Olympus VR-320 vs Ricoh WG-M1
94 Imaging
37 Features
35 Overall
36
91 Imaging
38 Features
22 Overall
31
Olympus VR-320 vs Ricoh WG-M1 Key Specs
(Full Review)
- 14MP - 1/2.3" Sensor
- 3" Fixed Screen
- ISO 80 - 1600
- Sensor-shift Image Stabilization
- 1280 x 720 video
- 24-300mm (F3.0-5.9) lens
- 158g - 101 x 58 x 29mm
- Announced July 2011
- Replacement is Olympus VR-330
(Full Review)
- 14MP - 1/2.3" Sensor
- 1.5" Fixed Display
- ISO 100 - 800
- 1920 x 1080 video
- (1×)mm (F2.8) lens
- 190g - 66 x 43 x 89mm
- Released September 2014
Photobucket discusses licensing 13 billion images with AI firms Olympus VR-320 vs Ricoh WG-M1 Overview
Following is a in-depth review of the Olympus VR-320 versus Ricoh WG-M1, former is a Small Sensor Superzoom while the other is a Waterproof by competitors Olympus and Ricoh. The sensor resolution of the VR-320 (14MP) and the WG-M1 (14MP) is fairly close and they possess the exact same sensor sizes (1/2.3").
Meta to Introduce 'AI-Generated' Labels for Media starting next monthThe VR-320 was brought out 4 years prior to the WG-M1 which is a fairly sizable difference as far as camera technology is concerned. Both the cameras come with the identical body type (Compact).
Before going straight into a in depth comparison, below is a quick summation of how the VR-320 scores against the WG-M1 in relation to portability, imaging, features and an overall score.
President Biden pushes bill mandating TikTok sale or ban Olympus VR-320 vs Ricoh WG-M1 Gallery
Below is a sample of the gallery pictures for Olympus VR-320 & Ricoh WG-M1. The entire galleries are provided at Olympus VR-320 Gallery & Ricoh WG-M1 Gallery.
Reasons to pick Olympus VR-320 over the Ricoh WG-M1
| VR-320 | WG-M1 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display dimension | 3" |  | 1.5" | Larger display (+1.5") |
| Display resolution | 230k |  | 115k | Clearer display (+115k dot) |
Reasons to pick Ricoh WG-M1 over the Olympus VR-320
| WG-M1 | VR-320 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Released | September 2014 |  | July 2011 | More modern by 38 months |
Common features in the Olympus VR-320 and Ricoh WG-M1
| VR-320 | WG-M1 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Focus manually |  | No manual focus | ||
| Display type | Fixed |  | Fixed | Fixed display |
| Selfie screen |  | Neither comes with selfie screen | ||
| Touch display |  | Neither comes with Touch display |
Olympus VR-320 vs Ricoh WG-M1 Physical Comparison
In case you're looking to carry around your camera, you'll need to think about its weight and measurements. The Olympus VR-320 comes with outer measurements of 101mm x 58mm x 29mm (4.0" x 2.3" x 1.1") accompanied by a weight of 158 grams (0.35 lbs) whilst the Ricoh WG-M1 has proportions of 66mm x 43mm x 89mm (2.6" x 1.7" x 3.5") and a weight of 190 grams (0.42 lbs).
Examine the Olympus VR-320 versus Ricoh WG-M1 in our brand new Camera & Lens Size Comparison Tool.
Bear in mind, the weight of an ILC will change based on the lens you have attached during that time. Below is the front view measurements comparison of the VR-320 compared to the WG-M1.
Looking at dimensions and weight, the portability rating of the VR-320 and WG-M1 is 94 and 91 respectively.
Olympus VR-320 vs Ricoh WG-M1 Sensor Comparison
Typically, it is hard to envision the gap in sensor sizes simply by looking through specifications. The pic here may give you a stronger sense of the sensor sizing in the VR-320 and WG-M1.
To sum up, the 2 cameras have got the exact same sensor measurements and the same MP and you can expect comparable quality of photos however you need to consider the launch date of the cameras into account. The more aged VR-320 will be disadvantaged in sensor innovation.
Olympus VR-320 vs Ricoh WG-M1 Screen and ViewFinder
Pentax 17 Pre-Orders Outperform Expectations by a Landslide Photography Type Scores
Portrait Comparison
Photography GlossaryStreet Comparison
Samsung Releases Faster Versions of EVO MicroSD CardsSports Comparison
Sora from OpenAI releases its first ever music videoTravel Comparison
Snapchat Adds Watermarks to AI-Created ImagesLandscape Comparison
Japan-exclusive Leica Leitz Phone 3 features big sensor and new modesVlogging Comparison
Apple Innovates by Creating Next-Level Optical Stabilization for iPhone
Olympus VR-320 vs Ricoh WG-M1 Specifications
| Olympus VR-320 | Ricoh WG-M1 | |
|---|---|---|
| General Information | ||
| Manufacturer | Olympus | Ricoh |
| Model | Olympus VR-320 | Ricoh WG-M1 |
| Category | Small Sensor Superzoom | Waterproof |
| Announced | 2011-07-19 | 2014-09-12 |
| Body design | Compact | Compact |
| Sensor Information | ||
| Chip | TruePic III | - |
| Sensor type | CCD | CMOS |
| Sensor size | 1/2.3" | 1/2.3" |
| Sensor measurements | 6.17 x 4.55mm | 6.17 x 4.55mm |
| Sensor area | 28.1mm² | 28.1mm² |
| Sensor resolution | 14MP | 14MP |
| Anti aliasing filter | ||
| Aspect ratio | 4:3 | 4:3 and 16:9 |
| Max resolution | 4288 x 3216 | 4320 x 3240 |
| Max native ISO | 1600 | 800 |
| Lowest native ISO | 80 | 100 |
| RAW format | ||
| Autofocusing | ||
| Manual focus | ||
| Touch to focus | ||
| Continuous AF | ||
| AF single | ||
| Tracking AF | ||
| Selective AF | ||
| AF center weighted | ||
| AF multi area | ||
| AF live view | ||
| Face detection focusing | ||
| Contract detection focusing | ||
| Phase detection focusing | ||
| Lens | ||
| Lens mounting type | fixed lens | fixed lens |
| Lens focal range | 24-300mm (12.5x) | (1×) |
| Max aperture | f/3.0-5.9 | f/2.8 |
| Macro focus range | 1cm | - |
| Crop factor | 5.8 | 5.8 |
| Screen | ||
| Range of screen | Fixed Type | Fixed Type |
| Screen diagonal | 3 inches | 1.5 inches |
| Screen resolution | 230k dot | 115k dot |
| Selfie friendly | ||
| Liveview | ||
| Touch screen | ||
| Screen tech | TFT Color LCD | - |
| Viewfinder Information | ||
| Viewfinder type | None | None |
| Features | ||
| Min shutter speed | 4 seconds | - |
| Max shutter speed | 1/2000 seconds | - |
| Continuous shutter speed | - | 10.0fps |
| Shutter priority | ||
| Aperture priority | ||
| Manually set exposure | ||
| Set WB | ||
| Image stabilization | ||
| Integrated flash | ||
| Flash range | 4.70 m | no built-in flash |
| Flash modes | Auto, On, Off, Red-Eye, Fill-in | no built-in flash |
| External flash | ||
| Auto exposure bracketing | ||
| White balance bracketing | ||
| Exposure | ||
| Multisegment | ||
| Average | ||
| Spot | ||
| Partial | ||
| AF area | ||
| Center weighted | ||
| Video features | ||
| Supported video resolutions | 1280 x 720 (30, 15fps), 640 x 480 (30, 15 fps), 320 x 240 (30, 15fps) | 1920 x 1080 (30p), 1280 x 960 (50p), 1280 x 720 (60p, 30p), 848 x 480 (60p, 120p) |
| Max video resolution | 1280x720 | 1920x1080 |
| Video format | Motion JPEG | H.264 |
| Microphone 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 proof | ||
| Dust proof | ||
| Shock proof | ||
| Crush proof | ||
| Freeze proof | ||
| Weight | 158 grams (0.35 lb) | 190 grams (0.42 lb) |
| Dimensions | 101 x 58 x 29mm (4.0" x 2.3" x 1.1") | 66 x 43 x 89mm (2.6" x 1.7" x 3.5") |
| DXO scores | ||
| DXO Overall score | not tested | not tested |
| DXO Color Depth score | not tested | not tested |
| DXO Dynamic range score | not tested | not tested |
| DXO Low light score | not tested | not tested |
| Other | ||
| Battery life | - | 350 images |
| Battery format | - | Battery Pack |
| Battery model | LI-42B | DB-65 |
| Self timer | Yes (2 or 12 sec) | - |
| Time lapse feature | ||
| Storage media | SD/SDHC | microSD/microSDHC, internal |
| Storage slots | 1 | 1 |
| Launch pricing | $179 | $2,000 |