Kodak AZ901 vs Olympus E-3

The Kodak PixPro AZ901 and the Olympus E-3 are two digital cameras that were announced, respectively, in January 2016 and October 2007. The AZ901 is a fixed lens compact, while the E-3 is a DSLR. The cameras are based on a 1/2.3-inch (AZ901) and a Four Thirds (E-3) sensor. The Kodak has a resolution of 20.2 megapixels, whereas the Olympus provides 10 MP.

Below is an overview of the main specs of the two cameras as a starting point for the comparison.

Headline Specifications

Kodak AZ901		Olympus E-3
Fixed lens compact camera		Digital single lens reflex
22-1980mm f/3.1-6.8		Four Thirds lenses
20.2 MP – 1/2.3" sensor		10 MP – Four Thirds sensor
1080/30p Video		no Video
ISO 100-3,200		ISO 100-3,200
Electronic viewfinder (202k dots)		Optical viewfinder
3.0" LCD – 920k dots		2.5" LCD – 230k dots
Swivel screen (not touch-sensitive)		Swivel screen (not touch-sensitive)
5 shutter flaps per second		5 shutter flaps per second
Lens-based stabilization		In-body stabilization
not weather sealed		Weathersealed body
400 shots per battery charge		750 shots per battery charge
139 x 104 x 119 mm, 777 g		142 x 116 x 75 mm, 876 g

Check AZ901 price at
amazon.com
Check E-3 offers at
ebay.com

Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Kodak PixPro AZ901 and the Olympus E-3? Which one should you buy? Read on to find out how these two cameras compare with respect to their body size, their imaging sensors, their shooting features, their input-output connections, and their reception by expert reviewers.

Body comparison

The side-by-side display below illustrates the physical size and weight of the Kodak AZ901 and the Olympus E-3. The two cameras are presented according to their relative size. Three consecutive views from the front, the top, and the rear side are shown. All width, height and depth measures are rounded to the nearest millimeter.

If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Olympus E-3 is notably larger (14 percent) than the Kodak AZ901. It is noteworthy in this context that the E-3 is splash and dust-proof, while the AZ901 does not feature any corresponding weather-sealing.

The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete and possibly misleading, as the AZ901 has a lens built in, whereas the E-3 is an interchangeable lens camera that requires a separate lens. Attaching the latter will add extra weight and bulk to the setup. You can compare the optics available for the E-3 and their specifications in the Four Thirds Lens Catalog.

Concerning battery life, the AZ901 gets 400 shots out of its Kodak LB-070 battery, while the E-3 can take 750 images on a single charge of its Olympus BLM-1 power pack.

The adjacent table lists the principal physical characteristics of the two cameras alongside a wider set of alternatives. If you would like to visualize and compare a different camera combination, you can navigate to the CAM-parator app and make your selection from a broad list of cameras there.

Body Specifications

		Camera Model	Camera Width	Camera Height	Camera Depth	Camera Weight	Battery Life	Weather Sealing	Camera Launch	Launch Price	Street Price
1.		Kodak AZ901	139 mm	104 mm	119 mm	777 g	400	n	Jan 2016	US$ 499	amazon.com
2.		Olympus E-3	142 mm	116 mm	75 mm	876 g	750	Y	Oct 2007	US$ 1 699	ebay.com
3.		Canon G9 X	98 mm	58 mm	31 mm	209 g	220	n	Oct 2015	US$ 529	ebay.com
4.		Canon G9 X Mark II	98 mm	58 mm	31 mm	206 g	235	n	Jan 2017	US$ 529	ebay.com
5.		Leica Q Typ 116	130 mm	80 mm	93 mm	640 g	300	n	Jun 2015	US$ 4 249	ebay.com
6.		Nikon B700	125 mm	85 mm	107 mm	565 g	350	n	Feb 2016	US$ 499	ebay.com
7.		Nikon P900	140 mm	103 mm	137 mm	899 g	360	n	Mar 2015	US$ 599	ebay.com
8.		Olympus E-1	141 mm	104 mm	81 mm	738 g	750	Y	Jun 2003	US$ 1 699	ebay.com
9.		Olympus E-5	142 mm	117 mm	75 mm	873 g	750	Y	Sep 2010	US$ 1 699	ebay.com
10.		Olympus E-30	142 mm	108 mm	75 mm	701 g	750	n	Nov 2008	US$ 1 299	ebay.com
11.		Olympus E-510	136 mm	92 mm	68 mm	538 g	750	n	Mar 2007	US$ 799	ebay.com
12.		Olympus E-520	136 mm	92 mm	68 mm	535 g	750	n	May 2008	US$ 699	ebay.com
13.		Panasonic FZ2500	138 mm	102 mm	135 mm	915 g	350	n	Sep 2016	US$ 1 199	amazon.com
14.		Panasonic ZS70	112 mm	67 mm	41 mm	322 g	380	n	Apr 2017	US$ 449	ebay.com
15.		Sony HX90V	102 mm	58 mm	36 mm	245 g	360	n	Apr 2015	US$ 429	ebay.com
16.		Sony HX350	130 mm	93 mm	103 mm	652 g	300	n	Dec 2016	US$ 449	ebay.com
17.		Sony HX400V	130 mm	93 mm	103 mm	660 g	300	n	Feb 2014	US$ 499	ebay.com
Note: Measurements and pricing do not include easily detachable parts, such as add-on or interchangeable lenses or optional viewfinders.
Convert to Imperial

Any camera decision will naturally be influenced heavily by the price. The manufacturer’s suggested retail prices give an idea on the placement of the camera in the maker’s lineup and the broader market. The AZ901 was launched at a lower price than the E-3, despite having a lens built in. Usually, retail prices stay at first close to the launch price, but after several months, discounts become available. Later in the product cycle and, in particular, when the replacement model is about to appear, further discounting and stock clearance sales often push the camera price considerably down.

Sensor comparison

The size of the sensor inside a digital camera is one of the key determinants of image quality. A large sensor will tend to have larger individual pixels that provide better low-light sensitivity, wider dynamic range, and richer color-depth than smaller pixel-units in a sensor of the same technological generation. Furthermore, a large sensor camera will give the photographer more possibilities to use shallow depth-of-field in order to isolate a subject from the background. On the downside, larger sensors tend to be associated with larger, more expensive camera bodies and lenses.

Of the two cameras under consideration, the Kodak AZ901 features a 1/2.3-inch sensor and the Olympus E-3 a Four Thirds sensor. The sensor area in the E-3 is 704 percent bigger. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 5.6 and 2.0. Both cameras feature a native aspect ratio (sensor width to sensor height) of 4:3.

Despite having a smaller sensor, the Kodak AZ901 offers a higher resolution of 20.2 megapixels, compared with 10 MP of the Olympus E-3. This megapixels advantage comes at the cost of a higher pixel density and a smaller size of the individual pixel (with a pixel pitch of 1.18μm versus 4.74μm for the E-3). However, it should be noted that the AZ901 is much more recent (by 8 years and 2 months) than the E-3, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that make it possible to gather light more efficiently.

The resolution advantage of the Kodak AZ901 implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the AZ901 for good quality output (200 dots per inch) amounts to 25.9 x 19.4 inches or 65.8 x 49.4 cm, for very good quality (250 dpi) 20.7 x 15.6 inches or 52.7 x 39.5 cm, and for excellent quality (300 dpi) 17.3 x 13 inches or 43.9 x 32.9 cm. The corresponding values for the Olympus E-3 are 18.2 x 13.7 inches or 46.3 x 34.7 cm for good quality, 14.6 x 10.9 inches or 37.1 x 27.8 cm for very good quality, and 12.2 x 9.1 inches or 30.9 x 23.2 cm for excellent quality prints.

The Kodak PixPro AZ901 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 3200. The Olympus E-3 offers exactly the same ISO settings.

In terms of underlying technology, the AZ901 is build around a BSI-CMOS sensor, while the E-3 uses a CMOS imager. Both cameras use a Bayer filter for capturing RGB colors on a square grid of photosensors. This arrangement is found in most digital cameras.

For many cameras, data on sensor performance has been reported by DXO Mark. This service assesses and scores the color depth ("DXO Portrait"), dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), and low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports") of camera sensors, and also publishes an overall camera score. The adjacent table reports on the physical sensor characteristics and the outcomes of the DXO sensor quality tests for a sample of comparator-cameras.

Sensor Characteristics

		Camera Model	Sensor Class	Resolution (MP)	Horiz. Pixels	Vert. Pixels	Video Format	DXO Portrait	DXO Landscape	DXO Sports	DXO Overall
1.		Kodak AZ901	1/2.3	20.2	5184	3888	1080/30p	20.3	11.7	806	48
2.		Olympus E-3	Four Thirds	10.0	3648	2736	none	21.6	10.5	571	56
3.		Canon G9 X	1-inch	20.0	5472	3648	1080/60p	21.5	12.3	495	63
4.		Canon G9 X Mark II	1-inch	20.0	5472	3648	1080/60p	21.9	12.5	522	65
5.		Leica Q Typ 116	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	1080/60p	24.3	12.7	2221	85
6.		Nikon B700	1/2.3	20.2	5184	3888	4K/30p	20.4	11.8	818	48
7.		Nikon P900	1/2.3	15.9	4608	3456	1080/60p	20.2	11.6	727	47
8.		Olympus E-1	Four Thirds	4.9	2560	1920	none	20.0	9.7	-145	44
9.		Olympus E-5	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.6	10.5	519	56
10.		Olympus E-30	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	none	21.3	10.4	530	55
11.		Olympus E-510	Four Thirds	10.0	3648	2736	none	21.2	10.0	442	52
12.		Olympus E-520	Four Thirds	10.0	3648	2736	none	21.4	10.4	548	55
13.		Panasonic FZ2500	1-inch	20.0	5472	3648	4K/30p	23.0	12.6	538	70
14.		Panasonic ZS70	1/2.3	20.2	5184	3888	4K/30p	19.1	10.6	106	36
15.		Sony HX90V	1/2.3	18.0	4896	3672	1080/60p	20.2	11.6	738	47
16.		Sony HX350	1/2.3	19.9	5152	3864	1080/60p	20.5	11.9	896	49
17.		Sony HX400V	1/2.3	20.2	5184	3888	1080/60p	20.1	11.4	629	45
Note: DXO values in italics represent estimates based on sensor size and age.

Many modern cameras are not only capable of taking still images, but also of capturing video footage. The AZ901 indeed provides movie recording capabilities, while the E-3 does not. The highest resolution format that the AZ901 can use is 1080/30p.

Feature comparison

Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a variety of features. For example, the AZ901 has an electronic viewfinder (202k dots), while the E-3 has an optical one. Both systems have their advantages, with the electronic viewfinder making it possible to project supplementary shooting information into the framing view, whereas the optical viewfinder offers lag-free viewing and a very clear framing image. The following table reports on some other key feature differences and similarities of the Kodak AZ901, the Olympus E-3, and comparable cameras.

Core Features

		Camera Model	Viewfinder (Type or 000 dots)	Control Panel (yes/no)	LCD Specifications (inch/000 dots)	LCD Attach- ment	Touch Screen (yes/no)	Max Shutter Speed *	Max Shutter Flaps *	Built-in Flash (yes/no)	Built-in Image Stab
1.		Kodak AZ901	202	n	3.0 / 920	swivel	n	1/2000s	5.0/s	Y	Y
2.		Olympus E-3	optical	Y	2.5 / 230	swivel	n	1/8000s	5.0/s	Y	Y
3.		Canon G9 X	none	n	3.0 / 1040	fixed	Y	1/2000s	6.0/s	Y	Y
4.		Canon G9 X Mark II	none	n	3.0 / 1040	fixed	Y	1/2000s	8.2/s	Y	Y
5.		Leica Q Typ 116	3680	n	3.0 / 1040	fixed	Y	1/2000s	10.0/s	n	Y
6.		Nikon B700	921	n	3.0 / 921	swivel	n	1/4000s	5.0/s	Y	Y
7.		Nikon P900	921	n	3.0 / 921	swivel	n	1/4000s	7.0/s	Y	Y
8.		Olympus E-1	optical	Y	1.8 / 134	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	n	n
9.		Olympus E-5	optical	Y	3.0 / 920	swivel	n	1/8000s	5.0/s	Y	Y
10.		Olympus E-30	optical	Y	2.7 / 230	swivel	n	1/8000s	5.0/s	Y	Y
11.		Olympus E-510	optical	n	2.5 / 215	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
12.		Olympus E-520	optical	n	2.7 / 215	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.5/s	Y	Y
13.		Panasonic FZ2500	2360	n	3.0 / 1040	swivel	Y	1/4000s	12.0/s	Y	Y
14.		Panasonic ZS70	1166	n	3.0 / 1040	tilting	Y	1/2000s	10.0/s	Y	Y
15.		Sony HX90V	638	n	3.0 / 921	tilting	n	1/2000s	10.0/s	Y	Y
16.		Sony HX350	202	n	3.0 / 922	tilting	n	1/4000s	10.0/s	Y	Y
17.		Sony HX400V	210	n	3.0 / 921	tilting	n	1/4000s	10.0/s	Y	Y
Note: *) Information refers to the mechanical shutter, unless the camera only has an electronic one.

