Olympus PEN-F vs XZ-2
The Olympus PEN-F and the Olympus XZ-2 are two digital cameras that were officially introduced, respectively, in January 2016 and September 2012. The PEN-F is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera, while the XZ-2 is a fixed lens compact. The cameras are based on a Four Thirds (PEN-F) and a 1/1.7-inch (XZ-2) sensor. The PEN-F has a resolution of 20.2 megapixels, whereas the XZ-2 provides 11.8 MP.
Below is an overview of the main specs of the two cameras as a starting point for the comparison.
Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Olympus PEN-F and the Olympus XZ-2? 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 PEN-F and the Olympus XZ-2 is provided in the side-by-side display below. 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 measures are rounded to the nearest millimeter.
The PEN-F can be obtained in two different colors (black, silver), while the XZ-2 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 Olympus XZ-2 is notably smaller (18 percent) than the Olympus PEN-F. In this context, it is worth noting that neither the PEN-F nor the XZ-2 are weather-sealed.
The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete and possibly misleading, as the XZ-2 has a lens built in, whereas the PEN-F 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 PEN-F 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 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.
Camera Model |
Camera Width |
Camera Height |
Camera Depth |
Camera Weight |
Battery Life |
Weather Sealing |
Camera Launch |
Launch Price |
Street Price |
||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Olympus PEN-F | 125 mm | 72 mm | 37 mm | 427 g | 330 | n | Jan 2016 | US$ 1 199 | ebay.com | |
2. | Olympus XZ-2 | 113 mm | 65 mm | 48 mm | 346 g | 340 | n | Sep 2012 | US$ 599 | ebay.com | |
3. | Olympus E-M1 | 130 mm | 94 mm | 63 mm | 497 g | 350 | Y | Sep 2013 | US$ 1 399 | ebay.com | |
4. | Olympus E-M5 | 122 mm | 89 mm | 43 mm | 425 g | 360 | Y | Feb 2012 | US$ 1 299 | ebay.com | |
5. | Olympus E-M5 II | 124 mm | 85 mm | 45 mm | 469 g | 310 | Y | Feb 2015 | US$ 1 099 | ebay.com | |
6. | Olympus E-M10 II | 120 mm | 83 mm | 47 mm | 390 g | 320 | n | Aug 2015 | US$ 649 | ebay.com | |
7. | Olympus E-M10 III | 122 mm | 84 mm | 50 mm | 410 g | 330 | n | Aug 2017 | US$ 649 | ebay.com | |
8. | Olympus E-P5 | 122 mm | 69 mm | 37 mm | 420 g | 330 | n | May 2013 | US$ 999 | ebay.com | |
9. | Olympus E-PL2 | 114 mm | 72 mm | 42 mm | 362 g | 280 | n | Jan 2011 | US$ 599 | ebay.com | |
10. | Olympus E-PL3 | 110 mm | 64 mm | 37 mm | 313 g | 300 | n | Jun 2011 | US$ 599 | ebay.com | |
11. | Olympus E-PL7 | 115 mm | 67 mm | 38 mm | 357 g | 350 | n | Aug 2014 | US$ 599 | ebay.com | |
12. | Olympus E-PL8 | 115 mm | 67 mm | 38 mm | 357 g | 350 | n | Sep 2016 | US$ 549 | ebay.com | |
13. | Olympus Stylus 1 | 116 mm | 87 mm | 57 mm | 402 g | 410 | n | Oct 2013 | US$ 699 | ebay.com | |
14. | Olympus XZ-1 | 111 mm | 65 mm | 42 mm | 275 g | 320 | n | Jan 2011 | US$ 499 | ebay.com | |
15. | Panasonic GX7 | 123 mm | 71 mm | 55 mm | 402 g | 350 | n | Aug 2013 | US$ 999 | ebay.com | |
16. | Panasonic GX8 | 133 mm | 78 mm | 63 mm | 487 g | 330 | Y | Jul 2015 | US$ 1 199 | ebay.com | |
17. | Pentax MX-1 | 122 mm | 61 mm | 51 mm | 391 g | 290 | n | Jan 2013 | US$ 499 | ebay.com | |
Note: Measurements and pricing do not include easily detachable parts, such as add-on or interchangeable lenses or optional viewfinders. | |||||||||||
Any camera decision will obviously take relative prices into account. 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 XZ-2 was launched at a lower price than the PEN-F, 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 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. 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 associated with larger, more expensive camera bodies and lenses.
Of the two cameras under consideration, the Olympus PEN-F features a Four Thirds sensor and the Olympus XZ-2 a 1/1.7-inch sensor. The sensor area in the XZ-2 is 81 percent smaller. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 2.0 and 4.4. Both cameras feature a native aspect ratio (sensor width to sensor height) of 4:3.
In terms of chip-set technology, the PEN-F uses a more advanced image processing engine (TruePic VII) than the XZ-2 (TruePic VI), with benefits for noise reduction, color accuracy, and processing speed.
With 20.2MP, the PEN-F offers a higher resolution than the XZ-2 (11.8MP), but the PEN-F nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 3.34μm versus 1.91μm for the XZ-2) due to its larger sensor. Moreover, the PEN-F is a much more recent model (by 3 years and 4 months) than the XZ-2, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that further enhance the light gathering capacity of its pixels. 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 XZ-2 are 19.8 x 14.9 inches or 50.4 x 37.8 cm for good quality, 15.9 x 11.9 inches or 40.3 x 30.2 cm for very good quality, and 13.2 x 9.9 inches or 33.6 x 25.2 cm for excellent quality prints.
Unlike the XZ-2, 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-F has a native sensitivity range from ISO 80 to ISO 25600. The corresponding ISO settings for the Olympus XZ-2 are ISO 100 to ISO 12800 (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 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 review, the PEN-F provides substantially higher image quality than the XZ-2, with an overall score that is 25 points higher. This advantage is based on 2.7 bits higher color depth, 1.1 EV in additional dynamic range, and 2 stops in additional low light sensitivity. The table below summarizes the physical sensor characteristics and sensor quality findings and compares them across a set of similar cameras.
Camera Model |
Sensor Class |
Resolution (MP) |
Horiz. Pixels |
Vert. Pixels |
Video Format |
DXO Portrait |
DXO Landscape |
DXO Sports |
DXO Overall |
||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Olympus PEN-F | Four Thirds | 20.2 | 5184 | 3888 | 1080/60p | 23.1 | 12.4 | 894 | 74 | |
2. | Olympus XZ-2 | 1/1.7 | 11.8 | 3968 | 2976 | 1080/30p | 20.4 | 11.3 | 216 | 49 | |
3. | Olympus E-M1 | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/30p | 23.0 | 12.7 | 757 | 73 | |
4. | Olympus E-M5 | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/60i | 22.8 | 12.3 | 826 | 71 | |
5. | Olympus E-M5 II | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/60p | 23.0 | 12.5 | 842 | 73 | |
6. | Olympus E-M10 II | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/60p | 23.1 | 12.5 | 842 | 73 | |
7. | Olympus E-M10 III | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 4K/30p | 23.1 | 12.8 | 1120 | 74 | |
8. | Olympus E-P5 | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/30p | 22.8 | 12.4 | 895 | 72 | |
9. | Olympus E-PL2 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 720/30p | 21.4 | 10.2 | 573 | 55 | |
10. | Olympus E-PL3 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 1080/60i | 20.9 | 10.3 | 499 | 52 | |
11. | Olympus E-PL7 | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/30p | 22.7 | 12.4 | 873 | 72 | |
12. | Olympus E-PL8 | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/30p | 23.0 | 12.6 | 1030 | 73 | |
13. | Olympus Stylus 1 | 1/1.7 | 11.8 | 3968 | 2976 | 1080/30p | 20.7 | 11.6 | 179 | 51 | |
14. | Olympus XZ-1 | 1/1.7 | 10.1 | 3664 | 2752 | 720/30p | 18.8 | 10.4 | 117 | 34 | |
15. | Panasonic GX7 | Four Thirds | 15.8 | 4592 | 3448 | 1080/60p | 22.6 | 12.2 | 718 | 70 | |
16. | Panasonic GX8 | Four Thirds | 20.2 | 5184 | 3888 | 4K/30p | 23.5 | 12.6 | 806 | 75 | |
17. | Pentax MX-1 | 1/1.7 | 12.0 | 4000 | 3000 | 1080/30p | 20.4 | 11.3 | 208 | 49 | |
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 can also record movies. Both cameras under consideration have a sensor with sufficiently fast read-out times for moving pictures, but the PEN-F provides a higher frame rate than the XZ-2. It can shoot video footage at 1080/60p, while the XZ-2 is limited to 1080/30p.
