Canon Powershot S100 vs Olympus PEN E-PM1

Winner
Canon Powershot S100

67

Olympus PEN E-PM1

36

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Canon Powershot S100

Wide aperture
Aperture
f/2
Wide angle lens
Wide angle
24 mm
High speed movies
High-speed framerate
240 fps
Image stabilization
Image stabilization
  1. Lens
 

Reasons to buy the Olympus PEN E-PM1

Low light performance
Low noise at high ISO
499 ISO
Interchangeable lenses
Interchangeable lenses
Many lenses to choose from
External flash
External flash
Better lighting
Longest exposure
Long exposures
60 seconds

galleries

Explore our gallery of 49 sample photos taken by the Canon Powershot S100.
Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Olympus PEN E-PM1.

competitors

Canon Powershot S100 Competitors

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5

Pro digicam

$700

Battery life Longer battery life
External flash Supports an external flash
Dynamic range Less dynamic range
Sony Cybershot DSC-RX100

Sony Cybershot DSC-RX100

Pro digicam

$425 - $448

Color depth Better color depth
Dynamic range More dynamic range
High-speed framerate Doesn't record high-speed movies
Canon PowerShot S95

Canon PowerShot S95

Pro digicam

$290

Startup delay Slightly less startup delay
Dynamic range Less dynamic range

Olympus PEN E-PM1 Competitors

Nikon 1 J1

Nikon 1 J1

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$534 body only

$999 with 10-30mm lens

High-speed framerate Records high-speed movies
Color depth Better color depth
Image stabilization No image stabilization
Olympus PEN E-PM2

Olympus PEN E-PM2

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$380 with 14-42mm lens

Dynamic range More dynamic range
Color depth Better color depth
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$900 with 14-45mm lens

Color depth Better color depth
Overall image quality Significantly better image quality
Image stabilization No image stabilization

discussion

Canon Powershot S100
Powershot S100
Canon

Report a correction
Olympus PEN E-PM1
PEN E-PM1
Olympus

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments