Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II vs Sony Alpha a6300: A Hands-On, In-Depth Comparison for Enthusiasts and Pros

Choosing your next camera often feels like navigating a minefield of specs sheets, marketing hype, and countless user opinions. With decades under my belt testing cameras across genres - from gritty street shoots to wildlife tracking - I’m here to cut through the noise and give you a detailed, practical comparison of two excellent but fundamentally different mirrorless cameras: the Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II and the Sony Alpha a6300.

These are both mirrorless cameras announced in 2016 with pro-leaning feature sets but differing sensor sizes and designs. Over the next 2500 words, I’ll share what these cameras bring to the table, how they perform across various photo and video disciplines, and crucially, how they stack up in real-world scenarios that matter to you. Expect candid evaluations based on hands-on testing, plus insights into ergonomics, image quality, autofocus, and value. By the end, you’ll have a clear idea which camera aligns best with your style, budget, and photographic ambitions.

Getting to Know Your Contenders: Olympus E-M1 II vs Sony A6300

Before diving deep, let’s set the stage with a snapshot of their core identities.

• Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II: A “Pro” Micro Four Thirds mirrorless camera with a weather-sealed, robust SLR-style body, famously packed with cutting-edge features like rugged 5-axis sensor stabilization, a top tier autofocus array, and ultra-fast burst shooting. It targets pros and enthusiasts who want compact versatility without compromising durability.

• Sony Alpha a6300: An advanced APS-C mirrorless camera with a rangefinder-style design, offering a larger-than-MFT sensor, superb high ISO performance, and an autofocus system boasting a staggering 425 phase-detect points. Acting as the follow-up to the popular A6000, it appeals to photographers craving high-resolution images and video prowess in a pretty compact package.

Let’s break down their tangible differences and what they mean for your photography.

Body Size, Build, and Handling: Olympus’s Ergonomic Clubs for Thumbs vs Sony’s Compact Rangefinder

Right off the bat, the Olympus E-M1 II is chunkier and heavier - measuring 134x91x67 mm and weighing 574g (body only), compared to Sony A6300’s sleeker 120x67x49 mm and 404g. That bulk translates into a more substantial grip and weather sealing on Olympus, making it a workhorse for adverse conditions and heavier lenses.

The Sony trades that tough build for portability and pocketability. Its smaller rangefinder style body is lighter and easier to carry over long shoots or street photo walks.

The E-M1 II’s physical controls are plentiful, with fully programmable dials and buttons that any seasoned shooter will appreciate, especially when working in manual or semi-auto modes. On the other hand, the A6300’s layout is minimalist but effective - lighter on clubs for your thumbs but more straightforward.

Both have articulated screens - you can swivel the Olympus’ fully articulated 3” display out for high and low-angle shooting, ideal for video or fieldwork, while Sony’s 3” tilting screen is less versatile but still helpful.

Sensor Size and Image Quality: Four Thirds vs APS-C - A Photography Classic Debate

A critical difference lies in the sensors:

In practical terms, the Sony’s larger APS-C sensor grants it an inherent advantage in noise performance and dynamic range. The DxO scores bear this out: Sony edges Olympus with an overall score of 85 vs 80, notably gaining in color depth (24.4 bits vs 23.7) and dynamic range (13.7 vs 12.8 stops). The larger sensor means better low light ISO performance; Sony’s native minimum ISO is 100 (vs Olympus 200), allowing finer control in bright conditions.

The lack of the anti-aliasing filter in Olympus should, in theory, give it a slight edge in sharpness and detail rendering, which I found noticeable especially in landscapes or studio portraits where resolving power matters.

That said, Olympus uses a Micro Four Thirds sensor that’s smaller, meaning its effective focal length multiplier is 2.0, inflating lens equivalent focal lengths. This compression can be a pro or a con depending on your style - doubling the reach of telephoto lenses but limiting depth-of-field control compared to APS-C.

Both cameras support RAW, vital for serious editing workflows, although the Sony’s sensor gives photographers more latitude to push shadows or recover highlights due to superior dynamic range.

Autofocus Systems: Olympus’s Swiss Army Knife vs Sony’s Point Armada

Autofocus is often the make-or-break factor for many genres. The Olympus E-M1 II boasts a sophisticated hybrid autofocus with 121 focus points utilizing both contrast-detection and phase-detection, an impressive feat for a Micro Four Thirds.

By comparison, the Sony A6300 sports a staggering 425 phase-detection autofocus points combined with contrast detection, covering almost the entire frame.

Sony’s larger number translates to faster lock-on speeds and superior subject tracking, especially important for fast-moving subjects in wildlife or sports. Olympus’s system is quick and accurate in many conditions, particularly good for stills and slower-paced work. However, Sony proves more reliable when tracking erratic movements due to its denser point coverage.

Neither camera offers animal eye autofocus (a feature added in later models), but both handle human eye detection competently, with slightly faster acquisition on the Sony.

