Olympus E-3 vs Pentax 645Z
The Olympus E-3 and the Pentax 645Z are two professional cameras that were announced, respectively, in October 2007 and April 2014. Both are DSLR (Digital Single Lens Reflex) cameras that are based on a Four Thirds (E-3) and a medium format (645Z) sensor. The Olympus has a resolution of 10 megapixels, whereas the Pentax provides 51.1 MP.
Below is an overview of the main specs of the two cameras as a starting point for the comparison.
Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Olympus E-3 and the Pentax 645Z? 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
An illustration of the physical size and weight of the Olympus E-3 and the Pentax 645Z is provided in the side-by-side display below. The two cameras are presented according to their relative size. Three successive views from the front, the top, and the rear are shown. All width, height and depth dimensions 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 Pentax 645Z is notably larger (11 percent) than the Olympus E-3. Moreover, the 645Z is substantially heavier (77 percent) than the E-3. In this context, it is worth noting that both cameras are splash and dust-proof and can, hence, be used in inclement weather conditions or harsh environments.
The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete since they do not consider the interchangeable lenses that both of these cameras require. Hence, you might want to study and compare the specifications of available lenses in order to get the full picture of the size and weight of the two camera systems.
Concerning battery life, the E-3 gets 750 shots out of its Olympus BLM-1 battery, while the 645Z can take 650 images on a single charge of its Pentax D-LI90 power pack.
The table below summarizes the key physical specs of the two cameras alongside a broader set of comparators. If you want to switch the focus of the display and review another camera pair, you can move across to the CAM-parator tool and choose from the broad selection of possible camera comparisons there.
Camera Model |
Camera Width |
Camera Height |
Camera Depth |
Camera Weight |
Battery Life |
Weather Sealing |
Camera Launch |
Launch Price |
Street Price |
||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Olympus E-3 | 142 mm | 116 mm | 75 mm | 876 g | 750 | Y | Oct 2007 | US$ 1 699 | ebay.com | |
2. | Pentax 645Z | 156 mm | 117 mm | 123 mm | 1550 g | 650 | Y | Apr 2014 | US$ 8 499 | ebay.com | |
3. | Canon 5DS | 152 mm | 116 mm | 76 mm | 930 g | 700 | Y | Feb 2015 | US$ 3 699 | ebay.com | |
4. | Canon 5DS R | 152 mm | 116 mm | 76 mm | 930 g | 700 | Y | Feb 2015 | US$ 3 699 | ebay.com | |
5. | Hasselblad X1D | 150 mm | 98 mm | 71 mm | 725 g | .. | Y | Jun 2016 | US$ 8 995 | ebay.com | |
6. | Leica SL | 147 mm | 104 mm | 39 mm | 847 g | 400 | Y | Oct 2015 | US$ 7 449 | ebay.com | |
7. | Nikon D300 | 147 mm | 114 mm | 74 mm | 925 g | 1000 | Y | Aug 2007 | US$ 1 799 | 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-410 | 130 mm | 91 mm | 53 mm | 435 g | 500 | n | Mar 2007 | US$ 699 | ebay.com | |
12. | Olympus E-420 | 130 mm | 91 mm | 53 mm | 440 g | 500 | n | Mar 2008 | US$ 599 | ebay.com | |
13. | Olympus E-510 | 136 mm | 92 mm | 68 mm | 538 g | 750 | n | Mar 2007 | US$ 799 | ebay.com | |
14. | Olympus E-520 | 136 mm | 92 mm | 68 mm | 535 g | 750 | n | May 2008 | US$ 699 | ebay.com | |
15. | Olympus E-600 | 130 mm | 94 mm | 60 mm | 535 g | 500 | n | Aug 2009 | US$ 449 | ebay.com | |
16. | Olympus E-620 | 130 mm | 94 mm | 60 mm | 521 g | 500 | n | Feb 2009 | US$ 699 | ebay.com | |
17. | Pentax 645D | 156 mm | 117 mm | 119 mm | 1480 g | 800 | Y | Mar 2010 | US$ 9 995 | ebay.com | |
Note: Measurements and pricing do not include easily detachable parts, such as add-on or interchangeable lenses or optional viewfinders. | |||||||||||
Any camera decision will obviously take relative prices into account. 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 E-3 was launched at a markedly lower price (by 80 percent) than the 645Z, which puts it into a different market segment. Normally, street prices remain initially close to the MSRP, but after a couple of months, the first discounts appear. 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 imaging sensor is at the core of digital cameras and its size is one of the main determining factors of image quality. A large sensor will generally have larger individual pixels that offer better low-light sensitivity, provide wider dynamic range, and have richer color-depth than smaller pixels in a sensor of the same technological generation. Moreover, a large sensor camera will give the photographer more control over depth-of-field in the image and, thus, the ability to better isolate a subject from the background. On the downside, larger sensors tend to be more expensive and lead to bigger and heavier cameras and lenses.
