Olympus E-PL3 vs Ricoh WG-60

The Olympus PEN E-PL3 and the Ricoh WG-60 are two digital cameras that were revealed to the public, respectively, in June 2011 and October 2018. The E-PL3 is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera, while the WG-60 is a fixed lens compact. The cameras are based on a Four Thirds (E-PL3) and a 1/2.3-inch (WG-60) sensor. The Olympus has a resolution of 12.2 megapixels, whereas the Ricoh provides 15.9 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 WG-60
Mirrorless system camera		Fixed lens compact camera
Micro Four Thirds lenses		28-140mm f/3.5-5.5
12.2 MP – Four Thirds sensor		15.9 MP – 1/2.3" sensor
1080/60i Video		1080/60p Video
ISO 200-12,800		ISO 125-6,400
Viewfinder optional		No viewfinder, LCD framing
3.0" LCD – 460k dots		2.7" LCD – 230k dots
Tilting screen (no touchscreen)		Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)
5.5 shutter flaps per second		8 shutter flaps per second
In-body stabilization		no shake reduction
not weather sealed		Waterproof body (14m)
300 shots per battery charge		300 shots per battery charge
110 x 64 x 37 mm, 313 g		123 x 62 x 30 mm, 193 g

Check E-PL3 offers at
ebay.com
Check WG-60 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 WG-60? 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-PL3 and the Ricoh WG-60 is provided 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 measures are rounded to the nearest millimeter.

The E-PL3 can be obtained in four different colors (black, silver, red, white), while the WG-60 is available in two color-versions (black, red).

If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Ricoh WG-60 is notably larger (8 percent) than the Olympus E-PL3. It is noteworthy in this context that the WG-60 is splash and dust-proof, while the E-PL3 does not feature any corresponding weather-sealing. More than that, the WG-60 is water-proof up to 14m and can, thus, be used for underwater photography.

The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete and possibly misleading, as the WG-60 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.

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 WG-60	123 mm	62 mm	30 mm	193 g	300	Y	Oct 2018	279	ebay.com
3.		Fujifilm XP120	110 mm	71 mm	28 mm	203 g	210	Y	Jan 2017	229	ebay.com
4.		Fujifilm XP130	110 mm	71 mm	28 mm	207 g	240	Y	Jan 2018	229	ebay.com
5.		Nikon W300	112 mm	66 mm	29 mm	231 g	280	Y	May 2017	389	ebay.com
6.		Olympus E-P2	121 mm	70 mm	36 mm	355 g	300	n	Nov 2009	799	ebay.com
7.		Olympus E-P3	122 mm	69 mm	34 mm	369 g	330	n	Jun 2011	799	ebay.com
8.		Olympus E-PL1	115 mm	72 mm	42 mm	334 g	290	n	Feb 2010	599	ebay.com
9.		Olympus E-PL2	114 mm	72 mm	42 mm	362 g	280	n	Jan 2011	599	ebay.com
10.		Olympus E-PL5	111 mm	64 mm	38 mm	325 g	360	n	Sep 2012	599	ebay.com
11.		Olympus E-PM1	110 mm	64 mm	34 mm	265 g	330	n	Jun 2011	499	ebay.com
12.		Olympus E-PM2	110 mm	64 mm	34 mm	269 g	360	n	Sep 2012	499	ebay.com
13.		Panasonic GF2	113 mm	68 mm	33 mm	310 g	300	n	Nov 2010	549	ebay.com
14.		Panasonic GF3	108 mm	67 mm	32 mm	264 g	300	n	Jun 2011	549	ebay.com
15.		Panasonic GF5	108 mm	67 mm	37 mm	267 g	360	n	Apr 2012	499	ebay.com
16.		Pentax WG-90	123 mm	62 mm	30 mm	194 g	300	Y	Nov 2023	279	amazon.com
17.		Sony WX800	102 mm	58 mm	36 mm	233 g	370	n	Oct 2018	399	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. The WG-60 was launched at a lower price than the E-PL3, despite having a lens built in. 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 size of the imaging sensor is a crucial determinant 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 WG-60 a 1/2.3-inch sensor. The sensor area in the WG-60 is 88 percent smaller. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 2.0 and 5.6. Both cameras feature a native aspect ratio (sensor width to sensor height) of 4:3.

Despite having a smaller sensor, the WG-60 offers a higher resolution of 15.9 megapixels, compared with 12.2 MP of the E-PL3. This megapixels advantage comes at the cost of a higher pixel density and a smaller size of the individual pixel (with a pixel pitch of 1.33μm versus 4.29μm for the E-PL3). However, it should be noted that the WG-60 is much more recent (by 7 years and 3 months) than the E-PL3, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that make it possible to gather light more efficiently. Coming back to sensor resolution, it should be mentioned that the WG-60 has no anti-alias filter installed, so that it can capture all the detail its sensor resolves.

The resolution advantage of the Ricoh WG-60 implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the WG-60 for good quality output (200 dots per inch) amounts to 23 x 17.3 inches or 58.5 x 43.9 cm, for very good quality (250 dpi) 18.4 x 13.8 inches or 46.8 x 35.1 cm, and for excellent quality (300 dpi) 15.4 x 11.5 inches or 39 x 29.3 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 WG-60 are ISO 125 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.

Consistent information on actual sensor performance is available from DXO Mark for many cameras. 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"). 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.		Ricoh WG-60	1/2.3	15.9	4608	3456	1080/60p	20.6	12.2	1072	51
3.		Fujifilm XP120	1/2.3	15.9	4608	3456	1080/60p	20.5	11.9	900	49
4.		Fujifilm XP130	1/2.3	15.9	4608	3456	1080/60p	20.6	12.1	1000	51
5.		Nikon W300	1/2.3	15.9	4608	3456	4K/30p	20.5	12.0	938	50
6.		Olympus E-P2	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.5	10.4	505	56
7.		Olympus E-P3	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	20.8	10.1	536	51
8.		Olympus E-PL1	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.5	10.1	487	54
9.		Olympus E-PL2	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.4	10.2	573	55
10.		Olympus E-PL5	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	22.8	12.3	889	72
11.		Olympus E-PM1	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	21.0	10.3	499	52
12.		Olympus E-PM2	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	22.7	12.2	932	72
13.		Panasonic GF2	Four Thirds	12.0	4000	3000	1080/60i	21.2	10.3	506	54
14.		Panasonic GF3	Four Thirds	12.0	4000	3000	1080/60i	20.6	10.1	459	50
15.		Panasonic GF5	Four Thirds	12.0	4000	3000	1080/60i	20.5	10.0	573	50
16.		Pentax WG-90	1/2.3	15.9	4608	3456	1080/60p	20.9	12.8	1570	54
17.		Sony WX800	1/2.3	18.0	4896	3672	4K/30p	20.6	12.2	1070	51
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 are equipped with sensors that have a sufficiently high read-out speed for moving images, but the E-PL3 provides a higher frame rate than the WG-60. It can shoot video footage at 1080/60i, while the Ricoh is limited to 1080/60p.

Feature comparison

Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. The E-PL3 and the WG-60 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-PL3 can be equipped with an optional viewfinder – the VF-2. The following table reports on some other key feature differences and similarities of the Olympus E-PL3, the Ricoh WG-60, 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.		Ricoh WG-60	none	n	2.7 / 230	fixed	n	1/4000s	8.0/s	Y	n
3.		Fujifilm XP120	none	n	3.0 / 920	fixed	n	1/2000s	10.0/s	Y	Y
4.		Fujifilm XP130	none	n	3.0 / 920	fixed	n	1/2000s	10.0/s	Y	Y
5.		Nikon W300	none	n	3.0 / 921	fixed	n	1/4000s	7.0/s	Y	Y
6.		Olympus E-P2	optional	n	3.0 / 230	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	n	Y
7.		Olympus E-P3	optional	n	3.0 / 614	fixed	Y	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
8.		Olympus E-PL1	optional	n	2.7 / 230	fixed	n	1/2000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
9.		Olympus E-PL2	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
10.		Olympus E-PL5	optional	n	3.0 / 460	tilting	Y	1/4000s	8.0/s	n	Y
11.		Olympus E-PM1	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/4000s	5.5/s	n	Y
12.		Olympus E-PM2	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	Y	1/4000s	8.0/s	n	Y
13.		Panasonic GF2	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	Y	1/4000s	2.6/s	Y	n
14.		Panasonic GF3	none	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	Y	1/4000s	3.2/s	Y	n
15.		Panasonic GF5	none	n	3.0 / 920	fixed	Y	1/4000s	4.0/s	Y	n
16.		Pentax WG-90	none	n	2.7 / 230	fixed	n	1/4000s	8.0/s	Y	n
17.		Sony WX800	none	n	3.0 / 922	tilting	Y	1/2000s	10.0/s	Y	Y
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 WG-60 has one, while the E-PL3 does not. While the built-in flash of the WG-60 is not very powerful, it can at times be useful as a fill-in light.

