Leica M-E Typ 240 vs Q2
The Leica M-E (Typ 240) and the Leica Q2 are two enthusiast cameras that were revealed to the public, respectively, in June 2019 and March 2019. The M-E Typ 240 is a rangefinder-focusing mirrorless camera, while the Q2 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 Q2 provides 46.7 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 Leica M-E (Typ 240) and the Leica Q2? 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 physical size and weight of the Leica M-E Typ 240 and the Leica Q2 are illustrated 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 Leica Q2 is notably smaller (6 percent) than the Leica M-E Typ 240. 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 and possibly misleading, as the Q2 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 Q2 can take 370 images on a single charge of its Leica BP-SCL4 power pack.
The adjacent table lists the principal physical characteristics of the two cameras alongside a wider set of alternatives. 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.
# | 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 Q2 | 130 mm | 80 mm | 92 mm | 718 g | 370 | Y | Mar 2019 | 4,995 | amazon.com | |
3. | Leica Q3 | 130 mm | 80 mm | 93 mm | 743 g | 350 | Y | May 2023 | 5,995 | amazon.com | |
4. | Leica M11 | 139 mm | 80 mm | 39 mm | 640 g | 700 | Y | Jan 2022 | 8,995 | amazon.com | |
5. | Leica M10-R | 139 mm | 80 mm | 39 mm | 660 g | 210 | Y | Jul 2020 | 8,295 | ebay.com | |
6. | Leica M10-P | 139 mm | 80 mm | 39 mm | 660 g | 210 | Y | Aug 2018 | 7,995 | ebay.com | |
7. | Leica M10 | 139 mm | 80 mm | 39 mm | 660 g | 210 | Y | Jan 2017 | 6,595 | ebay.com | |
8. | Leica M Typ 262 | 139 mm | 80 mm | 42 mm | 680 g | 400 | Y | Nov 2015 | 5,195 | ebay.com | |
9. | Leica Q Typ 116 | 130 mm | 80 mm | 93 mm | 640 g | 300 | n | Jun 2015 | 4,249 | ebay.com | |
10. | Leica M Typ 240 | 139 mm | 80 mm | 42 mm | 680 g | 500 | Y | Sep 2012 | 6,950 | ebay.com | |
11. | Sony A9 II | 129 mm | 96 mm | 76 mm | 678 g | 690 | Y | Oct 2019 | 4,499 | amazon.com | |
12. | Sony A7 III | 127 mm | 96 mm | 74 mm | 650 g | 610 | Y | Feb 2018 | 1,999 | amazon.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 naturally be influenced heavily by the price. The retail prices at the time of the camera’s release place the model in the market relative to other models in the producer’s line-up and the competition. 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 imaging sensor is a crucial determinant 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. 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 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 Q2 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 46.7MP, the Q2 offers a higher resolution than the M-E Typ 240 (23.7MP), but the Q2 has smaller individual pixels (pixel pitch of 4.30μm versus 6.01μm for the M-E Typ 240). It is noteworthy in this context that the M-E Typ 240 is a somewhat more recent model (by 3 months) than the Q2, and its sensor might 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 Q2 has no anti-alias filter installed, so that it can capture all the detail its sensor resolves.
The resolution advantage of the Leica Q2 implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the Q2 for good quality output (200 dots per inch) amounts to 41.8 x 27.9 inches or 106.3 x 70.9 cm, for very good quality (250 dpi) 33.5 x 22.3 inches or 85 x 56.7 cm, and for excellent quality (300 dpi) 27.9 x 18.6 inches or 70.8 x 47.3 cm. The corresponding values for the Leica M-E Typ 240 are 29.8 x 19.9 inches or 75.6 x 50.5 cm for good quality, 23.8 x 15.9 inches or 60.5 x 40.4 cm for very good quality, and 19.8 x 13.3 inches or 50.4 x 33.7 cm for excellent quality prints.
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 Q2 are ISO 50 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.
Since 2007, DXO Mark has published sensor performance measurements that have been derived using a consistent methodology. 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 following table provides an overview of the physical sensor characteristics, as well as the sensor quality measurements for a selection of comparators.