Of the two cameras under consideration, the Olympus E-3 features a Four Thirds sensor and the Pentax 645Z a medium format sensor. The sensor area in the 645Z is 539 percent bigger. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 2.0 and 0.79. Both cameras feature a native aspect ratio (sensor width to sensor height) of 4:3.
With 51.1MP, the 645Z offers a higher resolution than the E-3 (10MP), but the 645Z nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 5.30μm versus 4.74μm for the E-3) due to its larger sensor. Moreover, the 645Z is a much more recent model (by 6 years and 6 months) than the E-3, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that further enhance the light gathering capacity of its pixel-units. Coming back to sensor resolution, it should be mentioned that the 645Z has no anti-alias filter installed, so that it can capture all the detail its sensor resolves.
The resolution advantage of the Pentax 645Z implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the 645Z for good quality output (200 dots per inch) amounts to 41.3 x 31 inches or 104.9 x 78.6 cm, for very good quality (250 dpi) 33 x 24.8 inches or 83.9 x 62.9 cm, and for excellent quality (300 dpi) 27.5 x 20.6 inches or 69.9 x 52.4 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 Olympus E-3 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 3200. The corresponding ISO settings for the Pentax 645Z are ISO 100 to ISO 204800 (no boost).
Technology-wise, both cameras are equipped with CMOS (Complementary Metal–Oxide–Semiconductor) sensors. 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. Of the two cameras under consideration, the 645Z offers substantially better image quality than the E-3 (overall score 45 points higher). The advantage is based on 4.4 bits higher color depth, 4.2 EV in additional dynamic range, and 3 stops in additional low light sensitivity. The table below summarizes the physical sensor characteristics and sensor quality findings and compares them across a set of similar cameras.
Camera Model |
Sensor Class |
Resolution (MP) |
Horiz. Pixels |
Vert. Pixels |
Video Format |
DXO Portrait |
DXO Landscape |
DXO Sports |
DXO Overall |
||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Olympus E-3 | Four Thirds | 10.0 | 3648 | 2736 | none | 21.6 | 10.5 | 571 | 56 | |
2. | Pentax 645Z | Medium Format | 51.1 | 8256 | 6192 | 1080/60i | 26.0 | 14.7 | 4505 | 101 | |
3. | Canon 5DS | Full Frame | 50.3 | 8688 | 5792 | 1080/30p | 24.7 | 12.4 | 2381 | 87 | |
4. | Canon 5DS R | Full Frame | 50.3 | 8688 | 5792 | 1080/30p | 24.6 | 12.4 | 2308 | 86 | |
5. | Hasselblad X1D | Medium Format | 51.3 | 8272 | 6200 | 1080/25p | 26.2 | 14.8 | 4489 | 102 | |
6. | Leica SL | Full Frame | 24.0 | 6000 | 4000 | 4K/30p | 25.0 | 13.4 | 1821 | 88 | |
7. | Nikon D300 | APS-C | 12.2 | 4288 | 2848 | none | 22.1 | 12.0 | 679 | 67 | |
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-410 | Four Thirds | 10.0 | 3648 | 2736 | none | 21.1 | 10.0 | 494 | 51 | |
12. | Olympus E-420 | Four Thirds | 10.0 | 3648 | 2736 | none | 21.5 | 10.4 | 527 | 56 | |
13. | Olympus E-510 | Four Thirds | 10.0 | 3648 | 2736 | none | 21.2 | 10.0 | 442 | 52 | |
14. | Olympus E-520 | Four Thirds | 10.0 | 3648 | 2736 | none | 21.4 | 10.4 | 548 | 55 | |
15. | Olympus E-600 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | none | 21.5 | 10.3 | 541 | 55 | |
16. | Olympus E-620 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | none | 21.3 | 10.3 | 536 | 55 | |
17. | Pentax 645D | Medium Format | 39.5 | 7264 | 5440 | none | 24.6 | 12.6 | 1262 | 82 | |
Note: DXO values in italics represent estimates based on sensor size and age. |
Many modern cameras cannot only take still pictures, but also record videos. The 645Z indeed provides for movie recording, while the E-3 does not. The highest resolution format that the 645Z can use is 1080/60i.
