Olympus XZ-1 vs Ricoh GR III

The Olympus XZ-1 and the Ricoh GR III are two digital cameras that were revealed to the public, respectively, in January 2011 and February 2019. Both the XZ-1 and the GR III are fixed lens compact cameras that are based on a 1/1.7-inch (XZ-1) and an APS-C (GR III) sensor. The Olympus has a resolution of 10.1 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 XZ-1		Ricoh GR III
Fixed lens compact camera		Fixed lens compact camera
28-112mm f/1.8-2.5		28mm f/2.8
10.1 MP – 1/1.7" sensor		24 MP – APS-C sensor
720/30p Video		1080/60p Video
ISO 100-6,400		ISO 100-102,400
Viewfinder optional		Viewfinder optional
3.0" LCD – 614k dots		3.0" LCD – 1037k dots
Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)		Fixed touchscreen
2 shutter flaps per second		4 shutter flaps per second
In-body stabilization		In-body stabilization
320 shots per battery charge		200 shots per battery charge
111 x 65 x 42 mm, 275 g		109 x 62 x 33 mm, 257 g

Check XZ-1 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 XZ-1 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 XZ-1 and the Ricoh GR III. 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 XZ-1 can be obtained in two different colors (black, 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 notably smaller (6 percent) than the Olympus XZ-1. Moreover, the GR III is markedly lighter (7 percent) than the XZ-1. In this context, it is worth noting that neither the XZ-1 nor the GR III are weather-sealed.

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. In case you want to display and compare another camera duo, you can use the CAM-parator app to select your camera combination among a large number of options.

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 XZ-1	111 mm	65 mm	42 mm	275 g	320	n	Jan 2011	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 TG-5	113 mm	66 mm	32 mm	250 g	340	Y	May 2017	449	ebay.com
5.		Olympus E-PM2	110 mm	64 mm	34 mm	269 g	360	n	Sep 2012	499	ebay.com
6.		Olympus XZ-2	113 mm	65 mm	48 mm	346 g	340	n	Sep 2012	599	ebay.com
7.		Olympus E-PL3	110 mm	64 mm	37 mm	313 g	300	n	Jun 2011	599	ebay.com
8.		Olympus E-PM1	110 mm	64 mm	34 mm	265 g	330	n	Jun 2011	499	ebay.com
9.		Olympus E-PL1	115 mm	72 mm	42 mm	334 g	290	n	Feb 2010	599	ebay.com
10.		Panasonic ZS200	111 mm	65 mm	45 mm	340 g	370	n	Feb 2018	799	amazon.com
11.		Panasonic FZ200	125 mm	87 mm	110 mm	588 g	540	n	Jul 2012	599	ebay.com
12.		Panasonic LX7	111 mm	68 mm	46 mm	298 g	330	n	Jul 2012	499	ebay.com
13.		Panasonic FZ150	124 mm	82 mm	92 mm	528 g	410	n	Aug 2011	499	ebay.com
14.		Panasonic LX5	110 mm	65 mm	43 mm	271 g	400	n	Jul 2010	499	ebay.com
15.		Ricoh GR IIIx	109 mm	62 mm	35 mm	262 g	200	n	Sep 2021	999	amazon.com
16.		Ricoh GR II	117 mm	63 mm	35 mm	251 g	320	n	Jun 2015	699	ebay.com
17.		Ricoh GR	117 mm	61 mm	35 mm	245 g	290	n	Apr 2013	799	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 manufacturer’s suggested retail prices give an idea on the placement of the camera in the maker’s lineup and the broader market. The XZ-1 was launched at a markedly lower price (by 44 percent) than the GR III, 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 imaging sensor is at the core of digital cameras and its size is one of the main determining factors 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. 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.

Of the two cameras under consideration, the Olympus XZ-1 features a 1/1.7-inch sensor and the Ricoh GR III an APS-C sensor. The sensor area in the GR III is 698 percent bigger. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 4.4 and 1.5. The sensor in the XZ-1 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 XZ-1 (10.1MP), but the GR III nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 3.91μm versus 2.13μm for the XZ-1) due to its larger sensor. Moreover, the GR III is a much more recent model (by 8 years and 1 month) than the XZ-1, 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 XZ-1 are 18.3 x 13.8 inches or 46.5 x 35 cm for good quality, 14.7 x 11 inches or 37.2 x 28 cm for very good quality, and 12.2 x 9.2 inches or 31 x 23.3 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 XZ-1 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 6400. The corresponding ISO settings for the Ricoh GR III are ISO 100 to ISO 102400 (no boost).

