Olympus 9000 vs Ricoh WG-M1
92 Imaging
34 Features
20 Overall
28
91 Imaging
38 Features
22 Overall
31
Olympus 9000 vs Ricoh WG-M1 Key Specs
(Full Review)
- 12MP - 1/2.3" Sensor
- 2.7" Fixed Screen
- ISO 50 - 1600
- Sensor-shift Image Stabilization
- 640 x 480 video
- 28-280mm (F3.2-5.9) lens
- 225g - 96 x 60 x 31mm
- Revealed May 2009
- Alternate Name is mju 9000
(Full Review)
- 14MP - 1/2.3" Sensor
- 1.5" Fixed Screen
- ISO 100 - 800
- 1920 x 1080 video
- (1×)mm (F2.8) lens
- 190g - 66 x 43 x 89mm
- Released September 2014
President Biden pushes bill mandating TikTok sale or ban Olympus 9000 vs Ricoh WG-M1 Overview
Here is a extended assessment of the Olympus 9000 vs Ricoh WG-M1, one being a Small Sensor Compact and the latter is a Waterproof by competitors Olympus and Ricoh. The image resolution of the 9000 (12MP) and the WG-M1 (14MP) is relatively close and they use the exact same sensor measurements (1/2.3").
Sora from OpenAI releases its first ever music videoThe 9000 was released 6 years prior to the WG-M1 and that is a fairly significant gap as far as camera tech is concerned. Both cameras come with the identical body type (Compact).
Before going in to a complete comparison, below is a quick highlight of how the 9000 matches up against the WG-M1 in regards to portability, imaging, features and an overall rating.
Meta to Introduce 'AI-Generated' Labels for Media starting next month Olympus 9000 vs Ricoh WG-M1 Gallery
Below is a preview of the gallery photos for Olympus Stylus 9000 and Ricoh WG-M1. The complete galleries are viewable at Olympus 9000 Gallery and Ricoh WG-M1 Gallery.
Reasons to pick Olympus 9000 over the Ricoh WG-M1
| 9000 | WG-M1 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Screen dimension | 2.7" |  | 1.5" | Bigger screen (+1.2") |
| Screen resolution | 230k |  | 115k | Crisper screen (+115k dot) |
Reasons to pick Ricoh WG-M1 over the Olympus 9000
| WG-M1 | 9000 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Released | September 2014 |  | May 2009 | Fresher by 64 months |
Common features in the Olympus 9000 and Ricoh WG-M1
| 9000 | WG-M1 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Focus manually |  | No manual focusing | ||
| Screen type | Fixed |  | Fixed | Fixed screen |
| Selfie screen |  | Neither provides selfie screen | ||
| Touch screen |  | Neither provides Touch screen |
Olympus 9000 vs Ricoh WG-M1 Physical Comparison
If you're looking to carry your camera frequently, you have to factor its weight and dimensions. The Olympus 9000 provides external measurements of 96mm x 60mm x 31mm (3.8" x 2.4" x 1.2") with a weight of 225 grams (0.50 lbs) while the Ricoh WG-M1 has dimensions of 66mm x 43mm x 89mm (2.6" x 1.7" x 3.5") along with a weight of 190 grams (0.42 lbs).
Look at the Olympus 9000 vs Ricoh WG-M1 in the latest Camera and Lens Size Comparison Tool.
Always remember, the weight of an Interchangeable Lens Camera will change dependant on the lens you use during that time. Below is the front view over all size comparison of the 9000 vs the WG-M1.
Taking into consideration size and weight, the portability score of the 9000 and WG-M1 is 92 and 91 respectively.
Olympus 9000 vs Ricoh WG-M1 Sensor Comparison
Often, it's tough to envision the contrast in sensor sizing only by looking through specifications. The photograph underneath might give you a greater sense of the sensor sizing in the 9000 and WG-M1.
Plainly, both cameras have got the exact same sensor measurements albeit not the same resolution. You should count on the Ricoh WG-M1 to render extra detail as a result of its extra 2MP. Higher resolution can also enable you to crop photographs much more aggressively. The older 9000 will be behind with regard to sensor technology.
