Olympus XZ-2 iHS vs Ricoh WG-M1
85 Imaging
37 Features
67 Overall
49
91 Imaging
39 Features
22 Overall
32
Olympus XZ-2 iHS vs Ricoh WG-M1 Key Specs
(Full Review)
- 12MP - 1/1.7" Sensor
- 3" Tilting Screen
- ISO 100 - 12800
- Sensor-shift Image Stabilization
- 1920 x 1080 video
- 28-112mm (F1.8-2.5) lens
- 346g - 113 x 65 x 48mm
- Introduced December 2012
(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
- Announced September 2014
Samsung Releases Faster Versions of EVO MicroSD Cards Olympus XZ-2 iHS vs Ricoh WG-M1 Overview
Following is a extended comparison of the Olympus XZ-2 iHS versus Ricoh WG-M1, one is a Small Sensor Compact and the latter is a Waterproof by competitors Olympus and Ricoh. The sensor resolution of the XZ-2 iHS (12MP) and the WG-M1 (14MP) is pretty close but the XZ-2 iHS (1/1.7") and WG-M1 (1/2.3") feature totally different sensor measurements.
Body cameras now worn by bakery staff to deter stealingThe XZ-2 iHS was announced 21 months prior to the WG-M1 which makes the cameras a generation away from each other. Both the cameras offer the identical body type (Compact).
Before we go straight into a step-by-step comparison, below is a quick overview of how the XZ-2 iHS grades against the WG-M1 in relation to portability, imaging, features and an overall score.
Snapchat Adds Watermarks to AI-Created Images Olympus XZ-2 iHS vs Ricoh WG-M1 Gallery
Below is a preview of the gallery images for Olympus XZ-2 iHS and Ricoh WG-M1. The whole galleries are available at Olympus XZ-2 iHS Gallery and Ricoh WG-M1 Gallery.
Reasons to pick Olympus XZ-2 iHS over the Ricoh WG-M1
| XZ-2 iHS | WG-M1 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Manual focus |  | Dial precise focus | ||
| Screen type | Tilting |  | Fixed | Tilting screen |
| Screen sizing | 3" |  | 1.5" | Bigger screen (+1.5") |
| Screen resolution | 920k |  | 115k | Sharper screen (+805k dot) |
| Touch screen |  | Quickly navigate |
Reasons to pick Ricoh WG-M1 over the Olympus XZ-2 iHS
| WG-M1 | XZ-2 iHS | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Announced | September 2014 |  | December 2012 | More modern by 21 months |
Common features in the Olympus XZ-2 iHS and Ricoh WG-M1
| XZ-2 iHS | WG-M1 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Selfie screen |  | Lack of selfie screen |
Olympus XZ-2 iHS vs Ricoh WG-M1 Physical Comparison
If you're looking to carry around your camera regularly, you should think about its weight and size. The Olympus XZ-2 iHS features outer measurements of 113mm x 65mm x 48mm (4.4" x 2.6" x 1.9") with a weight of 346 grams (0.76 lbs) and the Ricoh WG-M1 has specifications of 66mm x 43mm x 89mm (2.6" x 1.7" x 3.5") accompanied by a weight of 190 grams (0.42 lbs).
Compare the Olympus XZ-2 iHS versus Ricoh WG-M1 in the latest Camera with Lens Size Comparison Tool.
Take into consideration, the weight of an Interchangeable Lens Camera will vary based on the lens you are utilising at that time. Below is the front view size comparison of the XZ-2 iHS vs the WG-M1.
Considering size and weight, the portability grade of the XZ-2 iHS and WG-M1 is 85 and 91 respectively.
Olympus XZ-2 iHS vs Ricoh WG-M1 Sensor Comparison
In many cases, it is hard to visualise the gap in sensor sizes just by researching specifications. The pic here will give you a clearer sense of the sensor measurements in the XZ-2 iHS and WG-M1.
Plainly, each of these cameras enjoy different megapixel count and different sensor sizes. The XZ-2 iHS using its bigger sensor will make shooting shallower depth of field less difficult and the Ricoh WG-M1 will result in more detail with its extra 2MP. Higher resolution will enable you to crop photographs far more aggressively. The more aged XZ-2 iHS will be disadvantaged when it comes to sensor innovation.