Feature comparison
Beyond body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range 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 XZ-2 relies on live view and the rear LCD for framing. That said, the XZ-2 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 PEN-F, the Olympus XZ-2, and comparable cameras.
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 PEN-F | 2360 | n | 3.0 / 1037 | swivel | Y | 1/8000s | 10.0/s | n | Y | |
2. | Olympus XZ-2 | optional | n | 3.0 / 920 | tilting | Y | 1/2000s | 5.0/s | Y | Y | |
3. | Olympus E-M1 | 2360 | n | 3.0 / 1037 | tilting | Y | 1/8000s | 10.0/s | n | Y | |
4. | Olympus E-M5 | 1440 | n | 3.0 / 610 | tilting | Y | 1/4000s | 9.0/s | n | Y | |
5. | Olympus E-M5 II | 2360 | n | 3.0 / 1037 | swivel | Y | 1/8000s | 10.0/s | n | Y | |
6. | Olympus E-M10 II | 2360 | n | 3.0 / 1040 | tilting | Y | 1/4000s | 8.0/s | Y | Y | |
7. | Olympus E-M10 III | 2360 | n | 3.0 / 1040 | tilting | Y | 1/4000s | 8.6/s | Y | Y | |
8. | Olympus E-P5 | optional | n | 3.0 / 1037 | tilting | Y | 1/8000s | 9.0/s | Y | Y | |
9. | Olympus E-PL2 | optional | n | 3.0 / 460 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | Y | Y | |
10. | Olympus E-PL3 | optional | n | 3.0 / 460 | tilting | n | 1/4000s | 5.5/s | n | Y | |
11. | Olympus E-PL7 | optional | n | 3.0 / 1037 | tilting | Y | 1/4000s | 8.0/s | n | Y | |
12. | Olympus E-PL8 | optional | n | 3.0 / 1037 | tilting | Y | 1/4000s | 8.0/s | n | Y | |
13. | Olympus Stylus 1 | 1440 | n | 3.0 / 1040 | tilting | Y | 1/2000s | 7.0/s | Y | Y | |
14. | Olympus XZ-1 | optional | n | 3.0 / 614 | fixed | n | 1/2000s | 2.0/s | Y | Y | |
15. | Panasonic GX7 | 2760 | n | 3.0 / 1040 | tilting | Y | 1/8000s | 5.0/s | Y | Y | |
16. | Panasonic GX8 | 2360 | n | 3.0 / 1040 | swivel | Y | 1/8000s | 10.0/s | n | Y | |
17. | Pentax MX-1 | none | n | 3.0 / 920 | tilting | n | 1/8000s | 1.0/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 XZ-2 has one, while the PEN-F does not. While the built-in flash of the XZ-2 is not very powerful, it can at times be useful as a fill-in light.
The PEN-F has an articulated LCD that can be turned to be front-facing. This characteristic will be appreciated by vloggers and photographers who are interested in snapping selfies. In contrast, the XZ-2 does not have a selfie-screen.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 and the Olympus XZ-2 both have 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 PEN-F and the XZ-2 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 XZ-2 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-F and Olympus XZ-2 and, in particular, the interfaces the cameras (and selected comparators) provide for accessory control and data transfer.
Camera Model |
Hotshoe Port |
Internal Mic / Speaker |
Microphone Port |
Headphone Port |
HDMI Port |
USB Port |
WiFi Support |
NFC Support |
Bluetooth Support |
||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Olympus PEN-F | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
2. | Olympus XZ-2 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
3. | Olympus E-M1 | Y | stereo / mono | Y | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
4. | Olympus E-M5 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
5. | Olympus E-M5 II | Y | stereo / mono | Y | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
6. | Olympus E-M10 II | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
7. | Olympus E-M10 III | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
8. | Olympus E-P5 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
9. | Olympus E-PL2 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
10. | Olympus E-PL3 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
11. | Olympus E-PL7 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
12. | Olympus E-PL8 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
13. | Olympus Stylus 1 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
14. | Olympus XZ-1 | Y | mono / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
15. | Panasonic GX7 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | Y | Y | - | |
16. | Panasonic GX8 | Y | stereo / mono | Y | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | Y | - | |
17. | Pentax MX-1 | - | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - |
It is notable that the PEN-F offers wifi support, while the XZ-2 does not. Wifi can be a very convenient means to transfer image data to an off-camera location.
Both the PEN-F and the XZ-2 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. Neither of the two has a direct successor, so they represent the end of the respective camera lines from Olympus. Further information on the features and operation of the PEN-F and XZ-2 can be found, respectively, in the Olympus PEN-F Manual (free pdf) or the online Olympus XZ-2 Manual.
Review summary
So what is the bottom line? Is the Olympus PEN-F better than the Olympus XZ-2 or vice versa? Below is a summary of the relative strengths of each of the two contestants.
Reasons to prefer the Olympus PEN-F:
- More detail: Offers more megapixels (20.2 vs 11.8MP) with a 31% higher linear resolution.
- 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 (25 points) in the DXO overall assessment.
- Richer colors: Generates images with noticeably better colors (2.7 bits more color depth).
- More dynamic range: Captures a larger spectrum of light and dark details (1.1 EV of extra DR).
- Better low-light sensitivity: Requires less light for good images (2 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 1080/30p).
- Easier framing: Has an electronic viewfinder for image composition and settings control.
- More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1037k vs 920k dots).
- More flexible LCD: Has a swivel screen for odd-angle shots in portrait or landscape orientation.
- 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 1/2000s) to freeze action.
- Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (10 vs 5 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
- Less disturbing: Has an electronic shutter option for completely silent shooting.
- More flexible: Accepts interchangeable lenses, so that lens characteristics can be altered.
- Easier file upload: Has wifi built in for automatic backup or image transfer to the web.
- Faster buffer clearing: Supports Ultra High Speed (UHS-II) SDXC cards.
- More modern: Reflects 3 years and 4 months of technical progress since the XZ-2 launch.
Arguments in favor of the Olympus XZ-2:
- Better moiré control: Has an anti-alias filter to avoid artificial patterns to appear in images.
- Ready to shoot: Has an integrated lens, whereas the PEN-F necessitates an extra lens.
- More compact: Is smaller (113x65mm vs 125x72mm) and will fit more readily into a bag.
- Less heavy: Has a lower weight even though it has a lens built in (unlike the PEN-F).
- 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 heavily discounted: Has been around for much longer (launched in September 2012).
If the count of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a measure, the PEN-F is the clear winner of the match-up (20 : 7 points). However, the relevance of individual strengths will vary across photographers, so that you might want to apply your own weighing scheme to the summary points when reflecting and deciding on a new camera. 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 PEN-F and the Olympus XZ-2 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 the spec-sheets of cameras can offer a general idea of their imaging potential, it says little about, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance of the PEN-F and the XZ-2 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 expert reviews 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.