The Ricoh WG-60 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 WG-60 write their files to 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-PL3 and Ricoh WG-60 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 WG-60	-	mono / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	-	-	-
3.		Fujifilm XP120	-	mono / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
4.		Fujifilm XP130	-	mono / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	Y
5.		Nikon W300	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	Y
6.		Olympus E-P2	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
7.		Olympus E-P3	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
8.		Olympus E-PL1	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
9.		Olympus E-PL2	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
10.		Olympus E-PL5	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
11.		Olympus E-PM1	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
12.		Olympus E-PM2	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
13.		Panasonic GF2	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
14.		Panasonic GF3	-	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
15.		Panasonic GF5	-	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
16.		Pentax WG-90	-	mono / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	-	-	-
17.		Sony WX800	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-

It is notable that the E-PL3 has a hotshoe, while the WG-60 does not. This socket makes it possible to easily attach optional accessories, such as an external flash gun.

Both the E-PL3 and the WG-60 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The E-PL3 was replaced by the Olympus E-PL5, while the WG-60 does not have a direct successor. Further information on the features and operation of the E-PL3 and WG-60 can be found, respectively, in the Olympus E-PL3 Manual (free pdf) or the online Ricoh WG-60 Manual.

Review summary

So how do things add up? Which of the two cameras – the Olympus E-PL3 or the Ricoh WG-60 – has the upper hand? Is one clearly better than the other? Below is a summary of the relative strengths of each of the two contestants.

Arguments in favor of the Olympus PEN E-PL3:

• Better moiré control: Has an anti-alias filter to avoid artificial patterns to appear in images.
• Better image quality: Features bigger pixels on a larger sensor for higher quality imaging.
• Richer colors: The pixel size advantage translates into images with better, more accurate colors.
• More dynamic range: Larger pixels capture a wider spectrum of light and dark details.
• Better low-light sensitivity: Larger pixels means good image quality even under poor lighting.
• Better video: Provides higher movie framerates (1080/60i versus 1080/60p).
• More framing options: Can be equipped with a hotshoe-mounted accessory-viewfinder.
• Larger screen: Has a bigger rear LCD (3.0" vs 2.7") for image review and settings control.
• More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (460k vs 230k dots).
• 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.
• More flexible: Accepts interchangeable lenses, so that lens characteristics can be altered.
• 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 available for much longer (launched in June 2011).

Advantages of the Ricoh WG-60:

• More detail: Has more megapixels (15.9 vs 12.2MP), which boosts linear resolution by 14%.
• Maximized detail: Lacks an anti-alias filter to exploit the sensor's full resolution potential.
• Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (8 vs 5.5 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
• 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).
• Better sealing: Is splash and dust sealed for shooting in inclement weather conditions.
• Water-proof: Is rugged and sealed and can thus be used for underwater photography (up to 14m).
• Easier fill-in: Has a small integrated flash to brighten shadows of backlit subjects.
• More affordable: Was introduced at a lower price, despite coming with a built-in lens.
• More modern: Reflects 7 years and 3 months of technical progress since the E-PL3 launch.

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 (15 : 11 points). 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 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 WG-60 place the cameras among the top in their class? Find out in the latest Best Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera and Best Travel-Zoom 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 WG-60 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 where reviews by experts come in. 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 WG-60	..	..	..	..	..	..	Oct 2018	279	ebay.com
3.		Fujifilm XP120	..	o	..	..	3.5/5	4/5	Jan 2017	229	ebay.com
4.		Fujifilm XP130	..	o	..	..	3.5/5	4/5	Jan 2018	229	ebay.com
5.		Nikon W300	..	+	..	..	4/5	4/5	May 2017	389	ebay.com
6.		Olympus E-P2	3/5	+	..	69/100	4/5	4.5/5	Nov 2009	799	ebay.com
7.		Olympus E-P3	..	83/100	..	74/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2011	799	ebay.com
8.		Olympus E-PL1	..	86/100	..	69/100	4/5	4.5/5	Feb 2010	599	ebay.com
9.		Olympus E-PL2	3/5	83/100	..	71/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jan 2011	599	ebay.com
10.		Olympus E-PL5	3/5	+ +	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2012	599	ebay.com
11.		Olympus E-PM1	..	86/100	..	71/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2011	499	ebay.com
12.		Olympus E-PM2	3/5	..	..	77/100	5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2012	499	ebay.com
13.		Panasonic GF2	3/5	82/100	..	70/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Nov 2010	549	ebay.com
14.		Panasonic GF3	3/5	82/100	..	71/100	4.5/5	4/5	Jun 2011	549	ebay.com
15.		Panasonic GF5	3/5	..	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Apr 2012	499	ebay.com
16.		Pentax WG-90	..	..	..	..	..	..	Nov 2023	279	amazon.com
17.		Sony WX800	..	..	..	..	..	..	Oct 2018	399	ebay.com
Note: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available.

The above review scores should be interpreted 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 comparing ratings of very distinct cameras or ones that are far apart in terms of their release date have little meaning. Also, please note that some of the review sites have changed their methodology and reporting over time.

Check E-PL3 offers at
ebay.com
Check WG-60 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-PL3 offers at
ebay.com
Check WG-60 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.