Olympus E-PM1 vs PEN-F

The Olympus PEN E-PM1 and the Olympus PEN-F are two digital cameras that were revealed to the public, respectively, in June 2011 and January 2016. Both the E-PM1 and the PEN-F are mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras that are equipped with a Four Thirds sensor. The E-PM1 has a resolution of 12.2 megapixels, whereas the PEN-F provides 20.2 MP.

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

Headline Specifications

Olympus E-PM1		Olympus PEN-F
Mirrorless system camera		Mirrorless system camera
Micro Four Thirds lenses		Micro Four Thirds lenses
12.2 MP – Four Thirds sensor		20.2 MP – Four Thirds sensor
1080/60i Video		1080/60p Video
ISO 100-12,800		ISO 80-25,600
Viewfinder optional		Electronic viewfinder (2360k dots)
3.0" LCD – 460k dots		3.0" LCD – 1037k dots
Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)		Swivel touchscreen
5.5 shutter flaps per second		10 shutter flaps per second
In-body stabilization		In-body stabilization
330 shots per battery charge		330 shots per battery charge
110 x 64 x 34 mm, 265 g		125 x 72 x 37 mm, 427 g

Check E-PM1 offers at
ebay.com
Check PEN-F offers at
ebay.com

Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Olympus PEN E-PM1 and the Olympus PEN-F? 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-PM1 and the Olympus PEN-F. The two cameras are presented according to their relative size. Three consecutive perspectives from the front, the top, and the back are available. All size dimensions are rounded to the nearest millimeter.

The E-PM1 can be obtained in six different colors (black, silver, brown, pink, purple, white), while the PEN-F is available in two color-versions (black, silver).

If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Olympus PEN-F is notably larger (28 percent) than the Olympus E-PM1. Moreover, the PEN-F is substantially heavier (61 percent) than the E-PM1. In this context, it is worth noting that neither the E-PM1 nor the PEN-F 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 table below summarizes the key physical specs of the two cameras alongside a broader set of comparators. 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-PM1	110 mm	64 mm	34 mm	265 g	330	n	Jun 2011	499	ebay.com
2.		Olympus PEN-F	125 mm	72 mm	37 mm	427 g	330	n	Jan 2016	1,199	ebay.com
3.		Olympus E-M1	130 mm	94 mm	63 mm	497 g	350	Y	Sep 2013	1,399	ebay.com
4.		Olympus E-M5 II	124 mm	85 mm	45 mm	469 g	310	Y	Feb 2015	1,099	ebay.com
5.		Olympus E-M10 II	120 mm	83 mm	47 mm	390 g	320	n	Aug 2015	649	ebay.com
6.		Olympus E-M10 III	122 mm	84 mm	50 mm	410 g	330	n	Aug 2017	649	ebay.com
7.		Olympus E-P3	122 mm	69 mm	34 mm	369 g	330	n	Jun 2011	799	ebay.com
8.		Olympus E-P5	122 mm	69 mm	37 mm	420 g	330	n	May 2013	999	ebay.com
9.		Olympus E-PL1	115 mm	72 mm	42 mm	334 g	290	n	Feb 2010	599	ebay.com
10.		Olympus E-PL2	114 mm	72 mm	42 mm	362 g	280	n	Jan 2011	599	ebay.com
11.		Olympus E-PL3	110 mm	64 mm	37 mm	313 g	300	n	Jun 2011	599	ebay.com
12.		Olympus E-PL5	111 mm	64 mm	38 mm	325 g	360	n	Sep 2012	599	ebay.com
13.		Olympus E-PM2	110 mm	64 mm	34 mm	269 g	360	n	Sep 2012	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
16.		Panasonic GF3	108 mm	67 mm	32 mm	264 g	300	n	Jun 2011	549	ebay.com
17.		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 naturally be influenced heavily by the price. 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 E-PM1 was launched at a markedly lower price (by 58 percent) than the PEN-F, which puts it into a different 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 generally have larger individual pixels that offer better low-light sensitivity, provide wider dynamic range, and have 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 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.

Technology-wise, the PEN-F uses a more advanced image processing engine (TruePic VII) than the E-PM1 (TruePic VI), with benefits for noise reduction, color accuracy, and processing speed.

While the two cameras under review share the same sensor size, the PEN-F offers a higher resolution of 20.2 megapixels, compared with 12.2 MP of the E-PM1. This megapixels advantage translates into a 29 percent gain in linear resolution. On the other hand, these sensor specs imply that the PEN-F has a higher pixel density and a smaller size of the individual pixel (with a pixel pitch of 3.34μm versus 4.29μm for the E-PM1). However, it should be noted that the PEN-F is much more recent (by 4 years and 6 months) than the E-PM1, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that compensate for the smaller pixel size. Coming back to sensor resolution, it should be mentioned that the PEN-F has no anti-alias filter installed, so that it can capture all the detail its sensor resolves.

The resolution advantage of the Olympus PEN-F implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the PEN-F for good quality output (200 dots per inch) amounts to 25.9 x 19.4 inches or 65.8 x 49.4 cm, for very good quality (250 dpi) 20.7 x 15.6 inches or 52.7 x 39.5 cm, and for excellent quality (300 dpi) 17.3 x 13 inches or 43.9 x 32.9 cm. The corresponding values for the Olympus E-PM1 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.

Unlike the E-PM1, the PEN-F has the capacity to capture high quality composite images (40MP) by combining multiple shots after shifting its sensor by miniscule distances. This multi-shot, pixel-shift mode is most suitable for photography of stationary objects (landscapes, studio scenes).

The Olympus PEN E-PM1 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 12800. The corresponding ISO settings for the Olympus PEN-F are ISO 80 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.

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 consideration, the PEN-F offers substantially better image quality than the E-PM1 (overall score 22 points higher). The advantage is based on 2.1 bits higher color depth, 2.1 EV in additional dynamic range, and 0.8 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-PM1	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	21.0	10.3	499	52
2.		Olympus PEN-F	Four Thirds	20.2	5184	3888	1080/60p	23.1	12.4	894	74
3.		Olympus E-M1	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	23.0	12.7	757	73
4.		Olympus E-M5 II	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/60p	23.0	12.5	842	73
5.		Olympus E-M10 II	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/60p	23.1	12.5	842	73
6.		Olympus E-M10 III	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	4K/30p	23.1	12.8	1120	74
7.		Olympus E-P3	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	20.8	10.1	536	51
8.		Olympus E-P5	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	22.8	12.4	895	72
9.		Olympus E-PL1	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.5	10.1	487	54
10.		Olympus E-PL2	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.4	10.2	573	55
11.		Olympus E-PL3	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	20.9	10.3	499	52
12.		Olympus E-PL5	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	22.8	12.3	889	72
13.		Olympus E-PM2	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	22.7	12.2	932	72
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
16.		Panasonic GF3	Four Thirds	12.0	4000	3000	1080/60i	20.6	10.1	459	50
17.		Panasonic GF5	Four Thirds	12.0	4000	3000	1080/60i	20.5	10.0	573	50
Note: DXO values in italics represent estimates based on sensor size and age.

Many modern cameras are not only capable of taking still images, but also of capturing video footage. The two cameras under consideration both have sensors whose read-out speed is fast enough to capture moving pictures, but the PEN-F provides a faster frame rate than the E-PM1. It can shoot movie footage at 1080/60p, while the E-PM1 is limited to 1080/60i.

Feature comparison

Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a variety of features. For example, the PEN-F has an electronic viewfinder (2360k dots), which can be very helpful when shooting in bright sunlight. In contrast, the E-PM1 relies on live view and the rear LCD for framing. That said, the E-PM1 can be equipped with an optional viewfinder – the VF-2. The table below summarizes some of the other core capabilities of the Olympus E-PM1 and Olympus PEN-F 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-PM1	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/4000s	5.5/s	n	Y
2.		Olympus PEN-F	2360	n	3.0 / 1037	swivel	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
3.		Olympus E-M1	2360	n	3.0 / 1037	tilting	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
4.		Olympus E-M5 II	2360	n	3.0 / 1037	swivel	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
5.		Olympus E-M10 II	2360	n	3.0 / 1040	tilting	Y	1/4000s	8.0/s	Y	Y
6.		Olympus E-M10 III	2360	n	3.0 / 1040	tilting	Y	1/4000s	8.6/s	Y	Y
7.		Olympus E-P3	optional	n	3.0 / 614	fixed	Y	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
8.		Olympus E-P5	optional	n	3.0 / 1037	tilting	Y	1/8000s	9.0/s	Y	Y
9.		Olympus E-PL1	optional	n	2.7 / 230	fixed	n	1/2000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
10.		Olympus E-PL2	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
11.		Olympus E-PL3	optional	n	3.0 / 460	tilting	n	1/4000s	5.5/s	n	Y
12.		Olympus E-PL5	optional	n	3.0 / 460	tilting	Y	1/4000s	8.0/s	n	Y
13.		Olympus E-PM2	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	Y	1/4000s	8.0/s	n	Y
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
16.		Panasonic GF3	none	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	Y	1/4000s	3.2/s	Y	n
17.		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 differentiating feature between the two cameras concerns the touch sensitivity of the rear screen. The PEN-F has a touchscreen, while the E-PM1 has a conventional panel. Touch control can be particularly helpful, for example, for setting the focus point.

The reported shutter speed information refers to the use of the mechanical shutter. Yet, some cameras only have an electronic shutter, while others have an electronic shutter in addition to a mechanical one. In fact, the PEN-F is one of those camera that have an additional electronic shutter, which makes completely silent shooting possible. However, this mode is less suitable for photographing moving objects (risk of rolling shutter) or shooting under artificial light sources (risk of flickering).

The Olympus PEN-F 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-PM1 and the PEN-F write their files to SDXC cards. The PEN-F supports UHS-II cards (Ultra High Speed data transfer of up to 312 MB/s), while the E-PM1 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-PM1 and Olympus PEN-F 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-PM1	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
2.		Olympus PEN-F	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
3.		Olympus E-M1	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
4.		Olympus E-M5 II	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
5.		Olympus E-M10 II	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
6.		Olympus E-M10 III	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
7.		Olympus E-P3	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
8.		Olympus E-P5	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
9.		Olympus E-PL1	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
10.		Olympus E-PL2	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
11.		Olympus E-PL3	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
12.		Olympus E-PL5	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
13.		Olympus E-PM2	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
14.		Panasonic G2	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
15.		Panasonic GF2	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
16.		Panasonic GF3	-	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
17.		Panasonic GF5	-	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-

It is notable that the PEN-F offers wifi support, which can be a very convenient means to transfer image data to an off-camera location. In contrast, the E-PM1 does not provide wifi capability.

Both the E-PM1 and the PEN-F have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The E-PM1 was replaced by the Olympus E-PM2, while the PEN-F does not have a direct successor. Further information on the features and operation of the E-PM1 and PEN-F can be found, respectively, in the Olympus E-PM1 Manual (free pdf) or the online Olympus PEN-F Manual.

Review summary

So what is the bottom line? Is there a clear favorite between the Olympus E-PM1 and the Olympus PEN-F? Which camera is better? The listing below highlights the relative strengths of the two models.

Reasons to prefer the Olympus PEN E-PM1:

• Better moiré control: Has an anti-alias filter to avoid artificial patterns to appear in images.
• More compact: Is smaller (110x64mm vs 125x72mm) and thus needs less room in the bag.
• Less heavy: Is lighter (by 162g or 38 percent) and hence easier to carry around.
• More affordable: Was introduced into a lower priced category (58 percent cheaper at launch).
• More heavily discounted: Has been available for much longer (launched in June 2011).

Advantages of the Olympus PEN-F:

• More detail: Has more megapixels (20.2 vs 12.2MP), which boosts linear resolution by 29%.
• Maximized detail: Lacks an anti-alias filter to exploit the sensor's full resolution potential.
• High quality composites: Can combine several shots after pixel-shifting its sensor.
• Better image quality: Scores substantially higher (22 points) in the DXO overall evaluation.
• Richer colors: Generates noticeably more natural colors (2.1 bits more color depth).
• More dynamic range: Captures a broader range of light and dark details (2.1 EV of extra DR).
• Better low-light sensitivity: Can shoot in dim conditions (0.8 stops ISO advantage).
• Better jpgs: Has a more modern image processing engine (TruePic VII vs TruePic VI).
• Better video: Provides higher movie framerates (1080/60p versus 1080/60i).
• Easier framing: Has an electronic viewfinder for image composition and settings control.
• More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1037k vs 460k dots).
• More flexible LCD: Has a swivel screen for odd-angle shots in portrait or landscape orientation.
• Fewer buttons to press: Has a touchscreen to facilitate handling and shooting adjustments.
• More selfie-friendly: Has an articulated screen that can be turned to be front-facing.
• Faster shutter: Has higher mechanical shutter speed (1/8000s vs 1/4000s) to freeze action.
• Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (10 vs 5.5 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
• Less disturbing: Has an electronic shutter option for completely silent shooting.
• Easier time-lapse photography: Has an intervalometer built-in for low frequency shooting.
• Easier file upload: Has wifi built in for automatic backup or image transfer to the web.
• Faster buffer clearing: Has an SD card interface that supports the UHS-II standard.
• More modern: Reflects 4 years and 6 months of technical progress since the E-PM1 launch.

If the number of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the PEN-F is the clear winner of the contest (21 : 5 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-PM1 and the Olympus PEN-F 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-PM1 and the PEN-F 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 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-PM1	..	86/100	..	71/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2011	499	ebay.com
2.		Olympus PEN-F	..	..	4/5	82/100	4.5/5	5/5	Jan 2016	1,199	ebay.com
3.		Olympus E-M1	5/5	+ +	..	84/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2013	1,399	ebay.com
4.		Olympus E-M5 II	5/5	+ +	4.5/5	81/100	5/5	5/5	Feb 2015	1,099	ebay.com
5.		Olympus E-M10 II	4.5/5	+ +	..	80/100	5/5	5/5	Aug 2015	649	ebay.com
6.		Olympus E-M10 III	..	+	5/5	80/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Aug 2017	649	ebay.com
7.		Olympus E-P3	..	83/100	..	74/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2011	799	ebay.com
8.		Olympus E-P5	5/5	+ +	..	78/100	4.5/5	5/5	May 2013	999	ebay.com
9.		Olympus E-PL1	..	86/100	..	69/100	4/5	4.5/5	Feb 2010	599	ebay.com
10.		Olympus E-PL2	3/5	83/100	..	71/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jan 2011	599	ebay.com
11.		Olympus E-PL3	3/5	+ +	..	72/100	4.5/5	4/5	Jun 2011	599	ebay.com
12.		Olympus E-PL5	3/5	+ +	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2012	599	ebay.com
13.		Olympus E-PM2	3/5	..	..	77/100	5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2012	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
16.		Panasonic GF3	3/5	82/100	..	71/100	4.5/5	4/5	Jun 2011	549	ebay.com
17.		Panasonic GF5	3/5	..	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Apr 2012	499	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 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-PM1 offers at
ebay.com
Check PEN-F 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-PM1 offers at
ebay.com
Check PEN-F 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.