Ricoh GR II vs Olympus E-M10 III
The Ricoh GR II and the Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark III are two digital cameras that were officially introduced, respectively, in June 2015 and August 2017. The GR II is a fixed lens compact, while the E-M10 III is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera. The cameras are based on an APS-C (GR II) and a Four Thirds (E-M10 III) sensor. The Ricoh has a resolution of 16.1 megapixels, whereas the Olympus provides 15.9 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 Ricoh GR II and the Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark 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 physical size and weight of the Ricoh GR II and the Olympus E-M10 III are illustrated in the side-by-side display below. 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 dimensions are rounded to the nearest millimeter.
The E-M10 III can be obtained in two different colors (black, silver), while the GR II 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 E-M10 III is notably larger (39 percent) than the Ricoh GR II. In this context, it is worth noting that neither the GR II nor the E-M10 III are weather-sealed.
The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete and possibly misleading, as the GR II has a lens built in, whereas the E-M10 III is an interchangeable lens camera that requires a separate lens. Attaching the latter will add extra weight and bulk to the setup. You can compare the optics available for the E-M10 III and their specifications in the Micro Four Thirds Lens Catalog.
Concerning battery life, the GR II gets 320 shots out of its Ricoh DB-65 battery, while the E-M10 III can take 330 images on a single charge of its Olympus BLS-50 power pack. The power pack in the GR II can be charged via the USB port, so that it is not always necessary to take the battery charger along when travelling.
The following table provides a synthesis of the main physical specifications of the two cameras and other similar ones. 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.
Camera Model |
Camera Width |
Camera Height |
Camera Depth |
Camera Weight |
Battery Life |
Weather Sealing |
Camera Launch |
Launch Price (USD) |
Street Price |
||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Ricoh GR II | 117 mm | 63 mm | 35 mm | 251 g | 320 | n | Jun 2015 | 699 | ebay.com | |
2. | Olympus E-M10 III | 122 mm | 84 mm | 50 mm | 410 g | 330 | n | Aug 2017 | 649 | ebay.com | |
3. | Canon G7 X | 103 mm | 60 mm | 40 mm | 304 g | 210 | n | Sep 2014 | 699 | ebay.com | |
4. | Fujifilm X70 | 113 mm | 64 mm | 44 mm | 340 g | 330 | n | Jan 2016 | 799 | ebay.com | |
5. | Olympus E-M10 II | 120 mm | 83 mm | 47 mm | 390 g | 320 | n | Aug 2015 | 649 | ebay.com | |
6. | Olympus E-M10 IV | 122 mm | 84 mm | 49 mm | 383 g | 360 | n | Aug 2020 | 699 | amazon.com | |
7. | Olympus E-PL8 | 115 mm | 67 mm | 38 mm | 357 g | 350 | n | Sep 2016 | 549 | ebay.com | |
8. | Olympus E-PL9 | 117 mm | 68 mm | 39 mm | 380 g | 350 | n | Feb 2018 | 599 | ebay.com | |
9. | Olympus E-PL10 | 117 mm | 68 mm | 39 mm | 380 g | 350 | n | Oct 2019 | 599 | ebay.com | |
10. | Panasonic GM5 | 99 mm | 60 mm | 36 mm | 211 g | 220 | n | Sep 2014 | 749 | ebay.com | |
11. | Ricoh GR | 117 mm | 61 mm | 35 mm | 245 g | 290 | n | Apr 2013 | 799 | ebay.com | |
12. | Sony NEX-3 | 117 mm | 62 mm | 33 mm | 297 g | 330 | n | May 2010 | 599 | ebay.com | |
13. | Sony NEX-5 | 111 mm | 59 mm | 38 mm | 287 g | 330 | n | May 2010 | 699 | ebay.com | |
14. | Sony NEX-5N | 111 mm | 59 mm | 38 mm | 269 g | 460 | n | Aug 2011 | 699 | ebay.com | |
15. | Sony NEX-5R | 111 mm | 59 mm | 39 mm | 276 g | 330 | n | Aug 2012 | 749 | ebay.com | |
16. | Sony NEX-C3 | 110 mm | 60 mm | 33 mm | 225 g | 400 | n | Jun 2011 | 599 | ebay.com | |
17. | Sony RX100 III | 102 mm | 58 mm | 41 mm | 290 g | 320 | n | May 2014 | 799 | 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. 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 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 more expensive and lead to bigger and heavier cameras and lenses.
Of the two cameras under consideration, the Ricoh GR II features an APS-C sensor and the Olympus E-M10 III a Four Thirds sensor. The sensor area in the E-M10 III is 39 percent smaller. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 1.5 and 2.0. The sensor in the GR II has a native 3:2 aspect ratio, while the one in the E-M10 III offers a 4:3 aspect.
With 16.1MP, the GR II offers a slightly higher resolution than the E-M10 III (15.9MP), but the GR II nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 4.79μm versus 3.76μm for the E-M10 III) due to its larger sensor. However, the E-M10 III is a much more recent model (by 2 years and 2 months) than the GR II, 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 neither of the two cameras has an anti-alias filter installed, so they are able to capture all the detail the sensor resolves.
The Ricoh GR II has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 25600. The corresponding ISO settings for the Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark III are ISO 200 to ISO 25600, with the possibility to increase the ISO range to 100-25600.
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"). The following table provides an overview of the physical sensor characteristics, as well as the sensor quality measurements for a selection of comparators.
Camera Model |
Sensor Class |
Resolution (MP) |
Horiz. Pixels |
Vert. Pixels |
Video Format |
DXO Portrait |
DXO Landscape |
DXO Sports |
DXO Overall |
||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Ricoh GR II | APS-C | 16.1 | 4928 | 3264 | 1080/30p | 23.6 | 13.7 | 1078 | 80 | |
2. | Olympus E-M10 III | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 4K/30p | 23.1 | 12.8 | 1120 | 74 | |
3. | Canon G7 X | 1-inch | 20.0 | 5472 | 3648 | 1080/60p | 23.0 | 12.7 | 556 | 71 | |
4. | Fujifilm X70 | APS-C | 16.0 | 4896 | 3264 | 1080/60p | 23.7 | 13.0 | 1608 | 80 | |
5. | Olympus E-M10 II | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/60p | 23.1 | 12.5 | 842 | 73 | |
6. | Olympus E-M10 IV | Four Thirds | 20.2 | 5184 | 3888 | 4K/30p | 23.3 | 13.2 | 1402 | 76 | |
7. | Olympus E-PL8 | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/30p | 23.0 | 12.6 | 1030 | 73 | |
8. | Olympus E-PL9 | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 4K/30p | 23.1 | 12.8 | 1162 | 74 | |
9. | Olympus E-PL10 | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 4K/30p | 23.3 | 13.1 | 1324 | 76 | |
10. | Panasonic GM5 | Four Thirds | 15.8 | 4592 | 3448 | 1080/60p | 22.1 | 11.7 | 721 | 66 | |
11. | Ricoh GR | APS-C | 16.1 | 4928 | 3264 | 1080/30p | 23.6 | 13.5 | 972 | 78 | |
12. | Sony NEX-3 | APS-C | 14.0 | 4592 | 3056 | 720/30p | 22.1 | 12.0 | 830 | 68 | |
13. | Sony NEX-5 | APS-C | 14.0 | 4592 | 3056 | 1080/60i | 22.2 | 12.2 | 796 | 69 | |
14. | Sony NEX-5N | APS-C | 16.0 | 4912 | 3264 | 1080/60i | 23.6 | 12.7 | 1079 | 77 | |
15. | Sony NEX-5R | APS-C | 16.0 | 4912 | 3264 | 1080/60i | 23.7 | 13.1 | 910 | 78 | |
16. | Sony NEX-C3 | APS-C | 16.0 | 4912 | 3264 | 720/30p | 22.7 | 12.2 | 1083 | 73 | |
17. | Sony RX100 III | 1-inch | 20.0 | 5472 | 3648 | 1080/60p | 22.4 | 12.3 | 495 | 67 | |
Note: DXO values in italics represent estimates based on sensor size and age. |
Many modern cameras cannot only take still pictures, but also record videos. Both cameras under consideration have a sensor with sufficiently fast read-out times for moving pictures, but the E-M10 III provides a better video resolution than the GR II. It can shoot movie footage at 4K/30p, while the Ricoh is limited to 1080/30p.
Feature comparison
Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a variety of features. For example, the E-M10 III has an electronic viewfinder (2360k dots), which can be very helpful when shooting in bright sunlight. In contrast, the GR II relies on live view and the rear LCD for framing. That said, the GR II can be equipped with an optional viewfinder – the GV-1. The adjacent table lists some of the other core features of the Ricoh GR II and Olympus E-M10 III along with similar information for a selection of comparators.
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. | Ricoh GR II | optional | n | 3.0 / 1230 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 4.0/s | Y | n | |
2. | Olympus E-M10 III | 2360 | n | 3.0 / 1040 | tilting | Y | 1/4000s | 8.6/s | Y | Y | |
3. | Canon G7 X | none | n | 3.0 / 1040 | tilting | Y | 1/2000s | 6.5/s | Y | Y | |
4. | Fujifilm X70 | optional | n | 3.0 / 1040 | tilting | Y | 1/4000s | 8.0/s | Y | n | |
5. | Olympus E-M10 II | 2360 | n | 3.0 / 1040 | tilting | Y | 1/4000s | 8.0/s | Y | Y | |
6. | Olympus E-M10 IV | 2360 | n | 3.0 / 1040 | tilting | Y | 1/4000s | 15.0/s | Y | Y | |
7. | Olympus E-PL8 | optional | n | 3.0 / 1037 | tilting | Y | 1/4000s | 8.0/s | n | Y | |
8. | Olympus E-PL9 | none | n | 3.0 / 1040 | tilting | Y | 1/4000s | 8.6/s | Y | Y | |
9. | Olympus E-PL10 | none | n | 3.0 / 1040 | tilting | Y | 1/4000s | 8.6/s | Y | Y | |
10. | Panasonic GM5 | 1166 | n | 3.0 / 921 | fixed | Y | 1/500s | 5.8/s | n | n | |
11. | Ricoh GR | optional | n | 3.0 / 1230 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 4.0/s | Y | n | |
12. | Sony NEX-3 | optional | n | 3.0 / 920 | tilting | n | 1/4000s | 7.0/s | n | n | |
13. | Sony NEX-5 | optional | n | 3.0 / 920 | tilting | n | 1/4000s | 7.0/s | n | n | |
14. | Sony NEX-5N | optional | n | 3.0 / 920 | tilting | Y | 1/4000s | 10.0/s | n | n | |
15. | Sony NEX-5R | optional | n | 3.0 / 920 | tilting | Y | 1/4000s | 10.0/s | n | n | |
16. | Sony NEX-C3 | optional | n | 3.0 / 920 | tilting | n | 1/4000s | 5.5/s | n | n | |
17. | Sony RX100 III | 1440 | n | 3.0 / 1229 | tilting | n | 1/2000s | 10.0/s | Y | Y | |
Note: *) Information refers to the mechanical shutter, unless the camera only has an electronic one. |
One differentiating feature between the two cameras concerns the touch sensitivity of the rear screen. The E-M10 III has a touchscreen, while the GR II has a conventional panel. Touch control can be particularly helpful, for example, for setting the focus point.
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 E-M10 III 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 Ricoh GR II and the Olympus E-M10 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.
Concerning the storage of imaging data, both the GR II and the E-M10 III write their files to SDXC cards. The E-M10 III supports UHS-II cards (Ultra High Speed data transfer of up to 312 MB/s), while the GR II can use UHS-I cards (up to 104 MB/s).
Connectivity comparison
For some imaging applications, the extent to which a camera can communicate with its environment can be an important aspect in the camera decision process. The table below provides an overview of the connectivity of the Ricoh GR II and Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark III 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. | Ricoh GR II | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | Y | - | |
2. | Olympus E-M10 III | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
3. | Canon G7 X | - | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | Y | - | |
4. | Fujifilm X70 | Y | stereo / mono | Y | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
5. | Olympus E-M10 II | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
6. | Olympus E-M10 IV | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | Y | |
7. | Olympus E-PL8 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
8. | Olympus E-PL9 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | Y | |
9. | Olympus E-PL10 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | Y | |
10. | Panasonic GM5 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
11. | Ricoh GR | Y | mono / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
12. | Sony NEX-3 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
13. | Sony NEX-5 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
14. | Sony NEX-5N | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
15. | Sony NEX-5R | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
16. | Sony NEX-C3 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
17. | Sony RX100 III | - | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | Y | - |
Both the GR II and the E-M10 III have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The GR II was replaced by the Ricoh GR III, while the E-M10 III was followed by the Olympus E-M10 IV. Further information on the features and operation of the GR II and E-M10 III can be found, respectively, in the Ricoh GR II Manual (free pdf) or the online Olympus E-M10 III Manual.
Review summary
So what is the bottom line? Which of the two cameras – the Ricoh GR II or the Olympus E-M10 III – has the upper hand? Is one clearly better than the other? The listing below highlights the relative strengths of the two models.
Advantages of the Ricoh GR II:
- Better image quality: Features bigger pixels on a larger sensor for higher quality imaging.
- Richer colors: The pixel size advantage translates into images with better, more accurate colors.
- More dynamic range: Larger pixels capture a wider spectrum of light and dark details.
- Better low-light sensitivity: Larger pixels means good image quality even under poor lighting.
- More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1230k vs 1040k dots).
- Ready to shoot: Has a lens built-in, whereas the E-M10 III requires a separate lens.
- More compact: Is smaller (117x63mm vs 122x84mm) and thus needs less room in the bag.
- Less heavy: Is lighter even though it comes with a built-in lens (unlike the E-M10 III).
- Easier travel charging: Can be conveniently charged via its USB port.
- Easier device pairing: Supports NFC for fast wireless image transfer over short distances.
- More heavily discounted: Has been available for much longer (launched in June 2015).
Arguments in favor of the Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark III:
- Better video: Provides higher definition movie capture (4K/30p vs 1080/30p).
- Easier framing: Has an electronic viewfinder for image composition and settings control.
- More flexible LCD: Has a tilting screen for odd-angle shots in landscape orientation.
- Fewer buttons to press: Has a touchscreen to facilitate handling and shooting adjustments.
- Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (8.6 vs 4 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
- Less disturbing: Has an electronic shutter option for completely silent shooting.
- More flexible: Takes interchangeable lenses and can thus be used with specialty optics.
- Sharper images: Has stabilization technology built-in to reduce the impact of hand-shake.
- Faster buffer clearing: Supports a more advanced SD data transfer standard (UHS-II vs UHS-I).
- More modern: Reflects 2 years and 2 months of technical progress since the GR II launch.
If the count of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a measure, the GR II comes out slightly ahead of the E-M10 III (11 : 10 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 Ricoh GR II and the Olympus E-M10 III place the cameras among the top in their class? Find out in the latest Best Prime Lens Compact Camera and Best Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera listings whether the two cameras rank among the cream of the crop.
