Olympus E-PM2 vs Ricoh GR III

The Olympus PEN E-PM2 and the Ricoh GR III are two digital cameras that were announced, respectively, in September 2012 and February 2019. The E-PM2 is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera, while the GR III is a fixed lens compact. The cameras are based on a Four Thirds (E-PM2) and an APS-C (GR III) sensor. The Olympus has a resolution of 15.9 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-PM2		Ricoh GR III
Mirrorless system camera		Fixed lens compact camera
Micro Four Thirds lenses		28mm f/2.8
15.9 MP – Four Thirds sensor		24 MP – APS-C sensor
1080/30p Video		1080/60p Video
ISO 100-25,600		ISO 100-102,400
Viewfinder optional		Viewfinder optional
3.0" LCD – 460k dots		3.0" LCD – 1037k dots
Fixed touchscreen		Fixed touchscreen
8 shutter flaps per second		4 shutter flaps per second
In-body stabilization		In-body stabilization
360 shots per battery charge		200 shots per battery charge
110 x 64 x 34 mm, 269 g		109 x 62 x 33 mm, 257 g

Check E-PM2 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-PM2 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-PM2 and the Ricoh GR III. The two cameras are presented according to their relative size. Three successive views from the front, the top, and the rear are shown. All width, height and depth measures are rounded to the nearest millimeter.

The E-PM2 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-PM2. In this context, it is worth noting that neither the E-PM2 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-PM2 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-PM2 and their specifications in the Micro Four Thirds Lens Catalog.

Concerning battery life, the E-PM2 gets 360 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-PM2	110 mm	64 mm	34 mm	269 g	360	n	Sep 2012	499	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-M10 II	120 mm	83 mm	47 mm	390 g	320	n	Aug 2015	649	ebay.com
5.		Olympus E-P5	122 mm	69 mm	37 mm	420 g	330	n	May 2013	999	ebay.com
6.		Olympus E-PL3	110 mm	64 mm	37 mm	313 g	300	n	Jun 2011	599	ebay.com
7.		Olympus E-PL5	111 mm	64 mm	38 mm	325 g	360	n	Sep 2012	599	ebay.com
8.		Olympus E-PL6	111 mm	64 mm	38 mm	325 g	360	n	May 2013	599	ebay.com
9.		Olympus E-PL7	115 mm	67 mm	38 mm	357 g	350	n	Aug 2014	599	ebay.com
10.		Olympus E-PL8	115 mm	67 mm	38 mm	357 g	350	n	Sep 2016	549	ebay.com
11.		Olympus E-PL9	117 mm	68 mm	39 mm	380 g	350	n	Feb 2018	599	ebay.com
12.		Olympus E-PM1	110 mm	64 mm	34 mm	265 g	330	n	Jun 2011	499	ebay.com
13.		Panasonic GX850	107 mm	65 mm	33 mm	269 g	210	n	Jan 2017	549	ebay.com
14.		Panasonic ZS200	111 mm	65 mm	45 mm	340 g	370	n	Feb 2018	799	amazon.com
15.		Ricoh GR	117 mm	61 mm	35 mm	245 g	290	n	Apr 2013	799	ebay.com
16.		Ricoh GR II	117 mm	63 mm	35 mm	251 g	320	n	Jun 2015	699	ebay.com
17.		Ricoh GR IIIx	109 mm	62 mm	35 mm	262 g	200	n	Sep 2021	999	amazon.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 listed launch prices provide an indication of the market segment that the manufacturer of the cameras have been targeting. 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.

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. 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.

Of the two cameras under consideration, the Olympus E-PM2 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-PM2 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-PM2 (15.9MP), but the GR III nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 3.91μm versus 3.76μm for the E-PM2) due to its larger sensor. Moreover, the GR III is a much more recent model (by 6 years and 5 months) than the E-PM2, and its sensor will 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 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-PM2 are 23 x 17.3 inches or 58.5 x 43.9 cm for good quality, 18.4 x 13.8 inches or 46.8 x 35.1 cm for very good quality, and 15.4 x 11.5 inches or 39 x 29.3 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-PM2 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 25600. 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 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 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-PM2	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	22.7	12.2	932	72
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-M10 II	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/60p	23.1	12.5	842	73
5.		Olympus E-P5	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	22.8	12.4	895	72
6.		Olympus E-PL3	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	20.9	10.3	499	52
7.		Olympus E-PL5	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	22.8	12.3	889	72
8.		Olympus E-PL6	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	22.5	12.0	717	68
9.		Olympus E-PL7	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	22.7	12.4	873	72
10.		Olympus E-PL8	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	23.0	12.6	1030	73
11.		Olympus E-PL9	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	4K/30p	23.1	12.8	1162	74
12.		Olympus E-PM1	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	21.0	10.3	499	52
13.		Panasonic GX850	Four Thirds	15.8	4592	3448	4K/30p	23.2	13.3	586	73
14.		Panasonic ZS200	1-inch	20.0	5472	3648	4K/30p	22.0	12.2	449	64
15.		Ricoh GR	APS-C	16.1	4928	3264	1080/30p	23.6	13.5	972	78
16.		Ricoh GR II	APS-C	16.1	4928	3264	1080/30p	23.6	13.7	1078	80
17.		Ricoh GR IIIx	APS-C	24.0	6000	4000	1080/60p	24.2	13.8	2146	85
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. Both cameras under consideration are equipped with sensors that have a sufficiently high read-out speed for moving images, but the GR III provides a faster frame rate than the E-PM2. It can shoot movie footage at 1080/60p, while the Olympus is limited to 1080/30p.

