Olympus E-PL5 vs. Panasonic FX90: A Friendly Face-Off Between Entry-Level Mirrorless and Compact Cameras

When it comes to stepping up your photography game without breaking the bank, choosing the right camera can be a bit of a head-scratcher. I’ve spent countless hours behind the viewfinders of various models, and today, I’m diving deep into a comparison that pits the 2012 Olympus PEN E-PL5 - an entry-level mirrorless camera - against the more compact, 2011 Panasonic Lumix DMC-FX90. Both come from brands with solid reputations, but they cater to somewhat different photographic appetites and workflows.

If you’re a budding enthusiast or a seasoned pro looking for a second-camera sidekick, understanding how these two stacks up can save you headaches, cash, and maybe even a few botched shots. So, buckle up as we dissect everything from sensor tech and autofocus to ergonomics and genre versatility with an eye toward helping you nail your next purchase.

Getting Physical: Size, Ergonomics, and Handling

Before diving into specs and pixels, one of the first things I noticed handling these cameras was how different they feel in my hands - and that tells you a lot about their intended use.

The Olympus E-PL5, though technically described as "rangefinder-style," actually has that classic mirrorless camera heft and presence. It measures roughly 111x64x38mm and weighs in at 325 grams. It’s compact, yet not pocketable - more like something you can comfortably sling around your neck or shoulder for a half-day shoot. The textured grip provides reassuring security and adds to a more traditional camera feel, which is important for those long photographic sessions.

On the other side, the Panasonic FX90 is deliberately designed to be ultra-portable - think small sensor compact, or a “point-and-shooter on steroids.” At just 102x56x22mm and tipping the scales at 149 grams, it fits snugly in almost any pocket. It lacks a dedicated grip, and its slender profile means the ergonomics lean toward quick grab-and-shoot rather than extended manual control sessions.

This fundamental difference in size and handling perfectly reflects their target audiences. The E-PL5 invites you to slow down and compose; the FX90 is your impulsive companion for moments when lugging extra gear isn’t an option.

Take a Bird’s Eye View: Design and Controls

If size sets the stage, design and control layout dictate how comfortably you can dance with the camera.

The Olympus maintains a surprisingly sleek yet functional top plate. While it doesn’t feature a built-in electronic or optical viewfinder, which might irk some, its tilting 3-inch touchscreen (more on that later) compensates nicely for composing from awkward angles. The E-PL5 gives you dedicated dials for shutter speed and exposure compensation - a gift to those who revel in manual and semi-manual shooting. Buttons are tactile, well spaced, and honestly, I was relieved to find no fumbling during quick adjustments.

Contrast this with the FX90’s minimalist approach: a fixed 3-inch touchscreen where most physical controls are compressed into a handful of buttons and a surrounding dial. There is no dedicated exposure compensation or manual mode - you’re largely at the mercy of the camera’s auto everything. This simplicity can be a relief if you want to shoot hassle-free, but it does limit creative control, especially for photographers who like to play with settings on the fly.

The Heart of the Matter: Sensor Tech and Image Quality

Now, here’s where the rubber meets the road. The sensor - the delicate piece of silicon behind your photos - can swing your results from meh to magnificent.

The Olympus boasts a Four Thirds CMOS sensor measuring 17.3x13 mm, with an effective resolution of 16 megapixels. By contrast, the Panasonic packs a considerably smaller 1/2.3-inch CCD sensor of 6.08x4.56 mm with a 12-megapixel output.

What does that mean practically? Larger sensors, like the E-PL5’s Four Thirds, capture more light, leading to better dynamic range, improved low-light performance, and cleaner images at higher ISOs. The Panasonic’s sensor is tinier, which inherently limits image quality, especially when ambient light is scarce or when you push for higher ISO settings.

Testing in varied lighting conditions confirmed this. The Olympus confidently managed ISO 1600 without a spike in noise, demonstrating commendable image detail and clean shadow retention. The FX90, meanwhile, often struggled beyond ISO 400, producing more noticeable grain and color shifts.

Olympus scored a DxOMark overall score of 72, highlighting excellent color depth and a dynamic range of 12.3 EV steps - impressive for this class and era. Panasonic FX90 hasn't been formally tested by DxOMark, but based on sensor tech and empirical shots, it’s clear the FX90 is optimized more for well-lit daylight scenarios.

Viewing the World: LCD Screens and Interface

No electronic viewfinder? No problem - but the LCD’s quality makes all the difference.

