Leica S1 Tamron Camera Ranking
APO-Telyt Module Vivitar Shutter count
A potelyt.com – Photography & Imaging Resources
ad
PW

Leica M-E Typ 240 vs Olympus Stylus 1

The Leica M-E (Typ 240) and the Olympus Stylus 1 are two digital cameras that were revealed to the public, respectively, in June 2019 and October 2013. The M-E Typ 240 is a rangefinder-style mirrorless camera, while the Stylus 1 is a fixed lens compact. The cameras are based on a full frame (M-E Typ 240) and a 1/1.7-inch (Stylus 1) sensor. The Leica has a resolution of 23.7 megapixels, whereas the Olympus provides 11.8 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 versus Olympus Stylus 1
Leica M-E Typ 240 Olympus Stylus 1
Rangefinder camera Fixed lens compact camera
Leica M mount lenses 28-300mm f/2.8
23.7 MP, Full Frame Sensor 11.8 MP, 1/1.7" Sensor
1080/25p Video 1080/30p Video
ISO 200-6,400 ISO 100-12,800
Optical viewfinder Electronic viewfinder (1440k dots)
3.0 LCD, 920k dots 3.0 LCD, 1040k dots
Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive) Tilting touchscreen
3 shutter flaps per second 7 shutter flaps per second
Weathersealed bodynot weather sealed
139 x 80 x 42 mm, 680 g 116 x 87 x 57 mm, 402 g

Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Leica M-E (Typ 240) and the Olympus Stylus 1? 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 Olympus Stylus 1. 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 measures are rounded to the nearest millimeter.

Size Leica M-E Typ 240 vs Olympus Stylus 1
Compare M-E Typ 240 versus Stylus 1 top
Comparison M-E Typ 240 or Stylus 1 rear

If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Olympus Stylus 1 is notably smaller (9 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 Stylus 1 does not feature any corresponding weather-sealing.

The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete and possibly misleading, as the Stylus 1 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.

The table below summarizes the key physical specs of the two cameras alongside a broader set of comparators. If you would like to visualize and compare a different camera combination, you can navigate to the CAM-parator app and make your selection from a broad list of cameras there.

scroll hint
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 5.5 in 3.1 in 1.7 in 24.0 oz .. Y Jun 2019 3,999 i
2.
 
Olympus Stylus 1 4.6 in 3.4 in 2.2 in 14.2 oz 410 n Oct 2013 699i
3.
 
Canon G1 X Mark II 4.6 in 2.9 in 2.6 in 19.5 oz 240 n Feb 2014 799i
4.
 
Canon G16 4.3 in 3.0 in 1.6 in 12.6 oz 360 n Aug 2013 549 i
5.
 
Leica M10-R 5.5 in 3.1 in 1.5 in 23.3 oz 210 Y Jul 2020 8,295 i
6.
 
Leica Q2 5.1 in 3.1 in 3.6 in 25.3 oz 370 Y Mar 2019 4,995 i
7.
 
Leica M10-P 5.5 in 3.1 in 1.5 in 23.3 oz 210 Y Aug 2018 7,995 i
8.
 
Leica M10 5.5 in 3.1 in 1.5 in 23.3 oz 210 Y Jan 2017 6,595 i
9.
 
Leica M Typ 262 5.5 in 3.1 in 1.7 in 24.0 oz .. Y Nov 2015 5,195i
10.
 
Leica Q Typ 116 5.1 in 3.1 in 3.7 in 22.6 oz 300 n Jun 2015 4,249i
11.
 
Leica M Typ 240 5.5 in 3.1 in 1.7 in 24.0 oz .. Y Sep 2012 6,950i
12.
 
Nikon Z6 5.3 in 4.0 in 2.6 in 23.8 oz 310 Y Aug 2018 1,999i
13.
 
Nikon P7800 4.7 in 3.1 in 2.0 in 14.1 oz 350 n Sep 2013 549i
14.
 
Olympus Stylus 1s 4.6 in 3.4 in 2.2 in 14.2 oz 450 n Apr 2015 699 i
15.
 
Olympus XZ-2 4.4 in 2.6 in 1.9 in 12.2 oz 340 n Sep 2012 599i
16.
 
