Canon 1D Mark IV versus Leica Q Typ 116
The Canon EOS-1D Mark IV and the Leica Q (Typ 116) are two digital cameras that were revealed to the public, respectively, in October 2009 and June 2015. The 1D Mark IV is a DSLR, while the Q Typ 116 is a fixed lens compact. The cameras are based on an APS-H (1D Mark IV) and a full frame (Q Typ 116) sensor. The Canon has a resolution of 16 megapixel, whereas the Leica provides 24 MP. Read on to find out how these two cameras compare with respect to their size, their sensors, their features, and their reception by expert reviewers.
Body comparison: Canon 1D Mark IV vs Leica Q Typ 116
The side-by-side display below illustrates the physical size and weight of the Canon 1D Mark IV and the Leica Q Typ 116. 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. You can also use the toggle button to switch to a percentage comparison if you prefer that the measures are being expressed in relative terms (in this case, the camera on the left – the 1D Mark IV – represents the basis or 100 percent across all the size and weight measures).
If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Leica Q Typ 116 is considerably smaller (58 percent) than the Canon 1D Mark IV. It is worth mentioning in this context that the 1D Mark IV is splash and dust resistant, while the Q Typ 116 does not feature any corresponding weather-sealing.
The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete and possibly misleading, as the Q Typ 116 has a lens build in, whereas the 1D Mark IV is an interchangeable lens camera that requires a separate lens. Attaching the latter will add extra weight and bulk to the setup. You can find an overview of optics for the 1D Mark IV and their specifications in the Canon EF Lens Catalog.
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, just select a new right or left comparator from among the camera models in the table. Alternatively, you can also move across to the CAM-parator tool and choose from the broad selection of possible camera comparisons there.
|Camera Body Specifications
|Canon 1D Mark IV (⇒ rgt)||6.1 in||6.2 in||3.1 in||43.4 oz||1500||YES||2009||4,999||discont.||check|
|Leica Q Typ 116 (⇒ lft)||5.1 in||3.1 in||3.7 in||22.6 oz||300||no||2015||4,249||latest||check|
|Canon 1D X Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||6.2 in||6.6 in||3.3 in||54.0 oz||1210||YES||2016||5,999||latest||check|
|Canon T6i (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.2 in||4.0 in||3.1 in||19.6 oz||440||no||2015||749||discont.||check|
|Canon T6s (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.2 in||4.0 in||3.1 in||19.9 oz||440||no||2015||849||discont.||check|
|Canon G7 X (⇒ lft | rgt)||4.1 in||2.4 in||1.6 in||10.7 oz||210||no||2014||699||discont.||check|
|Canon 1D X (⇒ lft | rgt)||6.2 in||6.6 in||3.3 in||54.7 oz||1120||YES||2011||6,799||discont.||check|
|Canon 60D (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.7 in||4.2 in||3.1 in||26.6 oz||1100||YES||2010||1,399||discont.||check|
|Canon 7D (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.8 in||4.4 in||2.9 in||30.3 oz||800||YES||2009||1,699||discont.||check|
|Canon 5D Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||6.0 in||4.5 in||3.0 in||30.0 oz||850||YES||2008||3,499||discont.||check|
|Canon 50D (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.7 in||4.3 in||2.9 in||29.0 oz||800||YES||2008||1,299||discont.||check|
|Canon 1D Mark III (⇒ lft | rgt)||6.1 in||6.2 in||3.1 in||40.7 oz||2200||YES||2007||4,499||discont.||check|
|Canon 1Ds Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||6.1 in||6.2 in||3.1 in||42.9 oz||1200||YES||2004||7,999||discont.||check|
|Leica M10 (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.5 in||3.1 in||1.5 in||23.3 oz||210||no||2017||6,595||latest||check|
|Nikon D4 (⇒ lft | rgt)||6.3 in||6.2 in||3.6 in||47.3 oz||2600||YES||2012||5,999||discont.||check|
|Nikon D3S (⇒ lft | rgt)||6.3 in||6.2 in||3.5 in||43.7 oz||4200||YES||2009||5,199||discont.||check|
|Sony RX100 IV (⇒ lft | rgt)||4.0 in||2.3 in||1.6 in||10.5 oz||280||no||2015||999||discont.||check|
The price is, of course, an important factor in any camera decision. The listed launch prices provide an indication of the market segment that the manufacturer of the cameras have been targeting. The Q Typ 116 was launched at a lower price than the 1D Mark IV, despite having a lens build 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. Then, after the new model is out, very good deals can frequently be found on the pre-owned market.
Sensor comparison: Canon 1D Mark IV vs Leica Q Typ 116
The size of the imaging sensor is a crucial determinant of image quality. All other things equal, a large sensor will have larger individual pixel-units that offer better low-light sensitivity, wider dynamic range, and richer color depth than smaller pixels in a sensor of the same technological generation. Further, a large sensor camera will give the photographer additional creative options when using shallow depth-of-field to isolate a subject from its background. On the downside, larger sensors are more costly to manufacture and tend to lead to bigger and heavier cameras and lenses.
Of the two cameras under consideration, the Canon 1D Mark IV features an APS-H sensor and the Leica Q Typ 116 a full frame sensor. The sensor area in the Q Typ 116 is 66 percent bigger. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 1.3 and 1.0. Both cameras have a native aspect ratio (sensor width to sensor height) of 3:2.
With 24MP, the Q Typ 116 offers a higher resolution than the 1D Mark IV (16MP), but the Q Typ 116 nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 6.00μm versus 5.70μm for the 1D Mark IV) due to its larger sensor. Moreover, the Q Typ 116 is a much more recent model (by 5 years and 7 months) than the 1D Mark IV, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that further enhance the light gathering capacity of its pixel-units.
For most cameras, data on sensor performance has been reported by DXO Mark. This service determines an overall sensor rating, as well as sub-scores for low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports"), dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), and color depth ("DXO Portrait"). Of the two cameras under consideration, the Q Typ 116 offers substantially better image quality than the 1D Mark IV (overall score 11 points higher). The advantage is based on 1.5 bits higher color depth, 0.7 EV in additional dynamic range, and 0.8 stops in additional low light sensitivity. The adjacent table reports on the physical sensor characteristics and the outcomes of the DXO sensor quality tests for a sample of comparator-cameras.
|Canon 1D Mark IV (⇒ rgt)||APS-H||16.0||4896||3264||1080/30p||22.8||12.0||1320||74|
|Leica Q Typ 116 (⇒ lft)||Full Frame||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||24.3||12.7||2221||85|
|Canon 1D X Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||Full Frame||20.0||5472||3648||4K/60p||24.1||13.5||3207||88|
|Canon T6i (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||22.7||12.0||919||71|
|Canon T6s (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/30p||22.6||12.0||915||70|
|Canon G7 X (⇒ lft | rgt)||1-inch||20.0||5472||3648||1080/60p||23.0||12.7||556||71|
|Canon 1D X (⇒ lft | rgt)||Full Frame||17.9||5184||3456||1080/30p||23.8||11.8||2786||82|
|Canon 60D (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||17.9||5184||3456||1080/30p||22.2||11.5||813||66|
|Canon 7D (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||17.9||5184||3456||1080/30p||22.0||11.7||854||66|
|Canon 5D Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||Full Frame||21.0||5616||3744||1080/30p||23.7||11.9||1815||79|
|Canon 50D (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||15.1||4752||3168||no||21.8||11.4||696||63|
|Canon 1D Mark III (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-H||10.1||3888||2592||no||22.7||11.7||1078||71|
|Canon 1Ds Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||Full Frame||16.6||4992||3328||no||23.3||11.3||1480||74|
|Leica M10 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Full Frame||23.8||5952||3992||no||24.4||13.2||2133||86|
|Nikon D4 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Full Frame||16.2||4928||3280||1080/30p||24.7||13.1||2965||89|
|Nikon D3S (⇒ lft | rgt)||Full Frame||12.1||4256||2832||720/24p||23.5||12.0||3253||82|
|Sony RX100 IV (⇒ lft | rgt)||1-inch||20.0||5472||3648||4K/30p||22.8||12.6||591||70|
Many modern cameras are not only capable of taking still images, but can also record movies. Both cameras under consideration are equipped with sensors that have a sufficiently high read-out speed for moving images, but the Q Typ 116 provides a faster frame rate than the 1D Mark IV. It can shoot movie footage at 1080/60p, while the Canon is limited to 1080/30p.
Feature comparison: Canon 1D Mark IV vs Leica Q Typ 116
Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a variety of features. For example, the Q Typ 116 has an electronic viewfinder (3680k dots), while the 1D Mark IV 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 Canon 1D Mark IV, the Leica Q Typ 116, and comparable cameras. If you need more detail on the specs, you can find comprehensive listings, for example, in the dpreview camera hub.
|Canon 1D Mark IV (⇒ rgt)||optical||YES||3.0||920||fixed||no||8000||10.0||no||no|
|Leica Q Typ 116 (⇒ lft)||3680||no||3.0||1040||fixed||YES||2000||10.0||no||no|
|Canon 1D X Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||3.2||1620||fixed||YES||8000||16.0||no||no|
|Canon T6i (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||3.0||1040||swivel||YES||4000||5.0||12||no|
|Canon T6s (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||3.0||1040||swivel||YES||4000||5.0||12||no|
|Canon G7 X (⇒ lft | rgt)||no||no||3.0||1040||tilting||YES||2000||6.5||7||YES|
|Canon 1D X (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||3.2||1040||fixed||no||8000||14.0||no||no|
|Canon 60D (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||3.0||1040||swivel||no||8000||5.3||13||no|
|Canon 7D (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||3.0||920||fixed||no||8000||8.0||12||no|
|Canon 5D Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||3.0||920||fixed||no||8000||3.9||no||no|
|Canon 50D (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||3.0||920||fixed||no||8000||6.3||13||no|
|Canon 1D Mark III (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||3.0||230||fixed||no||8000||10.0||no||no|
|Canon 1Ds Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||2.0||230||fixed||no||8000||4.0||no||no|
|Leica M10 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||3.0||1037||fixed||no||4000||5.0||no||no|
|Nikon D4 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||3.2||921||fixed||no||8000||11.0||no||no|
|Nikon D3S (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||3.0||921||fixed||no||8000||11.0||no||no|
|Sony RX100 IV (⇒ lft | rgt)||2359||no||3.0||1228||tilting||no||2000||16.0||10.2||YES|
The Q Typ 116 is a current model that online retailers, such as amazon, will have in stock. In contrast, the 1D Mark IV has been discontinued (but it can be found pre-owned on eBay). There has not been a direct replacement model for the 1D Mark IV from Canon.
Review summary: Canon 1D Mark IV vs Leica Q Typ 116
So what conclusions can be drawn? Is there a clear favorite between the Canon 1D Mark IV and the Leica Q Typ 116? A synthesis of the relative strong points of each of the models is listed below.
Arguments in favor of the Canon EOS-1D Mark IV:
- Brighter framing: Features an optical viewfinder for clear, lag-free composition.
- Easier setting verification: Has an LCD display on top to control shooting parameters.
- Faster shutter: Has higher mechanical shutter speed (8000/sec vs 2000/sec) to freeze action.
- More flexible: Can take a variety of interchangeable lenses, including specialty optics.
- Longer lasting: Can take more shots (1500 versus 300) on a single battery charge.
- Better sealing: Is weather sealed to enable shooting in dusty or wet environments.
- More heavily discounted: Has been available for much longer (launched in October 2009).
Reasons to prefer the Leica Q (Typ 116):
- More detail: Has more megapixels (24 vs 16MP), which boosts linear resolution by 23%.
- Better image quality: Scores substantially higher (11 points) in the DXO overall evaluation.
- Richer colors: Generates noticeably more natural colors (1.5 bits more color depth).
- More dynamic range: Captures a broader range of light and dark details (0.7 EV of extra DR).
- Better low-light sensitivity: Can shoot in dim conditions (0.8 stops ISO advantage).
- Better video: Provides higher movie framerates (1080/60p versus 1080/30p).
- More framing info: Has an electronic viewfinder that displays shooting data.
- More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1040k vs 920k dots).
- Fewer buttons to press: Has a touchscreen to facilitate handling and shooting adjustments.
- Ready to shoot: Comes with an integrated lens, while the 1D Mark IV requires a separate lens.
- More compact: Is smaller (130x80mm vs 156x157mm) and will fit more readily into a bag.
- Less heavy: Has a lower weight even though it has a lens build in (unlike the 1D Mark IV).
- More prestigious: Has the Leica luxury appeal, which ensures a high resale value.
- More affordable: Was introduced at a lower price, despite coming with a build-in lens.
- More modern: Reflects 5 years and 7 months of technical progress since the 1D Mark IV launch.
If the number of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the Q Typ 116 is the clear winner of the contest (15 : 7 points). However, the pertinence of the various camera strengths will differ across photographers, so that you might want to weigh individual camera traits according to their importance for your own imaging needs before making a camera decision.
In any case, while the comparison of the spec-sheets of cameras can offer a general idea of their imaging potential, it remains partial and cannot reveal, for example, the handling experience and imaging performance when actually working with the 1D Mark IV or the Q Typ 116. 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. This is where reviews by experts come in. The following table reports the overall rankings of the cameras as published by some of the major camera review sites (cameralabs, dpreview, ephotozine, imaging-resource, photographyblog). The detailed reviews can be accessed by clicking on the site logo in the table header.
|Canon 1D Mark IV (⇒ rgt)||-||89/100 Gold||-||5/5||-||2009||4,999||discont.||check|
|Leica Q Typ 116 (⇒ lft)||-||80/100 Silver||4.5/5||-||4.5/5||2015||4,249||latest||check|
|Canon 1D X Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||89/100 Gold||4.5/5||5/5||4.5/5||2016||5,999||latest||check|
|Canon T6i (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||75/100||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||2015||749||discont.||check|
|Canon T6s (⇒ lft | rgt)||Rec||77/100 Silver||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||2015||849||discont.||check|
|Canon G7 X (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||77/100 Silver||4.5/5||3.5/5||4.5/5||2014||699||discont.||check|
|Canon 1D X (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||-||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||2011||6,799||discont.||check|
|Canon 60D (⇒ lft | rgt)||87/100 Rec||79/100 Silver||4/5||5/5||4.5/5||2010||1,399||discont.||check|
|Canon 7D (⇒ lft | rgt)||93/100 HiRec||84/100||4.5/5||5/5||4.5/5||2009||1,699||discont.||check|
|Canon 5D Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||91/100||79/100 HiRec||4/5||5/5||-||2008||3,499||discont.||check|
|Canon 50D (⇒ lft | rgt)||90/100 HiRec||HiRec||4.5/5||5/5||4.5/5||2008||1,299||discont.||check|
|Canon 1D Mark III (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||-||-||reviewed||-||2007||4,499||discont.||check|
|Canon 1Ds Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||HiRec||-||-||-||2004||7,999||discont.||check|
|Leica M10 (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||-||4/5||-||4.5/5||2017||6,595||latest||check|
|Nikon D4 (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||-||4.5/5||-||4.5/5||2012||5,999||discont.||check|
|Nikon D3S (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||89/100 Gold||4.5/5||5/5||5/5||2009||5,199||discont.||check|
|Sony RX100 IV (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||85/100 Gold||4/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||2015||999||discont.||check|
The above review scores should be interpreted with care, though. The ratings are only valid when refering to cameras in the same category and of the same age. Hence, a score should always be seen in the context of the camera's market launch date and its price, and rating-comparisons among cameras that span long time periods or concern very differently equipped models make little sense. Also, please note that some of the review sites have changed their methodology and reporting over time.
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 make a corresponding selection in the search boxes below. Alternatively, you can follow any of the listed hyperlinks for comparisons that others found interesting. If you cannot find the camera you are interested in, kindly get in touch, and I will try to add information on that model to the database.
- Canon 5D Mark IV vs Canon 1D Mark IV
- Canon 6D Mark II vs Panasonic GH5s
- Hasselblad X1D vs Sony A7R III
- Nikon D610 vs Fujifilm X-T20
- Nikon D850 vs Nikon D750
- Olympus E-M5 vs Panasonic GX9
- Panasonic GF7 vs Panasonic G6
- Panasonic LX10 vs Panasonic G85
- Panasonic TS7 vs Pentax K-70
- Pentax K-70 vs Fujifilm X-A2
- Pentax K-70 vs Fujifilm X-A5
- Sony A6500 vs Sony RX100 II