Leica M-E Typ 240 vs Q Typ 116

The Leica M-E (Typ 240) and the Leica Q (Typ 116) are two enthusiast cameras that were announced, respectively, in June 2019 and June 2015. The M-E Typ 240 is a rangefinder-focusing mirrorless camera, while the Q Typ 116 is a fixed lens compact. Both cameras are equipped with a full frame sensor. The M-E Typ 240 has a resolution of 23.7 megapixels, whereas the Q Typ 116 provides 24 MP.

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

Headline Specifications

Leica M-E Typ 240		Leica Q Typ 116
Rangefinder camera		Fixed lens compact camera
Leica M mount lenses		28mm f/1.7
23.7 MP – Full Frame sensor		24 MP – Full Frame sensor
1080/25p Video		1080/60p Video
ISO 200-6,400		ISO 100-50,000
Optical viewfinder		Electronic viewfinder (3680k dots)
3.0" LCD – 920k dots		3.0" LCD – 1040k dots
Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)		Fixed touchscreen
3 shutter flaps per second		10 shutter flaps per second
Weathersealed body		not weather sealed
500 shots per battery charge		300 shots per battery charge
139 x 80 x 42 mm, 680 g		130 x 80 x 93 mm, 640 g

Check M-E Typ 240 offers at
ebay.com
Check Q Typ 116 offers at
ebay.com

Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Leica M-E (Typ 240) and the Leica Q (Typ 116)? 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 Leica M-E Typ 240 and the Leica Q Typ 116. 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.

The Q Typ 116 can be obtained in two different colors (black, silver), while the M-E Typ 240 is only available in silver.

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 notably smaller (6 percent) than the Leica M-E Typ 240. It is worth mentioning in this context that the M-E Typ 240 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 built in, whereas the M-E Typ 240 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 M-E Typ 240 and their specifications in the Leica M Lens Catalog.

Concerning battery life, the M-E Typ 240 gets 500 shots out of its Leica BP-SCL2 battery, while the Q Typ 116 can take 300 images on a single charge of its Leica BP-DC12 power pack.

The following table provides a synthesis of the main physical specifications of the two cameras and other similar ones. In case you want to display and compare another camera duo, you can use the CAM-parator app to select your camera combination among a large number of options.

Body Specifications

#		Camera Model	Camera Width	Camera Height	Camera Depth	Camera Weight	Battery Life	Weather Sealing	Camera Launch	Launch Price (USD)	Street Price
1.		Leica M-E Typ 240	139 mm	80 mm	42 mm	680 g	500	Y	Jun 2019	3,999	ebay.com
2.		Leica Q Typ 116	130 mm	80 mm	93 mm	640 g	300	n	Jun 2015	4,249	ebay.com
3.		Canon T6i	132 mm	101 mm	78 mm	555 g	440	n	Feb 2015	749	ebay.com
4.		Canon T6s	132 mm	101 mm	78 mm	565 g	440	n	Feb 2015	649	ebay.com
5.		Canon G7 X	103 mm	60 mm	40 mm	304 g	210	n	Sep 2014	699	ebay.com
6.		Leica M11	139 mm	80 mm	39 mm	640 g	700	Y	Jan 2022	8,995	amazon.com
7.		Leica M10-R	139 mm	80 mm	39 mm	660 g	210	Y	Jul 2020	8,295	ebay.com
8.		Leica Q2	130 mm	80 mm	92 mm	718 g	370	Y	Mar 2019	4,995	amazon.com
9.		Leica M10-P	139 mm	80 mm	39 mm	660 g	210	Y	Aug 2018	7,995	ebay.com
10.		Leica M10	139 mm	80 mm	39 mm	660 g	210	Y	Jan 2017	6,595	ebay.com
11.		Leica M Typ 262	139 mm	80 mm	42 mm	680 g	400	Y	Nov 2015	5,195	ebay.com
12.		Leica M Typ 240	139 mm	80 mm	42 mm	680 g	500	Y	Sep 2012	6,950	ebay.com
13.		Sony A9 II	129 mm	96 mm	76 mm	678 g	690	Y	Oct 2019	4,499	amazon.com
14.		Sony A7 III	127 mm	96 mm	74 mm	650 g	610	Y	Feb 2018	1,999	amazon.com
15.		Sony RX100 IV	102 mm	58 mm	41 mm	298 g	280	n	Jun 2015	999	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

