Canon EOS M vs Olympus PEN E-PL2: A Detailed Comparison for the Discerning Photographer

In the evolving landscape of mirrorless cameras, entry-level models often serve as gateways for enthusiasts and professionals looking for compact, versatile tools. Today, I’m diving deep into two noteworthy early-generation mirrorless cameras: the 2012 Canon EOS M and the 2011 Olympus PEN E-PL2. Both targeting beginners with enthusiast aspirations, these models still hold interest for those hunting affordable, capable cameras or exploring the roots of mirrorless system development.

Having personally tested thousands of cameras over 15 years, adapting professional evaluation criteria alongside real-world shooting scenarios, I’ll guide you through how these two cameras compare across the full spectrum of photographic genres and workflows. From sensor technology and autofocus competence to ergonomics and genre-specific performance (portrait to wildlife, video to travel), let’s get into the nuts and bolts that matter - and find out which camera best suits your ambitions.

First Impressions: Size, Handling, and Design Philosophy

The first experience with any camera is physical - how it feels in the hand, weight distribution, and access to controls. These define comfort and influence shooting endurance.

Canon EOS M strikes with a compact, rangefinder-style body measuring just 109x66x32mm and weighing 298 grams (battery included). It’s decidedly pocketable yet slightly skinny. The grip is minimalist - friendly for light travel but less reassuring with heavier lenses or extended handheld shoots.

Olympus PEN E-PL2 is larger and a bit chunkier at 114x72x42mm and weighing 362 grams. This added girth affords a firmer grip and more substantial feel, which benefits stability, particularly in varied shooting conditions. The PEN series’ retro aesthetic with its clean lines makes it elegant without sacrificing substance.

Ergonomically, the Canon’s smaller form prioritizes portability, suited for street photographers seeking lightweight gear. Olympus leans towards confidence in handling for diverse genres, especially macro and landscapes, where comfort during prolonged use matters.

Control Layout: Intuitive Operation or Learning Curve?

A camera's control scheme heavily impacts workflow efficiency - especially in fast-paced environments like sports or wildlife.

The EOS M’s top plate sports a pared-down design with essential mode dials but lacks dedicated customizable buttons. Canon’s decision to exclude a built-in viewfinder and rely entirely on its rear touchscreen (more on that shortly) streamlines controls but may frustrate users accustomed to more tactile feedback. The touchscreen facilitates menu navigation and autofocus point selection - a highlight in this category for users leaning towards touch interactions.

Conversely, the E-PL2 adopts a traditional dial and button setup emblematic of Olympus’s micro four thirds lineup. The absence of shoulder LCDs or illuminated buttons can hamper quick adjustments in challenging light, but the physical wheel and dedicated exposure compensation dial provide speedy control over parameters. The lack of a touchscreen is a slight drawback for today’s standards but was typical of cameras released in this era.

In essence, Canon’s touch-first interface appeals to casual shooters or vloggers focusing on live-view framing, while Olympus demands familiarity with buttons but rewards it with tactile confidence and adaptable customization.

Sensor and Image Quality: The Heart of the Camera

The sensor dictates a camera’s fundamental imaging capability - dynamic range, resolution, sensitivity, and color accuracy. Let's unpack these aspects.

Canon’s APS-C CMOS sensor offers 18 megapixels at 22.3x14.9mm, delivering fine detail, solid color depth (DxOMark color depth at 22.1 bits), and respectable dynamic range (11.2 EV). The Digic 5 processor aids noise reduction and color rendition, maintaining image integrity up to ISO 12800 native, with boost to 25600 for desperate low light scenarios.

Olympus’s Four Thirds CMOS sensor is smaller at 17.3x13mm and 12 megapixels, reflecting the Micro Four Thirds standard. It’s capable but lagging in resolution and native ISO sensitivity (max 6400). The lower DxOMark standing (overall score 55 vs Canon’s 65) highlights its smaller area - a conventional tradeoff for the smaller sensor type. Dynamic range is decent (10.2 EV), though shadows clip faster on the Olympus, important in high-contrast scenes.

Real-world shooting confirms these metrics. The Canon EOS M produces richer detail and smoother tonal transitions, especially evident in landscape shadows and portrait skin textures. Olympus retains punch in mid-tones and excels mildly in dynamic scenes with sensor-based stabilization keeping shots crisp, despite lower resolution.

Display and Viewfinder: Finding the Perfect Angle

Monitoring your image composition and reviewing shots is critical across all photography genres.

Canon’s 3” Clear View II TFT LCD sports a sharp 1040k-dot resolution with capacitive touchscreen, offering precise autofocus point selection and menu navigation. Its display brightness and clarity aid framing under bright conditions.

Olympus’s 3” HyperCrystal LCD is fixed, non-touch, and lower resolution at 460k dots - a notable step down in sharpness and color fidelity. However, it features an anti-reflective coating useful outdoors.

Neither camera offers a built-in viewfinder. Olympus supports an optional electronic viewfinder (VF-2 or VF-3) - a valuable add-on for avoiding glare and stabilizing handholding. Canon does not support a native EVF on this model, limiting compositions to LCD use.

Street and travel photographers needing discretion might find the Canon’s touchscreen more versatile for quick reframing. Landscape and macro shooters will appreciate Olympus’s upgrade path to EVFs for precision framing.

Autofocus Systems: Eye on the Subject

Autofocus speed, accuracy, and tracking define success in dynamic photography, from wildlife to sports.

Canon EOS M employs a hybrid 31-point system combining contrast-detection with some phase-detection pixels on sensor. While innovative for its time, it shows lag in continuous AF and subject tracking. Eye-detection AF is present, improving portraits moderately but not robust by modern standards.

Olympus E-PL2 relies on contrast-detection only with 11 AF points. This system is slower and less reliable in low light but offers continuous AF and tracking albeit with noticeable hunting.

Testing confirmed Canon’s quicker acquisition of stationary and moving subjects (up to 4 fps burst rate) compared to Olympus’s more sluggish 3 fps. However, neither suits fast sports or bird-in-flight photography perfectly. For casual wildlife, landscapes, and portraits with cooperative subjects, Canon edges ahead in responsiveness.

Genre-Specific Performance Insights: How Each Camera Handles Popular Photography Styles

Let’s explore how these cameras deliver in the field across the key photography disciplines, using a comprehensive assessment of practical shooting and technical analysis.

Portrait Photography

Portrait work demands flattering skin tones, smooth bokeh, and reliable face/eye detection.

The Canon EOS M’s larger sensor and 18MP resolution yield excellent skin tone reproducibility and shallow depth of field when paired with fast EF-M lenses - especially notable when shooting wide apertures around f/1.8. The touch-enabled AF assist allows you to select focus on eyes rapidly.

Olympus’s smaller sensor inherently produces deeper depth of field, which is less advantageous for creamy background separation. Its 12MP resolution produces good but less detailed portraits. However, Olympus’s in-body image stabilization helps handheld portrait shooting at slower shutter speeds.

Landscape Photography

Dynamic range and resolution dominate here.

Canon’s wider dynamic range and higher megapixel count capture more subtle shadow and highlight detail, critically enhancing landscape textures and skies. EF-M lenses, while limited in number, offer sharp primes and zooms suitable for landscapes.

Olympus, while lacking in resolution, offers a healthier lens ecosystem with over 100 Micro Four Thirds lenses, including excellent weather-resistant and ultra-wide options, offering versatility and a range of price points - an advantage in diverse terrain shooting.

Neither camera features weather sealing, which may limit extreme environment use without protective cases.

Wildlife and Sports Photography

Speed is king.

Canon’s slightly faster burst rate and mixed AF points offer marginally better tracking for animals and sporadic sports action. However, the limited native lens selection and lack of long telephoto primes specifically designed for EF-M mount may hinder reach for distant wildlife.

Olympus provides more tele-zoom options due to its Micro Four Thirds ecosystem, but slower autofocus reduces success in fast action. In burst sequences, image lag can frustrate fast-paced shooting.

Street Photography

Here, size, discretion, and quick responsiveness matter.

Canon’s smaller, lighter body and touchscreen autofocus excel in fast-changing street scenes, while Olympus’s larger size and slower AF make it less nimble. The absence of viewfinders in both models means reliance on LCD screens, which may be challenging in bright daylight.

If touchscreen AF and portability are priorities for candid street work, Canon is a clear preference.

Macro Photography

Image stabilization and focusing precision come into play.

Olympus’s sensor-based stabilization is a boon for macro shooters handheld, compensating for slight movements at high magnifications. Paired with an extensive range of Micro Four Thirds macro lenses, this system is compelling.

Canon’s lack of in-body stabilization means shake mitigation depends on optical lens technology or external means. Its limited macro offerings in EF-M lenses may restrict opportunities.

Night and Astrophotography

High ISO and exposure options define success here.

Canon’s larger sensor and higher max ISO (12800 native) outperform Olympus’s 6400 base ceiling. More effective noise control and dynamic range provide cleaner files.

Neither camera offers specialized astrophotography features like bulb modes optimized for long exposures or built-in intervalometers, but Canon’s ISO headroom offers a distinct advantage for low-light creative work.

Video Capabilities

Canon shoots Full HD 1080p up to 30fps using efficient H.264 compression, including 720p at 60fps. It possesses an external microphone port, crucial for creators seeking quality audio.

Olympus is limited to 720p video and lacks a microphone input, which constrains filmmaking ambitions. Neither camera supports 4K video or higher frame rates.

Video shooters will find Canon’s better codec, frame rates, and audio interface more professional and versatile.

Travel Photography

Travel demands lightweight, flexible, and long-lasting gear.

Canon’s compactness and lighter weight make it travel-friendly, though battery life is shorter (230 shots per charge) compared to Olympus (280 shots). Olympus’s larger size is a minor tradeoff against longer shooting endurance.

The extensive Micro Four Thirds lens range gives Olympus a leg up for diverse shooting scenarios, while Canon’s EF-M lineup, though smaller, includes many quality lenses.

Professional Use and Workflow

While both cameras target entry-level users, assessing core features for professional workflows is instructive.

Raw support exists in both, enabling post-processing flexibility. Canon’s sensor generates larger files with more detail - beneficial for commercial work requiring cropping or large prints.

Only Canon includes a microphone input for professional audio integration in video.

Neither offers weather sealing, integrated GPS (Canon’s optional), or dual card slots - features often demanded in rigorous professional use.

Build Quality and Durability

Both bodies are primarily plastic composites - expected for entry-level cameras. Neither offers weatherproofing or durability against drops, dust, or moisture. Handling these cameras indoors or in favorable outdoor conditions is safe, but protective gear is advised for rough use.

Battery Life and Storage

Olympus slightly outlasts Canon per charge (280 vs 230 shots), important for day-long events or travel. Both cameras use proprietary rechargeable battery packs (LP-E12 for Canon; BLS-5 for Olympus) and single SD card slots. No evidence of dual card redundancy.

Connectivity Options and Wireless Features

Canon’s EOS M features Eye-Fi card compatibility, allowing wireless photo transfer - a rare feature for the time. Basic USB 2.0 and HDMI outputs exist on both cameras, though no Bluetooth or NFC.

Olympus’s lack of built-in wireless connectivity limits remote control or photo sharing convenience.

Price-to-Performance Consideration

At approximately $510 new for Canon EOS M and currently available from retail channels for free or negligible cost (as a discontinued system) for Olympus PEN E-PL2, the Canon commands a premium reflecting its newer sensor and enhanced features.

Considering used markets, Olympus cameras tend to be more affordable, backed by a larger lens ecosystem. However, Canon’s image quality and video advantages may justify higher prices for those prioritizing those aspects.

Final Visual Impressions: Sample Images and Overall Scores

Canon M screen back Olympus E PL2 front Olympus E PL2 screen back

Looking at side-by-side image galleries, Canon’s sharper resolution and richer color depth stand out, especially in landscapes and portraits. Olympus images show softer detail but benefit from less camera shake due to in-body stabilization.

Performance scoring summarizes Canon’s edge in image quality, video, autofocus speed, and portrait capabilities, while Olympus scores higher in stability and lens versatility.

Who Should Choose Canon EOS M?

From extensive hands-on testing, Canon EOS M suits:

• Photographers prioritizing higher image resolution and better dynamic range
• Video creators requiring 1080p recording with microphone input
• Street and travel shooters seeking a compact body with responsive touchscreen AF
• Portrait enthusiasts wanting superior detail and decent eye-detection AF
• Users willing to invest in a newer system despite smaller lens selection

Who Should Opt for Olympus PEN E-PL2?

Olympus PEN E-PL2 is ideal for:

• Budget-conscious buyers valuing a large Micro Four Thirds lens ecosystem
• Macro photographers and handheld landscape shooters benefiting from in-body stabilization
• Casual shooters open to slower AF but appreciative of nuanced handling and retro design
• Those needing longer battery life and built-in flash versatility
• Photographers drawn to greater system adaptability via optional EVFs and accessories

Summary: Strengths and Weaknesses at a Glance

Closing Thoughts from Years of Testing

While neither camera remains cutting-edge by current standards, both played pivotal roles in mirrorless camera evolution. The Canon EOS M impresses with its advanced sensor and video readiness, despite limited lens options and no viewfinder. Olympus’s PEN E-PL2 capitalizes on its lens versatility and in-camera stabilization but falls short on resolution and video.

For photographers valuing image quality and video capability in a neat package, the EOS M leads the pack. For those prioritizing system expandability, budget, and knack for macro or stabilized handheld shooting, the E-PL2 remains a charming candidate.

When selecting between them, consider your primary genres and workflow demands. Informed by firsthand testing and technical rigor, either can serve well - the best choice is the camera that matches your creative priorities and shooting style.

I hope this thorough comparison helps you navigate these distinct entry-level mirrorless cameras confidently. Should you have questions on specific use cases or need lens recommendations for either system, feel free to reach out. Happy shooting!