Leica M-E Typ 240 vs Olympus TG-4

The Leica M-E (Typ 240) and the Olympus Tough TG-4 are two digital cameras that were announced, respectively, in June 2019 and April 2015. The M-E Typ 240 is a rangefinder-focusing mirrorless camera, while the TG-4 is a fixed lens compact. The cameras are based on a full frame (M-E Typ 240) and a 1/2.3-inch (TG-4) 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 TG-4
Rangefinder camera		Fixed lens compact camera
Leica M mount lenses		25-100mm f/2.0-4.9
23.7 MP – Full Frame sensor		15.9 MP – 1/2.3" sensor
1080/25p Video		1080/30p Video
ISO 200-6,400		ISO 100-6,400
Optical viewfinder		No viewfinder, LCD framing
3.0" LCD – 920k dots		3.0" LCD – 460k dots
Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)		Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)
3 shutter flaps per second		5 shutter flaps per second
no shake reduction		In-body stabilization
Weathersealed body		Waterproof body (15m)
500 shots per battery charge		380 shots per battery charge
139 x 80 x 42 mm, 680 g		112 x 66 x 31 mm, 247 g

Check M-E Typ 240 offers at
ebay.com
Check TG-4 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 Tough TG-4? 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 Olympus TG-4 are illustrated in the side-by-side display below. The two cameras are presented according to their relative size. Three consecutive views from the front, the top, and the rear side are shown. All size dimensions are rounded to the nearest millimeter.

The TG-4 can be obtained in two different colors (black, red), 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 TG-4 is considerably smaller (34 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. More than that, the TG-4 is water-proof up to 15m and can, thus, be used for underwater photography.

The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete and possibly misleading, as the TG-4 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 TG-4 can take 380 images on a single charge of its Olympus LI-92B power pack. The power pack in the TG-4 can be charged via the USB port, which can be very convenient when travelling.

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 TG-4	112 mm	66 mm	31 mm	247 g	380	Y	Apr 2015	379	ebay.com
3.		Fujifilm GFX 50R	161 mm	97 mm	66 mm	775 g	400	Y	Sep 2018	4,499	ebay.com
4.		Fujifilm XP130	110 mm	71 mm	28 mm	207 g	240	Y	Jan 2018	229	ebay.com
5.		Leica M Typ 240	139 mm	80 mm	42 mm	680 g	500	Y	Sep 2012	6,950	ebay.com
6.		Leica M Typ 262	139 mm	80 mm	42 mm	680 g	400	Y	Nov 2015	5,195	ebay.com
7.		Leica M10	139 mm	80 mm	39 mm	660 g	210	Y	Jan 2017	6,595	ebay.com
8.		Leica M10-P	139 mm	80 mm	39 mm	660 g	210	Y	Aug 2018	7,995	ebay.com
9.		Leica M10-R	139 mm	80 mm	39 mm	660 g	210	Y	Jul 2020	8,295	ebay.com
10.		Leica Q Typ 116	130 mm	80 mm	93 mm	640 g	300	n	Jun 2015	4,249	ebay.com
11.		Leica Q2	130 mm	80 mm	92 mm	718 g	370	Y	Mar 2019	4,995	amazon.com
12.		Leica V-LUX 5	136 mm	97 mm	131 mm	812 g	350	n	Jul 2019	1,249	amazon.com
13.		Nikon W300	112 mm	66 mm	29 mm	231 g	280	Y	May 2017	389	ebay.com
14.		Olympus E-M5 II	124 mm	85 mm	45 mm	469 g	310	Y	Feb 2015	1,099	ebay.com
15.		Olympus TG-5	113 mm	66 mm	32 mm	250 g	340	Y	May 2017	449	ebay.com
16.		Olympus TG-6	113 mm	66 mm	32 mm	253 g	340	Y	May 2019	449	ebay.com
17.		Sony A9 II	129 mm	96 mm	76 mm	678 g	690	Y	Oct 2019	4,499	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 TG-4 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.

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. 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. 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 tend to be more expensive and 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 TG-4 a 1/2.3-inch sensor. The sensor area in the TG-4 is 97 percent smaller. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 1.0 and 5.6. The sensor in the M-E Typ 240 has a native 3:2 aspect ratio, while the one in the TG-4 offers a 4:3 aspect.

With 23.7MP, the M-E Typ 240 offers a higher resolution than the TG-4 (15.9MP), but the M-E Typ 240 nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 6.01μm versus 1.33μm for the TG-4) due to its larger sensor. Moreover, the M-E Typ 240 is a much more recent model (by 4 years and 2 months) than the TG-4, 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 TG-4 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.

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 Tough TG-4 are ISO 100 to ISO 6400 (no boost).