Feature comparison
Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. The E-3 and the 645Z are similar in the sense that both have an optical viewfinder. The latter is useful for getting a clear image for framing even in brightly lit environments. The viewfinder in the E-3 offers a wider field of view (100%) than the one in the 645Z (98%), so that a larger proportion of the captured image is visible in the finder. On the other hand, the viewfinder of the 645Z has a higher magnification (0.78x vs 0.58x), so that the size of the image transmitted appears closer to the size seen with the naked human eye. The following table reports on some other key feature differences and similarities of the Olympus E-3, the Pentax 645Z, and comparable cameras.
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. | Olympus E-3 | optical | Y | 2.5 / 230 | swivel | n | 1/8000s | 5.0/s | Y | Y | |
2. | Pentax 645Z | optical | Y | 3.2 / 1037 | tilting | n | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | n | n | |
3. | Canon 5DS | optical | Y | 3.2 / 1040 | fixed | n | 1/8000s | 5.0/s | n | n | |
4. | Canon 5DS R | optical | Y | 3.2 / 1040 | fixed | n | 1/8000s | 5.0/s | n | n | |
5. | Hasselblad X1D | 2360 | n | 3.0 / 920 | fixed | Y | 1/2000s | 2.3/s | n | n | |
6. | Leica SL | 4400 | Y | 3.0 / 1040 | fixed | Y | 1/8000s | 11.0/s | n | n | |
7. | Nikon D300 | optical | Y | 3.0 / 922 | fixed | n | 1/8000s | 6.0/s | Y | n | |
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-410 | optical | n | 2.5 / 215 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | Y | n | |
12. | Olympus E-420 | optical | n | 2.7 / 215 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.5/s | Y | n | |
13. | Olympus E-510 | optical | n | 2.5 / 215 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | Y | Y | |
14. | Olympus E-520 | optical | n | 2.7 / 215 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.5/s | Y | Y | |
15. | Olympus E-600 | optical | n | 2.7 / 230 | swivel | n | 1/4000s | 4.0/s | Y | Y | |
16. | Olympus E-620 | optical | n | 2.7 / 230 | swivel | n | 1/4000s | 4.0/s | Y | Y | |
17. | Pentax 645D | optical | Y | 3.0 / 921 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 1.1/s | n | n | |
Note: *) Information refers to the mechanical shutter, unless the camera only has an electronic one. |
One difference between the cameras concerns the presence of an on-board flash. The E-3 has one, while the 645Z does not. While the built-in flash of the E-3 is not very powerful, it can at times be useful as a fill-in light.
The E-3 has an articulated LCD that can be turned to be front-facing. This characteristic will be appreciated by vloggers and photographers who are interested in snapping selfies. In contrast, the 645Z does not have a selfie-screen.The Pentax 645Z has an intervalometer built-in. This enables the photographer to capture time lapse sequences, such as flower blooming, a sunset or moon rise, without purchasing an external camera trigger and related software.
The E-3 writes its imaging data to Compact Flash or xD Picture cards, while the 645Z uses SDXC cards. Both cameras feature dual card slots, which can be very useful in case a memory card fails.
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 Olympus E-3 and Pentax 645Z and, in particular, the interfaces the cameras (and selected comparators) provide for accessory control and data transfer.
Camera Model |
Hotshoe Port |
Internal Mic / Speaker |
Microphone Port |
Headphone Port |
HDMI Port |
USB Port |
WiFi Support |
NFC Support |
Bluetooth Support |
||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Olympus E-3 | Y | - / - | - | - | - | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
2. | Pentax 645Z | Y | stereo / mono | Y | - | mini | 3.0 | - | - | - | |
3. | Canon 5DS | Y | mono / mono | Y | - | mini | 3.0 | - | - | - | |
4. | Canon 5DS R | Y | mono / mono | Y | - | mini | 3.0 | - | - | - | |
5. | Hasselblad X1D | Y | stereo / mono | Y | Y | mini | 3.0 | Y | - | - | |
6. | Leica SL | Y | stereo / mono | Y | Y | full | 3.0 | Y | - | - | |
7. | Nikon D300 | Y | - / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
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-410 | Y | - / - | - | - | - | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
12. | Olympus E-420 | Y | - / - | - | - | - | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
13. | Olympus E-510 | Y | - / - | - | - | - | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
14. | Olympus E-520 | Y | - / - | - | - | - | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
15. | Olympus E-600 | Y | - / - | - | - | - | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
16. | Olympus E-620 | Y | - / - | - | - | - | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
17. | Pentax 645D | Y | stereo / - | - | - | - | 2.0 | - | - | - |
Both cameras feature a PC Sync terminal to control professional strobe lights, which will be appreciated by studio photographers.
Both the E-3 and the 645Z have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The E-3 was replaced by the Olympus E-5, while the 645Z does not have a direct successor. Further information on the features and operation of the E-3 and 645Z can be found, respectively, in the Olympus E-3 Manual (free pdf) or the online Pentax 645Z Manual.
Review summary
So how do things add up? Is the Olympus E-3 better than the Pentax 645Z or vice versa? A synthesis of the relative strong points of each of the models is listed below.
Reasons to prefer the Olympus E-3:
- Better moiré control: Has an anti-alias filter to avoid artificial patterns to appear in images.
- More complete view: Has a viewfinder with a larger field of view (100% vs 98%).
- More flexible LCD: Has a swivel screen for odd-angle shots in portrait or landscape orientation.
- More selfie-friendly: Has an articulated screen that can be turned to be front-facing.
- Faster shutter: Has higher mechanical shutter speed (1/8000s vs 1/4000s) to freeze action.
- Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (5 vs 3 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
- Less heavy: Is lighter (by 674g or 43 percent) and hence easier to carry around.
- Longer lasting: Can take more shots (750 versus 650) on a single battery charge.
- Sharper images: Has hand-shake reducing image stabilization built-in.
- Easier fill-in: Is equipped with a small onboard flash to brighten deep shadow areas.
- More affordable: Was introduced into a lower priced category (80 percent cheaper at launch).
- More heavily discounted: Has been available for much longer (launched in October 2007).
Arguments in favor of the Pentax 645Z:
- More detail: Has more megapixels (51.1 vs 10MP), which boosts linear resolution by 126%.
- Maximized detail: Lacks an anti-alias filter to exploit the sensor's full resolution potential.
- Better image quality: Scores substantially higher (45 points) in the DXO overall evaluation.
- Richer colors: Generates noticeably more natural colors (4.4 bits more color depth).
- More dynamic range: Captures a broader range of light and dark details (4.2 EV of extra DR).
- Better low-light sensitivity: Can shoot in dim conditions (3 stops ISO advantage).
- Broader imaging potential: Can capture not only stills but also 1080/60i video.
- Larger viewfinder image: Features a viewfinder with a higher magnification (0.78x vs 0.58x).
- Larger screen: Has a bigger rear LCD (3.2" vs 2.5") for image review and settings control.
- More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1037k vs 230k dots).
- Easier time-lapse photography: Has an intervalometer built-in for low frequency shooting.
- Faster data transfer: Supports a more advanced USB protocol (3.0 vs 2.0).
- More modern: Reflects 6 years and 6 months of technical progress since the E-3 launch.
If the number of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the 645Z comes out slightly ahead of the E-3 (13 : 12 points). However, the relevance of individual strengths will vary across photographers, so that you might want to apply your own weighing scheme to the summary points when reflecting and deciding on a new camera. A professional sports photographer will view the differences between cameras in a way that diverges from the perspective of a street photog, and a person interested in family portraits has distinct needs from a landscape 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 Olympus E-3 and the Pentax 645Z place the cameras among the top in their class? Find out in the latest Best DSLR Camera listing whether the two cameras rank among the cream of the crop.
In any case, while the comparison of the spec-sheets of cameras can offer a general idea of their imaging potential, it remains incomplete and does no justice, for example, to the way the E-3 or the 645Z 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 adjacent summary-table relays the overall verdicts of several of the most popular 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.
Camera Model |
AP score |
CL score |
DCW score |
DPR score |
EPZ score |
PB score |
Camera Launch |
Launch Price |
Street Price |
||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Olympus E-3 | .. | 88/100 | .. | + + | o | 4/5 | Oct 2007 | US$ 1 699 | ebay.com | |
2. | Pentax 645Z | 5/5 | .. | 3.5/5 | .. | 4.5/5 | 5/5 | Apr 2014 | US$ 8 499 | ebay.com | |
3. | Canon 5DS | .. | + | .. | 83/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Feb 2015 | US$ 3 699 | ebay.com | |
4. | Canon 5DS R | 5/5 | + | .. | 83/100 | 5/5 | 4.5/5 | Feb 2015 | US$ 3 699 | ebay.com | |
5. | Hasselblad X1D | .. | o | .. | 81/100 | .. | 4/5 | Jun 2016 | US$ 8 995 | ebay.com | |
6. | Leica SL | 4/5 | .. | 4/5 | 84/100 | 4.5/5 | 4/5 | Oct 2015 | US$ 7 449 | ebay.com | |
7. | Nikon D300 | .. | + + | .. | + + | 5/5 | 4.5/5 | Aug 2007 | US$ 1 799 | 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-410 | .. | 86/100 | .. | + + | 4/5 | 4.5/5 | Mar 2007 | US$ 699 | ebay.com | |
12. | Olympus E-420 | .. | 85/100 | .. | + + | 4/5 | 4.5/5 | Mar 2008 | US$ 599 | ebay.com | |
13. | Olympus E-510 | .. | 89/100 | .. | + + | 3.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Mar 2007 | US$ 799 | ebay.com | |
14. | Olympus E-520 | .. | 87/100 | .. | + + | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | May 2008 | US$ 699 | ebay.com | |
15. | Olympus E-600 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | 4.5/5 | Aug 2009 | US$ 449 | ebay.com | |
16. | Olympus E-620 | 3/5 | 88/100 | .. | 72/100 | 4.5/5 | 5/5 | Feb 2009 | US$ 699 | ebay.com | |
17. | Pentax 645D | 5/5 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | Mar 2010 | US$ 9 995 | ebay.com | |
Note: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available. |
The above review scores should be interpreted with care, though. The ratings were established in reference to similarly priced cameras that were available in the market at the time of the review. Hence, a score should always be seen in the context of the camera's market launch date and its price, and comparing ratings of very distinct cameras or ones that are far apart in terms of their release date have little meaning. It should also be noted that some of the review sites have over time altered the way they render their verdicts.
Other camera comparisons
Did this review help to inform your camera decision process? In case you are interested in seeing how other cameras pair up, just make a corresponding selection in the search boxes below. There is also a set of direct links to comparison reviews that other users of the CAM-parator app explored.
- Canon 1Ds Mark II vs Olympus E-3
- Canon 1Ds Mark III vs Pentax 645Z
- Canon 60D vs Pentax 645Z
- Canon G1 X Mark II vs Olympus E-3
- Canon SL3 vs Olympus E-3
- Nikon D4S vs Olympus E-3
- Olympus E-3 vs Sony A3000
- Olympus E-3 vs Sony H400
- Olympus E-M5 II vs Pentax 645Z
- Olympus E-PM1 vs Pentax 645Z
- Panasonic FZ80 vs Pentax 645Z
- Pentax 645Z vs Pentax K-5
Specifications: Olympus E-3 vs Pentax 645Z
Below is a side-by-side comparison of the specs of the two cameras to facilitate a quick review of their differences and common features.