Sony A9 II 5.1 in 3.8 in 3.0 in 23.9 oz 690 Y Oct 2019 4,499 i
17.
 
Sony A7 III 5.0 in 3.8 in 2.9 in 22.9 oz 610 Y Feb 2018 1,999 i
Notes: 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 manufacturer’s suggested retail prices give an idea on the placement of the camera in the maker’s lineup and the broader market. The Stylus 1 was launched at a lower price than the M-E Typ 240, despite having a lens built 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.

ad

Sensor comparison

The imaging sensor is at the core of digital cameras and its size is one of the main determining factors 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. Moreover, a large sensor camera will give the photographer more control over depth-of-field in the image and, thus, the ability to better 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 Stylus 1 a 1/1.7-inch sensor. The sensor area in the Stylus 1 is 95 percent smaller. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 1.0 and 4.5. The sensor in the M-E Typ 240 has a native 3:2 aspect ratio, while the one in the Stylus 1 offers a 4:3 aspect.

Leica M-E Typ 240 and Olympus Stylus 1 sensor measures

With 23.7MP, the M-E Typ 240 offers a higher resolution than the Stylus 1 (11.8MP), but the M-E Typ 240 nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 6.01μm versus 1.91μm for the Stylus 1) due to its larger sensor. Moreover, the M-E Typ 240 is a much more recent model (by 5 years and 7 months) than the Stylus 1, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that further enhance the light gathering capacity of its pixels. Coming back to sensor resolution, it should be mentioned that the Stylus 1 has no anti-alias filter installed, so that it can capture all the detail its sensor resolves.

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 Stylus 1 are 19.8 x 14.9 inches or 50.4 x 37.8 cm for good quality, 15.9 x 11.9 inches or 40.3 x 30.2 cm for very good quality, and 13.2 x 9.9 inches or 33.6 x 25.2 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 Olympus Stylus 1 are ISO 100 to ISO 12800 (no boost).

M-E Typ 240 versus Stylus 1 MP

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 table below summarizes the physical sensor characteristics and sensor quality findings and compares them across a set of similar cameras.

scroll hint
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 39761080/25p........
2.
 
Olympus Stylus 1 1/1.7 11.8 3968 29761080/30p20.711.617951
3.
 
Canon G1 X Mark II 1.5-inch 13.0 4160 31201080/30p21.510.858158
4.
 
Canon G16 1/1.7 12.0 4000 30001080/60p21.011.723054
5.
 
Leica M10-R Full Frame 40.9 7864 5200none........
6.
 
Leica Q2 Full Frame 46.7 8368 55844K/30p26.413.5249196
7.
 
Leica M10-P Full Frame 23.8 5952 3992none........
8.
 
Leica M10 Full Frame 23.8 5952 3992none24.413.2213386
9.
 
Leica M Typ 262 Full Frame 23.7 5952 3976none........
10.
 
Leica Q Typ 116 Full Frame 24.0 6000 40001080/60p24.312.7222185
11.
 
Leica M Typ 240 Full Frame 23.7 5952 39761080/25p24.013.3186084
12.
 
Nikon Z6 Full Frame 24.3 6048 40244K/30p25.314.3329995
13.
 
Nikon P7800 1/1.7 12.0 4000 30001080/30p21.211.720054
14.
 
Olympus Stylus 1s 1/1.7 11.8 3968 29761080/30p........
15.
 
Olympus XZ-2 1/1.7 11.8 3968 29761080/30p20.411.321649
16.
 
Sony A9 II Full Frame 24.0 6000 40004K/30p25.014.0343493
17.
 
Sony A7 III Full Frame 24.0 6000 40004K/30p25.014.7373096

Many modern cameras are not only capable of taking still images, but also of capturing video footage. Both cameras under consideration are equipped with sensors that have a sufficiently high read-out speed for moving images, but the Stylus 1 provides a faster frame rate than the M-E Typ 240. It can shoot movie footage at 1080/30p, while the Leica is limited to 1080/25p.

ad

Feature comparison

Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. For example, the Stylus 1 has an electronic viewfinder (1440k 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 M-E Typ 240 has a higher magnification than the one of the Stylus 1 (0.68x vs 0.58x), so that the size of the image transmitted appears closer to the size seen with the naked human eye. The table below summarizes some of the other core capabilities of the Leica M-E Typ 240 and Olympus Stylus 1 in connection with corresponding information for a sample of similar cameras.

scroll hint
Core Features
    Camera
Model
Viewfinder
(Type or
000 dots)
Control
Panel
(yes/no)
LCD
Size
(inch)
LCD
Resolution
(000 dots)
LCD
Attach-
ment
Touch
Screen
(yes/no)
Mech
Shutter
Speed
Shutter
Flaps
(1/sec)
Built-in
Flash
(yes/no)
Built-in
Image
Stab
1.
 
Leica M-E Typ 240optical n 3.0 920 fixed n 1/4000s 3.0 n n
2.
 
Olympus Stylus 11440 n 3.0 1040 tilting Y 1/2000s 7.0 Y Y
3.
 
Canon G1 X Mark IIoptional n 3.0 1040 tilting Y 1/4000s 5.2 Y Y
4.
 
Canon G16optical n 3.0 922 fixed n 1/4000s 2.2 Y Y
5.
 
Leica M10-Roptical n 3.0 1037 fixed Y 1/4000s 4.5 n n
6.
 
Leica Q23680 n 3.0 1040 fixed Y 1/2000s 20.0 n Y
7.
 
Leica M10-Poptical n 3.0 1037 fixed Y 1/4000s 5.0 n n
8.
 
Leica M10optical n 3.0 1037 fixed n 1/4000s 5.0 n n
9.
 
Leica M Typ 262optical n 3.0 921 fixed n 1/4000s 3.0 n n
10.
 
Leica Q Typ 1163680 n 3.0 1040 fixed Y 1/2000s 10.0 n Y
11.
 
Leica M Typ 240optical n 3.0 920 fixed n 1/4000s 3.0 n n
12.
 
Nikon Z63690 Y 3.2 2100 tilting Y 1/8000s 12.0 n Y
13.
 
Nikon P7800921 n 3.0 921 swivel n 1/4000s 8.0 Y Y
14.
 
Olympus Stylus 1s1440 n 3.0 1040 tilting Y 1/2000s 7.0 Y Y
15.
 
Olympus XZ-2optional n 3.0 920 tilting Y 1/2000s 5.0 Y Y
16.
 
Sony A9 II3686 n 3.0 1440 tilting Y 1/8000s 10.0 n Y
17.
 
Sony A7 III2359 n 3.0 922 tilting Y 1/8000s 10.0 n Y

One differentiating feature between the two cameras concerns the touch sensitivity of the rear screen. The Stylus 1 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 Olympus Stylus 1 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 Stylus 1 write their files to SDXC cards. The M-E Typ 240 supports UHS-I cards (Ultra High Speed data transfer of up to 104 MB/s), while the Stylus 1 cannot take advantage of Ultra High Speed SD cards.

ad

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 Stylus 1 and, in particular, the interfaces the cameras (and selected comparators) provide for accessory control and data transfer.

scroll hint
Input-Output Connections
    Camera
Model
Hotshoe
Port
Internal
Microphone
Internal
Speaker
Microphone
Port
Headphone
Port
HDMI
Port
USB
Port
WiFi
Support
NFC
Support
Bluetooth
Support
1.
 
Leica M-E Typ 240Ymono----2.0---
2.
 
Olympus Stylus 1Ystereomono--micro2.0Y--
3.
 
Canon G1 X Mark IIYstereomono--mini2.0YY-
4.
 
Canon G16Ystereomono--mini2.0Y--
5.
 
Leica M10-RY------Y--
6.
 
Leica Q2Ystereomono----Y-Y
7.
 
Leica M10-PY------Y--
8.
 
Leica M10Y------Y--
9.
 
Leica M Typ 262Y-----2.0---
10.
 
Leica Q Typ 116Ystereomono--micro2.0YY-
11.
 
Leica M Typ 240Ystereomono---2.0---
12.
 
Nikon Z6YstereomonoYYmicro3.1Y-Y
13.
 
Nikon P7800YstereomonoY-mini2.0---
14.
 
Olympus Stylus 1sYstereomono--micro2.0Y--
15.
 
Olympus XZ-2Ystereomono--mini2.0---
16.
 
Sony A9 IIYstereomonoYYmicro3.1YYY
17.
 