In terms of underlying technology, the XZ-1 is build around a CCD sensor, while the GR III uses a 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 XZ-1	1/1.7	10.1	3664	2752	720/30p	18.8	10.4	117	34
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 TG-5	1/2.3	12.0	4000	3000	4K/30p	20.5	11.9	934	50
5.		Olympus E-PM2	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	22.7	12.2	932	72
6.		Olympus XZ-2	1/1.7	11.8	3968	2976	1080/30p	20.4	11.3	216	49
7.		Olympus E-PL3	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	20.9	10.3	499	52
8.		Olympus E-PM1	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	21.0	10.3	499	52
9.		Olympus E-PL1	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.5	10.1	487	54
10.		Panasonic ZS200	1-inch	20.0	5472	3648	4K/30p	22.0	12.2	449	64
11.		Panasonic FZ200	1/2.3	12.0	4000	3000	1080/60p	19.1	10.8	114	37
12.		Panasonic LX7	1/1.7	10.0	3648	2736	1080/60p	20.7	11.7	147	50
13.		Panasonic FZ150	1/2.3	12.0	4000	3000	1080/60p	19.4	10.9	132	40
14.		Panasonic LX5	1/1.7	10.0	3648	2736	720/60p	19.6	10.8	132	41
15.		Ricoh GR IIIx	APS-C	24.0	6000	4000	1080/60p	24.2	13.8	2146	85
16.		Ricoh GR II	APS-C	16.1	4928	3264	1080/30p	23.6	13.7	1078	80
17.		Ricoh GR	APS-C	16.1	4928	3264	1080/30p	23.6	13.5	972	78
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 GR III provides a better video resolution than the XZ-1. It can shoot movie footage at 1080/60p, while the Olympus is limited to 720/30p.

Feature comparison

Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. The XZ-1 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-2 for the XZ-1 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 XZ-1, 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 XZ-1	optional	n	3.0 / 614	fixed	n	1/2000s	2.0/s	Y	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 TG-5	none	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/2000s	20.0/s	Y	Y
5.		Olympus E-PM2	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	Y	1/4000s	8.0/s	n	Y
6.		Olympus XZ-2	optional	n	3.0 / 920	tilting	Y	1/2000s	5.0/s	Y	Y
7.		Olympus E-PL3	optional	n	3.0 / 460	tilting	n	1/4000s	5.5/s	n	Y
8.		Olympus E-PM1	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/4000s	5.5/s	n	Y
9.		Olympus E-PL1	optional	n	2.7 / 230	fixed	n	1/2000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
10.		Panasonic ZS200	2330	n	3.0 / 1240	fixed	Y	1/2000s	10.0/s	Y	Y
11.		Panasonic FZ200	1312	n	3.0 / 460	swivel	n	1/4000s	12.0/s	Y	Y
12.		Panasonic LX7	optional	n	3.0 / 920	fixed	n	1/4000s	11.0/s	Y	Y
13.		Panasonic FZ150	202	n	3.0 / 460	swivel	n	1/2000s	12.0/s	Y	Y
14.		Panasonic LX5	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/4000s	2.5/s	Y	Y
15.		Ricoh GR IIIx	optional	n	3.0 / 1037	fixed	Y	1/4000s	4.0/s	n	Y
16.		Ricoh GR II	optional	n	3.0 / 1230	fixed	n	1/4000s	4.0/s	Y	n
17.		Ricoh GR	optional	n	3.0 / 1230	fixed	n	1/4000s	4.0/s	Y	n
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-1 has one, while the GR III does not. While the built-in flash of the XZ-1 is not very powerful, it can at times be useful as a fill-in light.

The Olympus XZ-1 and the Ricoh GR III 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.

The XZ-1 is equipped with a zoom lens, while the GR III comes with a built-in prime. The XZ-1 has a 28-112mm f/1.8-2.5 optic and the GR III offers a 28mm f/2.8 (focal lengths in full frame equivalent terms). Hence, the Olympus and Ricoh provide the same view at the wide-angle end, but the Ricoh has less tele-photo reach at the long end. The XZ-1 offers the faster maximum aperture.