One feature that is present on the E-3, but is missing on the AZ901 is a top-level LCD. While being, of course, smaller than the rear screen, the control panel conveys some of the essential shooting information and can be convenient for quick and easy settings verification.

The AZ901 writes its imaging data to SDXC cards, while the E-3 uses Compact Flash or xD Picture cards. The E-3 features dual card slots, which can be very useful in case a memory card fails. In contrast, the AZ901 only has one slot.

Connectivity comparison

For some imaging applications, the extent to which a camera can communicate with its environment can be an important aspect in the camera decision process. The table below provides an overview of the connectivity of the Kodak PixPro AZ901 and Olympus E-3 and, in particular, the interfaces the cameras (and selected comparators) provide for accessory control and data transfer.

Input-Output Connections

		Camera Model	Hotshoe Port	Internal Mic / Speaker	Microphone Port	Headphone Port	HDMI Port	USB Port	WiFi Support	NFC Support	Bluetooth Support
1.		Kodak AZ901	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
2.		Olympus E-3	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
3.		Canon G9 X	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
4.		Canon G9 X Mark II	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	Y
5.		Leica Q Typ 116	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
6.		Nikon B700	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	Y
7.		Nikon P900	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
8.		Olympus E-1	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
9.		Olympus E-5	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
10.		Olympus E-30	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
11.		Olympus E-510	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
12.		Olympus E-520	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
13.		Panasonic FZ2500	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
14.		Panasonic ZS70	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
15.		Sony HX90V	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
16.		Sony HX350	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	-	-	-
17.		Sony HX400V	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-

It is notable that the AZ901 offers wifi support, while the E-3 does not. Wifi can be a very convenient means to transfer image data to an off-camera location.

Studio photographers will appreciate that the Olympus E-3 (unlike the AZ901) features a PC Sync socket, so that professional strobe lights can be controlled by the camera.

The AZ901 is a recent model that features in the current product line-up of Kodak. In contrast, the E-3 has been discontinued (but can be found pre-owned on ebay). As a replacement in the same line of cameras, the E-3 was succeeded by the Olympus E-5. Further information on the features and operation of the AZ901 and E-3 can be found, respectively, in the Kodak AZ901 Manual (free pdf) or the online Olympus E-3 Manual.

Review summary

So how do things add up? Is the Kodak AZ901 better than the Olympus E-3 or vice versa? The listing below highlights the relative strengths of the two models.

Reasons to prefer the Kodak PixPro AZ901:

• More detail: Offers more megapixels (20.2 vs 10MP) with a 42% higher linear resolution.
• Broader imaging potential: Can record not only still images but also 1080/30p movies.
• More framing info: Has an electronic viewfinder that displays shooting data.
• Larger screen: Has a bigger rear LCD (3.0" vs 2.5") for image review and settings control.
• More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (920k vs 230k dots).
• Ready to shoot: Comes with a built-in lens, while the E-3 requires a separate lens.
• More compact: Is smaller (139x104mm vs 142x116mm) and thus needs less room in the bag.
• Less heavy: Is lighter even though it comes with a built-in lens (unlike the E-3).
• Easier file upload: Has wifi built in for automatic backup or image transfer to the web.
• More affordable: Was introduced at a lower price, despite coming with a built-in lens.
• More modern: Reflects 8 years and 2 months of technical progress since the E-3 launch.

Arguments in favor of the Olympus E-3:

• Better image quality: Features bigger pixels on a larger sensor for higher quality imaging.
• Richer colors: The pixel size advantage translates into images with better, more accurate colors.
• More dynamic range: Larger pixels capture a wider spectrum of light and dark details.
• Better low-light sensitivity: Larger pixels means good image quality even under poor lighting.
• Brighter framing: Features an optical viewfinder for clear, lag-free composition.
• Easier setting verification: Features a control panel on top to check shooting parameters.
• Faster shutter: Has higher mechanical shutter speed (1/8000s vs 1/2000s) to freeze action.
• More flexible: Makes it possible to change lenses and thus to use specialty optics.
• Longer lasting: Gets more shots (750 versus 400) out of a single battery charge.
• Better sealing: Is splash and dust sealed for shooting in inclement weather conditions.
• Better lighting: Features a hotshoe and can thus hold and trigger an external flash gun.
• Better studio light control: Has a PC Sync socket to connect to professional strobe lights.
• Greater peace of mind: Features a second card slot as a backup in case of memory card failure.
• More heavily discounted: Has been around for much longer (launched in October 2007).

If the count of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a measure, the E-3 emerges as the winner of the match-up (14 : 11 points). However, the relative importance of the various individual camera aspects will vary according to personal preferences and needs, so that you might like to apply corresponding weights to the particular features before making a decision on a new camera. A professional wedding photographer will view the differences between cameras in a way that diverges from the perspective of a travel photog, and a person interested in cityscapes has distinct needs from a macro shooter. Hence, the decision which camera is best and worth buying is often a very personal one.

How about other alternatives? Do the specifications of the Kodak AZ901 and the Olympus E-3 place the cameras among the top in their class? Find out in the latest Best Superzoom Camera and Best DSLR Camera listings whether the two cameras rank among the cream of the crop.

In any case, while the specs-based evaluation of cameras can be instructive in revealing their potential as photographic tools, it remains incomplete and does no justice, for example, to the way the AZ901 or the E-3 perform in practice. User reviews that are available, for instance, at amazon can sometimes shed light on these issues, but such feedback is all too often partial, inconsistent, and inaccurate.

Expert reviews

This is why hands-on reviews by experts are important. The following table reports the overall ratings of the cameras as published by some of the major camera review sites (amateurphotographer [AP], cameralabs [CL], digitalcameraworld [DCW], dpreview [DPR], ephotozine [EPZ], photographyblog [PB]). As can be seen, the professional reviewers agree in many cases on the quality of different cameras, but sometimes their assessments diverge, reinforcing the earlier point that a camera decision is often a very personal choice.

Expert Camera Reviews

		Camera   Model	AP   score	CL   score	DCW   score	DPR   score	EPZ   score	PB   score	Camera Launch	Launch Price	Street Price
1.		Kodak AZ901	..	..	..	..	3.5/5	3/5	Jan 2016	US$ 499	amazon.com
2.		Olympus E-3	..	88/100	..	+ +	o	4/5	Oct 2007	US$ 1 699	ebay.com
3.		Canon G9 X	3.5/5	+ +	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Oct 2015	US$ 529	ebay.com
4.		Canon G9 X Mark II	4/5	..	4/5	75/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jan 2017	US$ 529	ebay.com
5.		Leica Q Typ 116	5/5	..	..	80/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2015	US$ 4 249	ebay.com
6.		Nikon B700	..	+	..	..	4/5	4/5	Feb 2016	US$ 499	ebay.com
7.		Nikon P900	..	..	..	77/100	4/5	4/5	Mar 2015	US$ 599	ebay.com
8.		Olympus E-1	..	..	..	+	o	..	Jun 2003	US$ 1 699	ebay.com
9.		Olympus E-5	4/5	..	..	75/100	4/5	4.5/5	Sep 2010	US$ 1 699	ebay.com
10.		Olympus E-30	..	..	..	71/100	4.5/5	4/5	Nov 2008	US$ 1 299	ebay.com
11.		Olympus E-510	..	89/100	..	+ +	3.5/5	4.5/5	Mar 2007	US$ 799	ebay.com
12.		Olympus E-520	..	87/100	..	+ +	4.5/5	4.5/5	May 2008	US$ 699	ebay.com
13.		Panasonic FZ2500	..	+	..	82/100	4.5/5	5/5	Sep 2016	US$ 1 199	amazon.com
14.		Panasonic ZS70	..	+ +	..	..	4/5	4/5	Apr 2017	US$ 449	ebay.com
15.		Sony HX90V	4/5	+ +	..	..	4/5	4.5/5	Apr 2015	US$ 429	ebay.com
16.		Sony HX350	..	..	..	..	..	4/5	Dec 2016	US$ 449	ebay.com
17.		Sony HX400V	4/5	+ +	..	..	4/5	4/5	Feb 2014	US$ 499	ebay.com
Note: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available.

Care should be taken when interpreting the review scores above, though. The ratings were established in reference to similarly priced cameras that were available in the market at the time of the review. Thus, a score needs to be put into the context of the launch date and the launch price of the camera, and comparisons of ratings among very different cameras or across long time periods have little meaning. It should also be noted that some of the review sites have over time altered the way they render their verdicts.

Check AZ901 price at
amazon.com
Check E-3 offers at
ebay.com

Other camera comparisons

Did this review help to inform your camera decision process? If you would like to see a different side-by-side camera review, just use the search menu below. Alternatively, you can follow any of the listed hyperlinks for comparisons that others found interesting.

~

Check AZ901 price at
amazon.com
Check E-3 offers at
ebay.com

Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.