Olympus PEN-F vs OM System OM-1

The Olympus PEN-F and the OM System OM-1 are two enthusiast cameras that were revealed to the public, respectively, in January 2016 and February 2022. Both the PEN-F and the OM-1 are mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras that are equipped with a Four Thirds sensor. Both cameras offer a resolution of 20.2 megapixels.

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

Headline Specifications

Olympus PEN-F		OM System OM-1
Mirrorless system camera		Mirrorless system camera
Micro Four Thirds lenses		Micro Four Thirds lenses
20.2 MP – Four Thirds sensor		20.2 MP – Four Thirds sensor
1080/60p Video		4K/60p Video
ISO 80-25,600		ISO 80-25,600 (80 - 102,400)
Electronic viewfinder (2360k dots)		Electronic viewfinder (5760k dots)
3.0" LCD – 1037k dots		3.0" LCD – 1640k dots
Swivel touchscreen		Swivel touchscreen
10 shutter flaps per second		10 shutter flaps per second
In-body stabilization		In-body stabilization
not weather sealed		Weathersealed body
330 shots per battery charge		520 shots per battery charge
125 x 72 x 37 mm, 427 g		135 x 92 x 73 mm, 599 g

Check PEN-F offers at
ebay.com
Check OM-1 offers at
ebay.com

Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Olympus PEN-F and the OM System OM-1? 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 PEN-F and the OM System OM-1. 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 PEN-F can be obtained in two different colors (black, silver), while the OM-1 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 OM System OM-1 is notably larger (38 percent) than the Olympus PEN-F. Moreover, the OM-1 is substantially heavier (40 percent) than the PEN-F. It is noteworthy in this context that the OM-1 is splash and dust-proof, while the PEN-F does not feature any corresponding weather-sealing.

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.

Concerning battery life, the PEN-F gets 330 shots out of its Olympus BLN-1 battery, while the OM-1 can take 520 images on a single charge of its OM System BLX-1 power pack. The power pack in the OM-1 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 PEN-F	125 mm	72 mm	37 mm	427 g	330	n	Jan 2016	1,199	ebay.com
2.		OM System OM-1	135 mm	92 mm	73 mm	599 g	520	Y	Feb 2022	2,199	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-M1 II	134 mm	91 mm	67 mm	574 g	440	Y	Sep 2016	1,999	ebay.com
5.		Olympus E-M1 III	134 mm	91 mm	69 mm	580 g	420	Y	Feb 2020	1,799	ebay.com
6.		Olympus E-M5	122 mm	89 mm	43 mm	425 g	360	Y	Feb 2012	1,299	ebay.com
7.		Olympus E-M5 II	124 mm	85 mm	45 mm	469 g	310	Y	Feb 2015	1,099	ebay.com
8.		Olympus E-M10 II	120 mm	83 mm	47 mm	390 g	320	n	Aug 2015	649	ebay.com
9.		Olympus E-M10 III	122 mm	84 mm	50 mm	410 g	330	n	Aug 2017	649	ebay.com
10.		Olympus E-P5	122 mm	69 mm	37 mm	420 g	330	n	May 2013	999	ebay.com
11.		Olympus E-PL7	115 mm	67 mm	38 mm	357 g	350	n	Aug 2014	599	ebay.com
12.		Olympus E-PL8	115 mm	67 mm	38 mm	357 g	350	n	Sep 2016	549	ebay.com
13.		OM System OM-1 II	135 mm	92 mm	73 mm	599 g	500	Y	Jan 2024	2,399	amazon.com
14.		Panasonic GH5	139 mm	98 mm	87 mm	725 g	410	Y	Jan 2017	1,999	ebay.com
15.		Panasonic GH5 II	139 mm	98 mm	87 mm	727 g	400	Y	May 2021	1,699	amazon.com
16.		Panasonic GX7	123 mm	71 mm	55 mm	402 g	350	n	Aug 2013	999	ebay.com
17.		Panasonic GX8	133 mm	78 mm	63 mm	487 g	330	Y	Jul 2015	1,199	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 manufacturer’s suggested retail prices give an idea on the placement of the camera in the maker’s lineup and the broader market. The PEN-F was launched at a markedly lower price (by 45 percent) than the OM-1, 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 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. Further, a large sensor camera will give the photographer additional creative options when using shallow depth-of-field to isolate a subject from its 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 OM-1 uses a more advanced image processing engine (TruePic X) than the PEN-F (TruePic VII), with benefits for noise reduction, color accuracy, and processing speed.

The two cameras under review do not only share the same sensor size, but also offer an identical resolution of 20.2 megapixels. This similarity in sensor specs implies that both the PEN-F and the OM-1 have the same pixel density, as well as the same pixel size. It should, however, be noted that the OM-1 is much more recent (by 6 years) than the PEN-F, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time. Coming back to sensor resolution, it should be mentioned that neither of the two cameras has an anti-alias filter installed, so they are able to capture all the detail the sensor resolves.

The OM-1 has on-sensor phase detect pixels, which results in fast and reliable autofocus acquisition even during live view operation.

Both cameras have the capacity to capture high quality composite images by combining multiple shots after shifting the 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 OM System OM-1 are ISO 80 to ISO 25600, with the possibility to increase the ISO range to 80-102400.

In terms of underlying technology, the PEN-F is build around a CMOS sensor, while the OM-1 uses a Stacked BSI-CMOS imager. 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 determines an overall sensor rating, as well as sub-scores for low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports"), dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), and color depth ("DXO Portrait"). The 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 PEN-F	Four Thirds	20.2	5184	3888	1080/60p	23.1	12.4	894	74
2.		OM System OM-1	Four Thirds	20.2	5184	3888	4K/60p	23.4	13.4	1553	77
3.		Olympus E-M1	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	23.0	12.7	757	73
4.		Olympus E-M1 II	Four Thirds	20.2	5184	3888	4K/30p	23.7	12.8	1312	80
5.		Olympus E-M1 III	Four Thirds	20.2	5184	3888	4K/30p	23.3	13.1	1356	76
6.		Olympus E-M5	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/60i	22.8	12.3	826	71
7.		Olympus E-M5 II	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/60p	23.0	12.5	842	73
8.		Olympus E-M10 II	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/60p	23.1	12.5	842	73
9.		Olympus E-M10 III	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	4K/30p	23.1	12.8	1120	74
10.		Olympus E-P5	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	22.8	12.4	895	72
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.		OM System OM-1 II	Four Thirds	20.2	5184	3888	4K/60p	23.4	13.6	1749	78
14.		Panasonic GH5	Four Thirds	20.2	5184	3888	4K/60p	23.9	13.0	807	77
15.		Panasonic GH5 II	Four Thirds	20.2	5184	3888	4K/60p	23.7	13.1	1136	79
16.		Panasonic GX7	Four Thirds	15.8	4592	3448	1080/60p	22.6	12.2	718	70
17.		Panasonic GX8	Four Thirds	20.2	5184	3888	4K/30p	23.5	12.6	806	75
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. The two cameras under consideration both have sensors whose read-out speed is fast enough to capture moving pictures, but the OM-1 provides a better video resolution than the PEN-F. It can shoot movie footage at 4K/60p, while the Olympus is limited to 1080/60p.

Feature comparison

Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. The two cameras under review are similar with respect to both having an electronic viewfinder. However, the one in the OM-1 offers a substantially higher resolution than the one in the PEN-F (5760k vs 2360k dots). The following table reports on some other key feature differences and similarities of the Olympus PEN-F, the OM System OM-1, 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 PEN-F	2360	n	3.0 / 1037	swivel	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
2.		OM System OM-1	5760	n	3.0 / 1640	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-M1 II	2360	n	3.0 / 1037	swivel	Y	1/8000s	18.0/s	n	Y
5.		Olympus E-M1 III	2360	n	3.0 / 1037	swivel	Y	1/8000s	18.0/s	n	Y
6.		Olympus E-M5	1440	n	3.0 / 610	tilting	Y	1/4000s	9.0/s	n	Y
7.		Olympus E-M5 II	2360	n	3.0 / 1037	swivel	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
8.		Olympus E-M10 II	2360	n	3.0 / 1040	tilting	Y	1/4000s	8.0/s	Y	Y
9.		Olympus E-M10 III	2360	n	3.0 / 1040	tilting	Y	1/4000s	8.6/s	Y	Y
10.		Olympus E-P5	optional	n	3.0 / 1037	tilting	Y	1/8000s	9.0/s	Y	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.		OM System OM-1 II	5760	n	3.0 / 1640	swivel	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
14.		Panasonic GH5	3680	n	3.2 / 1620	swivel	Y	1/8000s	12.0/s	n	Y
15.		Panasonic GH5 II	3680	n	3.0 / 1840	swivel	Y	1/8000s	12.0/s	n	Y
16.		Panasonic GX7	2760	n	3.0 / 1040	tilting	Y	1/8000s	5.0/s	Y	Y
17.		Panasonic GX8	2360	n	3.0 / 1040	swivel	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
Note: *) Information refers to the mechanical shutter, unless the camera only has an electronic one.

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, both cameras under consideration feature an 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 OM System OM-1 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 OM-1 write their files to SDXC cards. The OM-1 features dual card slots, which can be very useful in case a memory card fails. In contrast, the PEN-F only has one slot. Moreover, both cameras support UHS-II cards (Ultra High Speed data transfer of up to 312 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-F and OM System OM-1 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 PEN-F	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
2.		OM System OM-1	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.0	Y	-	Y
3.		Olympus E-M1	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
4.		Olympus E-M1 II	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.0	Y	-	-
5.		Olympus E-M1 III	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.1	Y	-	Y
6.		Olympus E-M5	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
7.		Olympus E-M5 II	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
8.		Olympus E-M10 II	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
9.		Olympus E-M10 III	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
10.		Olympus E-P5	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
11.		Olympus E-PL7	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
12.		Olympus E-PL8	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
13.		OM System OM-1 II	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.0	Y	-	Y
14.		Panasonic GH5	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	full	3.1	Y	-	Y
15.		Panasonic GH5 II	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	full	3.2	Y	-	Y
16.		Panasonic GX7	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	Y	Y	-
17.		Panasonic GX8	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-

It is notable that the OM-1 has a headphone jack, which makes it possible to attach external headphones and monitor the quality of sound during the recording process. The PEN-F lacks such a headphone port.

Studio photographers will appreciate that the OM System OM-1 (unlike the PEN-F) features a PC Sync socket, so that professional strobe lights can be controlled by the camera.

Both the PEN-F and the OM-1 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The OM-1 was replaced by the OM System OM-1 II, while the PEN-F does not have a direct successor. Further information on the features and operation of the PEN-F and OM-1 can be found, respectively, in the Olympus PEN-F Manual (free pdf) or the online OM System OM-1 Manual.

Review summary

So what is the bottom line? Is the Olympus PEN-F better than the OM System OM-1 or vice versa? A synthesis of the relative strong points of each of the models is listed below.

Reasons to prefer the Olympus PEN-F:

• More compact: Is smaller (125x72mm vs 135x92mm) and thus needs less room in the bag.
• Less heavy: Is lighter (by 172g or 29 percent) and hence easier to carry around.
• More affordable: Was introduced into a lower priced category (45 percent cheaper at launch).
• More heavily discounted: Has been available for much longer (launched in January 2016).

Arguments in favor of the OM System OM-1:

• Better jpgs: Has a more modern image processing engine (TruePic X vs TruePic VII).
• Better video: Provides higher definition movie capture (4K/60p vs 1080/60p).
• Better live-view autofocus: Features on-sensor phase-detection for more confident autofocus.
• Better sound: Can connect to an external microphone for higher quality sound recording.
• Better sound control: Has a headphone port that enables audio monitoring while recording.
• More detailed viewfinder: Has higher resolution electronic viewfinder (5760k vs 2360k dots).
• Larger viewfinder image: Features a viewfinder with a higher magnification (0.82x vs 0.62x).
• More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1640k vs 1037k dots).
• Longer lasting: Gets more shots (520 versus 330) out of a single battery charge.
• Easier travel charging: Can be conveniently charged via its USB port.
• Better sealing: Is splash and dust sealed for shooting in inclement weather conditions.
• Faster data transfer: Supports a more advanced USB protocol (3.0 vs 2.0).
• Easier wireless transfer: Supports Bluetooth for image sharing without cables.
• Better studio light control: Has a PC Sync socket to connect to professional strobe lights.
• Greater peace of mind: Features a second card slot as a backup in case of memory card failure.
• More modern: Reflects 6 years of technical progress since the PEN-F launch.

If the count of individual advantages (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the OM-1 is the clear winner of the contest (16 : 4 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 OM System OM-1 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 remains partial and cannot reveal, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance when actually working with the PEN-F or the OM-1. At times, user reviews, such as those published at amazon, address these issues in a useful manner, but such feedback is on many occasions incomplete, inconsistent, and unreliable.

Expert reviews

This is why hands-on reviews by experts are important. The adjacent summary-table relays the overall verdicts of several of the most popular 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 PEN-F	..	..	4/5	82/100	4.5/5	5/5	Jan 2016	1,199	ebay.com
2.		OM System OM-1	5/5	..	..	87/100	5/5	4.5/5	Feb 2022	2,199	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-M1 II	5/5	+ +	5/5	85/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2016	1,999	ebay.com
5.		Olympus E-M1 III	5/5	..	5/5	83/100	4.5/5	4/5	Feb 2020	1,799	ebay.com
6.		Olympus E-M5	4/5	+ +	..	80/100	4.5/5	5/5	Feb 2012	1,299	ebay.com
7.		Olympus E-M5 II	5/5	+ +	4.5/5	81/100	5/5	5/5	Feb 2015	1,099	ebay.com
8.		Olympus E-M10 II	4.5/5	+ +	..	80/100	5/5	5/5	Aug 2015	649	ebay.com
9.		Olympus E-M10 III	..	+	5/5	80/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Aug 2017	649	ebay.com
10.		Olympus E-P5	5/5	+ +	..	78/100	4.5/5	5/5	May 2013	999	ebay.com
11.		Olympus E-PL7	4/5	+	..	..	5/5	4/5	Aug 2014	599	ebay.com
12.		Olympus E-PL8	..	..	..	..	4.5/5	4/5	Sep 2016	549	ebay.com
13.		OM System OM-1 II	..	..	..	..	..	..	Jan 2024	2,399	amazon.com
14.		Panasonic GH5	4.5/5	+ +	..	85/100	4.5/5	5/5	Jan 2017	1,999	ebay.com
15.		Panasonic GH5 II	4.5/5	..	4.5/5	85/100	4.5/5	5/5	May 2021	1,699	amazon.com
16.		Panasonic GX7	4/5	+	..	79/100	5/5	5/5	Aug 2013	999	ebay.com
17.		Panasonic GX8	5/5	+	..	82/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jul 2015	1,199	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. Hence, a score should always be seen in the context of the camera's market launch date and its price, and comparisons of ratings among very different cameras or across long time periods have little meaning. Also, kindly note that some of the listed sites have over time developped their review approaches and their reporting style.

Check PEN-F offers at
ebay.com
Check OM-1 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. As an alternative, you can also directly jump to any one of the listed comparisons that were previously generated by the CAM-parator tool.

~

Check PEN-F offers at
ebay.com
Check OM-1 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.