When continuous AF and burst shooting speed combine, Olympus really shines with a blistering 60fps in silent electronic shutter mode (albeit at reduced resolution or blackouts), much faster than Sony’s 11fps maximum (with autofocus). Real-world burst usage is often limited by buffer size and image quality priorities, but Olympus is the clear leader here if you’re shooting sports or wildlife requiring rapid fire.

Build Quality and Weather Sealing: Olympus’s Rugged Warrior

If you’re a “get it dirty” kind of shooter or shoot outdoors regularly, the Olympus E-M1 II is built like a tank. It’s fully weather-sealed to resist dust, rain, and freezing temperatures, making it a trusted companion for landscape, wildlife, or adventure photography.

Sony’s A6300, while well-made, offers weather resistance but less sealing rigor compared to Olympus. For critical outdoor work, this can be a dealbreaker.

Interface and User Experience: Screen, Viewfinder, and Controls

The Olympus’s fully articulated 3” touchscreen with 1,037k-dot resolution offers a lot of flexibility for angles and touch-based focusing. Conversely, the Sony has a smaller tilting screen with 922k-dot resolution and no touch support, which can feel a little limiting if you’re used to tapping to focus or navigating menus quickly.

Both cameras have excellent electronic viewfinders (EVF). Olympus’s EVF offers a 2,360k-dot resolution with 0.74x magnification, while Sony matches that with a 2,359k-dot EVF and 0.7x magnification - both crisp and lag-free for eye-level shooting.

Navigating menus is subjective: Olympus’s menus, while comprehensive, can feel dense initially but rewards time investment with rich customization, including focus bracketing and stacking. Sony opts for a more streamlined system, prioritized for speed and ease, but still offers plenty of control once you dig in.

Lens Ecosystem: More Choices or More Reach?

Olympus uses the Micro Four Thirds system, one of the most mature mirrorless ecosystems with over 100 lenses available from Olympus, Panasonic, and third parties. The small lens size and lightweight options make it versatile for travel and macro photography. The 2x crop factor also makes telephoto lenses more affordable and physically smaller for wildlife.

Sony’s E-mount supports over 120 lenses ranging from ultra-wide primes to monstrous telephotos. Their APS-C options are complemented by full-frame lenses, though with some field of view cropping on this model. Overall, Sony’s lens selection offers higher resolution, more aperture choices, and excellent low-light optimized glass. However, lenses tend to be larger and pricier.

The E-M1 II’s in-body 5-axis image stabilization works harmoniously with lenses lacking IBIS, giving an edge for low light or macro, whereas the A6300 depends mostly on optical stabilization built into lenses.

Battery Life and Storage: Go Long or Go Home?

Olympus offers roughly 350 shots per charge using its BLH-1 battery, respectable for a Micro Four Thirds in this class. The dual card slots allow simultaneous or overflow storage, a boon for professionals backing up files on the fly.

Sony’s A6300 extends battery life to approximately 400 shots with its smaller NP-FW50 battery but only includes a single SD card slot. If you’re shooting long sessions or events, having a second card slot like Olympus provides is invaluable for redundancy.

Connectivity and Extras: What Tech Is on Board?

Both include built-in Wi-Fi for wireless image transfer, but only Sony offers NFC for faster pairing with compatible phones - a neat little convenience if you’re the type who shares on social constantly.

Olympus includes USB 3.0, faster than Sony’s USB 2.0, facilitating quicker tethered shooting and large file transfers.

Neither has Bluetooth (sadly), and GPS tracking is absent from both - though Olympus can add GPS functionality via an external accessory.

Real-World Photography Tests by Genre

To round out this head-to-head, here’s what I’ve found shooting both cameras through the major photography disciplines and use cases.

Portraiture: Skin Tones and Bokeh Battle

The Sony A6300’s APS-C sensor and 24MP resolution generally produce images with smoother gradations in skin tones and better dynamic range for subtle highlight retention in natural light portraits.

However, Olympus impresses with 5-axis stabilization that allows slower shutter speeds handheld without blur. The Micro Four Thirds depth-of-field is shallower than you might think when using fast primes, but creating creamy bokeh is easier on Sony with its larger sensor and wider aperture lenses.

Both performed eye detection autofocus reliably, but Sony’s more aggressive AF tracking made lock-ons faster on moving subjects or kids.

Landscape: Resolution and Dynamic Range Battles

Landscape enthusiasts will appreciate Sony’s higher resolution and slightly better dynamic range. Files from the A6300 can hold up better in post-processing shadow lifting. However, Olympus’s lack of an anti-aliasing filter means micro-contrast makes textures pop beautifully, leading to punchy images.

The E-M1 II’s weather sealing and ruggedness shine outside on misty mornings.

Wildlife and Sports: Speed and Endurance

If you shoot birds or fast-paced sports, Olympus’s 60fps burst mode combined with in-body stabilization is a game-changer. Its telephoto reach due to the 2x crop factor means you get 30-40% more ‘reach’ than Sony’s APS-C. The Sony autofocus system is faster at tracking erratic movement but limited to 11fps continuous shooting.

So, if your priority is raw speed and extended burst lengths, the Olympus wins. For precise, high-accuracy subject tracking, Sony’s AF system nudges ahead.

Street Photography: Discretion and Portability

Sony’s smaller, lighter body feels less intrusive on the streets, slipping into bags and under jackets with ease. The tilting screen is less flexible but the compact size and quieter built-in flash support make it a favorite.

Olympus is bulkier, but those who prefer a more “DSLR-esque” feel often cite comfort with the E-M1 II’s handling. Silent electronic shutter mode on Olympus enables near-silent shots, a bonus for discreet street work.

Macro: Magnification and Focus Precision

Olympus is no slouch here thanks to its smaller sensor and terrific stabilization system. Paired with MFT macro lenses, it excels at close-focus work and focus stacking capabilities built into the camera software seal the deal.

Sony has fewer macro-specific lenses at the ready in the APS-C mount and no built-in focus stacking unless added via third-party software.

Night and Astro: High ISO and Exposure Control

Sony’s bigger sensor and better native ISO lower noise at high magnifications, which is a boon for astrophotography. Olympus’s in-body stabilization suffers less here but noise levels rise more quickly. Sony takes the nighttime edge unless you prioritize stabilization in handheld night shots.

Video Capabilities: 4K Quality and Stabilization

The E-M1 Mark II shoots 4K at 24p and 30p up to 102 Mbps (MOV, H.264), with 4K video slightly oversampled and excellent colors. Crucially, it has 5-axis stabilization during video, enabling smooth handheld footage. Both microphone and headphone ports make it a pro-friendly rig for audio monitoring.

Sony A6300 records 4K at 24p/30p with efficient XAVC S codec, delivering detailed footage but lacks in-body stabilization. Video shooters will want optically stabilized lenses.

Sony’s lack of headphone jack is a downside for serious videographers, but its clean HDMI output supports external recorders.

Price and Value Analysis: Making Your Money Work Harder

At their launch and even secondhand, the Olympus E-M1 II carries a pro-level price tag around $1,700 (body only). Sony’s A6300 offers nearly half that, retailing near $889. Factor in lens costs, and Sony remains cheaper overall for APS-C glass despite fewer stabilization options.

Olympus E M1 II front Olympus E M1 II screen back Sony A6300 front Sony A6300 screen back

Both cameras deliver excellent image quality and feature sets for their class, but Olympus targets the rugged professional and serious enthusiast who needs blazing burst speeds and image stabilization with weather sealing. Sony offers better sensor performance at a value and smaller, lighter body size.

Final Performance Ratings and Genre Scores

The Bottom Line: Which Mirrorless Camera Should You Buy?

Choose the Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II if…

• You need top-tier weather sealing for rough environments.
• You value 5-axis in-body image stabilization that works in photos and video.
• You shoot a lot of wildlife or sports, where ultra-fast burst rates and reach matter.
• You like the feel of an SLR-style body with lots of physical controls.
• You want a robust lens ecosystem with compact telephotos.
• You’re okay spending significantly more for these perks.

Opt for the Sony Alpha a6300 if…

• You want a better sensor for low light and dynamic range at an affordable price.
• You prize compactness and portability for travel and street photography.
• You need faster, more accurate autofocus tracking with 425 points.
• You prefer a larger APS-C sensor for shallow depth of field and image quality.
• Your budget is tight but you want a nearly professional stills and video camera.
• You don’t mind relying on optically stabilized lenses since there’s no IBIS.

My Personal Take as an Experienced Reviewer

Having spent weeks shooting both in varied environments, I can say the Olympus E-M1 II appeals to seasoned pros with demanding usage scenarios - think rugged wildlife expeditions or studio pros seeking pro-level speed and durability. Sony A6300 fits better in the hands of ambitious enthusiasts or content creators looking for value, excellent image quality, and a lighter, more travel-friendly package.

If you’re a cheapskate budget-conscious photographer who likes APS-C quality and compactness, Sony will satisfy without compromise. But for photographers who suffer from ‘gear itch’ for professional features like IBIS, weather sealing, and ultra-high burst speeds, Olympus justifies its premium.

In summary, both cameras have stood the test of time and continue to offer solid fundamental capabilities. Your choice hinges on what photographic paths you prioritize - speed, ruggedness, and stabilization vs sensor size, image quality, and compactness. Hopefully, this thorough, hands-on breakdown arms you with the knowledge to make the smartest purchase for your capture quests.

Happy shooting!

If you have questions about specific features or shooting scenarios, drop a comment - I’m always happy to share more from the trenches.