Olympus XZ-2 iHS vs Ricoh WG-M1 Screen and ViewFinder
Japan-exclusive Leica Leitz Phone 3 features big sensor and new modes Photography Type Scores
Portrait Comparison
Photobucket discusses licensing 13 billion images with AI firmsStreet Comparison
Photography GlossarySports Comparison
President Biden pushes bill mandating TikTok sale or banTravel Comparison
Sora from OpenAI releases its first ever music videoLandscape Comparison
Apple Innovates by Creating Next-Level Optical Stabilization for iPhoneVlogging Comparison
Meta to Introduce 'AI-Generated' Labels for Media starting next month
Olympus XZ-2 iHS vs Ricoh WG-M1 Specifications
| Olympus XZ-2 iHS | Ricoh WG-M1 | |
|---|---|---|
| General Information | ||
| Brand | Olympus | Ricoh |
| Model | Olympus XZ-2 iHS | Ricoh WG-M1 |
| Type | Small Sensor Compact | Waterproof |
| Introduced | 2012-12-18 | 2014-09-12 |
| Body design | Compact | Compact |
| Sensor Information | ||
| Sensor type | CMOS | CMOS |
| Sensor size | 1/1.7" | 1/2.3" |
| Sensor measurements | 7.44 x 5.58mm | 6.17 x 4.55mm |
| Sensor area | 41.5mm² | 28.1mm² |
| Sensor resolution | 12 megapixels | 14 megapixels |
| Anti aliasing filter | ||
| Aspect ratio | 4:3 | 4:3 and 16:9 |
| Highest resolution | 3968 x 2976 | 4320 x 3240 |
| Highest native ISO | 12800 | 800 |
| Minimum native ISO | 100 | 100 |
| RAW pictures | ||
| Autofocusing | ||
| Manual focus | ||
| Autofocus touch | ||
| Continuous autofocus | ||
| Single autofocus | ||
| Tracking autofocus | ||
| Selective autofocus | ||
| Autofocus center weighted | ||
| Autofocus multi area | ||
| Autofocus live view | ||
| Face detection autofocus | ||
| Contract detection autofocus | ||
| Phase detection autofocus | ||
| Number of focus points | 35 | - |
| Lens | ||
| Lens mounting type | fixed lens | fixed lens |
| Lens focal range | 28-112mm (4.0x) | (1×) |
| Maximal aperture | f/1.8-2.5 | f/2.8 |
| Macro focus distance | 1cm | - |
| Focal length multiplier | 4.8 | 5.8 |
| Screen | ||
| Screen type | Tilting | Fixed Type |
| Screen sizing | 3 inch | 1.5 inch |
| Screen resolution | 920 thousand dot | 115 thousand dot |
| Selfie friendly | ||
| Liveview | ||
| Touch screen | ||
| Viewfinder Information | ||
| Viewfinder | Electronic (optional) | None |
| Features | ||
| Slowest shutter speed | 60 seconds | - |
| Maximum shutter speed | 1/2000 seconds | - |
| Continuous shooting speed | - | 10.0 frames/s |
| Shutter priority | ||
| Aperture priority | ||
| Manual exposure | ||
| Exposure compensation | Yes | - |
| Change white balance | ||
| Image stabilization | ||
| Inbuilt flash | ||
| Flash range | 8.60 m (ISO 800) | no built-in flash |
| Flash settings | Auto, On, Off, Red-Eye, Fill-in, Wireless | no built-in flash |
| External flash | ||
| Auto exposure bracketing | ||
| WB bracketing | ||
| Exposure | ||
| Multisegment | ||
| Average | ||
| Spot | ||
| Partial | ||
| AF area | ||
| Center weighted | ||
| Video features | ||
| Video resolutions | 1920 x 1080 (30 fps), 1280 x 720 (30 fps), 640 x 480 (30 fps) | 1920 x 1080 (30p), 1280 x 960 (50p), 1280 x 720 (60p, 30p), 848 x 480 (60p, 120p) |
| Highest video resolution | 1920x1080 | 1920x1080 |
| Video data format | MPEG-4, H.264 | H.264 |
| Microphone jack | ||
| Headphone jack | ||
| Connectivity | ||
| Wireless | Eye-Fi Connected | Built-In |
| Bluetooth | ||
| NFC | ||
| HDMI | ||
| USB | USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/sec) | USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/sec) |
| GPS | None | None |
| Physical | ||
| Environmental seal | ||
| Water proof | ||
| Dust proof | ||
| Shock proof | ||
| Crush proof | ||
| Freeze proof | ||
| Weight | 346g (0.76 lb) | 190g (0.42 lb) |
| Dimensions | 113 x 65 x 48mm (4.4" x 2.6" x 1.9") | 66 x 43 x 89mm (2.6" x 1.7" x 3.5") |
| DXO scores | ||
| DXO All around score | 49 | not tested |
| DXO Color Depth score | 20.4 | not tested |
| DXO Dynamic range score | 11.3 | not tested |
| DXO Low light score | 216 | not tested |
| Other | ||
| Battery life | 340 images | 350 images |
| Type of battery | Battery Pack | Battery Pack |
| Battery model | Li-90B | DB-65 |
| Self timer | Yes (2 or 12 sec) | - |
| Time lapse feature | ||
| Type of storage | SD/SDHC/SDXC | microSD/microSDHC, internal |
| Storage slots | 1 | 1 |
| Launch cost | $450 | $2,000 |
