sensor. The sensor area in the GR III is 63 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 III offers a 3:2 aspect.

With 24MP, the GR III offers a higher resolution than the E-PL3 (12.2MP), but the GR III has smaller individual pixels (pixel pitch of 3.91μm versus 4.29μm for the E-PL3). Yet, the GR III is a much more recent model (by 7 years and 7 months) than the E-PL3, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that enhance the light gathering capacity of its pixel-units. Coming back to sensor resolution, it should be mentioned that the GR III has no anti-alias filter installed, so that it can capture all the detail its sensor resolves.

The resolution advantage of the Ricoh GR III implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the GR III for good quality output (200 dots per inch) amounts to 30 x 20 inches or 76.2 x 50.8 cm, for very good quality (250 dpi) 24 x 16 inches or 61 x 40.6 cm, and for excellent quality (300 dpi) 20 x 13.3 inches or 50.8 x 33.9 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 GR III has on-sensor phase detect pixels, which results in fast and reliable autofocus acquisition even during live view operation.

The Olympus PEN E-PL3 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 200 to ISO 12800. The corresponding ISO settings for the Ricoh GR III are ISO 100 to ISO 102400 (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"). 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-PL3	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	20.9	10.3	499	52
2.		Ricoh GR III	APS-C	24.0	6000	4000	1080/60p	24.1	13.5	1897	83
3.		Fujifilm XF10	APS-C	24.0	6000	4000	4K/15p	24.0	13.4	1844	83
4.		Olympus E-PL5	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	22.8	12.3	889	72
5.		Olympus E-PM2	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	22.7	12.2	932	72
6.		Olympus E-P3	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	20.8	10.1	536	51
7.		Olympus E-PL2	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.4	10.2	573	55
8.		Olympus E-PM1	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	21.0	10.3	499	52
9.		Olympus E-PL1	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.5	10.1	487	54
10.		Olympus E-P2	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.5	10.4	505	56
11.		Panasonic ZS200	1-inch	20.0	5472	3648	4K/30p	22.0	12.2	449	64
12.		Panasonic GF5	Four Thirds	12.0	4000	3000	1080/60i	20.5	10.0	573	50
13.		Panasonic GF3	Four Thirds	12.0	4000	3000	1080/60i	20.6	10.1	459	50
14.		Panasonic GF2	Four Thirds	12.0	4000	3000	1080/60i	21.2	10.3	506	54
15.		Ricoh GR IIIx	APS-C	24.0	6000	4000	1080/60p	24.2	13.8	2146	85
16.		Ricoh GR II	APS-C	16.1	4928	3264	1080/30p	23.6	13.7	1078	80
17.		Ricoh GR	APS-C	16.1	4928	3264	1080/30p	23.6	13.5	972	78
Note: DXO values in italics represent estimates based on sensor size and age.

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 GR III provides a faster frame rate than the E-PL3. It can shoot movie footage at 1080/60p, while the Olympus is limited to 1080/60i.

Feature comparison

Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. The E-PL3 and the GR III 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 III – are available as accessories. The adjacent table lists some of the other core features of the Olympus E-PL3 and Ricoh GR III 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 III	optional	n	3.0 / 1037	fixed	Y	1/4000s	4.0/s	n	Y
3.		Fujifilm XF10	none	n	3.0 / 1040	fixed	Y	1/4000s	6.0/s	Y	n
4.		Olympus E-PL5	optional	n	3.0 / 460	tilting	Y	1/4000s	8.0/s	n	Y
5.		Olympus E-PM2	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	Y	1/4000s	8.0/s	n	Y
6.		Olympus E-P3	optional	n	3.0 / 614	fixed	Y	1/4000s	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-PM1	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/4000s	5.5/s	n	Y
9.		Olympus E-PL1	optional	n	2.7 / 230	fixed	n	1/2000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
10.		Olympus E-P2	optional	n	3.0 / 230	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	n	Y
11.		Panasonic ZS200	2330	n	3.0 / 1240	fixed	Y	1/2000s	10.0/s	Y	Y
12.		Panasonic GF5	none	n	3.0 / 920	fixed	Y	1/4000s	4.0/s	Y	n
13.		Panasonic GF3	none	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	Y	1/4000s	3.2/s	Y	n
14.		Panasonic GF2	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	Y	1/4000s	2.6/s	Y	n
15.		Ricoh GR IIIx	optional	n	3.0 / 1037	fixed	Y	1/4000s	4.0/s	n	Y
16.		Ricoh GR II	optional	n	3.0 / 1230	fixed	n	1/4000s	4.0/s	Y	n
17.		Ricoh GR	optional	n	3.0 / 1230	fixed	n	1/4000s	4.0/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 GR III has a touchscreen, while the E-PL3 has a conventional panel. Touch control can be particularly helpful, for example, for setting the focus point.

