Olympus E-PM2 vs Sony HX300

Olympus E-PM2 vs Sony HX300: A Deep Dive into Two Different Worlds of Photography

Choosing the right camera often feels like picking between apples and oranges, especially when comparing the Olympus PEN E-PM2, an entry-level mirrorless, to the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX300, a large-zoom bridge camera. But both hold unique appeal depending on how and what you like to shoot. Having extensively tested both cameras across many scenarios, I’ll walk you through what sets them apart technically and practically, helping you find exactly which one fits your photographic ambitions best.

Getting a Feel for the Cameras: Size and Ergonomics

Let’s start how it matters most in day-to-day handling - the physical size and ergonomics. The Olympus E-PM2 sports the classic rangefinder-style mirrorless form, compact and lightweight, weighing just 269g and measuring 110x64x34mm. It slips easily into bags and is refreshingly pocketable for an interchangeable-lens camera.

In contrast, the Sony HX300 is a beefier bridge model coming in at 623g with dimensions 130x103x93mm. It’s designed with an SLR-like grip and bulkier build to balance its mammoth 50x zoom. That said, it’s not pocketable; it’s more a grab-and-go for extended shooting days.

I found the Olympus far better suited for street, travel, or casual shooting where discretion and all-day carry comfort count. The Sony’s robust grip feels reassuring, especially zoomed-in, but it’s a commitment if portability matters that much to you.

The Design Language and Control Layout: Which Intuition Works for You?

Next, the layout and operational feel - do you prefer direct control dials or quick menus?

The Olympus E-PM2, true to Olympus’s heritage, features a clean top plate with minimal buttons, but crucially it supports touchscreen focus and navigation which, in my daily shooting, made quick framing and setting adjustments a breeze.

The HX300, meanwhile, replicates a DSLR control scheme with dedicated dials for mode, exposure, and zoom. The 3-inch tilting LCD helps with tricky angles but it lacks touchscreen functionality - you’ll rely on buttons and wheels.

For photographers who enjoy tactile dashes of manual control and instant access to key settings, Sony’s layout wins. However, if you prefer a simpler, more modern interface with touchscreen input, Olympus nudges ahead.

Sensor and Image Quality: The Heart of the Matter

This is where the fundamental difference lies. Olympus E-PM2 operates with a Four Thirds sensor measuring 17.3x13mm, producing 16MP stills. The Sony HX300 has a far smaller 1/2.3” (6.16x4.62mm) sensor with 20MP resolution.

Sensor area matters because larger sensors generally capture better dynamic range, color depth, and low-light performance.

Indeed, per DXO Mark metrics, Olympus earns a 72 overall score with excellent 22.7-bit color depth and a solid 12.2 EV dynamic range, while Sony’s HX300 has not been tested on DXO but we can infer compromises typical of tiny sensors - lower dynamic range, more noise at higher ISOs.

In real-world shooting, the E-PM2's images showed richer tones, cleaner shadows, and more natural skin colors. The Sony requires spotlighting its zoom flexibility despite generally softer results and visible noise creeping in at ISO 800 and above.

If ultimate image fidelity and print quality or RAW editing flexibility are priorities, Olympus takes the crown.

LCD Screen and Viewfinder Experience

Both provide electronic viewfinders and LCDs, but implementation differs markedly.

Olympus's fixed 3-inch touchscreen with 460K resolution is excellent for fine control and menu navigation, though modest by today’s standards.

Sony’s HX300 ups the ante with a 3-inch tilting screen at 921K resolution, sharp and bright though non-touch. The electronic viewfinder (EVF) is similarly functional but lower in resolution and with minor lag - common for cameras in this class.

For compositional versatility - like low or high angles - Sony’s tilting screen shines. But for tactile menu control and focusing accuracy, the E-PM2’s touchscreen is preferable.

Performance in the Field: Autofocus, Speed, and Shooting Modes

The Olympus E-PM2 features contrast-detection autofocus with 35 points, face detection, and continuous AF tracking - reliable but not lightning fast.

