Comparing the Olympus PEN E-P1 and Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ40: A Hands-On Expert Review

In the evolution of digital photography, the early 2010s brought an intriguing mix of entry-level mirrorless cameras and superzoom bridge cameras, each tailored to vastly different user needs. Today, I’m unpacking two notable representatives from that era - the Olympus PEN E-P1, Olympus’s debut mirrorless model introduced in 2009, and the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ40 (also known as the FZ45), a 2010 bridge camera renowned for its jaw-dropping 24x zoom range.

Both cameras are compelling for enthusiasts navigating budget constraints in today’s market - with the E-P1 hovering around $180 and the FZ40 roughly double that - but their feature sets, technical designs, and intended use cases couldn’t be more distinct. Let’s dive deep into how each performs in practice, and help you decide which might fit your photographic style best.

First Impressions: Size, Feel, and Handling Realities

Handling a camera is the first tactile indicator of whether it might become your trusted photographic partner. The Olympus E-P1 embraces a rangefinder-style, compact mirrorless build, whereas the Panasonic FZ40 is an SLR-like bridge camera with a fixed zoom lens.

Out of the box, the E-P1 feels surprisingly petite and light at just 355 grams, with physical dimensions of 121 x 70 x 36 mm. It fits easily into a jacket pocket or small bag - perfect for photographers who prioritize portability and discretion. Its design aesthetic is understated yet elegant, paying homage to classic rangefinders, and the compact body encourages manual operation thanks to dedicated dials and buttons.

Contrast this with the FZ40, which nearly doubles in weight and depth (494 grams; 120 x 80 x 92 mm), largely due to its massive built-in 25–600mm (35mm equivalent) lens - a marvel for telephoto enthusiasts but a bit unwieldy for casual street shooting. It feels solidly constructed with a substantial grip, but the size and weight inevitably draw more attention.

Ergonomically, the FZ40 falls somewhere between a DSLR and a point-and-shoot - intuitive for photographers used to bulkier cameras but potentially clunky for those accustomed to mirrorless nimbleness.

Design and Controls: Intuitive or Frustrating?

The command layout plays a vital role in shooting speed and ease of use.

The E-P1’s control scheme reflects Olympus’s early mirrorless philosophy - a minimalistic top plate lacks a dedicated DSLR-style mode dial, leaning on the rear menu and a few honored function buttons. The TruePic V processor and lack of a built-in viewfinder push users toward composing shots on the crisp 3-inch fixed LCD. Controls are pleasant but somewhat sparse; I missed tactile autofocus area selector buttons, though contrast detection autofocus with face detection partially compensates.

The Panasonic FZ40, in contrast, delivers a full suite of manual controls across its SLR-like top panel. Exposure modes, aperture and shutter dials, and drive mode switches mimic a DSLR workflow, elevating quick access while shooting. Its electronic viewfinder (EVF) is a valuable addition for bright outdoor scenarios where LCD viewing isn’t practical - although the EVF resolution is limited, its presence is a clear advantage over the E-P1 in this respect.

In summary, the PEN E-P1’s design favors minimalism and quiet elegance, while the FZ40 prioritizes easy access and DSLR familiarity - two philosophies that cater to different types of photographers.

Sensor Technology and Image Quality: Big Sensor vs. Superzoom Tradeoffs

At the heart of the imaging experience is the sensor - arguably the single greatest determinant of image quality.

The Olympus E-P1 sports a 12MP Four Thirds CMOS sensor, measuring 17.3 x 13 mm, considerably larger than the 1/2.3" CCD sensor (6.08 x 4.56 mm) inside the Panasonic FZ40. This size difference translates into a sensor area nearly eight times larger for the E-P1 (225mm² vs. 28mm²).

What does this mean in practice?

• Dynamic Range & Color Depth: The E-P1 scores notably higher with a dynamic range of 10.4 EV and color depth of 21.4 bits (measured by DxO Mark), allowing richer detail in shadows and highlights and smoother gradations of skin tones. The FZ40’s smaller sensor, while sporting a higher nominal resolution at 14MP, is handicapped by noise and limited bit depth that reduce its capacity to render fine tonal subtleties, especially in challenging light.

• Low-light Performance: Thanks to larger photosites and a noiseless sensor architecture, the E-P1 maintains usable images at ISO 6400 (its max native ISO) and performs substantially better above ISO 800. The FZ40 struggles beyond ISO 400, with noise and softening artifacts quickly degrading images.

• Macro and Close-ups: The FZ40 shines with a 1 cm macro focus range - remarkably close, considering the fixed superzoom lens - making it a capable tool for casual magnification without additional gear. The E-P1 depends on compatible Micro Four Thirds macro lenses (a vast lens ecosystem of over 100 lenses is compatible), which can provide far superior magnification, bokeh, and sharpness but at higher cost and complexity.

Overall, if ultimate image quality and creative flexibility are priorities, the E-P1’s Four Thirds sensor is the clear winner here.

LCDs and Viewfinders: Composing the Perfect Shot

Both cameras use 3-inch fixed-type LCDs with 230k dots resolution, which by today’s standard is modest but was typical in their generation.

The E-P1’s HyperCrystal LCD with anti-reflective coating performs well in bright daylight, maintaining decent visibility and color accuracy. Its touch controls are non-existent, so navigation relies on physical buttons - which demands a learning curve but avoids inadvertent taps.

The FZ40’s LCD is a basic fixed screen without AR coating, which fares less well under direct sunlight, making its EVF an essential composing tool outdoors. This EVF is roughly a 0.44” panel with low resolution but offers much-needed framing precision when glare hinders LCD use.

For extended shooting sessions, neither camera provides articulating or touch-enabled screens, which limits flexibility - something to note for vloggers or casual video shooters.

Autofocus Performance: Speed, Precision, and Tracking

Autofocus is where the cameras’ technological ceilings become evident.

The E-P1 employs a contrast-detection autofocus system with 11 focus points and face detection, but its continuous AF only operates at a modest 3 frames per second in burst mode. The system is reliable for portraits and everyday shooting but can feel sluggish in fast-action settings. Unfortunately, it lacks animal eye AF or advanced subject tracking, making wildlife or sports photography a challenge.

The FZ40’s autofocus, also contrast-detection based, is tuned for precision with the lock-on function disabled and a fixed lens’s quicker focus adjustment. It is generally slower (2 fps in burst mode) and less responsive in low contrast or dim settings. While it doesn't have face/eye detection, the huge focal length range means you spend more effort pre-focusing rather than relying on AF hunting.

In practical wildlife or sports scenarios, neither camera excels: the E-P1 lacks tracking capabilities, and the FZ40's relatively slow AF and limited continuous shooting speed restrict fast capture.

Photography Genres: Where Each Camera Excels

Let’s scrutinize real-world performance across popular genres:

Portrait Photography

The E-P1’s larger sensor and interchangeable lenses deliver creamy bokeh, smooth skin tones, and precise eye detection, especially when paired with fast prime lenses. The Panasonic FZ40’s smaller sensor and smaller maximum aperture at long focal lengths (F2.8-5.2) cannot replicate this professional look, producing flatter images with less subject isolation.

Landscape Photography

With a 12MP resolution and wide dynamic range, the PEN E-P1 produces satisfying landscapes with rich detail and shadow nuance. The mature Micro Four Thirds lens lineup offers sturdy wide-angle options - though weather sealing is absent for both cameras, so caution in adverse environments is advised.

The FZ40 offers an ultra-versatile zoom covering from ultra-wide 25mm to 600mm equivalent, excellent for travel landscapes where changing lenses isn’t feasible. However, diminished sensor size limits fine details and dynamic range in wide vistas compared to the E-P1.

Wildlife and Sports

Despite the E-P1’s autofocus limitations, interchangeable telephoto lenses with image stabilization help capture distant subjects. Unfortunately, slow burst speed and lack of tracking deter the sports enthusiast.

The FZ40’s built-in 24x zoom gives a massive telephoto reach, handy for casual wildlife or sports shooting at a distance. Still, limited focus speed and low buffer make it suitable mostly for slow-moving subjects.

Street and Travel Photography

The compact PEN E-P1 wins for discretion, portability, and stylish appeal, encouraging natural, spontaneous shooting. Its minimal shutter/dial noise also helps avoid drawing attention.

The FZ40’s size hinders street stealth but shines in travel scenarios demanding versatility and range without packing multiple lenses. Its battery life is not specified but generally bridge cameras run longer than mirrorless counterparts.

Macro and Close-up

Here the FZ40’s 1 cm macro focus range is a budget-friendly feature for casual close-ups. The E-P1, combined with dedicated macro lenses from the Micro Four Thirds ecosystem, can produce vastly superior detail and bokeh quality, though at extra expense.

Night and Astro Photography

The E-P1’s larger sensor, with better high-ISO performance and the option to control exposure settings in manual mode, is better suited for night or astrophotography - especially with tripod use and RAW output.

The FZ40, with CCD sensor drawbacks and noisy high ISO, struggles here.

Video Capabilities

Both can shoot up to 720p HD video: the E-P1 at 30fps in Motion JPEG, the FZ40 offering 720p at 60fps via AVCHD Lite. Neither supports 4K or advanced audio inputs - limiting appeal for serious videographers.

Neither has microphone or headphone ports, nor built-in Wi-Fi or Bluetooth.

Build Quality and Environmental Sealing

Neither camera boasts weather sealing or rugged build features such as dustproofing or shock resistance. Both target casual or enthusiast users operating mostly in controlled environments.

The E-P1’s metal construction conveys a premium feel; the FZ40’s plastic-heavy body is sturdy but utilitarian.

Lens Ecosystem and Compatibility

The Panasonic FZ40’s fixed lens means no lens changes, but its enormous 25–600 mm zoom offers enormous framing flexibility at the press of a dial.

The Olympus E-P1’s Micro Four Thirds mount taps into an extensive, mature ecosystem exceeding 100 lenses, from ultra-fast primes to professional-quality zooms - a dream for serious photographers wanting versatility.

Battery, Storage, and Connectivity

The E-P1 uses a BLS-1 battery pack rated for ~300 shots - modest endurance making spare batteries advisable on extended shoots.

The FZ40’s battery life is unspecified, but bridge cameras typically last longer than mirrorless models due to less power-hungry components.

Both have a single SD card slot compatible with SDHC; the FZ40 also supports SDXC and internal memory - a neat feature for on-the-go storage.

Neither camera offers wireless connectivity options (Wi-Fi, NFC, or Bluetooth), reflecting their generation’s era.

Price-to-Performance: Which Offers More Bang for Your Buck?

At approximately $180, the Olympus PEN E-P1, although dated, offers superior image quality, better low-light performance, and an unparalleled lens system for its price. It’s excellent for enthusiasts seeking a compact, creative mirrorless intro with scope to grow.

The Panasonic Lumix FZ40 costs about $420 in today’s market - a higher price justified by its unique superzoom lens and video capabilities, placing it as a versatile travel or casual “one and done” camera. However, compromises in sensor size and autofocus speed dampen its appeal to photographers demanding higher image quality.

Summarizing the Scores and Genre Performance

Our expert reviewers synthesized objective benchmarks and hands-on testing into the following visual analyses.

These charts crystallize the key takeaway:

• The Olympus E-P1 excels more in image quality-centric genres - portrait, landscape, night - and professional workflow integration.
• The Panasonic FZ40 scores better at superzoom versatility and casual travel use cases but compromises on image fidelity and speed.

Sample Images and Real-World Output

Nothing speaks louder than real photographs.

Olympus E P1 front Olympus E P1 screen back Panasonic FZ40 front Panasonic FZ40 screen back

Comparing JPEGs and RAW files, the E-P1 consistently renders richer colors, finer details, and natural gradations, especially in skin tones and shadow detail. The FZ40 images appear a touch flatter and noisier but deliver impressive detail at long zoom ranges in good light.

My Recommendations: Who Should Buy Which?

Choose the Olympus PEN E-P1 if you:

• Prioritize image quality, dynamic range, and color depth
• Want the flexibility of interchangeable lenses and manual controls
• Shoot portraits, landscapes, macro, or low-light photography
• Appreciate a compact, stylish body for street or travel discreetness
• Are on a budget but want a camera that can grow with your skills

Go for the Panasonic Lumix FZ40 if you:

• Need an all-in-one travel camera with extreme zoom reach (25–600mm equiv.)
• Desire a DSLR-like interface for intuitive manual controls
• Prefer an electronic viewfinder for bright outdoor compositions
• Shoot primarily in bright conditions where sensor limitations are less visible
• Want decent HD video at 60 fps without fussing over lenses

Final Thoughts: The Value of Experience and Choice

While it’s tempting to pick a winner outright, these two cameras serve fundamentally different philosophies. The Olympus PEN E-P1 introduced mirrorless magic, paving the path toward compact, high-quality digital photography. The Panasonic FZ40 stands as a testament to superzoom convenience and ‘bridge’ versatility for those unwilling or unable to invest in interchangeable lenses.

Having spent countless hours shooting and testing both, I can say: they each hold value for photographers who understand their strengths - and limitations. Before you buy, consider your priorities: image quality and creative control, or zoom range and simplicity. Choosing either means investing in a proven, if slightly aged, system with its own unique charm.

Happy shooting - and may your next camera be the perfect fit for your photographic journey.