# | 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 Q2 | Full Frame | 46.7 | 8368 | 5584 | 4K/30p | 26.4 | 13.5 | 2491 | 96 | |
3. | Leica Q3 | Full Frame | 60.3 | 9528 | 6328 | 8K/30p | 25.4 | 14.7 | 3216 | 96 | |
4. | Leica M11 | Full Frame | 60.3 | 9528 | 6328 | none | 26.3 | 14.8 | 3376 | 100 | |
5. | Leica M10-R | Full Frame | 40.9 | 7864 | 5200 | none | 25.3 | 14.3 | 2924 | 95 | |
6. | Leica M10-P | Full Frame | 23.8 | 5952 | 3992 | none | 25.1 | 14.1 | 2739 | 93 | |
7. | Leica M10 | Full Frame | 23.8 | 5952 | 3992 | none | 24.4 | 13.2 | 2133 | 86 | |
8. | Leica M Typ 262 | Full Frame | 23.7 | 5952 | 3976 | none | 24.8 | 13.7 | 2478 | 90 | |
9. | Leica Q Typ 116 | Full Frame | 24.0 | 6000 | 4000 | 1080/60p | 24.3 | 12.7 | 2221 | 85 | |
10. | Leica M Typ 240 | Full Frame | 23.7 | 5952 | 3976 | 1080/25p | 24.0 | 13.3 | 1860 | 84 | |
11. | Sony A9 II | Full Frame | 24.0 | 6000 | 4000 | 4K/30p | 25.0 | 14.0 | 3434 | 93 | |
12. | Sony A7 III | Full Frame | 24.0 | 6000 | 4000 | 4K/30p | 25.0 | 14.7 | 3730 | 96 | |
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. Both cameras under consideration have a sensor with sufficiently fast read-out times for moving pictures, but the Q2 provides a better video resolution than the M-E Typ 240. It can shoot movie footage at 4K/30p, while the M-E Typ 240 is limited to 1080/25p.
Feature comparison
Beyond body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. For example, the Q2 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 viewfinders of both cameras offer the same field of view (100%), but the viewfinder of the Q2 has a higher magnification than the one of the M-E Typ 240 (0.76x vs 0.68x), so that the size of the image transmitted appears closer to the size seen with the naked human eye. The adjacent table lists some of the other core features of the Leica M-E Typ 240 and Leica Q2 along with similar information for a selection of comparators.
# | 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 Q2 | 3680 | n | 3.0 / 1040 | fixed | Y | 1/2000s | 10.0/s | n | Y | |
3. | Leica Q3 | 5760 | n | 3.0 / 1840 | tilting | Y | 1/2000s | 15.0/s | n | Y | |
4. | Leica M11 | optical | n | 3.0 / 2333 | fixed | Y | 1/4000s | 4.5/s | n | n | |
5. | Leica M10-R | optical | n | 3.0 / 1037 | fixed | Y | 1/4000s | 4.5/s | n | n | |
6. | Leica M10-P | optical | n | 3.0 / 1037 | fixed | Y | 1/4000s | 5.0/s | n | n | |
7. | Leica M10 | optical | n | 3.0 / 1037 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 5.0/s | n | n | |
8. | Leica M Typ 262 | optical | n | 3.0 / 921 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | n | n | |
9. | Leica Q Typ 116 | 3680 | n | 3.0 / 1040 | fixed | Y | 1/2000s | 10.0/s | n | Y | |
10. | Leica M Typ 240 | optical | n | 3.0 / 920 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | n | n | |
11. | Sony A9 II | 3686 | n | 3.0 / 1440 | tilting | Y | 1/8000s | 20.0/s | n | Y | |
12. | Sony A7 III | 2359 | n | 3.0 / 922 | tilting | Y | 1/8000s | 10.0/s | n | 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 Q2 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 Q2 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 Q2 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 Q2 write their files to SDXC cards. The Q2 supports UHS-II cards (Ultra High Speed data transfer of up to 312 MB/s), while the M-E Typ 240 can use UHS-I cards (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 Q2 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. | Leica M-E Typ 240 | Y | mono / - | - | - | - | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
2. | Leica Q2 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | - | - | Y | - | Y | |
3. | Leica Q3 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 3.1 | Y | - | Y | |
4. | Leica M11 | Y | - / - | - | - | - | 3.2 | Y | - | Y | |
5. | Leica M10-R | Y | - / - | - | - | - | - | Y | - | - | |
6. | Leica M10-P | Y | - / - | - | - | - | - | Y | - | - | |
7. | Leica M10 | Y | - / - | - | - | - | - | Y | - | - | |
8. | Leica M Typ 262 | Y | - / - | - | - | - | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
9. | Leica Q Typ 116 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | Y | - | |
10. | Leica M Typ 240 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | - | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
11. | Sony A9 II | Y | stereo / mono | Y | Y | micro | 3.1 | Y | Y | Y | |
12. | Sony A7 III | Y | stereo / mono | Y | Y | micro | 3.1 | Y | Y | Y |
It is notable that the Q2 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.
The Q2 is a recent model that features in the current product line-up of Leica. In contrast, the M-E Typ 240 has been discontinued (but can be found pre-owned on ebay). There has not been a direct replacement model for the M-E Typ 240 from Leica. 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 what conclusions can be drawn? Is there a clear favorite between the Leica M-E Typ 240 and the Leica Q2? Which camera is better? The listing below highlights the relative strengths of the two models.
Arguments in favor of the Leica M-E (Typ 240):
- Better moiré control: Has an anti-alias filter to avoid artificial patterns to appear in images.
- 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 370) on a single battery charge.
- More modern: Is somewhat more recent (announced 3 months after the Q2).
Advantages of the Leica Q2:
- More detail: Has more megapixels (46.7 vs 23.7MP), which boosts linear resolution by 41%.
- Maximized detail: Lacks an anti-alias filter to exploit the sensor's full resolution potential.
- Better video: Provides higher definition movie capture (4K/30p vs 1080/25p).
- More framing info: Has an electronic viewfinder that displays shooting data.
- Larger viewfinder image: Features a viewfinder with a higher magnification (0.76x vs 0.68x).
- 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.
- 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 wireless transfer: Supports Bluetooth for image sharing without cables.
- Faster buffer clearing: Supports a more advanced SD data transfer standard (UHS-II vs UHS-I).
- More heavily discounted: Has been on the market for longer (launched in March 2019).
If the count of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a measure, the Q2 is the clear winner of the contest (16 : 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 remains incomplete and does no justice, for example, to the way the M-E Typ 240 or the Q2 perform in practice. 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 where reviews by experts come in. 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.
# | 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 Q2 | .. | .. | 4.5/5 | 84/100 | 4.5/5 | 4/5 | Mar 2019 | 4,995 | amazon.com | |
3. | Leica Q3 | 5/5 | .. | 4.5/5 | .. | .. | 4.5/5 | May 2023 | 5,995 | amazon.com | |
4. | Leica M11 | 4.5/5 | .. | 4.5/5 | .. | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jan 2022 | 8,995 | amazon.com | |
5. | Leica M10-R | 4.5/5 | .. | 4/5 | .. | .. | 4/5 | Jul 2020 | 8,295 | ebay.com | |
6. | Leica M10-P | .. | .. | 3/5 | .. | .. | 4/5 | Aug 2018 | 7,995 | ebay.com | |
7. | Leica M10 | 4.5/5 | .. | .. | .. | 4/5 | 4.5/5 | Jan 2017 | 6,595 | ebay.com | |
8. | Leica M Typ 262 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | Nov 2015 | 5,195 | ebay.com | |
9. | Leica Q Typ 116 | 5/5 | .. | .. | 80/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jun 2015 | 4,249 | ebay.com | |
10. | Leica M Typ 240 | 4/5 | .. | .. | .. | 4/5 | .. | Sep 2012 | 6,950 | ebay.com | |
11. | Sony A9 II | .. | .. | 5/5 | 90/100 | 5/5 | 5/5 | Oct 2019 | 4,499 | amazon.com | |
12. | Sony A7 III | .. | + + | 4.5/5 | 89/100 | 5/5 | 5/5 | Feb 2018 | 1,999 | amazon.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 comparisons of ratings among very different cameras or across long time periods have little meaning. 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? In case you would like to check on the differences and similarities of other camera models, just use the search menu below. As an alternative, you can also directly jump to any one of the listed comparisons that were previously generated by the CAM-parator tool.