Both cameras sport 3-inch 460k-dot displays - fairly standard even today. However, the Olympus takes a step ahead with a tilting touchscreen that swivels to aid shooting from low or high angles and even selfie-friendly positions. The touchscreen interface on the E-PL5 is responsive and intuitive enough to make navigating menus and focusing quicker.

The FX90’s fixed TFT LCD is also touch-enabled but is less versatile in angle and can get tricky if your light is harsh or you use the camera for extended framing from unusual perspectives.

For me, the tilting LCD was a game changer during street sessions and unpredictable candid moments where holding the camera at eye level isn’t always feasible.

Autofocus: Speed, Accuracy, and Tracking

Speed matters - whether you’re chasing sports action or snapping fleeting candid expressions.

The Olympus E-PL5 uses a contrast-detection AF system with 35 focus points and features face detection, continuous AF, and tracking options. Though it lacks phase detection pixels seen in some contemporaries, it manages respectable focus speeds, especially in decent lighting.

Panasonic FX90’s autofocus is contrast-detection only and comparatively more basic, with 23 focus points but no face or eye detection - a notable omission for portrait lovers.

During testing, the E-PL5 locked focus consistently and was quicker to track moving subjects across the frame. Burst shooting at 8 fps with AF tracking made it capable enough for casual sports or wildlife snippets, although its buffer depth wasn’t deep enough for professional-speed continuous shooting stints.

FX90’s 4 fps burst was sluggish, and AF lag became apparent in low light or high-motion scenarios, reaffirming its suitability more for snapshots and travel documentation than fast action.

Lens Ecosystem: Freedom or Fixed?

One of the biggest practical divides - lens compatibility.

The Olympus relies on the Micro Four Thirds mount, granting you access to over 100 lenses ranging from ultra-wide to super-telephoto primes and zooms from various manufacturers. This opens doors to creative experimentation - macro, portraits with luscious bokeh, landscapes with razor-sharp clarity.

The FX90 features a fixed 24-120mm equivalent zoom lens with a variable aperture of f/2.5-5.9. Great for convenience but severely restrictive for those craving optical versatility or specialized glass.

If flexibility is your hangup, Olympus wins hands down.

Real World Shooting: How They Handle Different Genres

Cameras aren’t just specs on paper - their mettle reveals in the field. So how did the two fare across popular photography disciplines?

Portraits: Skin Tones, Bokeh, Eye Detection

Olympus’s Four Thirds sensor allows for respectable subject isolation and creamy bokeh - not as pronounced as full frame, but better than expected for the sensor size. Face detection AF is reliable, helping keep eyes sharp, which is critical for pleasing portraits.

FX90’s smaller sensor and fixed lens produce images with limited background blur, producing flatter portraits. Absence of face detection can frustrate when aiming for tack-sharp eyes.

Verdict: Olympus wins, especially for portrait enthusiasts.

Landscapes: Dynamic Range and Resolution

With 16 MP and a stellar dynamic range of 12.3 stops, the E-PL5 handles landscapes fairly well - capturing highlights and shadows with balance and plenty of detail to crop if needed.

The FX90, with a smaller and less capable sensor, can’t capture the same depth and struggles in high contrast scenes.

Also, none of these cameras offer weather sealing, so consider a protective case if you’re shooting outdoors often.

Wildlife and Sports: Autofocus, Burst, Telephoto Reach

Olympus’s 8 fps burst combined with lens compatibility (including telephoto zooms) means it’s better positioned for aggressive action photography.

FX90 is handicapped here with limited zoom reach and 4 fps burst mode - adequate for casual snapping but not serious animal pursuits.

Street Photography: Discretions and Portability

If you prioritize absolute discretion and pocketability, the FX90 edges out the Olympus. Its tiny size, quiet operation, and ready-to-shoot nature make it excellent for streetscapes, though image quality might not ascend beyond daylight city strolls.

Still, the E-PL5’s tilting screen and faster AF gives creative advantages.

Macro: Magnification and Precision

Olympus's lens ecosystem includes macro options with close focusing distances and high magnifications - something the fixed FX90 lens cannot match beyond simple close-ups (minimum focusing at 3cm, but image quality and magnification remain limited).

Night and Astro: High ISO and Long Exposure

Olympus shines with a better ISO ceiling (up to 25,600 native ISO, though usable quality peaks nearer 1600-3200) and sensor-based stabilization that helps long exposures.