Concerning the storage of imaging data, both the XZ-1 and the GR III write their files to SDXC cards. The GR III supports UHS-I cards (Ultra High Speed data transfer of up to 104 MB/s), while the XZ-1 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 XZ-1 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 XZ-1	Y	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 TG-5	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
5.		Olympus E-PM2	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
6.		Olympus XZ-2	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
7.		Olympus E-PL3	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
8.		Olympus E-PM1	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
9.		Olympus E-PL1	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
10.		Panasonic ZS200	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	Y
11.		Panasonic FZ200	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
12.		Panasonic LX7	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
13.		Panasonic FZ150	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
14.		Panasonic LX5	Y	mono / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
15.		Ricoh GR IIIx	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	-	3.0	Y	-	Y
16.		Ricoh GR II	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
17.		Ricoh GR	Y	mono / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	-	-	-

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 XZ-1 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 XZ-1 has been discontinued (but can be found pre-owned on ebay). As a replacement in the same line of cameras, the XZ-1 was succeeded by the Olympus XZ-2. Further information on the features and operation of the XZ-1 and GR III can be found, respectively, in the Olympus XZ-1 Manual (free pdf) or the online Ricoh GR III Manual.

Review summary

So what is the bottom line? Is the Olympus XZ-1 better than the Ricoh GR III or vice versa? A synthesis of the relative strong points of each of the models is listed below.

Reasons to prefer the Olympus XZ-1:

• Better moiré control: Has an anti-alias filter to avoid artificial patterns to appear in images.
• Better light gathering: Has a lens with a wider maximum aperture (f/1.8 vs f/2.8).
• Longer lasting: Can take more shots (320 versus 200) on a single battery charge.
• Easier fill-in: Is equipped with a small onboard flash to brighten deep shadow areas.
• More affordable: Was introduced into a lower priced category (44 percent cheaper at launch).
• More heavily discounted: Has been available for much longer (launched in January 2011).

Arguments in favor of the Ricoh GR III:

• More detail: Has more megapixels (24 vs 10.1MP), which boosts linear resolution by 57%.
• 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 definition movie capture (1080/60p vs 720/30p).
• Better live-view autofocus: Features on-sensor phase-detection for more confident autofocus.
• More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1037k vs 614k dots).
• Fewer buttons to press: Has a touchscreen to facilitate handling and shooting adjustments.
• Faster shutter: Has higher mechanical shutter speed (1/4000s vs 1/2000s) to freeze action.
• Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (4 vs 2 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
• 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.
• Faster buffer clearing: Has an SD card interface that supports the UHS-I standard.
• More modern: Reflects 8 years and 1 month of technical progress since the XZ-1 launch.

If the count of individual advantages (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the GR III is the clear winner of the contest (18 : 6 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 XZ-1 and the Ricoh GR III place the cameras among the top in their class? Find out in the latest Best Travel-Zoom Camera and Best Prime Lens Compact Camera listings whether the two cameras rank among the cream of the crop.

In any case, while the comparison of technical specifications can provide a useful overview of the capabilities of different cameras, it remains partial and cannot reveal, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance when actually working with the XZ-1 or the GR III. 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 expert reviews 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 XZ-1	4/5	..	..	74/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jan 2011	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 TG-5	..	+ +	4.5/5	..	4/5	4/5	May 2017	449	ebay.com
5.		Olympus E-PM2	3/5	..	..	77/100	5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2012	499	ebay.com
6.		Olympus XZ-2	4/5	+	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2012	599	ebay.com
7.		Olympus E-PL3	3/5	+ +	..	72/100	4.5/5	4/5	Jun 2011	599	ebay.com
8.		Olympus E-PM1	..	86/100	..	71/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2011	499	ebay.com
9.		Olympus E-PL1	..	86/100	..	69/100	4/5	4.5/5	Feb 2010	599	ebay.com
10.		Panasonic ZS200	..	+ +	4.5/5	81/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Feb 2018	799	amazon.com
11.		Panasonic FZ200	3/5	+ +	..	80/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jul 2012	599	ebay.com
12.		Panasonic LX7	3/5	+ +	..	75/100	4/5	4.5/5	Jul 2012	499	ebay.com
13.		Panasonic FZ150	3/5	+ +	..	76/100	4/5	4.5/5	Aug 2011	499	ebay.com
14.		Panasonic LX5	4/5	+	..	73/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jul 2010	499	ebay.com
15.		Ricoh GR IIIx	..	..	4.5/5	..	..	..	Sep 2021	999	amazon.com
16.		Ricoh GR II	..	..	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2015	699	ebay.com
17.		Ricoh GR	5/5	..	..	79/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Apr 2013	799	ebay.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. 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, please note that some of the review sites have changed their methodology and reporting over time.

Check XZ-1 offers at
ebay.com
Check GR III price at
amazon.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 XZ-1 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.