Leica M-E Typ 240 vs Olympus E-M5 II

The Leica M-E (Typ 240) and the Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark II are two enthusiast cameras that were announced, respectively, in June 2019 and February 2015. The M-E Typ 240 is a rangefinder-focusing mirrorless, while the E-M5 II is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera. The cameras are based on a full frame (M-E Typ 240) and a Four Thirds (E-M5 II) sensor. The Leica has a resolution of 23.7 megapixels, whereas the Olympus provides 15.9 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		Olympus E-M5 II
Rangefinder camera		Mirrorless system camera
Leica M mount lenses		Micro Four Thirds lenses
23.7 MP – Full Frame sensor		15.9 MP – Four Thirds sensor
1080/25p Video		1080/60p Video
ISO 200-6,400		ISO 200-25,600
Optical viewfinder		Electronic viewfinder (2360k dots)
3.0" LCD – 920k dots		3.0" LCD – 1037k dots
Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)		Swivel touchscreen
3 shutter flaps per second		10 shutter flaps per second
no shake reduction		In-body stabilization
Weathersealed body		Weathersealed body
500 shots per battery charge		310 shots per battery charge
139 x 80 x 42 mm, 680 g		124 x 85 x 45 mm, 469 g

Check M-E Typ 240 offers at
ebay.com
Check E-M5 II 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 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark II? 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 Leica M-E Typ 240 and the Olympus E-M5 II 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.

The E-M5 II 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 Olympus E-M5 II is notably smaller (5 percent) than the Leica M-E Typ 240. Moreover, the E-M5 II is markedly lighter (31 percent) than the 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 since they do not consider the interchangeable lenses that both of these cameras require. A larger imaging sensor will tend to go along with bigger and heavier lenses, although exceptions exist. You can compare the optics available for the two cameras in the Leica M Lens Catalog (M-E Typ 240) and the Micro Four Thirds Lens Catalog (E-M5 II).

Concerning battery life, the M-E Typ 240 gets 500 shots out of its Leica BP-SCL2 battery, while the E-M5 II can take 310 images on a single charge of its Olympus BLN-1 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.

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.		Olympus E-M5 II	124 mm	85 mm	45 mm	469 g	310	Y	Feb 2015	1,099	ebay.com
3.		Leica M11	139 mm	80 mm	39 mm	640 g	700	Y	Jan 2022	8,995	amazon.com
4.		Leica M10-R	139 mm	80 mm	39 mm	660 g	210	Y	Jul 2020	8,295	ebay.com
5.		Leica Q2	130 mm	80 mm	92 mm	718 g	370	Y	Mar 2019	4,995	amazon.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.		Olympus E-M5 III	125 mm	85 mm	50 mm	414 g	310	Y	Oct 2019	1,199	ebay.com
12.		Olympus E-M10 II	120 mm	83 mm	47 mm	390 g	320	n	Aug 2015	649	ebay.com
13.		Olympus E-M10	119 mm	82 mm	46 mm	396 g	320	n	Jan 2014	699	ebay.com
14.		Olympus E-M1	130 mm	94 mm	63 mm	497 g	350	Y	Sep 2013	1,399	ebay.com
15.		Olympus E-M5	122 mm	89 mm	43 mm	425 g	360	Y	Feb 2012	1,299	ebay.com
16.		Sony A9 II	129 mm	96 mm	76 mm	678 g	690	Y	Oct 2019	4,499	amazon.com
17.		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.
Convert to Imperial

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. The E-M5 II was launched at a markedly lower price (by 73 percent) than the M-E Typ 240, 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 size of the sensor inside a digital camera is one of the key determinants 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. 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 are more costly to manufacture and tend to lead to bigger and heavier cameras and lenses.

Of the two cameras under consideration, the Leica M-E Typ 240 features a full frame sensor and the Olympus E-M5 II a Four Thirds sensor. The sensor area in the E-M5 II is 74 percent smaller. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 1.0 and 2.0. The sensor in the M-E Typ 240 has a native 3:2 aspect ratio, while the one in the E-M5 II offers a 4:3 aspect.

With 23.7MP, the M-E Typ 240 offers a higher resolution than the E-M5 II (15.9MP), but the M-E Typ 240 nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 6.01μm versus 3.76μm for the E-M5 II) due to its larger sensor. Moreover, the M-E Typ 240 is a much more recent model (by 4 years and 4 months) than the E-M5 II, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that further enhance the light gathering capacity of its pixels.

The resolution advantage of the Leica M-E Typ 240 implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the M-E Typ 240 for good quality output (200 dots per inch) amounts to 29.8 x 19.9 inches or 75.6 x 50.5 cm, for very good quality (250 dpi) 23.8 x 15.9 inches or 60.5 x 40.4 cm, and for excellent quality (300 dpi) 19.8 x 13.3 inches or 50.4 x 33.7 cm. The corresponding values for the Olympus E-M5 II are 23 x 17.3 inches or 58.5 x 43.9 cm for good quality, 18.4 x 13.8 inches or 46.8 x 35.1 cm for very good quality, and 15.4 x 11.5 inches or 39 x 29.3 cm for excellent quality prints.

Unlike the M-E Typ 240, the E-M5 II has the capacity to capture high quality composite images (40MP) by combining multiple shots after shifting its sensor by miniscule distances. This multi-shot, pixel-shift mode is most suitable for photography of stationary objects (landscapes, studio scenes).

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 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark II are ISO 200 to ISO 25600, with the possibility to increase the ISO range to 100-25600.

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 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. The table below summarizes the physical sensor characteristics and sensor quality findings and compares them across a set of similar 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.		Olympus E-M5 II	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/60p	23.0	12.5	842	73
3.		Leica M11	Full Frame	60.3	9528	6328	none	26.3	14.8	3376	100
4.		Leica M10-R	Full Frame	40.9	7864	5200	none	25.3	14.3	2924	95
5.		Leica Q2	Full Frame	46.7	8368	5584	4K/30p	26.4	13.5	2491	96
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.		Olympus E-M5 III	Four Thirds	20.2	5184	3888	4K/30p	23.3	13.1	1324	76
12.		Olympus E-M10 II	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/60p	23.1	12.5	842	73
13.		Olympus E-M10	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	22.8	12.3	884	72
14.		Olympus E-M1	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	23.0	12.7	757	73
15.		Olympus E-M5	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/60i	22.8	12.3	826	71
16.		Sony A9 II	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	4K/30p	25.0	14.0	3434	93
17.		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 can also record movies. The two cameras under consideration both have sensors whose read-out speed is fast enough to capture moving pictures, but the E-M5 II provides a faster frame rate than the M-E Typ 240. It can shoot movie footage at 1080/60p, while the Leica is limited to 1080/25p.

Feature comparison

Beyond body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. For example, the E-M5 II has an electronic viewfinder (2360k 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 E-M5 II has a higher magnification than the one of the M-E Typ 240 (0.74x 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 Olympus E-M5 II 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.		Olympus E-M5 II	2360	n	3.0 / 1037	swivel	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
3.		Leica M11	optical	n	3.0 / 2333	fixed	Y	1/4000s	4.5/s	n	n
4.		Leica M10-R	optical	n	3.0 / 1037	fixed	Y	1/4000s	4.5/s	n	n
5.		Leica Q2	3680	n	3.0 / 1040	fixed	Y	1/2000s	10.0/s	n	Y
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.		Olympus E-M5 III	2360	n	3.0 / 1040	swivel	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
12.		Olympus E-M10 II	2360	n	3.0 / 1040	tilting	Y	1/4000s	8.0/s	Y	Y
13.		Olympus E-M10	1440	n	3.0 / 1037	tilting	Y	1/4000s	8.0/s	Y	Y
14.		Olympus E-M1	2360	n	3.0 / 1037	tilting	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
15.		Olympus E-M5	1440	n	3.0 / 610	tilting	Y	1/4000s	9.0/s	n	Y
16.		Sony A9 II	3686	n	3.0 / 1440	tilting	Y	1/8000s	20.0/s	n	Y
17.		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 E-M5 II 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 E-M5 II 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 Olympus E-M5 II 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 E-M5 II write their files to SDXC cards. The E-M5 II 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 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark II 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.		Olympus E-M5 II	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
3.		Leica M11	Y	- / -	-	-	-	3.2	Y	-	Y
4.		Leica M10-R	Y	- / -	-	-	-	-	Y	-	-
5.		Leica Q2	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	-	-	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.		Olympus E-M5 III	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	Y
12.		Olympus E-M10 II	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
13.		Olympus E-M10	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
14.		Olympus E-M1	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
15.		Olympus E-M5	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
16.		Sony A9 II	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.1	Y	Y	Y
17.		Sony A7 III	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.1	Y	Y	Y

It is notable that the E-M5 II 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.