Sony A7 IIIYstereomonoYYmicro3.1YYY

It is notable that the Stylus 1 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 M-E Typ 240 is a recent model that features in the current product line-up of Leica. In contrast, the Stylus 1 has been discontinued (but can be found pre-owned on eBay). As a replacement in the same line of cameras, the Stylus 1 was succeeded by the Olympus Stylus 1s. 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.

ad

Review summary

So what is the bottom line? Which of the two cameras – the Leica M-E Typ 240 or the Olympus Stylus 1 – 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.

ilogo

Advantages of the Leica M-E (Typ 240):

  • More detail: Offers more megapixels (23.7 vs 11.8MP) with a 44% higher linear resolution.
  • Better moiré control: Has an anti-alias filter to avoid artificial patterns to appear in images.
  • 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.
  • Larger viewfinder image: Features a viewfinder with a higher magnification (0.68x vs 0.58x).
  • 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.
  • Better sealing: Is weather sealed to enable shooting in dusty or wet environments.
  • Faster buffer clearing: Has an SD card interface that supports the UHS-I standard.
  • More prestigious: Has the Leica luxury appeal, which ensures a high resale price.
  • More modern: Reflects 5 years and 7 months of technical progress since the Stylus 1 launch.

ilogo

Reasons to prefer the Olympus Stylus 1:

  • Maximized detail: Lacks an anti-alias filter to exploit the sensor's full resolution potential.
  • Better video: Provides higher movie framerates (1080/30p 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).
  • More flexible LCD: Has a tilting screen for odd-angle shots in landscape orientation.
  • Fewer buttons to press: Has a touchscreen to facilitate handling and shooting adjustments.
  • Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (7 vs 3 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
  • 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 fill-in: Has a small integrated flash to brighten shadows of backlit subjects.
  • Easier file upload: Has wifi built in for automatic backup or image transfer to the web.
  • More affordable: Was introduced at a lower price, despite coming with a built-in lens.
  • More heavily discounted: Has been around for much longer (launched in October 2013).

If the number of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the Stylus 1 comes out slightly ahead of the M-E Typ 240 (15 : 14 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.

M-E Typ 240 14:15 Stylus 1

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 Stylus 1 in practical situations. 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 adjacent summary-table relays the overall verdicts of several of the most popular camera review sites (amateurphotographer [AP], cameralabs [CL], 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.

scroll hint
Expert Camera Reviews
     Camera 
 Model 
 AP 
 score 
 CL 
 score 
 DPR 
 score 
 EPZ 
 score 
 PB 
 score 
Camera
Launch
Launch
Price (USD)
Street
Price
1.
 
Leica M-E Typ 240.......... Jun 2019 3,999 i
2.
 
Olympus Stylus 1..+ +..4.5/54.5/5 Oct 2013 699i
3.
 
Canon G1 X Mark II3/5+77/1004/54.5/5 Feb 2014 799i
4.
 
Canon G164/5+..4.5/54.5/5 Aug 2013 549 i
5.
 
Leica M10-R4.5/5......4/5 Jul 2020 8,295 i
6.
 
Leica Q2....84/1004.5/54/5 Mar 2019 4,995 i
7.
 
Leica M10-P........4/5 Aug 2018 7,995 i
8.
 
Leica M104.5/5....4/54.5/5 Jan 2017 6,595 i
9.
 
Leica M Typ 262.......... Nov 2015 5,195i
10.
 
Leica Q Typ 1165/5..80/1004.5/54.5/5 Jun 2015 4,249i
11.
 
Leica M Typ 2404/5....4/5.. Sep 2012 6,950i
12.
 
Nikon Z65/5....4.5/55/5 Aug 2018 1,999i
13.
 
Nikon P78003/5....4/54.5/5 Sep 2013 549i
14.
 
Olympus Stylus 1s.......... Apr 2015 699 i
15.
 
Olympus XZ-24/5+..4.5/54.5/5 Sep 2012 599i
16.
 
Sony A9 II....90/1005/55/5 Oct 2019 4,499 i
17.
 
Sony A7 III..+ +89/1005/55/5 Feb 2018 1,999 i
Notes: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available.

Care should be taken when interpreting the review scores above, 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. Also, kindly note that some of the listed sites have over time developped their review approaches and their reporting style.