In terms of underlying technology, the M-E Typ 240 is build around a CMOS sensor, while the TG-4 uses a BSI-CMOS imager. 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 TG-4	1/2.3	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	20.2	11.6	737	47
3.		Fujifilm GFX 50R	Medium Format	51.1	8256	6192	1080/30p	25.7	14.4	3169	98
4.		Fujifilm XP130	1/2.3	15.9	4608	3456	1080/60p	20.6	12.1	1000	51
5.		Leica M Typ 240	Full Frame	23.7	5952	3976	1080/25p	24.0	13.3	1860	84
6.		Leica M Typ 262	Full Frame	23.7	5952	3976	none	24.8	13.7	2478	90
7.		Leica M10	Full Frame	23.8	5952	3992	none	24.4	13.2	2133	86
8.		Leica M10-P	Full Frame	23.8	5952	3992	none	25.1	14.1	2739	93
9.		Leica M10-R	Full Frame	40.9	7864	5200	none	25.3	14.3	2924	95
10.		Leica Q Typ 116	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	1080/60p	24.3	12.7	2221	85
11.		Leica Q2	Full Frame	46.7	8368	5584	4K/30p	26.4	13.5	2491	96
12.		Leica V-LUX 5	1-inch	20.0	5472	3648	4K/30p	22.2	12.4	584	65
13.		Nikon W300	1/2.3	15.9	4608	3456	4K/30p	20.5	12.0	938	50
14.		Olympus E-M5 II	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/60p	23.0	12.5	842	73
15.		Olympus TG-5	1/2.3	12.0	4000	3000	4K/30p	20.5	11.9	934	50
16.		Olympus TG-6	1/2.3	12.0	4000	3000	4K/30p	20.7	12.2	1127	52
17.		Sony A9 II	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	4K/30p	25.0	14.0	3434	93
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 TG-4 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.

Feature comparison

Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a variety of features. For example, the M-E Typ 240 has an optical viewfinder, which can be very useful when shooting in bright sunlight. In contrast, the TG-4 relies on live view and the rear LCD for framing. The table below summarizes some of the other core capabilities of the Leica M-E Typ 240 and Olympus TG-4 in connection with corresponding information for a sample of similar cameras.

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 TG-4	none	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/2000s	5.0/s	Y	Y
3.		Fujifilm GFX 50R	3690	n	3.2 / 2360	tilting	Y	1/4000s	3.0/s	n	n
4.		Fujifilm XP130	none	n	3.0 / 920	fixed	n	1/2000s	10.0/s	Y	Y
5.		Leica M Typ 240	optical	n	3.0 / 920	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	n	n
6.		Leica M Typ 262	optical	n	3.0 / 921	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	n	n
7.		Leica M10	optical	n	3.0 / 1037	fixed	n	1/4000s	5.0/s	n	n
8.		Leica M10-P	optical	n	3.0 / 1037	fixed	Y	1/4000s	5.0/s	n	n
9.		Leica M10-R	optical	n	3.0 / 1037	fixed	Y	1/4000s	4.5/s	n	n
10.		Leica Q Typ 116	3680	n	3.0 / 1040	fixed	Y	1/2000s	10.0/s	n	Y
11.		Leica Q2	3680	n	3.0 / 1040	fixed	Y	1/2000s	10.0/s	n	Y
12.		Leica V-LUX 5	2360	n	3.0 / 1240	swivel	Y	1/4000s	12.0/s	Y	Y
13.		Nikon W300	none	n	3.0 / 921	fixed	n	1/4000s	7.0/s	Y	Y
14.		Olympus E-M5 II	2360	n	3.0 / 1037	swivel	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
15.		Olympus TG-5	none	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/2000s	20.0/s	Y	Y
16.		Olympus TG-6	none	n	3.0 / 1040	fixed	n	1/2000s	20.0/s	Y	Y
17.		Sony A9 II	3686	n	3.0 / 1440	tilting	Y	1/8000s	20.0/s	n	Y
Note: *) Information refers to the mechanical shutter, unless the camera only has an electronic one.

One difference between the cameras concerns the presence of an on-board flash. The TG-4 has one, while the M-E Typ 240 does not. While the built-in flash of the TG-4 is not very powerful, it can at times be useful as a fill-in light.

The Olympus TG-4 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 TG-4 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 Olympus Tough TG-4 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 TG-4	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
3.		Fujifilm GFX 50R	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.0	Y	-	Y
4.		Fujifilm XP130	-	mono / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	Y
5.		Leica M Typ 240	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
6.		Leica M Typ 262	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
7.		Leica M10	Y	- / -	-	-	-	-	Y	-	-
8.		Leica M10-P	Y	- / -	-	-	-	-	Y	-	-
9.		Leica M10-R	Y	- / -	-	-	-	-	Y	-	-
10.		Leica Q Typ 116	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
11.		Leica Q2	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	-	-	Y	-	Y
12.		Leica V-LUX 5	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	Y
13.		Nikon W300	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	Y
14.		Olympus E-M5 II	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
15.		Olympus TG-5	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
16.		Olympus TG-6	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
17.		Sony A9 II	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.1	Y	Y	Y

It is notable that the M-E Typ 240 has a hotshoe, while the TG-4 does not. This socket makes it possible to easily attach optional accessories, such as an external flash gun.

Travel and landscape photographers will find it useful that the TG-4 has an internal geolocalization sensor and can record GPS coordinates in its EXIF data.

Both the M-E Typ 240 and the TG-4 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The TG-4 was replaced by the Olympus TG-5, 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 what is the bottom line? Which of the two cameras – the Leica M-E Typ 240 or the Olympus TG-4 – has the upper hand? Is one clearly better than the other? Below is a summary of the relative strengths of each of the two contestants.

Advantages 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.
• Easier framing: Has an optical viewfinder for image composition and settings control.
• More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (920k vs 460k dots).
• 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 380) on a single battery charge.
• Better lighting: Features a hotshoe and can thus hold and trigger an external flash gun.
• More prestigious: Has the Leica luxury appeal, which ensures a high resale price.
• More modern: Reflects 4 years and 2 months of technical progress since the TG-4 launch.

Reasons to prefer the Olympus Tough TG-4:

• Better video: Provides higher movie framerates (1080/30p versus 1080/25p).
• Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (5 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.
• More compact: Is smaller (112x66mm vs 139x80mm) and will fit more readily into a bag.
• Less heavy: Has a lower weight even though it has a lens built in (unlike the M-E Typ 240).
• Easier travel charging: Can be conveniently charged via its USB port.
• Sharper images: Has stabilization technology built-in to reduce the impact of hand-shake.
• Water-proof: Is rugged and sealed and can thus be used for underwater photography (up to 15m).
• Easier fill-in: Has a small integrated flash to brighten shadows of backlit subjects.
• Easier geotagging: Features an internal GPS sensor to log localization data.
• 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 April 2015).

If the count of individual advantages (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the TG-4 comes out slightly ahead of the M-E Typ 240 (14 : 13 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 sports photographer will view the differences between cameras in a way that diverges from the perspective of a street photog, and a person interested in family portraits has distinct needs from a landscape shooter. Hence, the decision which camera is best and worth buying is often a very personal one.

In any case, while the comparison of technical specifications can provide a useful overview of the capabilities of different cameras, it remains partial and cannot reveal, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance when actually working with the M-E Typ 240 or the TG-4. 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 following table reports the overall ratings of the cameras as published by some of the major camera 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 TG-4	..	+	..	79/100	4/5	4/5	Apr 2015	379	ebay.com
3.		Fujifilm GFX 50R	5/5	..	5/5	84/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2018	4,499	ebay.com
4.		Fujifilm XP130	..	o	..	..	3.5/5	4/5	Jan 2018	229	ebay.com
5.		Leica M Typ 240	4/5	..	..	..	4/5	..	Sep 2012	6,950	ebay.com
6.		Leica M Typ 262	..	..	..	..	..	..	Nov 2015	5,195	ebay.com
7.		Leica M10	4.5/5	..	..	..	4/5	4.5/5	Jan 2017	6,595	ebay.com
8.		Leica M10-P	..	..	3/5	..	..	4/5	Aug 2018	7,995	ebay.com
9.		Leica M10-R	4.5/5	..	4/5	..	..	4/5	Jul 2020	8,295	ebay.com
10.		Leica Q Typ 116	5/5	..	..	80/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2015	4,249	ebay.com
11.		Leica Q2	..	..	4.5/5	84/100	4.5/5	4/5	Mar 2019	4,995	amazon.com
12.		Leica V-LUX 5	..	..	..	..	4/5	4/5	Jul 2019	1,249	amazon.com
13.		Nikon W300	..	+	..	..	4/5	4/5	May 2017	389	ebay.com
14.		Olympus E-M5 II	5/5	+ +	4.5/5	81/100	5/5	5/5	Feb 2015	1,099	ebay.com
15.		Olympus TG-5	..	+ +	4.5/5	..	4/5	4/5	May 2017	449	ebay.com
16.		Olympus TG-6	4/5	+ +	4.5/5	76/100	4/5	4/5	May 2019	449	ebay.com
17.		Sony A9 II	..	..	5/5	90/100	5/5	5/5	Oct 2019	4,499	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.

Check M-E Typ 240 offers at
ebay.com
Check TG-4 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 a corresponding selection in the search boxes below. There is also a set of direct links to comparison reviews that other users of the CAM-parator app explored.

~

Check M-E Typ 240 offers at
ebay.com
Check TG-4 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.