ad
ad
A potelyt.com – Photography & Imaging Resources
ad
PW

Olympus XZ-2 vs Ricoh GR III

The Olympus XZ-2 and the Ricoh GR III are two digital cameras that were announced, respectively, in September 2012 and February 2019. Both the XZ-2 and the GR III are fixed lens compact cameras that are based on a 1/1.7-inch (XZ-2) and an APS-C (GR III) sensor. The Olympus has a resolution of 11.8 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-2
versus
Ricoh GR III
Olympus XZ-2   Ricoh GR III
Fixed lens compact camera Fixed lens compact camera
28-112mm f/1.8-2.5 28mm f/2.8
11.8 MP – 1/1.7" sensor 24 MP – APS-C sensor
1080/30p Video 1080/60p Video
ISO 100-12,800 ISO 100-102,400
Viewfinder optional Viewfinder optional
3.0" LCD – 920k dots 3.0" LCD – 1037k dots
Tilting touchscreen Fixed touchscreen
5 shutter flaps per second 4 shutter flaps per second
In-body stabilizationIn-body stabilization
340 shots per battery charge200 shots per battery charge
113 x 65 x 48 mm, 346 g 109 x 62 x 33 mm, 257 g
Olympus XZ-2:
Check Ebay offers
Ricoh GR III:
Check Amazon price

Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Olympus XZ-2 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-2 and the Ricoh GR III. 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 dimensions are rounded to the nearest millimeter.

Size Olympus XZ-2 vs Ricoh GR III
Compare XZ-2 versus GR III top
Comparison XZ-2 or GR III rear

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 (8 percent) than the Olympus XZ-2. Moreover, the GR III is markedly lighter (26 percent) than the XZ-2. In this context, it is worth noting that neither the XZ-2 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 following table provides a synthesis of the main physical specifications of the two cameras and other similar ones. 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.

scroll hint
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-2 113 mm 65 mm 48 mm 346 g 340 n Sep 2012 599i
2.
 
Ricoh GR III 109 mm 62 mm 33 mm 257 g 200 n Feb 2019 899 i
3.
 
Canon G16 109 mm 76 mm 40 mm 356 g 360 n Aug 2013 549 i
4.
 
Canon G15 107 mm 76 mm 40 mm 352 g 350 n Sep 2012 499i
5.
 
Fujifilm XF10 113 mm 64 mm 41 mm 279 g 330 n Jul 2018 499 i
6.
 
Fujifilm X10 117 mm 70 mm 57 mm 350 g 270 n Sep 2011 599i
7.
 
Olympus Stylus 1 116 mm 87 mm 57 mm 402 g 410 n Oct 2013 699i
8.
 
Olympus E-P3 122 mm 69 mm 34 mm 369 g 330 n Jun 2011 799i
9.
 
Olympus E-PL2 114 mm 72 mm 42 mm 362 g 280 n Jan 2011 599i
10.
 
Olympus E-PL3 110 mm 64 mm 37 mm 313 g 300 n Jun 2011 599i
11.
 
Olympus XZ-1 111 mm 65 mm 42 mm 275 g 320 n Jan 2011 499i
12.
 
Panasonic ZS200 111 mm 65 mm 45 mm 340 g 370 n Feb 2018 799 i
13.
 
Panasonic LX7 111 mm 68 mm 46 mm 298 g 330 n Jul 2012 499i
14.
 
Pentax MX-1 122 mm 61 mm 51 mm 391 g 290 n Jan 2013 499i
15.
 
Ricoh GR IIIx 109 mm 62 mm 35 mm 262 g 200 n Sep 2021 999 i
16.
 
Ricoh GR II 117 mm 63 mm 35 mm 251 g 320 n Jun 2015 699 i
17.
 
Ricoh GR 117 mm 61 mm 35 mm 245 g 290 n Apr 2013 799i
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 listed launch prices provide an indication of the market segment that the manufacturer of the cameras have been targeting. The XZ-2 was launched at a markedly lower price (by 33 percent) than the GR III, which puts it into a different market segment. 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 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 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 XZ-2 features a 1/1.7-inch sensor and the Ricoh GR III an APS-C sensor. The sensor area in the GR III is 753 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-2 has a native 4:3 aspect ratio, while the one in the GR III offers a 3:2 aspect.

Olympus XZ-2 and Ricoh GR III sensor measures

With 24MP, the GR III offers a higher resolution than the XZ-2 (11.8MP), but the GR III nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 3.91μm versus 1.91μm for the XZ-2) due to its larger sensor. Moreover, the GR III is a much more recent model (by 6 years and 5 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 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-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.