Olympus 9000 vs Ricoh WG-M1 Screen and ViewFinder
Photography Glossary Photography Type Scores
Portrait Comparison
Pentax 17 Pre-Orders Outperform Expectations by a LandslideStreet Comparison
Japan-exclusive Leica Leitz Phone 3 features big sensor and new modesSports Comparison
Samsung Releases Faster Versions of EVO MicroSD CardsTravel Comparison
Snapchat Adds Watermarks to AI-Created ImagesLandscape Comparison
Photobucket discusses licensing 13 billion images with AI firmsVlogging Comparison
Apple Innovates by Creating Next-Level Optical Stabilization for iPhone
Olympus 9000 vs Ricoh WG-M1 Specifications
| Olympus Stylus 9000 | Ricoh WG-M1 | |
|---|---|---|
| General Information | ||
| Company | Olympus | Ricoh |
| Model type | Olympus Stylus 9000 | Ricoh WG-M1 |
| Also called as | mju 9000 | - |
| Class | Small Sensor Compact | Waterproof |
| Revealed | 2009-05-14 | 2014-09-12 |
| Body design | Compact | Compact |
| Sensor Information | ||
| Sensor type | CCD | CMOS |
| Sensor size | 1/2.3" | 1/2.3" |
| Sensor dimensions | 6.08 x 4.56mm | 6.17 x 4.55mm |
| Sensor surface area | 27.7mm² | 28.1mm² |
| Sensor resolution | 12 megapixels | 14 megapixels |
| Anti alias filter | ||
| Aspect ratio | 16:9, 4:3 and 3:2 | 4:3 and 16:9 |
| Maximum resolution | 3968 x 2976 | 4320 x 3240 |
| Maximum native ISO | 1600 | 800 |
| Minimum native ISO | 50 | 100 |
| RAW photos | ||
| Autofocusing | ||
| Focus manually | ||
| Touch to focus | ||
| AF continuous | ||
| Single AF | ||
| Tracking AF | ||
| AF selectice | ||
| Center weighted AF | ||
| Multi area AF | ||
| Live view AF | ||
| Face detection AF | ||
| Contract detection AF | ||
| Phase detection AF | ||
| Lens | ||
| Lens support | fixed lens | fixed lens |
| Lens zoom range | 28-280mm (10.0x) | (1×) |
| Max aperture | f/3.2-5.9 | f/2.8 |
| Macro focusing distance | 1cm | - |
| Crop factor | 5.9 | 5.8 |
| Screen | ||
| Screen type | Fixed Type | Fixed Type |
| Screen diagonal | 2.7" | 1.5" |
| Screen resolution | 230k dot | 115k dot |
| Selfie friendly | ||
| Liveview | ||
| Touch friendly | ||
| Viewfinder Information | ||
| Viewfinder type | None | None |
| Features | ||
| Slowest shutter speed | 4 secs | - |
| Maximum shutter speed | 1/2000 secs | - |
| Continuous shooting speed | - | 10.0 frames/s |
| Shutter priority | ||
| Aperture priority | ||
| Expose Manually | ||
| Change WB | ||
| Image stabilization | ||
| Integrated flash | ||
| Flash distance | 5.00 m | no built-in flash |
| Flash options | Auto, Fill-in, Red-Eye reduction, Off, On | no built-in flash |
| External flash | ||
| AE bracketing | ||
| WB bracketing | ||
| Exposure | ||
| Multisegment | ||
| Average | ||
| Spot | ||
| Partial | ||
| AF area | ||
| Center weighted | ||
| Video features | ||
| Video resolutions | 640 x 480 (30, 15 fps), 320 x 240 (30, 15 fps) | 1920 x 1080 (30p), 1280 x 960 (50p), 1280 x 720 (60p, 30p), 848 x 480 (60p, 120p) |
| Maximum video resolution | 640x480 | 1920x1080 |
| Video file format | Motion JPEG | H.264 |
| Mic input | ||
| Headphone input | ||
| Connectivity | ||
| Wireless | None | Built-In |
| Bluetooth | ||
| NFC | ||
| HDMI | ||
| USB | USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/sec) | USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/sec) |
| GPS | None | None |
| Physical | ||
| Environment seal | ||
| Water proofing | ||
| Dust proofing | ||
| Shock proofing | ||
| Crush proofing | ||
| Freeze proofing | ||
| Weight | 225 grams (0.50 lbs) | 190 grams (0.42 lbs) |
| Dimensions | 96 x 60 x 31mm (3.8" x 2.4" x 1.2") | 66 x 43 x 89mm (2.6" x 1.7" x 3.5") |
| DXO scores | ||
| DXO All around rating | not tested | not tested |
| DXO Color Depth rating | not tested | not tested |
| DXO Dynamic range rating | not tested | not tested |
| DXO Low light rating | not tested | not tested |
| Other | ||
| Battery life | - | 350 images |
| Battery format | - | Battery Pack |
| Battery ID | - | DB-65 |
| Self timer | Yes (12 seconds) | - |
| Time lapse feature | ||
| Type of storage | xD Picture Card, microSD Card, Internal | microSD/microSDHC, internal |
| Storage slots | 1 | 1 |
| Launch pricing | $300 | $2,000 |