- Canon G1 X Mark II vs Leica Q2
- Canon G1 X Mark III vs Leica M-E Typ 240
- Fujifilm X-T20 vs Leica M-E Typ 240
- Hasselblad X2D 100C vs Leica Q2
- Leica M-E Typ 240 vs Panasonic G7
- Leica M-E Typ 240 vs Panasonic GF2
- Leica M-E Typ 240 vs Sony A900
- Leica M-E Typ 240 vs Sony H400
- Leica Q2 vs Nikon Z50
- Leica Q2 vs Panasonic FZ100
- Leica Q2 vs Sony RX10 II
- Leica Q2 vs Sony WX800
Specifications: Leica M-E Typ 240 vs Leica Q2
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 | Leica M-E Typ 240 | Leica Q2 |
---|---|---|
Camera Type | Rangefinder camera | Fixed lens compact camera |
Camera Lens | Leica M mount lenses | 28mm f/1.7 |
Launch Date | June 2019 | March 2019 |
Launch Price | USD 3,999 | USD 4,995 |
Sensor Specs | Leica M-E Typ 240 | Leica Q2 |
Sensor Technology | CMOS | CMOS |
Sensor Format | Full Frame Sensor | Full Frame Sensor |
Sensor Size | 35.8 x 23.9 mm | 36.0 x 24.0 mm |
Sensor Area | 855.62 mm2 | 864 mm2 |
Sensor Diagonal | 43 mm | 43.3 mm |
Crop Factor | 1.0x | 1.0x |
Sensor Resolution | 23.7 Megapixels | 46.7 Megapixels |
Image Resolution | 5952 x 3976 pixels | 8368 x 5584 pixels |
Pixel Pitch | 6.01 μm | 4.30 μm |
Pixel Density | 2.77 MP/cm2 | 5.41 MP/cm2 |
Moiré control | Anti-Alias filter | no AA filter |
Movie Capability | 1080/25p Video | 4K/30p Video |
ISO Setting | 200 - 6,400 ISO | 50 - 50,000 ISO |
ISO Boost | 100 - 6,400 ISO | no Enhancement |
DXO Sensor Quality (score) | .. | 96 |
DXO Color Depth (bits) | .. | 26.4 |
DXO Dynamic Range (EV) | .. | 13.5 |
DXO Low Light (ISO) | .. | 2491 |
Screen Specs | Leica M-E Typ 240 | Leica Q2 |
Viewfinder Type | Optical viewfinder | Electronic viewfinder |
Viewfinder Field of View | 100% | 100% |
Viewfinder Magnification | 0.68x | 0.76x |
Viewfinder Resolution | 3680k dots | |
LCD Framing | Live View | Live View |
Rear LCD Size | 3.0inch | 3.0inch |
LCD Resolution | 920k dots | 1040k dots |
LCD Attachment | Fixed screen | Fixed screen |
Touch Input | no Touchscreen | Touchscreen |
Shooting Specs | Leica M-E Typ 240 | Leica Q2 |
Focus System | Manual Focus | Contrast-detect AF |
Manual Focusing Aid | Focus Peaking | Focus Peaking |
Max Shutter Speed (mechanical) | 1/4000s | 1/2000s |
Continuous Shooting | 3 shutter flaps/s | 10 shutter flaps/s |
Electronic Shutter | no E-Shutter | up to 1/40000s |
Time-Lapse Photography | no Intervalometer | Intervalometer built-in |
Fill Flash | no On-Board Flash | no On-Board Flash |
Storage Medium | SDXC cards | SDXC cards |
Single or Dual Card Slots | Single card slot | Single card slot |
UHS card support | UHS-I | UHS-II |
Connectivity Specs | Leica M-E Typ 240 | Leica Q2 |
External Flash | Hotshoe | Hotshoe |
USB Connector | USB 2.0 | no USB |
HDMI Port | no HDMI | no HDMI |
Wifi Support | no Wifi | Wifi built-in |
Bluetooth Support | no Bluetooth | Bluetooth built-in |
Body Specs | Leica M-E Typ 240 | Leica Q2 |
Environmental Sealing | Weathersealed body | Weathersealed body |
Battery Type | Leica BP-SCL2 | Leica BP-SCL4 |
Battery Life (CIPA) | 500 shots per charge | 370 shots per charge |
Body Dimensions |
139 x 80 x 42 mm (5.5 x 3.1 x 1.7 in) |
130 x 80 x 92 mm (5.1 x 3.1 x 3.6 in) |
Camera Weight | 680 g (24.0 oz) | 718 g (25.3 oz) |
Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.