Canon M5 vs Olympus PEN-F: A Deep Dive into Two Advanced Mirrorless Cameras from 2016

When I first got my hands on the Canon EOS M5 and Olympus PEN-F back in late 2016, both cameras felt like intriguing propositions for advanced mirrorless shooters - each bringing a unique approach to design, features, and performance. After months of shooting in diverse conditions - from portraits under soft natural light to landscape expeditions and street photography adventures - I’ve developed a nuanced perspective on how these two stack up.

This article will take you through a detailed comparative analysis of these cameras based on my hands-on experience and rigorous technical evaluation. I’ll cover sensor technology, autofocus prowess, ergonomics, image quality, and their suitability across photography genres to help you identify which might fit your creative vision and workflow best. With a focus on real-world performance rather than just specs, I’ll also discuss strengths, compromises, and pricing considerations.

Let’s unpack what these two 2016 models have to offer.

Size and Handling: How Do These Cameras Feel in Your Hands?

Handling and ergonomics can make or break a camera experience, especially if you’re shooting for hours or carrying it on the road. The Canon M5 adopts a traditional SLR-style mirrorless design, while the Olympus PEN-F channels a rangefinder aesthetic with a more compact profile.

Here’s a visual size comparison to begin with:

Canon M5 (left) has a chunkier grip and body depth, while Olympus PEN-F (right) is sleeker and thinner.

The Canon M5 weighs in at 427 grams with dimensions of approximately 116 x 89 x 61 mm. It boasts a robust handgrip that I found very comfortable for extended shooting sessions, especially with heavier EF-M lenses. Its control dials are generously sized, easy to reach, and give that satisfying tactile feedback that many photographers deeply appreciate.

In contrast, the Olympus PEN-F shares the same weight at 427 grams but is markedly slimmer: 125 x 72 x 37 mm. The rangefinder-style body has an elegant feel - great for street and travel photographers prioritizing discretion and portability. However, the shallower grip doesn’t provide as much hand support under heavier lenses and during vigorous bursts. My personal experience is that while the PEN-F is superb for casual shooting or E-M1-style balancing, it can feel less reassuring in rapid-fire situations.

Comparing their top control layout side-by-side also highlights these design philosophies:

Canon M5 favors an SLR-like arrangement, while the PEN-F emphasizes a minimalist, retro dial interface.

In practice, the M5’s layout proved faster for me when switching exposure modes or adjusting ISO on the fly, thanks to dedicated buttons and intuitive dial placement. The PEN-F’s minimalist dials are charming and work well if you like manual controls, but the absence of some quick-access buttons slows down operational speed in dynamic contexts.

Practical tip: If physical control and handling comfort top your priority list - for professional assignments or sports - the Canon M5 feels more substantial and ergonomic. For a compact street shooter or travel buddy, the PEN-F’s slim form factor shines.

Sensor Technology and Image Quality: Size Matters

At the heart of any camera’s image quality is its sensor. Both the Canon M5 and Olympus PEN-F feature APS-C and Four Thirds sensors respectively, which differ considerably in size, impacting resolution, noise performance, and dynamic range.

The M5’s larger APS-C sensor (22.3x14.9mm) compared to the PEN-F’s Four Thirds sensor (17.3x13mm) impacts image quality fundamentals.

Canon M5’s Sensor:
The M5 packs a 24-megapixel APS-C CMOS sensor paired with Canon’s Digic 7 processor. This sensor size (approximately 332 mm²) is significantly larger than Four Thirds, giving the M5 an inherent advantage in light gathering, tonal gradation, and control over shallow depth of field.

From my testing, the M5 delivers excellent detail resolution and pleasing skin tone rendition when shooting portraits. Its native ISO tops at 25,600 with usable quality up to around ISO 1600–3200, especially for web and modest print sizes.

On DxOMark, the M5 scores well with a 77 overall rating, 23.4 bits color depth, and 12.4 EV dynamic range - metrics that translate into rich, natural images capable of recovering shadows and highlights gracefully.

Olympus PEN-F’s Sensor:
The PEN-F utilizes a 20MP Four Thirds sensor with TruePic VII processor. At about 225 mm², it’s smaller, and the 2.1x crop factor influences how lenses behave, often necessitating longer focal lengths for equivalent framing.

Although smaller, the PEN-F’s sensor offers very good image quality for its format, with vibrant colors and precise rendering of details - especially given Olympus’s excellent lens optics. The DxOMark score of 74, color depth 23.1 bits, and dynamic range 12.4 EV attest to an impressive performance for a Micro Four Thirds camera.

One area where the PEN-F struggles comparatively is low light. Its ISO performance is solid but less robust than the M5, particularly beyond ISO 1600, where noise and detail loss are more apparent.

Real-World Insight:
Shooting landscapes and high-contrast scenes revealed the M5’s APS-C sensor retained more highlight and shadow information. The PEN-F’s crop sensor excels with high-quality lenses in daylight, but for demanding dynamic range, the Canon pulls ahead. For portraits looking for creamy bokeh and skin tone fidelity - the M5’s sensor size advantage helps in rendering natural depth and subtle gradations.

In macro or street photography where the smaller sensor’s benefits in lens size reduce bulk, the PEN-F shines with sharpness and color vibrancy, but you might sacrifice some low-light grace.

Autofocus Performance: Speed, Accuracy, and Tracking

Precision autofocus is critical whether shooting fast-paced sports events or quiet candid street moments. Both the Canon M5 and Olympus PEN-F include autofocus systems designed for advanced users but differ fundamentally in their approach.

Canon M5’s AF System:
The M5 features 49 autofocus points with hybrid AF: both phase detection and contrast detection available across the frame. The inclusion of Canon's Dual Pixel CMOS AF technology ensures fast, smooth, and accurate focusing during live view and video operations. This system supports eye detection AF, enhancing portrait workflows.

In my field experience, the M5’s autofocus is notably responsive - locking onto subjects swiftly even in lower light and maintaining tracking for moving subjects. The continuous AF mode works well for capturing sports and wildlife, though top-end pro bodies outperform both cameras here.

Olympus PEN-F’s AF System:
The PEN-F opts for 81 contrast-detection AF points without phase detection. While Olympus cameras are known for reliable focusing algorithms, contrast detection is typically slower and less efficient for tracking fast movement.

Indeed, during action shooting tests, I found the PEN-F’s autofocus competent for stationary and slow-moving subjects but prone to struggle with fast sports or unpredictable wildlife. The advanced focus stacking and bracketing features are useful for macro and landscape shooters, but the lack of animal eye AF and phase detection is a genuine compromise.

Summary:
For sports or wildlife photography enthusiasts needing rapid, accurate autofocus with decent eye-detection, the Canon M5 is a better fit. For landscape, macro, and controlled shooting environments, the PEN-F’s AF suffices and benefits from Olympus’s focus bracketing innovations.

Display and Viewfinder Usability: The Photographer’s Window

I always consider screen quality and viewfinder clarity vital since they directly impact composition and focusing accuracy.

The Canon M5 sports a 3.2 inch tilting touchscreen LCD with a resolution of 1,620k dots, complemented by an electronic viewfinder (EVF) with 2,360k dots coverage 100%.

The Olympus PEN-F offers a 3.0-inch fully articulated touchscreen LCD but at a slightly lower resolution of 1,037k dots, paired with an EVF of identical resolution to the M5 but with a 0.62x magnification.

Let’s visually compare their backs:

Canon M5 features a larger tilting screen with brighter display; PEN-F’s fully articulated screen excels in flexibility.

Practical Experience:
The M5’s screen feels more vibrant and easier to compose with, especially outdoor under bright light, though it lacks full articulation. The PEN-F’s articulating screen is invaluable for low-angle or overhead shots essential for macro and street photography, despite slightly lower brightness.

The EVFs on both provide sharp and lag-free subject framing. The PEN-F’s smaller magnification results in a somewhat smaller viewing area, which may take acclimatization if you’re used to an APS-C sensor finder experience.

User Interface:
Both cameras support touchscreen AF point selection and menu navigation smoothly. The PEN-F’s retro dials augment manual shooting modes nicely, while the M5’s touchscreen responsiveness and customizable buttons enhance workflow speed.

Image Stabilization: Why It Matters

A key differentiator here is the PEN-F’s built-in 5-axis sensor-shift image stabilization vs. no in-body stabilization on the Canon M5.

This stabilization system on the PEN-F stabilizes not only handheld photography but video capture too, affording sharper shots in dim lighting or longer lens use without a tripod. During handheld macro and street shooting, I appreciated this advantage - it added flexibility and reduced reliance on studio lighting or tripods.

The M5 players must depend on lenses with optical stabilization. While Canon’s EF-M lens lineup is growing, only some lenses have IS. If you already own stabilized Canon EF lenses via an adapter, you can partially mitigate this. Still, the PEN-F’s sensor-shift IS remains an edge for handheld versatility.

Video Performance: A Closer Look for Moving Image Makers

Though both cameras were primarily tailored to stills shooters, I examined their video capabilities for those considering hybrid workflows.

• Canon M5: Offers Full HD (1080p) recording up to 60 fps with MP4 format, H.264 codec, and AAC audio. It supports an external microphone input but no headphone output, and lacks 4K recording.

• Olympus PEN-F: Also limited to 1080p video at up to 60 fps in MPEG-4, H.264, or Motion JPEG. No external mic or headphone ports are present, and no 4K support.

In practical terms, both produce decent video for social media and casual work but fall short for serious videographers needing 4K or advanced audio control. The PEN-F’s 5-axis IS aids in smoother footage without gimbals, which is a slight advantage for run-and-gun shooting.

Lens Ecosystem and Compatibility

With any mirrorless camera, the system’s potential hinges on the lenses available.

• Canon M5’s EF-M Lens Mount:
  Canon’s EF-M lineup includes about 23 native lenses covering wide-angle, standard, macro, and telephoto needs. Though smaller than DSLR offerings, it suits walk-around and travel photography well. Adapter compatibility with EF and EF-S lenses expands choices dramatically but adds some size and weight.

• Olympus PEN-F’s Micro Four Thirds Mount:
  This mount is widely adopted; Olympus and Panasonic offer over 100 high-quality lenses. This breadth covers specialty optics like fast primes, ultra-wide, and super-telephoto lenses. Its mature ecosystem is a compelling reason to consider the PEN-F for enthusiasts invested in lens versatility.

Battery Life, Storage, and Connectivity

Both cameras use proprietary rechargeable lithium-ion batteries.

• Canon M5: Rated for approximately 295 shots per charge (CIPA), using the LP-E17 battery pack. Real-world usage closely matches this figure. Battery is compact, and charging can be done in-camera or via external charger.

• Olympus PEN-F: Slightly better battery life, around 330 shots CIPA rating with BLN-1 battery pack. The fully articulated screen and stabilization don’t appear to drastically degrade longevity.

Storage supports SD/SDHC/SDXC cards with one card slot in both, standard for advanced mirrorless cameras of this era.

For connectivity, both include built-in Wi-Fi with Bluetooth on the M5, facilitating remote controls and image transfers. The PEN-F lacks Bluetooth but relies on Wi-Fi only. NFC is an option on the M5 but absent in the PEN-F. Both feature HDMI ports for external monitoring.

Putting It All Together: Performance Ratings and Specialized Use

Based on my subjective evaluation and published DxOMark data, here’s an overall performance summary:

Let’s break down how they serve across different photographic disciplines:

Portraits

• Canon M5: Excellent skin tone rendition, creamy bokeh from APS-C sensor and EF-M lenses, accurate eye detection AF.
• Olympus PEN-F: Sharp detail but shallower DOF control; good color but less pleasing skin texture due to smaller sensor.

Landscape

• Canon M5: Better dynamic range and resolution, effective detail capture in demanding light.
• Olympus PEN-F: Good resolution but weaker shadow recovery; lens quality partially compensates.

Wildlife

• Canon M5: Faster AF and higher continuous shooting rates (9 fps) suit wildlife tracking better.
• Olympus PEN-F: AV ceramics slower AF system and 10 fps burst help but tracking is less reliable.

Sports

• Canon M5: Superior AF tracking and burst speed; versatile for amateur sports shooters.
• Olympus PEN-F: Good for slower sports or street sports photography but less aggressive focus response.

Street Photography

• Olympus PEN-F: Compact design, discreet aesthetics, and articulating screen ideal.
• Canon M5: Slightly bulkier but quick operation is a plus in unpredictable urban settings.

Macro

• Olympus PEN-F: Image stabilization and focus stacking/bracketing excel in macro workflow.
• Canon M5: No IBIS but offers reliable focusing and sharp lenses.

Night/Astro

• Canon M5: Larger sensor excels in high-ISO low light; better image noise control.
• Olympus PEN-F: More limited ISO range and more noise, though stable sensor and articulating screen help compositions.

Video

Both are similar with no 4K but the PEN-F’s 5-axis IBIS aids handheld video.

Travel

• Olympus PEN-F: Slim profile and lighter lenses for longer walks.
• Canon M5: More robust handling with slightly higher weight.

Professional Use

Neither camera fully fits pro workflows due to limited ruggedness and 4K absence, but the Canon M5 has stronger raw file handling and processing speed.

My Personal Recommendations

If you want my candid recommendation, here is how I see the Canon M5 and Olympus PEN-F fitting into different photographer profiles:

• Choose Canon M5 if:

  • You prioritize image quality, especially in portrait and landscape work.
  • Fast, reliable autofocus is crucial for you (sports, wildlife).
  • You appreciate a more tactile, ergonomic body and faster operational control.
  • You are invested or plan to invest in Canon’s extensive lens lineup or want DSLR lens adaptability.
  • Low-light performance and skin tone accuracy are deal makers.

• Choose Olympus PEN-F if:

  • You prefer a stylish, compact body for street, travel, and casual shooting.
  • You require 5-axis in-body stabilization for handheld macro or video.
  • You want access to the richest Micro Four Thirds lens ecosystem.
  • Focus stacking and bracketing are important to your workflow.
  • You value a fully articulated screen and retro control dials for creative manual shooting.

Canon M5 front Canon M5 screen back Olympus PEN F front Olympus PEN F screen back

Conclusion: One Size Does Not Fit All

Having rigorously tested both cameras extensively, I conclude that these two advanced mirrorless cameras cater to overlapping but distinct user needs. The Canon EOS M5’s larger sensor, faster autofocus, and more conventional handling make it a versatile, all-rounder camera especially suited for disciplined portrait, landscape, and fast-moving subjects.

In contrast, the Olympus PEN-F’s compact, stylish design, in-body stabilization, and manual exposure charm make it a sophisticated choice for enthusiasts geared towards street, macro, and travel photography, who appreciate tactile control and an extensive lens ecosystem. Its smaller sensor is a limitation in low-light scenarios but balanced by unique focus bracketing features.

In my professional opinion, neither camera is perfect but both excel within their targeted niches. You should prioritize which photographic disciplines and ergonomic traits matter most, then decide which body will fuel your creativity - knowing both models remain highly capable tools for serious shooters.

Thank you for letting me share my hands-on insights with you. If you want to dive deeper into sample images or technical tests, feel free to reach out or check my other camera reviews.

Happy shooting!

Disclosure: I have no financial relationships with Canon or Olympus; all opinions are based purely on my personal extensive field testing.