The price is, of course, an important factor in any camera decision. The manufacturer’s suggested retail prices give an idea on the placement of the camera in the maker’s lineup and the broader market. 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

The size of the imaging sensor is a crucial determinant 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. 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.

Both cameras under consideration feature a full frame sensor, but their sensors differ slightly in size. The sensor area in the Q Typ 116 is 1 percent bigger. They nevertheless have the same format factor of 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 M-E Typ 240 (23.7MP), but the Q Typ 116 has marginally smaller individual pixels (pixel pitch of 6.00μm versus 6.01μm for the M-E Typ 240). Yet, the M-E Typ 240 is a much more recent model (by 4 years) than the Q Typ 116, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that further enhance the light gathering capacity of its pixel-units.

The Leica M-E (Typ 240) has a native sensitivity range from ISO 200 to ISO 6400, which can be extended to ISO 100-6400. The corresponding ISO settings for the Leica Q (Typ 116) are ISO 100 to ISO 50000 (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.

Consistent information on actual sensor performance is available from DXO Mark for many cameras. 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"). 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.		Leica M-E Typ 240	Full Frame	23.7	5952	3976	1080/25p	25.2	14.2	2821	94
2.		Leica Q Typ 116	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	1080/60p	24.3	12.7	2221	85
3.		Canon T6i	APS-C	24.0	6000	4000	1080/30p	22.7	12.0	919	71
4.		Canon T6s	APS-C	24.0	6000	4000	1080/30p	22.6	12.0	915	70
5.		Canon G7 X	1-inch	20.0	5472	3648	1080/60p	23.0	12.7	556	71
6.		Leica M11	Full Frame	60.3	9528	6328	none	26.3	14.8	3376	100
7.		Leica M10-R	Full Frame	40.9	7864	5200	none	25.3	14.3	2924	95
8.		Leica Q2	Full Frame	46.7	8368	5584	4K/30p	26.4	13.5	2491	96
9.		Leica M10-P	Full Frame	23.8	5952	3992	none	25.1	14.1	2739	93
10.		Leica M10	Full Frame	23.8	5952	3992	none	24.4	13.2	2133	86
11.		Leica M Typ 262	Full Frame	23.7	5952	3976	none	24.8	13.7	2478	90
12.		Leica M Typ 240	Full Frame	23.7	5952	3976	1080/25p	24.0	13.3	1860	84
13.		Sony A9 II	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	4K/30p	25.0	14.0	3434	93
14.		Sony A7 III	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	4K/30p	25.0	14.7	3730	96
15.		Sony RX100 IV	1-inch	20.0	5472	3648	4K/30p	22.8	12.6	591	70
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 two cameras under consideration both have sensors whose read-out speed is fast enough to capture moving pictures, but the Q Typ 116 provides a faster frame rate than the M-E Typ 240. It can shoot movie footage at 1080/60p, while the M-E Typ 240 is limited to 1080/25p.

Feature comparison

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 M-E Typ 240 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 adjacent table lists some of the other core features of the Leica M-E Typ 240 and Leica Q Typ 116 along with similar information for a selection of comparators.

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.		Leica M-E Typ 240	optical	n	3.0 / 920	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	n	n
2.		Leica Q Typ 116	3680	n	3.0 / 1040	fixed	Y	1/2000s	10.0/s	n	Y
3.		Canon T6i	optical	n	3.0 / 1040	swivel	Y	1/4000s	5.0/s	Y	n
4.		Canon T6s	optical	Y	3.0 / 1040	swivel	Y	1/4000s	5.0/s	Y	n
5.		Canon G7 X	none	n	3.0 / 1040	tilting	Y	1/2000s	6.5/s	Y	Y
6.		Leica M11	optical	n	3.0 / 2333	fixed	Y	1/4000s	4.5/s	n	n
7.		Leica M10-R	optical	n	3.0 / 1037	fixed	Y	1/4000s	4.5/s	n	n
8.		Leica Q2	3680	n	3.0 / 1040	fixed	Y	1/2000s	10.0/s	n	Y
9.		Leica M10-P	optical	n	3.0 / 1037	fixed	Y	1/4000s	5.0/s	n	n
10.		Leica M10	optical	n	3.0 / 1037	fixed	n	1/4000s	5.0/s	n	n
11.		Leica M Typ 262	optical	n	3.0 / 921	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	n	n
12.		Leica M Typ 240	optical	n	3.0 / 920	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	n	n
13.		Sony A9 II	3686	n	3.0 / 1440	tilting	Y	1/8000s	20.0/s	n	Y
14.		Sony A7 III	2359	n	3.0 / 922	tilting	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
15.		Sony RX100 IV	2359	n	3.0 / 1228	tilting	n	1/2000s	16.0/s	Y	Y
Note: *) Information refers to the mechanical shutter, unless the camera only has an electronic one.

One differentiating feature between the two cameras concerns the touch sensitivity of the rear screen. The Q Typ 116 has a touchscreen, while the M-E Typ 240 has a conventional panel. Touch control can be particularly helpful, for example, for setting the focus point.

The reported shutter speed information refers to the use of the mechanical shutter. Yet, some cameras only have an electronic shutter, while others have an electronic shutter in addition to a mechanical one. In fact, the Q Typ 116 is one of those camera that have an additional electronic shutter, which makes completely silent shooting possible. However, this mode is less suitable for photographing moving objects (risk of rolling shutter) or shooting under artificial light sources (risk of flickering).

The Leica Q Typ 116 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.

Concerning the storage of imaging data, both the M-E Typ 240 and the Q Typ 116 write their files to SDXC cards. Both cameras can use UHS-I cards, which provide for Ultra High Speed data transfer of up to 104 MB/s.

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 Leica M-E (Typ 240) and Leica Q (Typ 116) 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.		Leica M-E Typ 240	Y	mono / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
2.		Leica Q Typ 116	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
3.		Canon T6i	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	mini	2.0	Y	Y	-
4.		Canon T6s	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	mini	2.0	Y	Y	-
5.		Canon G7 X	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
6.		Leica M11	Y	- / -	-	-	-	3.2	Y	-	Y
7.		Leica M10-R	Y	- / -	-	-	-	-	Y	-	-
8.		Leica Q2	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	-	-	Y	-	Y
9.		Leica M10-P	Y	- / -	-	-	-	-	Y	-	-
10.		Leica M10	Y	- / -	-	-	-	-	Y	-	-
11.		Leica M Typ 262	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
12.		Leica M Typ 240	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
13.		Sony A9 II	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.1	Y	Y	Y
14.		Sony A7 III	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.1	Y	Y	Y
15.		Sony RX100 IV	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-

It is notable that the Q Typ 116 offers wifi support, which can be a very convenient means to transfer image data to an off-camera location. In contrast, the M-E Typ 240 does not provide wifi capability.

Both the M-E Typ 240 and the Q Typ 116 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The Q Typ 116 was replaced by the Leica Q2, while the M-E Typ 240 does not have a direct successor. Further information on the two cameras (e.g. user guides, manuals), as well as related accessories, can be found on the official Leica website.

Review summary

So how do things add up? Which of the two cameras – the Leica M-E Typ 240 or the Leica Q Typ 116 – has the upper hand? Is one clearly better than the other? A synthesis of the relative strong points of each of the models is listed below.