Feature comparison

Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a variety of features. The E-PM2 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-4 for the E-PM2 and the GV-1 for the GR III – are available as accessories. The following table reports on some other key feature differences and similarities of the Olympus E-PM2, the Ricoh GR III, 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-PM2	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	Y	1/4000s	8.0/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-M10 II	2360	n	3.0 / 1040	tilting	Y	1/4000s	8.0/s	Y	Y
5.		Olympus E-P5	optional	n	3.0 / 1037	tilting	Y	1/8000s	9.0/s	Y	Y
6.		Olympus E-PL3	optional	n	3.0 / 460	tilting	n	1/4000s	5.5/s	n	Y
7.		Olympus E-PL5	optional	n	3.0 / 460	tilting	Y	1/4000s	8.0/s	n	Y
8.		Olympus E-PL6	optional	n	3.0 / 460	tilting	Y	1/4000s	8.0/s	n	Y
9.		Olympus E-PL7	optional	n	3.0 / 1037	tilting	Y	1/4000s	8.0/s	n	Y
10.		Olympus E-PL8	optional	n	3.0 / 1037	tilting	Y	1/4000s	8.0/s	n	Y
11.		Olympus E-PL9	none	n	3.0 / 1040	tilting	Y	1/4000s	8.6/s	Y	Y
12.		Olympus E-PM1	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/4000s	5.5/s	n	Y
13.		Panasonic GX850	none	n	3.0 / 1040	tilting	Y	1/500s	10.0/s	Y	n
14.		Panasonic ZS200	2330	n	3.0 / 1240	fixed	Y	1/2000s	10.0/s	Y	Y
15.		Ricoh GR	optional	n	3.0 / 1230	fixed	n	1/4000s	4.0/s	Y	n
16.		Ricoh GR II	optional	n	3.0 / 1230	fixed	n	1/4000s	4.0/s	Y	n
17.		Ricoh GR IIIx	optional	n	3.0 / 1037	fixed	Y	1/4000s	4.0/s	n	Y
Note: *) Information refers to the mechanical shutter, unless the camera only has an electronic one.

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-PM2 and the GR III write their files to SDXC cards. Both cameras can use UHS-I cards, which provide for Ultra High Speed data transfer of up to 104 MB/s.

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-PM2 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-PM2	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	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-M10 II	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
5.		Olympus E-P5	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
6.		Olympus E-PL3	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
7.		Olympus E-PL5	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
8.		Olympus E-PL6	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
9.		Olympus E-PL7	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
10.		Olympus E-PL8	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
11.		Olympus E-PL9	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	Y
12.		Olympus E-PM1	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
13.		Panasonic GX850	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
14.		Panasonic ZS200	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	Y
15.		Ricoh GR	Y	mono / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	-	-	-
16.		Ricoh GR II	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
17.		Ricoh GR IIIx	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	-	3.0	Y	-	Y

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-PM2 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-PM2 has been discontinued (but can be found pre-owned on ebay). There has not been a direct replacement model for the E-PM2 from Olympus. Further information on the features and operation of the E-PM2 and GR III can be found, respectively, in the Olympus E-PM2 Manual (free pdf) or the online Ricoh GR III Manual.

Review summary

So what is the bottom line? Is the Olympus E-PM2 better than the Ricoh GR III or vice versa? The listing below highlights the relative strengths of the two models.

Reasons to prefer the Olympus PEN E-PM2:

• Better moiré control: Has an anti-alias filter to avoid artificial patterns to appear in images.
• Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (8 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 (360 versus 200) on a single battery charge.
• More heavily discounted: Has been available for much longer (launched in September 2012).

Arguments in favor of the Ricoh GR III:

• More detail: Has more megapixels (24 vs 15.9MP), which boosts linear resolution by 25%.
• 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 1080/30p).
• 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).
• Easier time-lapse photography: Has an intervalometer built-in for low frequency shooting.
• Ready to shoot: Has an integrated lens, whereas the E-PM2 necessitates an extra lens.
• Less heavy: Has a lower weight even though it has a lens built in (unlike the E-PM2).
• 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.
• More modern: Reflects 6 years and 5 months of technical progress since the E-PM2 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 (17 : 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-PM2 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 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-PM2 or the GR III. 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-PM2	3/5	..	..	77/100	5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2012	499	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-M10 II	4.5/5	+ +	..	80/100	5/5	5/5	Aug 2015	649	ebay.com
5.		Olympus E-P5	5/5	+ +	..	78/100	4.5/5	5/5	May 2013	999	ebay.com
6.		Olympus E-PL3	3/5	+ +	..	72/100	4.5/5	4/5	Jun 2011	599	ebay.com
7.		Olympus E-PL5	3/5	+ +	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2012	599	ebay.com
8.		Olympus E-PL6	..	..	..	..	..	..	May 2013	599	ebay.com
9.		Olympus E-PL7	4/5	+	..	..	5/5	4/5	Aug 2014	599	ebay.com
10.		Olympus E-PL8	..	..	..	..	4.5/5	4/5	Sep 2016	549	ebay.com
11.		Olympus E-PL9	..	+	..	..	4.5/5	4/5	Feb 2018	599	ebay.com
12.		Olympus E-PM1	..	86/100	..	71/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2011	499	ebay.com
13.		Panasonic GX850	..	+	..	76/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jan 2017	549	ebay.com
14.		Panasonic ZS200	..	+ +	4.5/5	81/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Feb 2018	799	amazon.com
15.		Ricoh GR	5/5	..	..	79/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Apr 2013	799	ebay.com
16.		Ricoh GR II	..	..	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2015	699	ebay.com
17.		Ricoh GR IIIx	..	..	4.5/5	..	..	..	Sep 2021	999	amazon.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 comparisons of ratings among very different cameras or across long time periods have little meaning. It should also be noted that some of the review sites have over time altered the way they render their verdicts.

Check E-PM2 offers at
ebay.com
Check GR III price at
amazon.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-PM2 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.