Sony’s HX300 uses a less sophisticated 9-point contrast detection with single-shot autofocus, alongside tracking. Despite fewer AF points, its speedier continuous shooting at 10 fps beats Olympus’s 8 fps.

Practical implications? For fast action or wildlife, HX300’s burst rate offers an edge, but Olympus provides more autofocus points for accuracy, especially vital for portraits or selective focusing.

How Do They Handle Different Photography Genres?

Let’s break it down by photographic genre, based on my extensive hands-on tests.

Portrait Photography

Olympus E-PM2’s larger Four Thirds sensor collects richer tonal gradations and smoother skin rendering. Combined with the Micro Four Thirds lens ecosystem offering fast primes, I found it easier to achieve creamy bokeh and sharp eye detection - although it lacks the advanced animal eye AF newer cameras have.

Sony HX300’s fixed lens F2.8-6.3 zoom lets you reach distant subjects quickly but bokeh is more clinical due to the small sensor. Face detection AF is missing, so portrait work requires more manual attentiveness.

Winner: Olympus for images and handling; Sony if you want reach but accept image trade-offs.

Landscape Photography

Landscape benefits from rich detail and dynamic range to render shadows and highlights realistically.

Olympus’s sensor shines here, producing images with strong tonal response, good midtone contrast, and sharpness, especially when paired with quality Micro Four Thirds glass. Olympus lacks weather sealing though, which I advise considering if you shoot harsh environments.

Sony’s superzoom allows framing sweeping vistas or isolating details far away, but small sensor limitations in shadow/highlight and resolution make prints less stunning.

Winner: Olympus for final image quality; Sony for framing reach.

Wildlife and Sports Photography

Sony’s 50x zoom covering 24-1200mm is a wildlife hunter’s dream on a budget, letting you get close without heavy telephotos. Its 10 fps burst mode helps capture action sequences.

However, its single AF mode and contrast detection only mean you must be patient for accurate focusing.

Olympus’s burst mode lags slightly, and no animal eye AF limits ease of focus on moving subjects. Yet, lightweight lenses and interchangeable optics can surpass Sony’s fixed zoom with proper glass.

Winner: Sony for sheer reach and burst speed; Olympus for better image quality if paired with fast telephoto lenses (though not bundled).

Street Photography

Olympus’s compact size, quiet shutter, and responsiveness make it ideal for candid street work. Touchscreen AF simplifies quick captures without fiddling with buttons.

Sony’s bulkier body and protruding lens can draw more attention, making candid shots trickier but its zoom flexibility adds creative framing options.

Winner: Olympus hands down for discreetness and speed.

Macro Photography

Olympus supports macro shooting through compatible Micro Four Thirds lenses offering precise close-focusing distances. Its in-body sensor stabilization (IBIS) helps handheld sharpness.

Sony lacks dedicated macro features and the fixed lens limits true close-up versatility.

Winner: Olympus clearly preferred for true macro work.

Night and Astro Photography

Sensor noise and high ISO handling are crucial here.

Olympus’s larger sensor and better low-light score (ISO 932 per DXO) deliver cleaner images at ISO 1600 and 3200. Expanded ISO to 25,600 is usable with noise caveats.

Sony’s tiny sensor struggles above ISO 400, leading to noisy, softer images.

Neither camera offers special astro modes, but Olympus’s manual controls and RAW support aid longer exposures and editing.

Winner: Olympus for low light and nightshots.

Video Capabilities

Olympus records Full HD 1080p at 30fps and supports manual exposure and stabilization via IBIS. It lacks mic or headphone ports, limiting professional audio capture.

Sony matches with 1080p but ups the fps with 60/50p options, great for smoother motion. Optical image stabilization helps steady shots for handheld video. However, limited manual control and no external audio inputs constrain serious videographers.

Winner: Sony offers more smooth video options; Olympus's IBIS steadies footage well.

Travel Photography

For travel, balance between size, versatility, battery, and image quality is key.

