Mirrorless Camera Size Comparison: NEX5, NX10, E-P2, E-PL1, GF1, G2

Amin Sabet

Administrator Emeritus
Jul 3, 2010
124
Thanks to B&H Photo, I have several mirrorless cameras on hand for comparison and thought it may be helpful to present some size comparisons. Feel free to embed these images on other sites, but please do not remove the watermark.

If you're reading this on the blog main page with resized images, click here to view this post with all images at full size.

We'll start with the standard zoom lenses:


Above (left to right): Olympus mZD 14-42mm lens (kit zoom for Olympus Micro 4/3 cameras, shown collapsed), Sony NEX 18-55mm lens (kit zoom for Sony NEX cameras), Panasonic 14-45mm lens (kit zoom for Panasonic G1 and GF1), Panasonic 14-42mm lens (kit zoom for Panasonic G2 and G10), Samsung NX 18-55 (kit zoom for Samsung NX10)

The same lenses en face:



Now to take a look at three of the available "pancake lenses":


Above (left to right): Sony NEX 16mm f/2.8, Samsung 30mm f/2, Panasonic 20mm f/1.7.

Unfortunately, I didn't have the diminuitive Olympus 17mm f/2.8 on hand.


Above (left to right): Panasonic GF1 with Lumix 20mm f/1.7, Samsung NX10 with Samsung 30mm f/2, Sony NEX5 with Sony 16mm f/2.8


Above (left to right): Olympus E-P2 with Lumix 20mm f/1.7, Samsung NX10 with Samsun 30mm f/2, Panasonic G2 with Lumix 20mm f/1.7


Above (left to right): Panasonic GF1 with Lumix 20mm f/1.7, Sony NEX5 with Sony 16mm f/2.8, Olympus E-PL1 with Panasonic 20mm f/1.7


Above (left to right): Panasonic GF1 with Panasonic 20mm f/1.7, Sony NEX5 with Sony 16mm f/2.8, Olympus E-PL1 with Panasonic 20mm f/1.7


Above (left to right): Olympus E-PL1 with Olympus mZD 14-42 (collapsed), Sony NEX5 with Sony 18-55, Panasonic GF1 with Panasonic 14-42 (Sorry, wrong kit lens pictured; should have been the 14-45, which is slightly smaller as shown in the first image in this post)


Above (left to right): Samsung NX10 with Samsung 30mm f/2, Panasonic G2 with Panasonic 20mm f/1.7, Sony NEX5 with Sony 16mm f/2.8


Above (left to right): Samsung NX10 with Samsung 18-55, Panasonic G2 with Panasonic 14-42, Olympus E-P2 with 14-42 (shown collapsed)


Above (left to right): Panasonic GF1 with Panasonic 20mm f/1.7, Samsung NX10 with Samsung 30mm f/2, Panasonic G2 with Panasonic 20mm f/1.7


Above (left to right): Panasonic GF1 with Panasonic 20mm f/1.7, Sony NEX5 with Sony 16mm f/2.8, Olympus E-PL1 with Panasonic 20mm f/1.7

Here is the NEX5 compared with two fixed-lens, small sensor cameras:


Above (left to right): Samsung EX1/TL500, Sony NEX5 with Sony 16mm f/2.8, Panasonic LX3

Please register a free member account or login with your Facebook credentials (via the blue "f Connect" button at the top of the screen) to join the discussion.

If you find these comparisons helpful, please click the following link to visit B&H for your next camera, lens, or accessory purchase: B&H Photo-Video. Your purchases made after clicking that link give B&H a reason to continue to provide gear for testing here at Serious Compacts.

Direct links to check pricing and availability at B&H:

 

Amin Sabet

Administrator Emeritus
Jul 3, 2010
124
I showed all lenses in storage position (shortest length, collapsed when applicable) with front caps on since this is what matters to me when carrying cameras. I regret that due to time constraints, I cannot take requests to show additional views, eg lens fully extended, view from the left, etc.
 

Remko

Rookie
Aug 8, 2010
3
Netherlands
Interesting to see that the sensor size doesn't seem to influence the kit zoom lens size. Wasn't that one of the advantages of (micro) 4/3?

Remko
 

Amin Sabet

Administrator Emeritus
Jul 3, 2010
124
Sony chose an even shorter registration distance than Micro 4/3. This may have been a smart move, even if it makes it hard to deliver high image quality at the edges/corners of the frame, since sensor technology improvements will mitigate those issues over time, while the lens mount specifications are here to stay.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BBW

Björn Utpott

Rookie
Jul 17, 2010
3
Seeing them together like this, the NEX-5 really stands out. Sony accomplished an impressive feat of engineering in accommodating both an APS-C sensor and an articulated screen is such a compact and attractive design. While this miniaturization does compromise edge quality wide open, at least with the current lenses, this phenomenon seems to be confined to the extreme edges. So I might consider shooting in 16:9 if I need to shoot wide open, which has the added advantage of the preview filling the 16:9 LCD screen. The NEX-5 provides some very stiff competition for Panasonic. I'm looking forward to seeing their answer in the next few weeks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BBW

JoepLX3

Regular
Jul 11, 2010
8
Very helpful overview pictures for many of us - thanks
- I thought the Lumix lens caps on the Olympus camera's were funny...
- It also looks like the Sony cannot "stand" straight with "thick" lens attached

(I know it are Panasonic lenses, but still)
 

madmaxmedia

Veteran
Nov 10, 2010
43
Los Angeles
It shouldn't actually impact image quality with any given lens design though, since a Sony E lens could just have a slightly longer barrel than the equivalent lens on another mount, right? Of course in the real world, you have different companies making totally different lenses. But I think having the shorter registration distance can only help by giving more options. Now if a company tries to use the shortest barrel length possible and sacrifice IQ a bit, the balance of IQ/size is up to them. Or maybe some company is able to make short Sony E pancake without sacrificing IQ, with more expensive elements.

Sony chose an even shorter registration distance than Micro 4/3. This may have been a smart move, even if it makes it hard to deliver high image quality at the edges/corners of the frame, since sensor technology improvements will mitigate those issues over time, while the lens mount specifications are here to stay.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BBW

BBW

Administrator Emeritus
Jul 7, 2010
123
betwixt and between
BB
You know, I agree that the Nex is "one ugly camera" but it must have inner beauty, Vidar, because we have have a bunch of folks pretty smitten with it.
 

madmaxmedia

Veteran
Nov 10, 2010
43
Los Angeles
To me the NEX is not so much ugly, as it was designed with a totally different aesthetic. I love the E-P1, it was designed with vintage camera styling in mind. When I first picked up a NEX, it looked not so much like a high-end camera (which it very much is), and more like a high-end consumer electronics product. Kind of like high end camcorders, which have a similar aesthetic.

So it was never ugly to me, just not my personal preference. At the end of the day though, the practicalities of the NEX won me over- big sensor, compact size, tilt screen, nice handgrip, etc. And the interface is just as usable to me now with the current firmware.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BBW
U

Unregistered

Guest
Why last generation cameras?

Nice post but it would be great if you included the current GF2, E-PL2, LX5 and XZ-1 rather than the last generation GF1 (much larger than the GF2), E-PL1 (simply not an attractive design) and LX3.
 
U

Unregistered

Guest
My mistake!

Apologies, just checked the date of the original post and didn't realize it was 8 months back. I assumed it was current having used a link in an article in 4/3's Rumors.
 
U

Unregistered

Guest
What about Samsung?

You didn't include the Samsung NX100. It would have been interesting, as it is very small in size, even smaller than the NEX (with the lens on).
 

wolfie

Veteran
Sep 19, 2010
68
APS sensor -> lens will always be bigger...

You're correct that the the Samsung is the smallest option with a zoom as shown in this comparison by DPReview: http://a.img-dpreview.com/previews/samsungnx100/images/side-by-side-td.jpg
Yes, but ... the Samsung has the smallest zoom range as well.

The image also shows how just beacuse you can make an APS body smaller you are actually going to exagerrate/exacerbate the lens to body imbalance, especially with a zoom, in comparison to M43. Simply physics.
 

pictor

All-Pro
Jul 14, 2010
124
You know, I agree that the Nex is "one ugly camera" but it must have inner beauty, Vidar, because we have have a bunch of folks pretty smitten with it.
The NEX may be ugly, but has a great sensor. The E-PL1, which is my main camera at the moment, is ugly, too, but does not have such a great sensor. To be honest, I am happy with the image quality of my E-PL1 at base ISO and I can live with ISO 400 quite well, but I would love better ISO 800 or even ISO 1600. I don't shoot at night, but when I use a telephoto lens and need short shutter speeds, I miss better image quality at high ISO. Maybe the GH2 would be fine, but since it is virtually impossible to get spare batteries, this is no option.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BBW

Latest posts

Latest threads

Top Bottom