Studio photographers will appreciate that the Olympus E-M5 II (unlike the M-E Typ 240) features a PC Sync socket, so that professional strobe lights can be controlled by the camera.

Both the M-E Typ 240 and the E-M5 II have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The E-M5 II was replaced by the Olympus E-M5 III, 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 and Olympus websites.

Review summary

So how do things add up? Is there a clear favorite between the Leica M-E Typ 240 and the Olympus E-M5 II? 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):

• More detail: Offers more megapixels (23.7 vs 15.9MP) with a 24% higher linear resolution.
• Better image quality: Features a larger and more technologically advanced imaging sensor.
• Richer colors: The sensor size advantage translates into images with better, more accurate colors.
• More dynamic range: Larger sensor captures a wider spectrum of light and dark details.
• Better low-light sensitivity: Larger sensor produces good images even in poorly lit environments.
• Brighter framing: Features an optical viewfinder for clear, lag-free composition.
• Longer lasting: Can take more shots (500 versus 310) on a single battery charge.
• More prestigious: Has the Leica luxury appeal, which ensures a high resale price.
• More modern: Reflects 4 years and 4 months of technical progress since the E-M5 II launch.

Advantages of the Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark II:

• High quality composites: Can combine several shots after pixel-shifting its sensor.
• Better video: Provides higher movie framerates (1080/60p versus 1080/25p).
• Better sound: Can connect to an external microphone for higher quality sound recording.
• More framing info: Has an electronic viewfinder that displays shooting data.
• Larger viewfinder image: Features a viewfinder with a higher magnification (0.74x vs 0.68x).
• More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1037k vs 920k dots).
• More flexible LCD: Has a swivel screen for odd-angle shots in portrait or landscape orientation.
• Fewer buttons to press: Has a touchscreen to facilitate handling and shooting adjustments.
• 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 (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.
• Less heavy: Has a lower weight (by 211g or 31 percent) and is thus easier to take along.
• 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.
• Better studio light control: Has a PC Sync socket to connect to professional strobe lights.
• Faster buffer clearing: Supports a more advanced SD data transfer standard (UHS-II vs UHS-I).
• More affordable: Was introduced into a lower priced category (73 percent cheaper at launch).
• More heavily discounted: Has been around for much longer (launched in February 2015).

If the number of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the E-M5 II is the clear winner of the contest (20 : 9 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. 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 E-M5 II perform in practice. At times, user reviews, such as those published at amazon, address these issues in a useful manner, but such feedback is on many occasions incomplete, inconsistent, and unreliable.

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.

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.		Olympus E-M5 II	5/5	+ +	4.5/5	81/100	5/5	5/5	Feb 2015	1,099	ebay.com
3.		Leica M11	4.5/5	..	4.5/5	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jan 2022	8,995	amazon.com
4.		Leica M10-R	4.5/5	..	4/5	..	..	4/5	Jul 2020	8,295	ebay.com
5.		Leica Q2	..	..	4.5/5	84/100	4.5/5	4/5	Mar 2019	4,995	amazon.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.		Olympus E-M5 III	5/5	+	5/5	82/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Oct 2019	1,199	ebay.com
12.		Olympus E-M10 II	4.5/5	+ +	..	80/100	5/5	5/5	Aug 2015	649	ebay.com
13.		Olympus E-M10	4/5	..	..	80/100	5/5	5/5	Jan 2014	699	ebay.com
14.		Olympus E-M1	5/5	+ +	..	84/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2013	1,399	ebay.com
15.		Olympus E-M5	4/5	+ +	..	80/100	4.5/5	5/5	Feb 2012	1,299	ebay.com
16.		Sony A9 II	..	..	5/5	90/100	5/5	5/5	Oct 2019	4,499	amazon.com
17.		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, kindly note that some of the listed sites have over time developped their review approaches and their reporting style.

Check M-E Typ 240 offers at
ebay.com
Check E-M5 II offers at
ebay.com

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.

~

Check M-E Typ 240 offers at
ebay.com
Check E-M5 II 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.