Olympus E-PL1s vs Olympus E-PM2: A Meticulous Comparison of Two Entry-Level Mirrorless Cameras

The Olympus PEN series has long been a flagship line within Olympus's mirrorless portfolio, renowned for blending classic rangefinder aesthetics with compact, capable imaging tools. Two early entries - the E-PL1s (2010) and the slightly later E-PM2 (2013) - encapsulate the evolution of Olympus’s design philosophy and technical improvements within entry-level mirrorless systems. Both cameras share the Micro Four Thirds mount, making them accessible to a vast lens ecosystem, but beyond that, their specifications betray notable contrasts that impact their usability across varied photographic disciplines.

Having rigorously tested both models under comparable conditions using standardized image quality metrics, autofocus protocols, and ergonomic assessments, this detailed comparison will guide photography enthusiasts and professionals alike to discern the practical differences and determine which model aligns best with their photographic pursuits. By no means superficial, the analysis incorporates technical sensor performance, autofocus mechanisms, ergonomics, and real-world field use, culminating in recommendations tied to specific photographic genres and user priorities.

Understanding the Core Hardware Differences

Both the E-PL1s and E-PM2 deploy Micro Four Thirds (MFT) sensors, maintaining a sensor size footprint of 17.3x13 mm, with a crop factor of 2.1x. However, the resolution and underlying sensor technology differ significantly - implications of which ripple through all imaging aspects.

• E-PL1s: 12 MP CMOS sensor paired with Olympus’s early TruePic V image processor.
• E-PM2: 16 MP CMOS sensor paired with an improved unidentified processor (legacy models do not always specify exact iterations).

Though seemingly modest upgrades, this sensor bump elevates image detail, dynamic range, and noise control in the E-PM2. The newer sensor also supports native ISO 200 to 25600, while the E-PL1s only spans ISO 100 to 6400. These differences manifest particularly in low-light and high-contrast scenarios.

Both cameras employ sensor-based image stabilization - a hallmark Olympus feature - enabling stabilization across compatible lenses. While technically comparable on paper, real-world testing illustrates subtle gains in stability effectiveness when paired with the E-PM2’s updated stabilization firmware.

Sensor and Image Quality: Measuring Detail and Dynamic Range

The resolution increase from 12 to 16 MP on the same sensor size inherently means smaller pixel pitch, which can lead to higher potential noise and diffraction issues at smaller apertures. Yet Olympus’s sensor advancements and improved processing have successfully balanced these trade-offs.

• Color depth, dynamic range, and low-light performance - benchmarked using professional software like DxOMark - rate the E-PM2 with clear advantages:
  • E-PM2 scored 72 overall (color depth 22.7 bits, dynamic range 12.2 EV, high ISO score 932), while the E-PL1s remains untested but generally rated lower.

This correlates with practical observation: The E-PM2 consistently delivers cleaner shadows with less luminance noise at high ISOs (1600–3200), and better retention of highlight detail in direct sunlight, essential for landscape and travel photography where dynamic range is paramount.

Ergonomics and Handling: Size, Weight, and Controls

The physical measurements and ergonomics strongly influence portability and user comfort during extended shooting sessions.

• E-PL1s dimensions: 115 x 72 x 42 mm, weighing roughly 334 g (without lens).
• E-PM2 dimensions: 110 x 64 x 34 mm, weighing a lighter 269 g body-only.

The E-PM2’s smaller, lighter build favors street and travel photographers who prioritize discretion and ease of carry. That said, the shallower grip on the E-PM2 may reduce hand stability during prolonged handheld shooting, especially when paired with larger lenses.

Control Layout and Interface

Neither camera features an electronic viewfinder by default, although optional VF-2/VF-3 units exist - sold separately - which may factor into professional workflow choices.

• The E-PL1s features minimalistic physical controls, with an early multi-control dial placement that requires deliberate button pressing to access key functions.
• The E-PM2 offers a more refined but still compact layout; more significantly, it adds a 3.0-inch touchscreen (460k dots), enhancing navigating menus, changing settings, and manual focusing via touch - features absent from the E-PL1s’s smaller, fixed 2.7-inch non-touchscreen display (230k dots).

This display differential is especially impactful in fast-paced shooting scenarios like street photography or casual portrait sessions, improving intuitive camera operation and real-time compositional adjustments.

Autofocus and Shooting Performance: Speed and Accuracy

Autofocus (AF) systems often define a camera's practical utility beyond pure specs. Here the differences become clear:

The E-PM2’s 35-area AF array allows more precise subject locking and tracking, a critical advantage in sports and wildlife photography where target acquisition accuracy and burst rates dictate acceptable captures.

In real-world field testing:

• The E-PM2 locks focus faster, especially in good light, and maintains tracking over erratic subject movement better than the E-PL1s.
• Continuous shooting doubles from 3 to 8 frames per second, facilitating capturing fleeting moments.
• Eye-detection AF is absent on both, which is an acknowledged limitation for portrait specialists.

While neither camera is designed for high-end professional sports or wildlife use, the E-PM2 offers substantially better performance for amateurs aiming to capture action or moving subjects.

Built-In Flash and Exposure Control

Both cameras include built-in flashes but differ in options and power:

• E-PL1s: Pop-up flash with a guide number of 10 at ISO 100.
• E-PM2: No pop-up flash in the body; relies on bundled FL-LM1 external flash with a guide number of 7.

The lack of an on-board pop-up flash on the E-PM2 necessitates carrying an external flash for fill-in light or off-camera setups, which may inconvenience spontaneous shooting or travel scenarios.

Exposure control modes including shutter priority, aperture priority, manual exposure, and exposure compensation are equivalent on both models, adequately covering typical creative controls.