Camera Model | Olympus E-3 | Pentax 645Z |
---|---|---|
Camera Type | Digital single lens reflex | Digital single lens reflex |
Camera Lens | Four Thirds lenses | Pentax 645 mount lenses |
Launch Date | October 2007 | April 2014 |
Launch Price | USD 1,699 | USD 8,499 |
Sensor Specs | Olympus E-3 | Pentax 645Z |
Sensor Technology | CMOS | CMOS |
Sensor Format | Four Thirds Sensor | Medium Format Sensor |
Sensor Size | 17.3 x 13.0 mm | 43.8 x 32.8 mm |
Sensor Area | 224.9 mm2 | 1436.64 mm2 |
Sensor Diagonal | 21.6 mm | 54.7 mm |
Crop Factor | 2.0x | 0.79x |
Sensor Resolution | 10 Megapixels | 51.1 Megapixels |
Image Resolution | 3648 x 2736 pixels | 8256 x 6192 pixels |
Pixel Pitch | 4.74 μm | 5.30 μm |
Pixel Density | 4.44 MP/cm2 | 3.56 MP/cm2 |
Moiré control | Anti-Alias filter | no AA filter |
Movie Capability | no Video | 1080/60i Video |
ISO Setting | 100 - 3,200 ISO | 100 - 204,800 ISO |
Image Processor | TruePic III | PRIME III |
DXO Sensor Quality (score) | 56 | 101 |
DXO Color Depth (bits) | 21.6 | 26.0 |
DXO Dynamic Range (EV) | 10.5 | 14.7 |
DXO Low Light (ISO) | 571 | 4505 |
Screen Specs | Olympus E-3 | Pentax 645Z |
Viewfinder Type | Optical viewfinder | Optical viewfinder |
Viewfinder Field of View | 100% | 98% |
Viewfinder Magnification | 0.58x | 0.78x |
Top-Level Screen | Control Panel | Control Panel |
LCD Framing | Live View | Live View |
Rear LCD Size | 2.5inch | 3.2inch |
LCD Resolution | 230k dots | 1037k dots |
LCD Attachment | Swivel screen | Tilting screen |
Shooting Specs | Olympus E-3 | Pentax 645Z |
Focus System | Phase-detect AF | Phase-detect AF |
Manual Focusing Aid | no Peaking Feature | Focus Peaking |
Max Shutter Speed (mechanical) | 1/8000s | 1/4000s |
Continuous Shooting | 5 shutter flaps/s | 3 shutter flaps/s |
Shutter Life Expectancy | 150 000 actuations | 100 000 actuations |
Time-Lapse Photography | no Intervalometer | Intervalometer built-in |
Image Stabilization | In-body stabilization | Lens stabilization only |
Fill Flash | Built-in Flash | no On-Board Flash |
Storage Medium | CF or XD cards | SDXC cards |
Single or Dual Card Slots | Dual card slots | Dual card slots |
Connectivity Specs | Olympus E-3 | Pentax 645Z |
External Flash | Hotshoe | Hotshoe |
Studio Flash | PC Sync socket | PC Sync socket |
USB Connector | USB 2.0 | USB 3.0 |
HDMI Port | no HDMI | mini HDMI |
Microphone Port | no MIC socket | External MIC port |
Wifi Support | no Wifi | no Wifi |
Body Specs | Olympus E-3 | Pentax 645Z |
Environmental Sealing | Weathersealed body | Weathersealed body |
Battery Type | Olympus BLM-1 | Pentax D-LI90 |
Battery Life (CIPA) | 750 shots per charge | 650 shots per charge |
Body Dimensions |
142 x 116 x 75 mm (5.6 x 4.6 x 3.0 in) |
156 x 117 x 123 mm (6.1 x 4.6 x 4.8 in) |
Camera Weight | 876 g (30.9 oz) | 1550 g (54.7 oz) |
Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.