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-2 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 12800. The corresponding ISO settings for the Ricoh GR III are ISO 100 to ISO 102400 (no boost).

XZ-2 versus GR III MP

Since 2007, DXO Mark has published sensor performance measurements that have been derived using a consistent methodology. 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.

scroll hint
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-2 1/1.7 11.8 3968 29761080/30p20.411.321649
2.
 
Ricoh GR III APS-C 24.0 6000 40001080/60p24.113.5189783
3.
 
Canon G16 1/1.7 12.0 4000 30001080/60p21.011.723054
4.
 
Canon G15 1/1.7 12.0 4000 30001080/24p19.911.516546
5.
 
Fujifilm XF10 APS-C 24.0 6000 40004K/15p24.013.4184483
6.
 
Fujifilm X10 2/3 12.0 4000 30001080/30p20.511.324550
7.
 
Olympus Stylus 1 1/1.7 11.8 3968 29761080/30p20.711.617951
8.
 
Olympus E-P3 Four Thirds 12.2 4032 30241080/60i20.810.153651
9.
 
Olympus E-PL2 Four Thirds 12.2 4032 3024720/30p21.410.257355
10.
 
Olympus E-PL3 Four Thirds 12.2 4032 30241080/60i20.910.349952
11.
 
Olympus XZ-1 1/1.7 10.1 3664 2752720/30p18.810.411734
12.
 
Panasonic ZS200 1-inch 20.0 5472 36484K/30p22.012.244964
13.
 
Panasonic LX7 1/1.7 10.0 3648 27361080/60p20.711.714750
14.
 
Pentax MX-1 1/1.7 12.0 4000 30001080/30p20.411.320849
15.
 
Ricoh GR IIIx APS-C 24.0 6000 40001080/60p24.213.8214685
16.
 
Ricoh GR II APS-C 16.1 4928 32641080/30p23.613.7107880
17.
 
Ricoh GR APS-C 16.1 4928 32641080/30p23.613.597278
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 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 XZ-2. 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 range of features. The XZ-2 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-2 and the GV-1 for the GR III – are available as accessories. The adjacent table lists some of the other core features of the Olympus XZ-2 and Ricoh GR III along with similar information for a selection of comparators.

scroll hint
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-2optional n3.0 / 920 tilting Y 1/2000s 5.0/s Y Y
2.
 
Ricoh GR IIIoptional n3.0 / 1037 fixed Y 1/4000s 4.0/s n Y
3.
 
Canon G16optical n3.0 / 922 fixed n 1/4000s 2.2/s Y Y
4.
 
Canon G15optical n3.0 / 922 fixed n 1/4000s 2.1/s Y Y
5.
 
Fujifilm XF10none n3.0 / 1040 fixed Y 1/4000s 6.0/s Y n
6.
 
Fujifilm X10optical n2.8 / 460 fixed n 1/4000s 10.0/s Y Y
7.
 
Olympus Stylus 11440 n3.0 / 1040 tilting Y 1/2000s 7.0/s Y Y
8.
 
Olympus E-P3optional n3.0 / 614 fixed Y 1/4000s 3.0/s Y Y
9.
 
Olympus E-PL2optional n3.0 / 460 fixed n 1/4000s 3.0/s Y Y
10.
 
Olympus E-PL3optional n3.0 / 460 tilting n 1/4000s 5.5/s n Y
11.
 
Olympus XZ-1optional n3.0 / 614 fixed n 1/2000s 2.0/s Y Y
12.
 
Panasonic ZS2002330 n3.0 / 1240 fixed Y 1/2000s 10.0/s Y Y
13.
 
Panasonic LX7optional n3.0 / 920 fixed n 1/4000s 11.0/s Y Y
14.
 
Pentax MX-1none n3.0 / 920 tilting n 1/8000s 1.0/s Y Y
15.
 
Ricoh GR IIIxoptional n3.0 / 1037 fixed Y 1/4000s 4.0/s n Y
16.
 
Ricoh GR IIoptional n3.0 / 1230 fixed n 1/4000s 4.0/s Y n
17.
 
Ricoh GRoptional n3.0 / 1230 fixed n 1/4000s 4.0/s Y n
Notes: *) 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 GR III 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 Olympus XZ-2 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-2 is equipped with a zoom lens, while the GR III comes with a built-in prime. The XZ-2 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-2 offers the faster maximum aperture.

Concerning the storage of imaging data, both the XZ-2 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-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 XZ-2 and Ricoh GR III and, in particular, the interfaces the cameras (and selected comparators) provide for accessory control and data transfer.

scroll hint
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-2Ystereo / mono--mini2.0---
2.
 
Ricoh GR IIIYstereo / mono---3.0Y-Y
3.
 
Canon G16Ystereo / mono--mini2.0Y--
4.
 
Canon G15Ystereo / mono--mini2.0---
5.
 
Fujifilm XF10-stereo / monoY-micro2.0Y-Y
6.
 
Fujifilm X10Ystereo / mono--mini2.0---
7.
 
Olympus Stylus 1Ystereo / mono--micro2.0Y--
8.
 
Olympus E-P3Ystereo / ---mini2.0---
9.
 
Olympus E-PL2Ystereo / ---mini2.0---
10.
 
Olympus E-PL3Ystereo / ---mini2.0---
11.
 
Olympus XZ-1Ymono / ---mini2.0---
12.
 
Panasonic ZS200-stereo / mono--micro2.0Y-Y
13.
 
Panasonic LX7Ystereo / mono--mini2.0---
14.
 
Pentax MX-1-stereo / mono--mini2.0---
15.
 
Ricoh GR IIIxYstereo / mono---3.0Y-Y
16.
 
Ricoh GR IIYstereo / mono--micro2.0YY-
17.
 
Ricoh GRYmono / mono--micro2.0---

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-2 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-2 has been discontinued (but can be found pre-owned on eBay). There has not been a direct replacement model for the XZ-2 from Olympus. Further information on the two cameras (e.g. user guides, manuals), as well as related accessories, can be found on the official Olympus and Ricoh websites.

Review summary

So what is the bottom line? Which of the two cameras – the Olympus XZ-2 or the Ricoh GR III – has the upper hand? Is one clearly better than the other? A synthesis of the relative strong points of each of the models is listed below.

ilogo

Advantages of the Olympus XZ-2:

  • Better moiré control: Has an anti-alias filter to avoid artificial patterns to appear in images.
  • More flexible LCD: Has a tilting screen for odd-angle shots in landscape orientation.
  • Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (5 vs 4 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
  • Better light gathering: Has a lens with a wider maximum aperture (f/1.8 vs f/2.8).
  • Longer lasting: Can take more shots (340 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 (33 percent cheaper at launch).
  • More heavily discounted: Has been available for much longer (launched in September 2012).

ilogo

Arguments in favor of the Ricoh GR III:

  • More detail: Has more megapixels (24 vs 11.8MP), which boosts linear resolution by 45%.
  • 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 920k dots).
  • Faster shutter: Has higher mechanical shutter speed (1/4000s vs 1/2000s) to freeze action.
  • Less heavy: Has a lower weight (by 89g or 26 percent) and is thus easier to take along.
  • 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 6 years and 5 months of technical progress since the XZ-2 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 : 8 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 sports photographer will view the differences between cameras in a way that diverges from the perspective of a street photog, and a person interested in family portraits has distinct needs from a landscape shooter. Hence, the decision which camera is best and worth buying is often a very personal one.

XZ-2 08:17 GR III

How about other alternatives? Do the specifications of the Olympus XZ-2 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 specs-based evaluation of cameras can be instructive in revealing their potential as photographic tools, it remains incomplete and does no justice, for example, to the way the XZ-2 or the GR III perform in practice. 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.

scroll hint
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-24/5+....4.5/54.5/5 Sep 2012 599i
2.
 
Ricoh GR III4/5..3.5/581/1004/5.. Feb 2019 899 i
3.
 
Canon G164/5+....4.5/54.5/5 Aug 2013 549 i
4.
 
Canon G154/5+..76/1004.5/54.5/5 Sep 2012 499i
5.
 
Fujifilm XF10....4/575/1004/54.5/5 Jul 2018 499 i
6.
 
Fujifilm X10......76/1004/54.5/5 Sep 2011 599i
7.
 
Olympus Stylus 1..+ +....4.5/54.5/5 Oct 2013 699i
8.
 
Olympus E-P3..83/100..74/1004.5/54.5/5 Jun 2011 799i
9.
 
Olympus E-PL23/583/100..71/1004.5/54.5/5 Jan 2011 599i
10.
 
Olympus E-PL33/5+ +..72/1004.5/54/5 Jun 2011 599i
11.
 
Olympus XZ-14/5....74/1004.5/54.5/5 Jan 2011 499i
12.
 
