Samsung EX1 vs Olympus PEN E-PL5

Winner
Samsung EX1

67

Olympus PEN E-PL5

51

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Samsung EX1

Wide aperture
Aperture
f/1.8
Wide angle lens
Wide angle
24 mm
High resolution screen
Screen resolution
920k dots
Image stabilization
Image stabilization
  1. Lens
 

Reasons to buy the Olympus PEN E-PL5

Movie format
Full HD
1080p @ 30fps
Touch screen
Touch screen
Fewer buttons
Movie continuous focus
Movie continuous focus
Makes it easy to get in-focus movies
Lens availability
Slightly more lenses available
108 lenses

galleries

Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Olympus PEN E-PL5.
Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Samsung EX1.

competitors

Samsung EX1 Competitors

Canon PowerShot G12

Canon PowerShot G12

Pro digicam

$2,042

Supports 24p Supports 24p
Battery life Longer battery life
Wide angle Much worse wide angle
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5

Pro digicam

$700

Battery life Significantly longer battery life
Continuous shooting Shoots faster
Screen type Doesn't have an OLED screen
Sony Cybershot DSC-RX100

Sony Cybershot DSC-RX100

Pro digicam

$403 - $448

Screen resolution Higher resolution screen
Sensor type Has a CMOS-family sensor
Wide angle Much worse wide angle

Olympus PEN E-PL5 Competitors

Olympus OM-D E-M10

Olympus OM-D E-M10

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$380 - $449 body only

$390 - $499 with 14-42mm lens

Screen resolution Much higher resolution screen
Viewfinder Has a viewfinder
Size Larger
Nikon 1 V1

Nikon 1 V1

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$436 body only

High-speed framerate Records high-speed movies
Continuous shooting Shoots much faster
Image stabilization No image stabilization
Samsung NX3000

Samsung NX3000

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$446 body only

$499 with 20-50mm lens

Sensor type Has a CMOS-family sensor
True resolution Higher true resolution
Image stabilization No image stabilization

discussion

Samsung EX1
EX1
Samsung

Report a correction
Olympus PEN E-PL5
PEN E-PL5
Olympus

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments