Olympus E-600 vs Olympus PEN E-PL1: A Deep Dive into Two Micro Four Thirds Entrants

In the ever-evolving landscape of digital photography, Olympus has long been a key player, particularly in the Four Thirds and Micro Four Thirds formats. Today, I’m dissecting two of Olympus’s cherished entry-level models that have many enthusiasts still debating: the Olympus E-600 DSLR and the Olympus PEN E-PL1 mirrorless camera. Both hail from Olympus’s realm of compact, approachable systems suited for photographers looking to dip toes or stretch creative limits without a hefty price tag.

I’ve spent considerable time comparing these two, both in controlled lab settings and on real shoots, to bring you a nuanced, expert perspective. Whether you’re a portrait lover, avid traveler, or intrigued by video capabilities, this detailed breakdown covers sensor technology to handling ergonomics, and every aspect where these cameras diverge or shine. Grab a coffee - this will be thorough.

Seeing Them Side by Side: Size, Handling & Ergonomics

Right off the bat, the Olympus E-600 and PEN E-PL1 embody two different design philosophies. The E-600, an SLR-style camera, presents a traditional grip and button layout, whereas the PEN E-PL1 opts for a slimmer, rangefinder-inspired body emphasizing portability.

Handling the E-600 feels familiar to those who’ve wielded DSLRs: a sturdy, compact SLR shape with a pronounced handgrip and a logically arranged set of buttons. Its weight at 515g gives it a reassuring heft without being unwieldy. The physical dimensions (130x94x60mm) place it in the category of truly pocketable enthusiast DSLRs, but you won't forget it’s there strapped to your neck.

On the flip side, the PEN E-PL1’s lighter 334g and sleeker body (115x72x42mm) significantly reduce fatigue during extended use - especially for street and travel photography where discretion is key. Its streamlined form is less intrusive but potentially less "camera-like" to tactile preferences accustomed to DSLR grips.

Ergonomically, the E-600’s top plate sports a conventional PASM dial and dedicated exposure compensation button, ideal for quick exposure adjustments in dynamic scenarios. The PEN E-PL1’s controls are more minimalist, with reliance on menu navigation. While this keeps weight and complexity down, it sometimes slows manual tweaking for experienced shooters. The lack of an in-body viewfinder on the PEN hurts if you rely heavily on traditional eye-level framing.

Sensor and Image Quality: Two CMOS Sensors Wrestling for Dominance

Both cameras utilize a 12MP Four Thirds CMOS sensor measuring 17.3 x 13mm, delivering a sensor area of roughly 225mm², paired with an anti-aliasing filter for balanced sharpness and moiré control.

Despite their similar sensor specs, image quality has subtle yet meaningful differences attributable to processing engines and system design. The E-600 employs the TruePic III+ processor, while the PEN E-PL1 uses the updated TruePic V processor, Olympus’s then-latest imaging engine designed for improved noise reduction and color rendition.

Color Depth and Dynamic Range: Both cameras offer a color depth around 21.5 bits and dynamic range near 10 stops (E-600: 10.3; E-PL1: 10.1), meaning either will pull nuanced tones from shadows and highlights with care. The slightly higher dynamic range on the E-600 edges it just ahead in landscape and high-contrast scenes.

Low Light ISO Performance: Here, the E-600 outperforms marginally with a DxO low-light ISO score of 541 vs. 487 for the PEN E-PL1. This aligns with the DSLR's better noise handling at ISO 1600 and above - practical if you shoot in dim settings.

Both cameras max out at ISO 3200 natively, which was generous at their launch. But while the PEN includes more advanced noise reduction via TruePic V, its lower hardware exposure tolerance keeps noise somewhat more visible.

Viewing and Composing: Screen and Viewfinder Face-Off

The compositions experience distinctly differs between these two.

The E-600 incorporates a classic optical pentamirror viewfinder covering 95% frame coverage with 0.48x magnification - fairly standard but functional. Its fully articulating 2.7” 230-knot HyperCrystal LCD facilitates flexible live view shooting and creative angles - excellent for macro or awkward setups.

The PEN E-PL1 opts for a fixed 2.7” LCD with anti-reflective coating, same resolution but slightly lower visibility under bright sunlight. Notably, it lacks a built-in viewfinder altogether but supports an optional electronic viewfinder attachment - a compromise for those wishing to keep size minimal or add upgrades later.

The articulated screen on the E-600 adds value for video and creative compositions, whereas the PEN’s fixed screen suits quick snapshots and casual shooting but restricts flexibility.

Autofocus and Shooting Speed: Who’s Faster to the Shot?

AF systems are critical for sports, wildlife, and fast-moving subjects.

Olympus E-600:

• 7 autofocus points with contrast and phase detection technologies
• Face detection available but no eye or animal detection
• Continuous shooting at 4fps with reasonable buffer depth

Olympus PEN E-PL1:

• 11 autofocus points, contrast detection only
• Face and eye-tracking AF enabled and continuous AF with tracking
• Continuous shooting maxes at 3fps

In field tests, the E-600’s hybrid AF system provided marginally quicker initial autofocus and better subject tracking in decent light, particularly helpful for wildlife or sports scenarios. The PEN E-PL1’s continuous AF tracking with face detection performed well in portraits and street photography but lagged slightly behind in aggressive subject movement.

Lens Ecosystem: Matching Glass to Sensor

Both cameras use Olympus’s Micro Four Thirds mount, which sits on the shoulders of a wealth of native lenses from Olympus and Panasonic, along with third-party options from Sigma, Tamron, and others.

• E-600: Has access to 45 lenses originally available for Four Thirds (DSLR), including high-quality longer telephotos and legacy MFT glass via adapters.
• PEN E-PL1: Compatible with 107 Micro Four Thirds lenses designed specifically for mirrorless bodies - typically smaller, lighter, and optically optimized for shorter registers.

The mirrorless PEN system benefits from a rapidly maturing lens lineup focused on compactness, making it ideal for travel and street shooters who prize portability. The DSLR E-600 allows more high-end telephoto options suited for wildlife and sports enthusiasts wanting reach without large system bulk - a rare balance.

Burst Shooting, Buffer, and Performance Under Pressure

Burst speed is a deciding factor for shooting action.

• The E-600 clocks in at an impressive 4fps continuous shooting with reliable AF between frames.
• The PEN E-PL1 manages 3fps max, also with continuous AF but limited buffer.

The E-600’s faster shooting makes it better for fleeting moments - think a bird in flight or an athlete mid-dash. The PEN’s 3fps still covers decisive moments but might miss burst sequences in high-speed sports or wildlife environments.

Build Quality and Durability

Both cameras lack weather sealing or rugged construction, signs of their entry-level, consumer-grade positioning. Neither is dustproof or freezeproof, so cautious handling on harsh outdoor shoots is advisable.

The E-600’s slightly larger build and standard DSLR body afford a more secure grip, reducing accidental drops or fatigue on long hikes. The PEN, with its smaller form factor, can be more vulnerable in rough conditions but excels in portability.

Battery Life and Storage Flexibility

Battery life is where these cameras diverge notably:

The E-600’s DSLR heritage pays off with a larger battery pack and better longevity - essential when shooting extended sessions or travel excursions without recharge access.

Storage-wise, the E-600 stores images on CompactFlash or xD Picture Cards, somewhat outdated by today’s standards but common at its release. The PEN E-PL1 embraces more modern SD/SDHC cards, offering more ubiquity and faster read/write speeds - a practical advantage for contemporary workflows.

Connectivity and Extras: The Missing Links

Neither model features Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, or NFC connectivity. The PEN E-PL1 boasts an HDMI out for external display - helpful for presentations - while the E-600 does not. Both cameras connect via USB 2.0 for file transfer.

A lack of modern wireless features might deter users who want on-the-go social sharing or remote shooting capabilities without cables.

Video Capabilities: Mirrorless Snaps Ahead

The E-600 has no video recording capability, a notable omission, especially for users wanting hybrid stills and video.

The PEN E-PL1 does provide 720p HD video at 30fps, recorded in Motion JPEG format, which is not the most efficient or highest quality codec but sufficient for casual videography. Lack of microphone input limits audio quality control.

If video matters for your workflow, the PEN clearly wins and might be a base model to build a hybrid kit around.

Real-World Use Case Performance

Let’s contextualize the specs into practical scenarios gleaned from my field tests:

Portrait Photography

• Both produce pleasing skin tones thanks to the Four Thirds sensor and Olympus’s color science.
• E-600’s faster autofocus is less critical here, but its articulated screen helps with creative angles.
• PEN E-PL1 edge due to face and eye AF tracking for quick, spontaneous candid portraits and the more compact system for event shooting.

Landscape Photography

• E-600’s marginally better dynamic range and longer maximum shutter speed (up to 1/4000s vs 1/2000s on PEN) deliver slight benefit for sharp, high-contrast landscapes.
• The PEN’s lighter body aids long treks.
• Both benefit from the rich MFT lens ecosystem suitable for ultra-wide to standard focal lengths.

Wildlife Photography

• E-600's 4fps burst, phase detection AF, and access to bigger telephotos make it better suited for wildlife shooters needing reach and speed.
• PEN lags slightly due to slower burst and contrast AF only.

Sports Photography

• E-600 has the edge with faster shooting and hybrid AF.
• PEN workable for low-profile sports coverage but may miss critical frames.

Street Photography

• PEN shines for its discreet size, silent shooting modes, and tilt screen (though not articulating).
• E-600 feels bulkier and more conspicuous.

Macro Photography

• Both benefit from sensor-based stabilization and articulated/fixed screens respectively.
• The articulating screen of the E-600 better facilitates shooting difficult close-up angles.

Night/Astro Photography

• Both can handle long exposures but E-600 supports longer max shutter speed and produces cleaner ISO performance.
• Low-light autofocus better on E-600, important for focusing on dim stars or subjects.

Video

• PEN is the only option here. Basic HD video with stabilization; not for profs but a bonus for casual users.

Travel Photography

• PEN’s compactness and lens range give it a clear advantage in portability and adaptability.
• E-600 better suited if extended battery, slightly better IQ, and versatility are priorities over size.

Professional Work

• Neither camera is truly professional-grade, lacking environmental sealing, dual card slots, or advanced connectivity.
• E-600’s raw support and slightly better ISO make it marginally more reliable for demanding workflows.

Image Quality Gallery

Below, sample images captured by both cameras in various conditions illustrate their output characteristics.

Olympus E 600 screen back Olympus E PL1 front Olympus E PL1 screen back

Notice the E-600’s cleaner shadows and a tad more dynamic range in the woods scene, while the PEN E-PL1 shows commendable color fidelity and detail in portraits, albeit with marginally higher noise at ISO 1600.

Performance Scores Summed Up

Compiling data from my tests and DxOMark benchmarks, here’s a consolidated performance rating chart:

E-600 slightly leads in sensor performance and shooting speed, PEN scores better in portability and video capability.

Further broken down by photographic genres:

Final Verdict: Which Olympus Should You Choose?

Choosing between the Olympus E-600 and PEN E-PL1 boils down to priorities and shooting style:

• Choose the Olympus E-600 if you want:

  • A classic DSLR experience with optical viewfinder
  • Superior battery life
  • Slightly better low-light performance and dynamic range
  • Faster autofocus with phase detection for wildlife and sports
  • Flexible articulated LCD for video and macro use
  • Compatibility with a wider array of legacy Four Thirds lenses

• Choose the Olympus PEN E-PL1 if you want:

  • A compact, lightweight mirrorless system for travel and street shooting
  • Basic HD video recording functionality
  • Advanced face/eye tracking autofocus for portraits
  • Modern storage (SD cards) and HDMI output
  • Access to a growing collection of compact Micro Four Thirds lenses

If video or portability define your workflow, the PEN is the more compelling choice despite some sensor compromises. For photographers valuing traditional DSLR handling, longer battery life, and a slight edge in image quality, the E-600 still holds up admirably.

Summary Table at a Glance

In wrapping up, both cameras are products of their time but stand firm as capable Micro Four Thirds contenders boasting contrasting advantages. Your choice hinges upon whether you desire the tried-and-true DSLR ambience paired with raw image prowess or a lightweight mirrorless system that nudges toward future-proof versatility.

Ultimately, I encourage hands-on trials if possible. Neither camera demands blind loyalty, but each offers thoughtful design and performance for photographers who appreciate Olympus’s distinct blend of portability, image quality, and creative control.

I hope this comprehensive comparison helps you navigate your next camera investment with confidence. Happy shooting!