Video Capabilities: Modernized Versus Basic

Video recording specifications display clear generational improvements:

• E-PL1s: Offers 720p HD (1280x720) at 30fps, encoded in Motion JPEG only.
• E-PM2: Supports full HD 1080p (1920x1080) at 30fps, plus 720p and VGA modes, with more efficient and versatile MPEG-4 and H.264 codec support.

Neither supports 4K or higher-frame rate video recording, so video enthusiasts must temper expectations.

Notably, neither camera includes microphone or headphone ports, limiting manual audio adjustments and monitoring - critical for serious videographers.

Battery Life and Storage

Battery longevity is a practical concern for on-the-move shooters:

The newer E-PM2 offers a modest 20% increase in battery endurance per CIPA testing standards, amplified by improved power management.

E-PM2’s compatibility with SDXC media ensures support for larger capacity cards, critical for high-volume shooting, especially with higher resolution RAW files.

Connectivity and Wireless Features

Neither camera boasts Bluetooth or GPS integration. The E-PM2 does support Eye-Fi wireless SD cards, enabling some level of Wi-Fi-like functionality via Eye-Fi’s proprietary systems, though this requires purchasing compatible cards and remains limited compared to contemporary camera wireless standards.

USB 2.0 connectivity and HDMI output are standard on both, but no USB charging is supported, which may hamper portability when power sources are limited.

Durability and Weather Sealing

No environmental sealing, dustproofing, waterproofing, or shockproofing features exist on either model, categorizing both as delicate tools best suited for controlled environments or moderate outdoor use. This fact weighs heavily on professionals working in challenging conditions who may need more robust gear.

Lens Ecosystem and System Versatility

Both cameras utilize the Micro Four Thirds mount, which offers access to an extensive range of lenses (over 100 lenses listed for both).

• Lens compatibility is universal across both cameras, allowing seamless upgrades or adaptation depending on photographic needs.
• Native autofocus support, image stabilization, and remote control capabilities remain consistent.

Practical Usage Across Photography Genres

To translate features into genre-specific recommendations, let us consider each major photography type:

Portrait Photography

• E-PM2 wins due to higher resolution (16 MP vs 12 MP), improving detail capture critical for headshots.
• Face detection AF on both is usable but limited without eye autofocus.
• The wider ISO range and better high-ISO performance on the E-PM2 help in lower light portrait studios or evening events.
• Bokeh quality depends on lens choice; sensor size is identical, so results hinge on optics.

Landscape Photography

• Dynamic range superiority and greater resolution on the E-PM2 deliver more latitude for highlight/shadow recovery and large prints.
• Sensor-based stabilization assists handheld shooting but tripod use recommended for landscapes.
• Neither camera is weather sealed, limiting use in harsh outdoor conditions.

Wildlife and Sports Photography

• The E-PM2’s faster burst mode (8 FPS vs 3 FPS) and superior autofocus tracking provide a tangible advantage.
• Both lack phase-detection AF and advanced tracking modes, limiting reliability in demanding wildlife or sports conditions.
• Focal length multiplier of 2.1x on MFT benefits telephoto reach but increases the demand for fast lenses.

Street Photography

• Portability and discrete size favor the E-PM2.
• Touchscreen controls allow quicker manual focus and exposure adjustments.
• Built-in flash on the E-PL1s helps for spontaneous fill light whereas the E-PM2 requires an external flash.

Macro Photography

• Both cameras lack focus bracketing and stacking features.
• Sensor stabilization helps but lens choice and manual focus skills dominate this niche.
• Touchscreen on E-PM2 aids precise focusing.

Night and Astro Photography

• Higher ISO ceiling up to 25600 on E-PM2 outperforms the E-PL1s.
• Noise reduction and dynamic range improvements help retain star details.
• Neither camera offers long exposure noise reduction or bulb mode enhancements.

Video Capabilities

• E-PM2 can record HD at 1080p versus only 720p on the E-PL1s.
• Codec improvements allow better quality and editing flexibility.
• Lack of audio ports limits professional use.

Travel Photography

• Compact size and battery improvements make the E-PM2 preferable.
• Lens compatibility and sensor stabilization enhance versatility.
• The external flash requirement on the E-PM2 may be inconvenient.

Professional Use

• Both cameras target entry-level; neither fully meets professional reliability or advanced workflow needs.
• Raw support present on both but E-PM2’s larger files require faster storage and processing.
• Lack of built-in viewfinder narrows usability.

Evaluated Scores and Summary Visuals

Olympus E PL1s front Olympus E PL1s screen back Olympus E PM2 front Olympus E PM2 screen back

A side-by-side analysis of image samples confirms the anticipated improvements in sharpness, noise handling, and dynamic range in the E-PM2.

Performance scoring correlates with specification advantages: the E-PM2 rates higher overall.

Detailed genre scores affirm the E-PM2’s superiority across most categories, with only a few exceptions related to flash convenience and grip ergonomics.

Final Verdict: Which Olympus Entry-Level Mirrorless to Choose?

Summary

The Olympus PEN E-PL1s and PEN E-PM2 embody progressive steps in early Micro Four Thirds mirrorless design, presenting practical options for different entry-level users. The E-PM2’s enhancements in sensor resolution, autofocus, video, and ergonomics provide palpable benefits justifying its higher cost, while the E-PL1s remains a solid introduction to mirrorless photography with essential manual controls and stabilization.

Prospective buyers should weigh these core differences against their specific use cases and budgets. For those prioritizing image quality, speed, and a more refined interface, the E-PM2 stands out as the more future-proof choice in Olympus's early PEN lineup.