Camera Model |
AP score |
CL score |
DCW score |
DPR score |
EPZ score |
PB score |
Camera Launch |
Launch Price |
Street Price |
||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Olympus PEN-F | .. | .. | 4/5 | 82/100 | 4.5/5 | 5/5 | Jan 2016 | US$ 1 199 | ebay.com | |
2. | Olympus XZ-2 | 4/5 | + | .. | .. | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Sep 2012 | US$ 599 | ebay.com | |
3. | Olympus E-M1 | 5/5 | + + | .. | 84/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Sep 2013 | US$ 1 399 | ebay.com | |
4. | Olympus E-M5 | 4/5 | + + | .. | 80/100 | 4.5/5 | 5/5 | Feb 2012 | US$ 1 299 | ebay.com | |
5. | Olympus E-M5 II | 5/5 | + + | 4.5/5 | 81/100 | 5/5 | 5/5 | Feb 2015 | US$ 1 099 | ebay.com | |
6. | Olympus E-M10 II | 4.5/5 | + + | .. | 80/100 | 5/5 | 5/5 | Aug 2015 | US$ 649 | ebay.com | |
7. | Olympus E-M10 III | .. | + | 5/5 | 80/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Aug 2017 | US$ 649 | ebay.com | |
8. | Olympus E-P5 | 5/5 | + + | .. | 78/100 | 4.5/5 | 5/5 | May 2013 | US$ 999 | ebay.com | |
9. | Olympus E-PL2 | 3/5 | 83/100 | .. | 71/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jan 2011 | US$ 599 | ebay.com | |
10. | Olympus E-PL3 | 3/5 | + + | .. | 72/100 | 4.5/5 | 4/5 | Jun 2011 | US$ 599 | ebay.com | |
11. | Olympus E-PL7 | 4/5 | + | .. | .. | 5/5 | 4/5 | Aug 2014 | US$ 599 | ebay.com | |
12. | Olympus E-PL8 | .. | .. | .. | .. | 4.5/5 | 4/5 | Sep 2016 | US$ 549 | ebay.com | |
13. | Olympus Stylus 1 | .. | + + | .. | .. | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Oct 2013 | US$ 699 | ebay.com | |
14. | Olympus XZ-1 | 4/5 | .. | .. | 74/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jan 2011 | US$ 499 | ebay.com | |
15. | Panasonic GX7 | 4/5 | + | .. | 79/100 | 5/5 | 5/5 | Aug 2013 | US$ 999 | ebay.com | |
16. | Panasonic GX8 | 5/5 | + | .. | 82/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jul 2015 | US$ 1 199 | ebay.com | |
17. | Pentax MX-1 | 3/5 | .. | .. | 74/100 | 4/5 | 4/5 | Jan 2013 | US$ 499 | ebay.com | |
Note: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available. |
The above review scores should be interpreted with care, though. The ratings are only valid when referring to cameras in the same category and of the same age. A score, therefore, has to be seen in close connection to the price and market introduction time 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.
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. There is also a set of direct links to comparison reviews that other users of the CAM-parator app explored.
- Canon 200D vs Olympus XZ-2
- Canon T6i vs Olympus XZ-2
- Canon XC10 vs Olympus PEN-F
- Fujifilm X-A5 vs Olympus PEN-F
- Fujifilm X30 vs Olympus PEN-F
- Leica Q2 vs Olympus XZ-2
- Leica S Typ 006 vs Olympus XZ-2
- Nikon 1 V2 vs Olympus PEN-F
- Olympus E-PM1 vs Olympus XZ-2
- Olympus PEN-F vs Sony RX1
- Olympus PEN-F vs Sony RX1R II
- Olympus XZ-2 vs Sony A6400
Specifications: Olympus PEN-F vs Olympus XZ-2
Below is a side-by-side comparison of the specs of the two cameras to facilitate a quick review of their differences and common features.
Camera Model | Olympus PEN-F | Olympus XZ-2 |
---|---|---|
Camera Type | Mirrorless system camera | Fixed lens compact camera |
Camera Lens | Micro Four Thirds lenses | 28-112mm f/1.8-2.5 |
Launch Date | January 2016 | September 2012 |
Launch Price | USD 1,199 | USD 599 |
Sensor Specs | Olympus PEN-F | Olympus XZ-2 |
Sensor Technology | CMOS | CMOS |
Sensor Format | Four Thirds Sensor | 1/1.7" Sensor |
Sensor Size | 17.3 x 13.0 mm | 7.6 x 5.7 mm |
Sensor Area | 224.9 mm2 | 43.32 mm2 |
Sensor Diagonal | 21.6 mm | 9.5 mm |
Crop Factor | 2.0x | 4.4x |
Sensor Resolution | 20.2 Megapixels | 11.8 Megapixels |
Image Resolution | 5184 x 3888 pixels | 3968 x 2976 pixels |
Pixel Pitch | 3.34 μm | 1.91 μm |
Pixel Density | 8.96 MP/cm2 | 27.26 MP/cm2 |
Moiré control | no AA filter | Anti-Alias filter |
Movie Capability | 1080/60p Video | 1080/30p Video |
ISO Setting | 80 - 25,600 ISO | 100 - 12,800 ISO |
Image Processor | TruePic VII | TruePic VI |
DXO Sensor Quality (score) | 74 | 49 |
DXO Color Depth (bits) | 23.1 | 20.4 |
DXO Dynamic Range (EV) | 12.4 | 11.3 |
DXO Low Light (ISO) | 894 | 216 |
Screen Specs | Olympus PEN-F | Olympus XZ-2 |
Viewfinder Type | Electronic viewfinder | Viewfinder optional |
Viewfinder Field of View | 100% | |
Viewfinder Magnification | 0.62x | |
Viewfinder Resolution | 2360k dots | |
LCD Framing | Live View | Live View |
Rear LCD Size | 3.0inch | 3.0inch |
LCD Resolution | 1037k dots | 920k dots |
LCD Attachment | Swivel screen | Tilting screen |
Touch Input | Touchscreen | Touchscreen |
Shooting Specs | Olympus PEN-F | Olympus XZ-2 |
Focus System | Contrast-detect AF | Contrast-detect AF |
Manual Focusing Aid | Focus Peaking | no Peaking Feature |
Continuous Shooting | 10 shutter flaps/s | 5 shutter flaps/s |
Electronic Shutter | up to 1/16000s | no E-Shutter |
Time-Lapse Photography | Intervalometer built-in | Intervalometer built-in |
Image Stabilization | In-body stabilization | In-body stabilization |
Fill Flash | no On-Board Flash | Built-in Flash |
Storage Medium | SDXC cards | SDXC cards |
Single or Dual Card Slots | Single card slot | Single card slot |
UHS card support | UHS-II | no |
Connectivity Specs | Olympus PEN-F | Olympus XZ-2 |
External Flash | Hotshoe | Hotshoe |
USB Connector | USB 2.0 | USB 2.0 |
HDMI Port | micro HDMI | mini HDMI |
Wifi Support | Wifi built-in | no Wifi |
Body Specs | Olympus PEN-F | Olympus XZ-2 |
Battery Type | Olympus BLN-1 | Olympus Li-90B |
Battery Life (CIPA) | 330 shots per charge | 340 shots per charge |
Body Dimensions |
125 x 72 x 37 mm (4.9 x 2.8 x 1.5 in) |
113 x 65 x 48 mm (4.4 x 2.6 x 1.9 in) |
Camera Weight | 427 g (15.1 oz) | 346 g (12.2 oz) |
Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.