Panasonic ZS200..+ +..81/1004.5/54.5/5 Feb 2018 799 i
13.
 
Panasonic LX73/5+ +..75/1004/54.5/5 Jul 2012 499i
14.
 
Pentax MX-13/5....74/1004/54/5 Jan 2013 499i
15.
 
Ricoh GR IIIx............ Sep 2021 999 i
16.
 
Ricoh GR II........4.5/54.5/5 Jun 2015 699 i
17.
 
Ricoh GR5/5....79/1004.5/54.5/5 Apr 2013 799i
Notes: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available.

Care should be taken when interpreting the review scores above, 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 comparing ratings of very distinct cameras or ones that are far apart in terms of their release date have little meaning. Also, please note that some of the review sites have changed their methodology and reporting over time.

Olympus XZ-2:
Check Ebay offers
Ricoh GR III:
Check Amazon price

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 make a corresponding selection in the search boxes 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.

~
    loader

    Specifications: Olympus XZ-2 vs Ricoh GR III

    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 Specifications
    Camera Model Olympus XZ-2 Ricoh GR III
    Camera Type Fixed lens compact camera Fixed lens compact camera
    Camera Lens 28-112mm f/1.8-2.5 28mm f/2.8
    Launch Date September 2012 February 2019
    Launch Price USD 599 USD 899
    Sensor Specs Olympus XZ-2 Ricoh GR III
    Sensor Technology CMOS CMOS
    Sensor Format 1/1.7" Sensor APS-C Sensor
    Sensor Size 7.6 x 5.7 mm 23.5 x 15.6 mm
    Sensor Area 43.32 mm2 366.6 mm2
    Sensor Diagonal 9.5 mm 28.2 mm
    Crop Factor 4.4x 1.5x
    Sensor Resolution 11.8 Megapixels 24 Megapixels
    Image Resolution 3968 x 2976 pixels 6000 x 4000 pixels
    Pixel Pitch 1.91 μm 3.91 μm
    Pixel Density 27.26 MP/cm2 6.55 MP/cm2
    Moiré control Anti-Alias filter no AA filter
    Movie Capability 1080/30p Video 1080/60p Video
    ISO Setting 100 - 12,800 ISO 100 - 102,400 ISO
    Image Processor TruePic VI GR Engine VI
    DXO Sensor Quality (score) 49 ..
    DXO Color Depth (bits) 20.4 ..
    DXO Dynamic Range (EV) 11.3 ..
    DXO Low Light (ISO) 216 ..
    Screen Specs Olympus XZ-2 Ricoh GR III
    Viewfinder Type Viewfinder optional Viewfinder optional
    LCD Framing Live View Live View
    Rear LCD Size 3.0inch 3.0inch
    LCD Resolution 920k dots 1037k dots
    LCD Attachment Tilting screen Fixed screen
    Touch Input Touchscreen Touchscreen
    Shooting Specs Olympus XZ-2 Ricoh GR III
    Focus System Contrast-detect AF On-Sensor Phase-detect
    Continuous Shooting 5 shutter flaps/s 4 shutter flaps/s
    Time-Lapse PhotographyIntervalometer built-inIntervalometer built-in
    Image StabilizationIn-body stabilizationIn-body stabilization
    Fill Flash Built-in Flash no On-Board Flash
    Storage Medium SDXC cards SDXC cards
    Second Storage Option Single card slot Single card slot
    UHS card support no UHS-I
    Connectivity Specs Olympus XZ-2 Ricoh GR III
    External Flash Hotshoe Hotshoe
    USB Connector USB 2.0 USB 3.0
    HDMI Port mini HDMI no HDMI
    Wifi Support no Wifi Wifi built-in
    Bluetooth Support no Bluetooth Bluetooth built-in
    Body Specs Olympus XZ-2 Ricoh GR III
    Battery Type Li-90B DB-110
    Battery Life (CIPA)340 shots per charge200 shots per charge
    In-Camera Charging no USB charging USB charging
    Body Dimensions 113 x 65 x 48 mm
    (4.4 x 2.6 x 1.9 in)
    109 x 62 x 33 mm
    (4.3 x 2.4 x 1.3 in)
    Camera Weight 346 g (12.2 oz) 257 g (9.1 oz)
    Olympus XZ-2:
    Check Ebay offers
    Ricoh GR III:
    Check Amazon price

    Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.

    You are here Home  »  CAM-parator  »  Olympus XZ-2 vs Ricoh GR III