In any case, while the specs-based evaluation of cameras can be instructive in revealing their potential as photographic tools, it remains partial and cannot reveal, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance when actually working with the GR II or the E-M10 III. 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 where reviews by experts come in. The following table reports the overall ratings of the cameras as published by some of the major camera review sites (amateurphotographer [AP], cameralabs [CL], digitalcameraworld [DCW], dpreview [DPR], ephotozine [EPZ], photographyblog [PB]). As can be seen, the professional reviewers agree in many cases on the quality of different cameras, but sometimes their assessments diverge, reinforcing the earlier point that a camera decision is often a very personal choice.
Camera Model |
AP score |
CL score |
DCW score |
DPR score |
EPZ score |
PB score |
Camera Launch |
Launch Price (USD) |
Street Price |
||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Ricoh GR II | .. | .. | .. | .. | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jun 2015 | 699 | ebay.com | |
2. | Olympus E-M10 III | .. | + | 5/5 | 80/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Aug 2017 | 649 | ebay.com | |
3. | Canon G7 X | 4/5 | + + | .. | 77/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Sep 2014 | 699 | ebay.com | |
4. | Fujifilm X70 | 4.5/5 | .. | .. | 76/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jan 2016 | 799 | ebay.com | |
5. | Olympus E-M10 II | 4.5/5 | + + | .. | 80/100 | 5/5 | 5/5 | Aug 2015 | 649 | ebay.com | |
6. | Olympus E-M10 IV | 4.5/5 | .. | 5/5 | 81/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Aug 2020 | 699 | amazon.com | |
7. | Olympus E-PL8 | .. | .. | .. | .. | 4.5/5 | 4/5 | Sep 2016 | 549 | ebay.com | |
8. | Olympus E-PL9 | .. | + | .. | .. | 4.5/5 | 4/5 | Feb 2018 | 599 | ebay.com | |
9. | Olympus E-PL10 | .. | .. | 4/5 | 77/100 | .. | 4/5 | Oct 2019 | 599 | ebay.com | |
10. | Panasonic GM5 | 3.5/5 | + | .. | 77/100 | 5/5 | 4.5/5 | Sep 2014 | 749 | ebay.com | |
11. | Ricoh GR | 5/5 | .. | .. | 79/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Apr 2013 | 799 | ebay.com | |
12. | Sony NEX-3 | .. | .. | .. | 70/100 | 4.5/5 | 4/5 | May 2010 | 599 | ebay.com | |
13. | Sony NEX-5 | 3/5 | + + | .. | 71/100 | 4.5/5 | 4/5 | May 2010 | 699 | ebay.com | |
14. | Sony NEX-5N | 3/5 | + + | .. | 79/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Aug 2011 | 699 | ebay.com | |
15. | Sony NEX-5R | .. | .. | .. | .. | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Aug 2012 | 749 | ebay.com | |
16. | Sony NEX-C3 | 3/5 | + + | .. | 74/100 | 4.5/5 | 4/5 | Jun 2011 | 599 | ebay.com | |
17. | Sony RX100 III | 5/5 | + + | .. | 82/100 | 4.5/5 | 5/5 | May 2014 | 799 | ebay.com | |
Note: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available. |
The review scores listed above should be treated with care, though. The assessments were made in relation to similar cameras of the same technological generation. Hence, a score should always be seen in the context of the camera's market launch date and its price, and rating-comparisons among cameras that span long time periods or concern very differently equipped models make little sense. Also, please note that some of the review sites have changed their methodology and reporting over time.
Other camera comparisons
Did this review help to inform your camera decision process? If you would like to see a different side-by-side camera review, just use the search menu below. Alternatively, you can follow any of the listed hyperlinks for comparisons that others found interesting.
- Canon G7 X vs Olympus E-M10 III
- Canon T100 vs Ricoh GR II
- Canon T6i vs Ricoh GR II
- Fujifilm X-A10 vs Olympus E-M10 III
- Fujifilm X-A3 vs Ricoh GR II
- Leica X Vario vs Olympus E-M10 III
- Nikon D3X vs Ricoh GR II
- Nikon D90 vs Olympus E-M10 III
- Olympus E-M10 III vs Panasonic GX1
- Olympus E-M10 III vs Panasonic GX850
- Panasonic GH5s vs Ricoh GR II
- Ricoh GR II vs Sony H400
Specifications: Ricoh GR II vs Olympus E-M10 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 Model | Ricoh GR II | Olympus E-M10 III |
---|---|---|
Camera Type | Fixed lens compact camera | Mirrorless system camera |
Camera Lens | 28mm f/2.8 | Micro Four Thirds lenses |
Launch Date | June 2015 | August 2017 |
Launch Price | USD 699 | USD 649 |
Sensor Specs | Ricoh GR II | Olympus E-M10 III |
Sensor Technology | CMOS | CMOS |
Sensor Format | APS-C Sensor | Four Thirds Sensor |
Sensor Size | 23.7 x 15.6 mm | 17.3 x 13.0 mm |
Sensor Area | 369.72 mm2 | 224.9 mm2 |
Sensor Diagonal | 28.4 mm | 21.6 mm |
Crop Factor | 1.5x | 2.0x |
Sensor Resolution | 16.1 Megapixels | 15.9 Megapixels |
Image Resolution | 4928 x 3264 pixels | 4608 x 3456 pixels |
Pixel Pitch | 4.79 μm | 3.76 μm |
Pixel Density | 4.35 MP/cm2 | 7.08 MP/cm2 |
Moiré control | no AA filter | no AA filter |
Movie Capability | 1080/30p Video | 4K/30p Video |
ISO Setting | 100 - 25,600 ISO | 200 - 25,600 ISO |
ISO Boost | no Enhancement | 100 - 25,600 ISO |
Image Processor | GR Engine V | TruePic VIII |
DXO Sensor Quality (score) | 80 | .. |
DXO Color Depth (bits) | 23.6 | .. |
DXO Dynamic Range (EV) | 13.7 | .. |
DXO Low Light (ISO) | 1078 | .. |
Screen Specs | Ricoh GR II | Olympus E-M10 III |
Viewfinder Type | Viewfinder optional | Electronic viewfinder |
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 | 1230k dots | 1040k dots |
LCD Attachment | Fixed screen | Tilting screen |
Touch Input | no Touchscreen | Touchscreen |
Shooting Specs | Ricoh GR II | Olympus E-M10 III |
Focus System | Contrast-detect AF | Contrast-detect AF |
Manual Focusing Aid | no Peaking Feature | Focus Peaking |
Max Shutter Speed (mechanical) | 1/4000s | 1/4000s |
Continuous Shooting | 4 shutter flaps/s | 8.6 shutter flaps/s |
Electronic Shutter | no E-Shutter | up to 1/16000s |
Time-Lapse Photography | Intervalometer built-in | Intervalometer built-in |
Image Stabilization | no shake reduction | In-body stabilization |
Fill Flash | Built-in 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-I | UHS-II |
Connectivity Specs | Ricoh GR II | Olympus E-M10 III |
External Flash | Hotshoe | Hotshoe |
USB Connector | USB 2.0 | USB 2.0 |
HDMI Port | micro HDMI | micro HDMI |
Wifi Support | Wifi built-in | Wifi built-in |
Near-Field Communication | NFC built-in | no NFC |
Body Specs | Ricoh GR II | Olympus E-M10 III |
Battery Type | Ricoh DB-65 | Olympus BLS-50 |
Battery Life (CIPA) | 320 shots per charge | 330 shots per charge |
In-Camera Charging | USB charging | no USB charging |
Body Dimensions |
117 x 63 x 35 mm (4.6 x 2.5 x 1.4 in) |
122 x 84 x 50 mm (4.8 x 3.3 x 2.0 in) |
Camera Weight | 251 g (8.9 oz) | 410 g (14.5 oz) |
Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.