Arguments in favor of the Leica M-E (Typ 240):

• Brighter framing: Features an optical viewfinder for clear, lag-free composition.
• Faster shutter: Has higher mechanical shutter speed (1/4000s vs 1/2000s) to freeze action.
• More flexible: Accepts interchangeable lenses, so that lens characteristics can be altered.
• Longer lasting: Can take more shots (500 versus 300) on a single battery charge.
• Better sealing: Is weather sealed to enable shooting in dusty or wet environments.
• More modern: Reflects 4 years of technical progress since the Q Typ 116 launch.

Advantages of the Leica Q (Typ 116):

• Better video: Provides higher movie framerates (1080/60p versus 1080/25p).
• 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.
• Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (10 vs 3 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
• Less disturbing: Has an electronic shutter option for completely silent shooting.
• Easier time-lapse photography: Has an intervalometer built-in for low frequency shooting.
• Ready to shoot: Has an integrated lens, whereas the M-E Typ 240 necessitates an extra lens.
• Less heavy: Has a lower weight even though it has a lens built in (unlike the M-E Typ 240).
• Sharper images: Has stabilization technology built-in to reduce the impact of hand-shake.
• Easier file upload: Has wifi built in for automatic backup or image transfer to the web.
• Easier device pairing: Supports NFC for fast wireless image transfer over short distances.
• More heavily discounted: Has been around for much longer (launched in June 2015).

If the count of individual advantages (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the Q Typ 116 is the clear winner of the contest (13 : 6 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.

In any case, while the comparison of the spec-sheets of cameras can offer a general idea of their imaging potential, it says little about, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance of the M-E Typ 240 and the Q Typ 116 in practical situations. User reviews, such as those found at amazon, can sometimes inform about these issues, but such feedback is often incomplete, inconsistent, and biased.

Expert reviews

This is why expert reviews are important. The table below provides a synthesis of the camera assessments of some of the best known photo-gear 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 (USD)	Street Price
1.		Leica M-E Typ 240	..	..	..	..	..	..	Jun 2019	3,999	ebay.com
2.		Leica Q Typ 116	5/5	..	..	80/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2015	4,249	ebay.com
3.		Canon T6i	5/5	..	..	75/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Feb 2015	749	ebay.com
4.		Canon T6s	5/5	+	..	77/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Feb 2015	649	ebay.com
5.		Canon G7 X	4/5	+ +	..	77/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2014	699	ebay.com
6.		Leica M11	4.5/5	..	4.5/5	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jan 2022	8,995	amazon.com
7.		Leica M10-R	4.5/5	..	4/5	..	..	4/5	Jul 2020	8,295	ebay.com
8.		Leica Q2	..	..	4.5/5	84/100	4.5/5	4/5	Mar 2019	4,995	amazon.com
9.		Leica M10-P	..	..	3/5	..	..	4/5	Aug 2018	7,995	ebay.com
10.		Leica M10	4.5/5	..	..	..	4/5	4.5/5	Jan 2017	6,595	ebay.com
11.		Leica M Typ 262	..	..	..	..	..	..	Nov 2015	5,195	ebay.com
12.		Leica M Typ 240	4/5	..	..	..	4/5	..	Sep 2012	6,950	ebay.com
13.		Sony A9 II	..	..	5/5	90/100	5/5	5/5	Oct 2019	4,499	amazon.com
14.		Sony A7 III	..	+ +	4.5/5	89/100	5/5	5/5	Feb 2018	1,999	amazon.com
15.		Sony RX100 IV	4.5/5	+ +	..	85/100	4/5	4.5/5	Jun 2015	999	ebay.com
Note: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available.

The above review scores should be interpreted with care, though. The ratings are only valid when referring to cameras in the same category and of the same age. A score, therefore, has to be seen in close connection to the price and market introduction time 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 M-E Typ 240 offers at
ebay.com
Check Q Typ 116 offers at
ebay.com

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 your choice using the following search menu. As an alternative, you can also directly jump to any one of the listed comparisons that were previously generated by the CAM-parator tool.

~

Check M-E Typ 240 offers at
ebay.com
Check Q Typ 116 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.