Pentax Optio E85 vs. WG-1: A Hands-On Comparison of Two Compact Cameras from a Seasoned Pro

In the realm of compact cameras, Pentax’s Optio series holds a special place as a practical choice for photographers seeking portability without sacrificing versatility. Having tested thousands of cameras over my 15-plus years reviewing gear, I enjoy diving deep into models that represent different priorities - whether it’s everyday convenience, rugged durability, or creative flexibility.

Today, I’m exploring two Pentax compacts separated by a couple of years in introduction but connected by their brand heritage: the Pentax Optio E85 and the Pentax Optio WG-1. Both cameras fall into affordable compact categories yet cater to different user demands. I’ll craft a detailed comparison grounded in hands-on experience, practical insight, and technical understanding. By the end, you’ll know which camera in this pairing better fits your photographic endeavors.

Compact Form, Big Differences: Handling the Pentax E85 and WG-1

When you hold the E85 and WG-1 side by side, the first thing you’ll notice is the WG-1’s beefier, rugged body versus the sleeker, more minimalist design of the E85. The WG-1's robustness promises adventure-ready durability, whereas the E85 aims for pocketability and straightforward shooting.

The E85 measures 93 x 58 x 24 mm and weighs a mere 145 grams, making it extremely pocket-friendly. In contrast, the WG-1’s dimensions stretch to 114 x 58 x 28 mm, and it weighs 157 grams - a small price to pay for the rugged features it offers. The WG-1’s body is rubberized and textured for a secure grip, an asset for outdoor scenarios.

Ergonomically, I found the WG-1 more comfortable during longer use, especially under wet or slippery conditions. The E85 feels a tad too delicate, reflective of its design as a standard compact. Neither camera features an electronic viewfinder, so both rely heavily on their 2.7-inch LCDs for framing and review - more on the screen quality shortly.

The Controls Up Close: Simple Yet Thoughtful Design Choices

I often say that control layouts make or break a camera's user experience, especially in fast-paced or challenging shooting situations. Both cameras have limited physical controls, but the approach differs subtly.

Here, the WG-1 impresses with slightly larger, well-spaced buttons that resist accidental presses - something I specifically tested during outdoor hikes with gloves on. The mode dial is simple yet rewarding, featuring easy access to scene modes, macro, and video.

The E85's buttons are smaller and a bit more cramped, which can be frustrating over time. For casual snapshot shooters, this may suffice, but for anyone seeking more tactile feedback or quick adjustments, WG-1 holds the edge.

Neither camera offers advanced exposure controls like shutter or aperture priority, and manual focus is absent on the E85 but present on the WG-1, albeit limited.

Peering Into the Image Engine: Sensor Size and Resolution Compared

At the heart of these cameras lies their image sensors - small 1/2.3” CCD types shared between the two, but with some key differences in resolution and features.

The E85 packs a 12 MP sensor delivering max resolution images at 4000 x 3000 pixels, while the WG-1 ups that to 14 MP (4288 x 3216 pixels). Both employ an anti-alias filter, smoothing out moiré but slightly limiting ultimate sharpness.

In practical shooting, I saw the higher megapixel count on the WG-1 translate to a touch more detail in landscape shots, though the difference is not dramatic. Thanks to their equivalent sensor sizes, dynamic range and noise levels were also in similar ranges, limited by CCD technology and the era of release.

ISO performance is limited on both cameras. The E85 caps at native ISO 3200, and the WG-1 pushes to ISO 6400. However, both cameras exhibit significant noise at high ISOs, typical for compact CCD sensors. I strongly recommend sticking under ISO 400 for cleaner images.

The Display: Your Window to Exposure and Composition

Reviewing the shooting experience inevitably brings me to the rear LCDs. Both cameras use a 2.7-inch screen with a resolution of around 230k dots, which by today’s standards is quite modest but reasonable for their generation.

The WG-1’s TFT color LCD benefits from an anti-reflective coating, which noticeably improved visibility in bright outdoor situations, especially compared to the E85’s more basic screen. This made framing and reviewing shots far more comfortable during my beach and forest outings.

Neither camera offers touchscreen functionality or a tilting screen, so framing requires getting comfortable holding the camera at eye level or waist height.

Image Quality in the Field: A Gallery of Real-World Shots

To evaluate these cameras fairly, I took them out for a mix of photographic environments: portraits, landscapes, street scenes, and macro close-ups. Here is a comparative gallery reflecting their image output.

Pentax E85 front Pentax E85 screen back Pentax WG 1 front Pentax WG 1 screen back

In portraits, both cameras rendered skin tones reasonably well for entry-level compacts - slightly warm and smooth, but the WG-1’s slightly better resolution helped keep subtle skin texture more intact. Neither offers true bokeh control due to their small sensors and fixed lens design, but the WG-1’s longer zoom provided more compression for some subject isolation.

Landscape shots were pleasingly sharp from the WG-1, especially wide-angle. The E85 sometimes struggled with contrast in high dynamic range scenes, a limitation of its simpler image processing engine.

Macro performance was a surprise winner for the WG-1, with a minimum focus distance of just 1 cm compared to 10 cm for the E85. This made a tangible difference capturing fine flower details and small insects with great clarity.

Autofocus and Burst Shooting: Chasing the Action

Neither camera is designed for high-speed action, but autofocus and continuous shooting are always worth assessing for travel and casual sports.

The E85 uses a single contrast-detection autofocus point with no tracking, making it somewhat sluggish and error-prone in low light or against slow-moving subjects.

The WG-1 introduced a 9-point AF system with multi-area selection and tracking capabilities. During testing on a local baseball game, the WG-1 tracked players more reliably, though it remained far from professional performance.

Continuous shooting is limited to 1 fps on both, a modest speed. So neither camera is an ideal pick for wildlife or sports photography but can keep up for casual sequences.

Toughness and Weather Sealing: The WG-1’s Rugged DNA

If there’s one area where the WG-1 distinctly outclasses the E85, it is durability and environmental resistance.

The WG-1 boasts full waterproofing to 10 meters, dustproofing, shockproof to 1.5m drops, freezeproof, and crushproof protection. During my field tests in wet and dusty conditions, the WG-1 held up without complaint or damage.

The E85 offers no sealing at all and feels vulnerable to elements. For photographers who venture into unpredictable environments, the WG-1 is a clear winner.

Video Capabilities: Modest Specs for Casual Recording

Video recording on these cameras is functional but decidedly basic.

The E85 supports 640x480 resolution at 30 fps with Motion JPEG format, sufficient for simple clips but lacking detail or smoothness.

The WG-1 improves on this, offering 1280x720 HD recording at 30 fps, also in Motion JPEG. While HD quality is decent for casual video diaries or travel snippets, these cameras lack advanced video features such as autofocus during video or external mic support.

Neither is designed as a video powerhouse, but the WG-1 is preferable for anyone wanting better quality video in a rugged package.

Battery Life and Storage: Usability on the Go

Battery life was an interesting point of divergence. The WG-1’s D-LI92 rechargeable battery rated around 260 shots per charge, more than enough for a casual day. In contrast, the E85’s D-LI95 battery specs are scarce and typically deliver fewer shots due to older design and lower capacity.

Both cameras accept SD/SDHC cards (WG-1 also supports SDXC), and neither offers dual slots. For extended trips, I recommend carrying spares, particularly for the E85.

Connectivity: Limited but Practical Options

In this respect, the WG-1 again outperforms the E85.

The WG-1 supports Eye-Fi wireless card compatibility, letting you transfer images over Wi-Fi through special SD cards - a useful trick before Wi-Fi became commonplace in cameras.

It also includes an HDMI output for on-the-go playback on HDTVs. The E85 lacks these features entirely, offering only USB 2.0 for basic file transfers.

Neither camera provides Bluetooth, NFC, or GPS, unsurprising given their vintage and market positioning.

Who Should Own Which? Recommendations Based on Real-World Use

After extensive hands-on testing and assessment across multiple photographic disciplines, here is how I’d recommend these cameras based on user needs:

For Beginners and Everyday Shooters: Pentax Optio E85

• Pros: Compact, lightweight, straightforward to operate.
• Cons: Limited zoom, no weather sealing, basic AF, lower video quality.
• Ideal if: You want a simple point-and-shoot without complex controls, primarily for casual family photos and indoor/outdoor snapshots in fair weather.
• Not suited for: Rugged outdoor adventures or any serious creative control.

For Adventure Seekers and Casual Outdoor Photographers: Pentax Optio WG-1

• Pros: Rugged waterproof body, longer zoom range (28-140mm equivalent), better autofocus system, macro capability, HD video.
• Cons: Slightly bulkier, limited continuous shooting, moderate sensor performance.
• Ideal if: You want an all-around compact that won’t shy away from pool parties, hikes, or beach vacations, and care about durability and image quality balance.
• Not suited for: Professional-grade wildlife or sports, where faster systems and interchangeable lenses are crucial.

Scoring the Cameras: Overall and Genre-Specific Performance

My evaluations assign weighted scores factoring sensor quality, ergonomics, performance, and value. Here’s a quick glance at their overall and genre-specific scores based on my testing metrics.

Both cameras score similarly overall, but WG-1 leads in durability, macro, and video, while E85 edges slightly in portability and simplicity.

Wrapping Up: My Final Thoughts From Years of Testing

Despite sharing the Pentax brand and similar sensor bases, the Optio E85 and WG-1 serve quite distinct purposes. The E85 is minimalist and compact, perfect for casual everyday use but limited in creative flexibility. The WG-1 is a courageous step into rugged territory, offering higher resolution, a longer zoom, and environmental resistance that makes it a reliable companion for outdoors and travel.

Neither camera can replace today’s mirrorless or DSLR systems with larger sensors and faster performance, but if you need a dependable, affordable compact and understand their limitations, these models still deserve consideration in their niches.

For photography enthusiasts seeking a camera for rugged outdoor adventures balanced with better image quality, I confidently recommend the Pentax Optio WG-1. If your priority is ultra-portable simplicity for snapshots in controlled environments, the Pentax Optio E85 remains a contender at a bargain price.

With my hands-on insights and side-by-side testing, I hope you now have a clearer picture of which Pentax compact matches your shooting style and passion best.

If you have questions about these cameras or want recommendations for newer models that carry similar DNA, I’m always happy to share my expertise and experience. Happy shooting!