Olympus XZ-2 iHS vs Canon EOS M

Winner
Olympus XZ-2 iHS

68

Canon EOS M

43

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Olympus XZ-2 iHS

Image stabilization
Image stabilization
  1. Sensor shift
Flip-out screen
Screen flips out
Great for movies
Long exposures
Longest exposure
60 seconds
Touch screen
Touch screen
Fewer buttons
 

Reasons to buy the Canon EOS M

Size
Really small
Compact (109×66×32 mm)
HDR
In-camera HDR
Combines multiple exposures
Movie continuous focus
Movie continuous focus
Makes it easy to get in-focus movies
Badge
Autofocuses shooting video
Contrast detection

galleries

Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Canon EOS M.
Explore our gallery of 37 sample photos taken by the Olympus XZ-2 iHS.

competitors

Olympus XZ-2 iHS Competitors

Olympus XZ-1

Olympus XZ-1

Pro digicam

$206

Screen type Has an OLED screen
Size Slightly smaller
Overall image quality Significantly worse image quality
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7

Pro digicam

$585

High-speed framerate Records high-speed movies
Wide angle Better wide angle
Touch screen No touch screen
Olympus Stylus XZ-10

Olympus Stylus XZ-10

Pro digicam

$309

Wide angle Better wide angle
Size Slightly smaller
External mic jack Lacks an external mic jack

Canon EOS M Competitors

Canon EOS M10

Canon EOS M10

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$675 body only

$449 with 15-45mm lens

Autofocus Faster autofocus
Screen flips out Has a flip-out screen
External mic jack Lacks an external mic jack
Canon EOS M3

Canon EOS M3

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$419 - $429 body only

$549 with 18-55mm lens

Autofocus Faster autofocus
Screen flips out Has a flip-out screen
Size Slightly larger
Sony Alpha A5000

Sony Alpha A5000

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$446 body only

$348 with 16-50mm lens

Overall image quality Significantly better image quality
Dynamic range More dynamic range
Screen resolution Significantly lower resolution screen

discussion

Olympus XZ-2 iHS
XZ-2 iHS
Olympus

Report a correction
Canon EOS M
EOS M
Canon

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments