Olympus E-P1 vs Sony RX100 IV

Exploring Two Distinct Eras of Photography: Olympus PEN E-P1 vs Sony RX100 IV

In the evolving landscape of digital photography, camera technology dramatically influences creative possibilities. Having extensively tested countless models over 15 years, I find it instructive to juxtapose two markedly different yet influential cameras: the Olympus PEN E-P1, launched in 2009 embodying early mirrorless innovation, and the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 IV from 2015, a high-performance large sensor compact. This comprehensive comparison dissects these cameras’ technical underpinnings, real-world performance, and suitability across photography genres. The goal is to equip enthusiasts and professionals with nuanced, experiential insights to guide rational purchase decisions.

Physical Design, Handling, and Ergonomics

The Olympus E-P1 embodies the rangefinder-style mirrorless form factor, featuring retro-inspired aesthetics combined with a compact 121 x 70 x 36 mm body weighing 355g. Its body sits comfortably in hand despite lacking a protruding grip. Controls are minimalistic, befitting its entry-level positioning, but this simplicity can constrain rapid manual adjustments in dynamic shooting. Notably, it lacks any form of viewfinder, relying exclusively on a fixed 3-inch HyperCrystal LCD with modest 230k-dot resolution for composition.

Conversely, the Sony RX100 IV is engineered for portability found in a large sensor compact (102 x 58 x 41 mm at 298g), pushing boundaries by integrating a fast 24-70mm f/1.8-2.8 fixed zoom and an electronic viewfinder (EVF). The tilting 3-inch LCD with 1229k-dot resolution enhances framing flexibility, especially at awkward angles. The RX100 IV’s design considers pocketability while retaining sophisticated tactile controls, including an intuitive control ring around the lens, enriching manual handling without cumbersome bulk.

The RX100 IV’s built-in pop-up EVF (0.59x magnification, 2359k-dot) is a decisive usability advantage in bright light scenarios, where Olympus’ lack of any finder can hinder precise framing or manual focusing confidence.

In summary, for photographers prioritizing ergonomic refinement and physical controls for quick operation, especially on the move, the RX100 IV markedly outshines the E-P1. The Olympus, while classically elegant and discrete, feels dated and more suited to deliberate, contemplative shooting rather than dynamic scenarios.

Sensor Technology and Image Quality

Sensor performance fundamentally shapes photographic outcomes, dictating resolution, dynamic range, ISO sensitivity, color depth, and noise characteristics examined through both heart-of-the-camera specifications and DxO Mark testing.

The Olympus E-P1 employs a Four Thirds system CMOS sensor, physically measuring 17.3 x 13 mm, totaling 224.9 mm² sensor area, and resolving 12 MP images at 4032 x 3024 pixels. This sensor size is medium in mirrorless terms but smaller than APS-C and full-frame sensors, affecting shallow depth of field control and high ISO performance. The TruePic V processor supports the sensor, delivering naturalistic color rendering and moderate noise handling up to ISO 6400, though with noticeable grain beyond ISO 800 in real shooting.

By contrast, the Sony RX100 IV features a stacked 1-inch BSI-CMOS sensor (13.2 x 8.8 mm, 116.16 mm²), with 20 MP resolution (5472 x 3648 pixels), significantly higher than the Olympus in pixel count despite a smaller physical area. The backside illumination and stacked sensor architecture facilitate enhanced light gathering, speed, and noise control, while the Bionz X processor advances detail retention and noise suppression. Native ISOs between 125 and 12800 extend usability in challenging light.

According to DxO Mark scores, the RX100 IV shows an overall score of 70 versus the E-P1’s 55, indicating substantive gains in dynamic range (12.6 vs 10.4 EV), color depth (22.9 vs 21.4 bits), and low-light ISO performance (562 vs 536). While the E-P1 produces pleasing skin tones with a natural palette, the RX100 IV delivers sharper images with higher detail fidelity and better highlight preservation.

These differences bear out under practical tests: landscapes shot in high-contrast conditions reveal the RX100 IV’s superior tonal gradations and shadow detail, whereas the E-P1 shows some highlight clipping and reduced dynamic nuance. Portrait shooting benefits from the RX’s greater resolution and sharpness, adding micro-detail to eyes and hair - critical when large prints or cropping are intended.

Autofocus System and Speed

Autofocus (AF) constitutes a crucial operational facet, especially across moving subjects, low light, and fast-action photography.

The Olympus E-P1 uses an 11-point contrast-detection AF system without phase detection, limiting autofocus speed and accuracy, particularly in continuous tracking modes. Its focusing modes include single, continuous, selective (single point), and multi-area AF, and it incorporates face detection. However, there is no support for eye or animal eye autofocus, and tracking performance is rudimentary. In practical use, AF hunting can be frequent, and continuous shooting at 3 fps restricts capturing decisive moments in sport or wildlife.

The Sony RX100 IV’s AF system also relies on contrast detection but pairs that with a hybrid phase-detection layer (although phase detection AF is notably absent here, its stacked sensor accelerates focusing). The RX100 IV provides 25 AF points and supports AF tracking, face detection, and eye AF (though only human eyes), resulting in snappy acquisition and reliable lock-on performance. Burst shooting reaches a high 16 fps with AF tracking enabled, making it far more adept for sports or wildlife in comparison to the E-P1.

The RX100 IV’s faster shutter speeds (max electronic shutter 1/32000 s) and silent shutter options also enhance discretion and reduce motion blur with fast-moving subjects, not feasible on the E-P1’s max 1/4000 s mechanical shutter.

Build Quality, Weather Resistance, and Durability

Neither camera offers advanced environmental sealing or ruggedized features. Both lack dustproof, waterproof, shockproof, crushproof, or freezeproof certifications. The Olympus E-P1’s build employs metal alloy construction to reinforce durability, while the RX100 IV uses high-quality polycarbonate and magnesium alloy elements. Weight differences slightly favor the RX100 IV for extended handheld comfort.

While neither is recommended for harsh weather or extreme environments without protective housing, moderately stable conditions suit both designs well.

Display and Electronic Viewfinder Features

The Olympus E-P1’s fixed 3-inch LCD offers a surprisingly decent viewing angle and anti-reflective coating but suffers from low 230k-dot resolution, insufficient for precise focus assessment. The lack of a built-in electronic or optical viewfinder severely limits usability in bright sunlight or when shooting at eye level quickly.

The Sony RX100 IV excels here with a high-resolution tilting 3-inch panel (1229k-dot), providing vivid, detailed live views critical for manual focus accuracy and exposure evaluation. Its integral pop-up EVF is one of the finest in a compact camera, covering 100% of the frame at 2359k-dot resolution and 0.59x magnification.

For photographers prioritizing focus precision and outdoor usability, the RX100 IV clearly leads.

Lens Ecosystem and Compatibility

The Olympus E-P1 utilizes the Micro Four Thirds mount, granting access to a broad and mature system of over 100 lenses from Olympus and Panasonic, along with third-party options. This modularity supports specialized requirements such as macro, ultra-wide, telephoto, and prime lenses, facilitating adaptation to any genre from landscape to wildlife.

Conversely, the RX100 IV’s fixed lens (24-70 mm equivalent, f/1.8-2.8) restricts compositional versatility. However, the fast constant aperture zoom lens provides excellent image quality and bokeh performance within its focal range. Macro focus limit as close as 5 cm is suitable for casual close-ups but cannot match dedicated macro lenses available to the E-P1.

Therefore, for photographers intending to expand into varied genres requiring specialized optics, the Olympus platform presents superior flexibility.

Image Stabilization and Flash Systems

Both cameras incorporate image stabilization, albeit differing in implementation. The E-P1 utilizes sensor-based stabilization which slightly reduces camera shake effects at slower shutter speeds but with limited effectiveness. The RX100 IV applies optical stabilized elements in the lens, offering more substantial correction beneficial for telephoto zoom and handheld video.

The Olympus lacks a built-in flash, necessitating an external flash for fill or low-light bursts, which impacts portability and readiness. Meanwhile, the Sony RX100 IV includes an integrated pop-up flash, convenient for fill light in a compact form factor, though limited in power.

Burst Shooting and Shutter Speed Ranges

Shooting speed is critical for capturing motion and fleeting expressions.

The Olympus E-P1’s mechanical shutter range (60s to 1/4000s) and continuous shooting at 3 fps severely constrain its utility for sports or wildlife photography. No electronic shutter option removes silent shooting capacity and reduces shutter speed flexibility.

The Sony RX100 IV’s shutter spans from 30s to a remarkable 1/32000s using its electronic shutter, supporting silent capture and fast exposure bracketing. The 16 fps burst with continuous AF and AE tracking is exceptional for a compact, rivaling many DSLRs and mirrorless models.

Connectivity, Storage, and Power Considerations

Neither camera supports GPS, weatherproofing, or extensive wireless connectivity and modern IoT features. However, the Sony RX100 IV incorporates built-in Wi-Fi and NFC for rapid image transfer and smartphone remote control, enhancing workflow efficiency.

Both utilize single SD card slots; however, the RX100 IV additionally supports Memory Stick formats, providing broader storage compatibility.

Battery life measures approximately 300 shots for the Olympus E-P1 (BLS-1 battery) and about 280 shots for the RX100 IV (NP-BX1), a marginal difference likely irrelevant in field use given accessories and spare batteries.

Video Recording Capabilities

Video remains a defining dimension of the RX100 IV’s strengths. It captures high-quality 4K UHD (3840 x 2160) at 30p, with multiple frame rates and formats including AVCHD and XAVC S. High frame rate slow motion at 120 fps in 720p expands creative possibilities. Optical stabilization and manual audio control complement the system, though lacking microphone/headphone jacks.

Conversely, the Olympus E-P1 provides only HD 720p at 30 fps output in Motion JPEG format - adequate for casual uses but far behind contemporary standards. No audio input support and absence of 1080p video limit professional utility.

Olympus E P1 front Olympus E P1 screen back Sony RX100 IV front Sony RX100 IV screen back

Use Case Performance and Genre-Specific Strengths

Portrait Photography
The Olympus E-P1’s Four Thirds sensor and 12MP resolution yield smooth skin tones and good color gradation. Paired with the extensive lens options, selective aperture control delivers flattering bokeh, though the smaller sensor makes shallow depth of field harder to achieve than in larger sensor cameras. Its face detection autofocus performs adequately but can struggle with focus speed and accuracy in low light.

The RX100 IV’s higher resolution sensor captures finer detail, and the fast lens facilitates stronger subject isolation. Eye detection AF supports precise focus on pupils, enhancing sharpness in portraits. These aspects, combined with superior dynamic range and noise performance, make the RX100 IV better-suited for professional-grade portraiture within its zoom range.

Landscape Photography
Landscape photographers require high resolution, dynamic range, and robust weather sealing. Neither camera offers weather resistance, eliminating outdoor reliability in harsh conditions. The E-P1’s resolution and Four Thirds sensor size are modest but deliver acceptable print quality up to medium sizes. The large Micro Four Thirds lens range includes ultra-wide options favorable for landscapes.

The RX100 IV’s greater resolution and better dynamic range contribute to sharper, richer images. However, its fixed lens’s limited wide angle (24mm equivalent) reduces compositional flexibility for sweeping vistas.

Wildlife Photography
Speedy AF, burst shooting, and telephoto reach are paramount. The E-P1’s modest 3 fps continuous shooting and 11-point contrast AF cannot keep pace with fast-moving subjects, and its inherent slower focus acquisition is a disadvantage.

The RX100 IV, despite lacking extensive telephoto reach, offers 16 fps bursts, fast hybrid AF, and excellent shutter speed control. Its compactness aids in stealthy approach, though lens reach limitations hamper distant wildlife capture. Dedicated telephoto lenses on Micro Four Thirds systems provide the E-P1 an edge with compatible glass.

Sports Photography
Again, burst frame rates and autofocus tracking are decisive. The Olympus’ continuous shooting rate and AF system constraints limit action capture. The RX100 IV excels with high-speed shooting, accurate tracking, and fast shutter response. Still, its lens zoom range trades off for some reach.

Street Photography
Portability, discretion, and low-light prowess matter. The E-P1’s low weight and rangefinder style support low-profile shooting, but its lack of EVF and slow AF may frustrate spontaneous moments. The RX100 IV’s small size, quick AF, pop-up EVF for stable framing, and built-in flash grant greater versatility, though it is slightly less subtle due to its lens design.

Macro Photography
Dedicated macro lenses on Micro Four Thirds systems enable high magnification and fine focus control on the Olympus E-P1, presenting a decisive advantage. The RX100 IV’s 5 cm macro minimum focusing distance with its lens suffices for casual close-ups but lacks true macro fidelity.

Night and Astrophotography
Low-light noise performance and manual exposure controls are critical. The RX100 IV’s higher native ISO ceiling, better noise control, and longer exposure capabilities favor its use in astrophotography, while the E-P1’s more limited ISO range and performance hinder noise management. However, absence of advanced long exposure modes restricts astrophotography potential on both.

Travel Photography
For travel, battery life, size, weight, and versatility are central. The Olympus E-P1 offers lens interchangeability at the cost of additional gear bulk. The RX100 IV’s pocketability adjacent to outstanding image quality and video puts it ahead as a versatile travel companion, albeit with less lens flexibility.

Professional Workflows
The Olympus supports Four Thirds RAW files facilitating standard post-processing but lacks significant advances in file formats or workflow integration. The RX100 IV’s RAW files benefit from higher resolution and better dynamic range, catering for demanding post-production. Both cameras lack extended tethering support or advanced connectivity needed for studio workflows.

Value Assessment and Pricing Considerations

At launch, the Olympus E-P1 was priced around $180 (current market valuation for used units), representing an entry-level, budget-conscious mirrorless solution. Its compromises in AF speed, display resolution, and video are balanced by hardware modularity and approachable design.

The Sony RX100 IV, significantly higher-priced at approximately $900 new, demands investment justified by expansive feature sets: superior sensor technology, video capabilities, burst shooting, refined ergonomics, and connectivity.

Prospective buyers must weigh budget constraints against required technical performance. For casual shooters or photography students prioritizing interchangeable lenses and creative growth, the E-P1 remains compelling. Professionals or enthusiasts desiring high-performance imaging and content versatility benefit from the RX100 IV despite its fixed-lens limitations.

Concluding Recommendations: Matching Cameras to Photographic Needs

• Portrait photographers: Choose Sony RX100 IV for sharper images, eye AF support, and pleasing bokeh with a fast zoom lens. Olympus E-P1 suits entry-level portraitists exploring interchangeable lens systems.

• Landscape enthusiasts: Olympus E-P1 offers lens variety for compositional breadth; RX100 IV provides higher image quality but narrower framing options.

• Wildlife/sports photographers: RX100 IV’s fast continuous shooting and AF outperform the E-P1 hands down, but lack of telephoto reach may require companion gear.

• Street photographers: RX100 IV’s EVF, speed, and discreet form factor make it preferable, though the E-P1 offers classic aesthetics and straightforward control.

• Macro and close-up shooters: Olympus E-P1 enables specialized macro lenses and fine focus control unlike the RX100 IV.

• Video creators: RX100 IV is vastly superior with 4K, slow motion, and stabilization; the E-P1 is limited to basic 720p modes.

• Travel photographers: RX100 IV’s compact size and versatility triumph for lightweight travel; E-P1 caters to those willing to carry lenses for flexibility.

• Astro shooters: Both limited in functionality, but RX100 IV’s sensor technology provides a slight edge.

• Professionals requiring reliability and workflow integration: Neither camera excels beyond entry-level or enthusiast tiers.

In summary, these cameras represent distinct technological paradigms: the Olympus PEN E-P1 as a seminal early mirrorless platform with lens interchangeability and modest specs; the Sony RX100 IV as a specialized large sensor compact excelling in speed, image quality, and multimedia functionality. Their divergent strengths cater to contrasting photographic philosophies and budgets.

For modern users seeking a comprehensive everyday camera with standout image quality and fast operation within a compact design, the Sony RX100 IV remains a formidable choice. Meanwhile, photographers valuing system expansion, classical styling, and beginner-friendly controls on a limited budget may find enduring value in the Olympus E-P1 despite its dated features.

Ultimately, the decision hinges on prioritized genres, operational preferences, and investment scope - a nuanced balance of optics, sensor technology, speed, and convenience illuminated through practical experience summarized here.