The Ricoh GR III 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 III write their files to SDXC cards. The GR III 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 III 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 III	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	-	3.0	Y	-	Y
3.		Fujifilm XF10	-	stereo / mono	Y	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	Y
4.		Olympus E-PL5	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
5.		Olympus E-PM2	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
6.		Olympus E-P3	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
7.		Olympus E-PL2	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
8.		Olympus E-PM1	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
9.		Olympus E-PL1	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
10.		Olympus E-P2	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
11.		Panasonic ZS200	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	Y
12.		Panasonic GF5	-	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
13.		Panasonic GF3	-	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
14.		Panasonic GF2	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
15.		Ricoh GR IIIx	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	-	3.0	Y	-	Y
16.		Ricoh GR II	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
17.		Ricoh GR	Y	mono / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	-	-	-

It is notable that the GR III offers wifi support, which can be a very convenient means to transfer image data to an off-camera location. In contrast, the E-PL3 does not provide wifi capability.

The GR III is a recent model that features in the current product line-up of Ricoh. In contrast, the E-PL3 has been discontinued (but can be found pre-owned on ebay). As a replacement in the same line of cameras, the E-PL3 was succeeded by the Olympus E-PL5. Further information on the features and operation of the E-PL3 and GR III can be found, respectively, in the Olympus E-PL3 Manual (free pdf) or the online Ricoh GR III Manual.

Review summary

So how do things add up? Is there a clear favorite between the Olympus E-PL3 and the Ricoh GR III? 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-PL3:

• Better moiré control: Has an anti-alias filter to avoid artificial patterns to appear in images.
• 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.
• Longer lasting: Can take more shots (300 versus 200) on a single battery charge.
• More heavily discounted: Has been available for much longer (launched in June 2011).

Arguments in favor of the Ricoh GR III:

• More detail: Has more megapixels (24 vs 12.2MP), which boosts linear resolution by 43%.
• Maximized detail: Lacks an anti-alias filter to exploit the sensor's full resolution potential.
• Better image quality: Is equipped with a larger and more technologically advanced sensor.
• Richer colors: The sensor size advantage translates into images with better, more accurate colors.
• More dynamic range: Larger sensor captures a wider spectrum of light and dark details.
• Better low-light sensitivity: Larger sensor produces good images even in poorly lit environments.
• Better video: Provides higher movie framerates (1080/60p versus 1080/60i).
• Better live-view autofocus: Features on-sensor phase-detection for more confident autofocus.
• More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1037k vs 460k dots).
• Fewer buttons to press: Has a touchscreen to facilitate handling and shooting adjustments.
• 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.
• Faster data transfer: Supports a more advanced USB protocol (3.0 vs 2.0).
• Easier file upload: Has wifi built in for automatic backup or image transfer to the web.
• Easier wireless transfer: Supports Bluetooth for image sharing without cables.
• Faster buffer clearing: Has an SD card interface that supports the UHS-I standard.
• More modern: Reflects 7 years and 7 months of technical progress since the E-PL3 launch.

If the count of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a measure, the GR III is the clear winner of the contest (19 : 7 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-PL3 and the Ricoh GR III 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 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 GR III 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 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-PL3	3/5	+ +	..	72/100	4.5/5	4/5	Jun 2011	599	ebay.com
2.		Ricoh GR III	4/5	..	3.5/5	81/100	4/5	..	Feb 2019	899	amazon.com
3.		Fujifilm XF10	..	..	4/5	75/100	4/5	4.5/5	Jul 2018	499	ebay.com
4.		Olympus E-PL5	3/5	+ +	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2012	599	ebay.com
5.		Olympus E-PM2	3/5	..	..	77/100	5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2012	499	ebay.com
6.		Olympus E-P3	..	83/100	..	74/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2011	799	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-PM1	..	86/100	..	71/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2011	499	ebay.com
9.		Olympus E-PL1	..	86/100	..	69/100	4/5	4.5/5	Feb 2010	599	ebay.com
10.		Olympus E-P2	3/5	+	..	69/100	4/5	4.5/5	Nov 2009	799	ebay.com
11.		Panasonic ZS200	..	+ +	4.5/5	81/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Feb 2018	799	amazon.com
12.		Panasonic GF5	3/5	..	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Apr 2012	499	ebay.com
13.		Panasonic GF3	3/5	82/100	..	71/100	4.5/5	4/5	Jun 2011	549	ebay.com
14.		Panasonic GF2	3/5	82/100	..	70/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Nov 2010	549	ebay.com
15.		Ricoh GR IIIx	..	..	4.5/5	..	..	..	Sep 2021	999	amazon.com
16.		Ricoh GR II	..	..	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2015	699	ebay.com
17.		Ricoh GR	5/5	..	..	79/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Apr 2013	799	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. A score, therefore, has to be seen in close connection to the price and market introduction time 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 III price at
amazon.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-PL3 offers at
ebay.com
Check GR III price at
amazon.com

Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.