Leica M-E Typ 240:
Check Amazon price
Olympus Stylus 1:
Check Ebay offers

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 use the search menu below. Alternatively, you can follow any of the listed hyperlinks for comparisons that others found interesting.

~
    loader

    Specifications: Leica M-E Typ 240 vs Olympus Stylus 1

    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 Specifications
    Camera Model Leica M-E Typ 240 Olympus Stylus 1
    Camera Type Rangefinder camera Fixed lens compact camera
    Camera Lens Leica M mount lenses 28-300mm f/2.8
    Launch Date June 2019 October 2013
    Launch Price USD 3,999 USD 699
    Sensor Specs Leica M-E Typ 240 Olympus Stylus 1
    Sensor Technology CMOS BSI-CMOS
    Sensor Format Full Frame Sensor 1/1.7" Sensor
    Sensor Size 35.8 x 23.9 mm 7.6 x 5.7 mm
    Sensor Area 855.62 mm2 43.32 mm2
    Sensor Diagonal 43 mm 9.5 mm
    Crop Factor 1.0x 4.5x
    Sensor Resolution 23.7 Megapixels 11.8 Megapixels
    Image Resolution 5952 x 3976 pixels 3968 x 2976 pixels
    Pixel Pitch 6.01 μm 1.91 μm
    Pixel Density 2.77 MP/cm2 27.26 MP/cm2
    Moiré control Anti-Alias filter no AA filter
    Movie Capability 1080/25p Video 1080/30p Video
    ISO Setting 200 - 6,400 ISO 100 - 12,800 ISO
    ISO Boost 100 - 6,400 ISO no Enhancement
    DXO Sensor Quality (score) .. 51
    DXO Color Depth (bits) .. 20.7
    DXO Dynamic Range (EV) .. 11.6
    DXO Low Light (ISO) .. 179
    Screen Specs Leica M-E Typ 240 Olympus Stylus 1
    Viewfinder Type Optical viewfinder Electronic viewfinder
    Viewfinder Field of View 100% 100%
    Viewfinder Magnification 0.68x 0.58x
    Viewfinder Resolution 1440k dots
    LCD Framing Live View Live View
    Rear LCD Size 3.0inch 3.0inch
    LCD Resolution 920k dots 1040k dots
    LCD Attachment Fixed screen Tilting screen
    Touch Input no Touchscreen Touchscreen
    Shooting Specs Leica M-E Typ 240 Olympus Stylus 1
    Focus System Manual Focus Contrast-detect AF
    Manual Focusing AidFocus PeakingFocus Peaking
    Max Shutter Speed (mechanical) 1/4000s 1/2000s
    Continuous Shooting 3 shutter flaps/s 7 shutter flaps/s
    Time-Lapse Photographyno IntervalometerIntervalometer built-in
    Fill Flash no On-Board Flash Build-in Flash
    Storage Medium SDXC cards SDXC cards
    Second Storage Option Single card slot Single card slot
    UHS card support UHS-I no
    Connectivity Specs Leica M-E Typ 240 Olympus Stylus 1
    External Flash Hotshoe Hotshoe
    USB Connector USB 2.0 USB 2.0
    HDMI Port no HDMI micro HDMI
    Wifi Support no Wifi Wifi built-in
    Body Specs Leica M-E Typ 240 Olympus Stylus 1
    Environmental SealingWeathersealed bodynot weather sealed
    Battery Type BP-SCL2 BLS-5
    Body Dimensions 139 x 80 x 42 mm
    (5.5 x 3.1 x 1.7 in)
    116 x 87 x 57 mm
    (4.6 x 3.4 x 2.2 in)
    Camera Weight 680 g (24.0 oz) 402 g (14.2 oz)

    Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.

    You are here Home  »  CAM-parator  »  Leica M-E Typ 240 vs Olympus Stylus 1

    Thanks for your vote!

    You rated this page 4 out of 5.


    Rating

    Any additional comment or suggestion for improvement would be welcome.


    If you like it, make sure you share it:

    • Mention this page to your Facebook friends and Twitter followers.
    • Bookmark it in your browser for future reference by pressing "Crtl" + "D".
    • Create a hyperlink by copying the text below into your web-project or discussion forum entry.

    Once again, thanks for taking the time to provide feedback. I appreciate it.