Olympus excels with compact size, lightweight system, and excellent image quality. Battery life (about 360 shots per charge) is decent for casual travel. Lens choices allow tailoring setups from ultra-wide to telephoto.

Sony, despite weight, offers an ‘all-in-one’ with mega zoom - no lens swapping needed - great if you prefer convenience over ultimate quality. Battery life details aren’t clear but expect shorter life due to heftier zoom electronics.

Winner: Olympus for enthusiasts; Sony for grab-and-shoot travelers needing long zoom reach.

Professional Workflow and Reliability

Olympus supports RAW capture and uses Micro Four Thirds lenses that integrate into professional Lightroom/Photoshop workflows easily. USB 2.0 connectivity is slow by today’s standards, but serviceable.

Sony lacks RAW support - a big limitation for professionals wanting image latitude. Storage options and no wireless connectivity further limit high-end workflow flexibility.

Neither model offers environmental sealing or ruggedness, so neither is ideal for tough professional use.

Winner: Olympus clearly better for pros or serious enthusiasts.

Technical Deep-Dive: Autofocus, Stabilization, and Connectivity

• Autofocus: Olympus uses 35 contrast detection points with face detection and continuous tracking, which performed reliably in my tests, especially on static subjects. Sony’s 9-point contrast AF is slower and less precise but adequate given its fixed zoom.

• Image Stabilization: Olympus relies on sensor-based stabilization, effective across all lenses, greatly aiding handheld low light and macro shooting. Sony’s optical stabilization is lens-built-in (fixed lens) and helps with high zoom tele shots but less versatile.

• Connectivity: Olympus has Eye-Fi card compatibility for wireless photo transfer though no Wi-Fi or Bluetooth. Sony lacks wireless connectivity altogether.

• Battery & Storage: Olympus’s BLS-5 battery is rated ~360 shots per charge, reasonable but not class-leading. Sony info is sparse but heavy internal electronics suggest shorter endurance. Both use SD cards.

• Price-to-Performance: At current pricing (~$448 Olympus, ~$339 Sony) the Olympus costs more but delivers significantly superior image quality, RAW support, and interchangeable lenses. Sony is unbeatable for zoom reach and value if you want a cheap, versatile all-rounder.

Olympus E PM2 front Olympus E PM2 screen back Sony HX300 front Sony HX300 screen back

Final Judgement: How These Scores Stack Up

Let’s visualize how both perform overall and in specialized genres.

Olympus scores higher universally thanks to advanced sensor, image quality, and feature set, while Sony shines in zoom reach and burst speed.

Who Should Buy Which?

• Choose Olympus E-PM2 if you are a photography enthusiast or professional seeking better image quality, flexibility with lenses, better low-light and video capabilities, and portability for travel and street photography. Ideal for portrait, landscape, macro, and night shooters.

• Choose Sony HX300 if you want an affordable, do-it-all superzoom camera with high burst frame rates, perfect for wildlife, sports, and casual shooting where simplicity and heavy reach matter more than superb image fidelity or professional features. Great if you dislike changing lenses and want a one-piece zoom.

Wrapping Up with My Personal Take

I’ve enjoyed shooting with both cameras in their respective niches. The Olympus E-PM2 reminds me of the joy of creative control and image quality without extra bulk, while the Sony HX300 is a marvel of zoom versatility - though with notable limits in image quality and controls.

If you prize sharp, clean photos and evolving your skillset with different lenses and manual controls, Olympus deserves your attention. But if you want a competent, grab-and-go superzoom with a simple interface for casual or travel shootouts, Sony serves that niche very well.

So, it’s a question of priorities and style - a micro four thirds mirrorless with rich image quality, or a mega-zoom bridge camera designed for reach and simplicity? Hopefully, this detailed breakdown clears the fog and helps you pick your perfect photographic partner.

If you want to explore further, I recommend trying each camera in hand if possible. Nothing beats the tactile feel when deciding.

Happy shooting!

Note: All performance observations come from months of hands-on shooting and targeted tests with standard evaluation charts, real-life scenes, and post-processing workflows.