FX90 tops out ISO 6400, but image quality at high ISO degrades quickly due to the small sensor.

Neither camera is optimized for dedicated astrophotography, but Olympus will give you cleaner starscapes in practice.

Video Capabilities: Do They Step Up?

Both shoot Full HD 1080p video, but with some differences.

The Olympus records at 30fps max in 1080p and encodes in MPEG-4/H.264 and Motion JPEG. No microphone input limits audio improvement.

Panasonic edges out a bit with 1080p at 60fps capability and AVCHD support - lending smoother video capture. It also has built-in image stabilization (optical) which is a bonus for handheld shooting.

However, lack of mic input and headphone out on both disappoints serious videographers.

Professional Perspectives: Build, Reliability, and Workflow

Neither camera offers weather sealing or rugged build - so neither is best suited for tough conditions straight out of the box. However, the Olympus’s solid metal build feels more durable.

The E-PL5 supports RAW capture, vital for serious editing workflows. Panasonic FX90 relies solely on JPEG, limiting post-processing latitude.

Battery life favors Olympus slightly (360 shots per charge vs 200 for FX90), which can matter for extended shoots.

Both support SD cards but Olympus uses USB 2.0 - a relic but standard for the era.

Connectivity and Extras

Olympus connects via Eye-Fi wireless, which can be a mixed bag depending on your WiFi setup. Panasonic has built-in wireless connectivity, arguably more integrated for basic transfers.

Neither supports Bluetooth or NFC, which is a reminder of their vintage.

Price and Value: What Are You Getting for Your Dollars?

At launch, Olympus E-PL5 priced near $400, and Panasonic FX90 about $227. This gap reflects their differing capabilities.

If you can find an Olympus E-PL5 at second-hand or discounted prices, it provides excellent bang for your buck - more control, better sensor, and broader creative options.

The FX90 is an affordable back-pocket companion, great for casual snaps or travel when size is paramount, but compromises on image quality and flexibility.

Scoring Their Strengths: Overall and by Photography Genre

Olympus E-PL5 ranks solidly higher on sensor quality, autofocus, and features.

Notably, Olympus leads in portraits, landscapes, and wildlife (thanks to lens flexibility and AF) while Panasonic’s small sensor limits it to snapshots and casual use.

Visual Storytelling: Sample Gallery Shots

Enough talk - images tell us plenty.

Olympus E PL5 front Olympus E PL5 screen back Panasonic FX90 front Panasonic FX90 screen back

In comparing real-world samples, the Olympus images reveal more detail, richer colors, and smoother gradients, especially in shadows and highlights. The Panasonic’s images look sharper at base ISO in bright light but lose detail and color nuance quickly as conditions dim.

Summing It Up: Which One Should You Choose?

Choosing between the Olympus E-PL5 and Panasonic FX90 boils down to your priorities.

Pick the Olympus E-PL5 if you:

• Seek better image quality and dynamic range
• Want manual and semi-manual exposure controls
• Crave a flexible lens system for portrait, landscape, macro, and more
• Are okay carrying a slightly bigger camera for improved handling
• Shoot in mixed or low light conditions often
• Need RAW file support for advanced editing

Pick the Panasonic FX90 if you:

• Prioritize truly pocketable equipment for travel or casual shooting
• Want a simple, easy-to-use point and shoot with optical zoom
• Are willing to trade-off some image quality for convenience
• Want decent Full HD video at 60fps in a small package
• Want an affordable entry into digital photography without investing in extra lenses

Final Thoughts From Experience

From my time handling both cameras, the Olympus E-PL5 feels like a grown-up’s playground compared to the FX90’s pocket buddy. The richer control, superior optics, and larger sensor make it a clear choice for enthusiasts who want to learn and grow their skills. Meanwhile, if your shooting style leans toward spontaneity, simplicity, and minimal fuss, the FX90’s compactness and straightforward interface are compelling, especially for snapshots and travel diaries.

Whichever you pick, understanding these fundamental differences and their implications on your photography will mean a smarter purchase and better photographs down the line. Remember, the best camera is the one you enjoy shooting - and that fits seamlessly into your workflow, style, and budget.

Happy shooting!

Author’s note: This comparison relies on extensive hands-on testing, shots under diverse conditions, and technical analysis using industry-standard metrics enhanced by real-world experience. If you want deeper insight into modern alternatives or more recent gear, feel free to check back in soon - the camera world never stands still!