Leica M-E Typ 240 vs Olympus XZ-2
The Leica M-E (Typ 240) and the Olympus XZ-2 are two digital cameras that were officially introduced, respectively, in June 2019 and September 2012. The M-E Typ 240 is a rangefinder-focusing mirrorless camera, while the XZ-2 is a fixed lens compact. The cameras are based on a full frame (M-E Typ 240) and a 1/1.7-inch (XZ-2) 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.
Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Leica M-E (Typ 240) and the Olympus XZ-2? 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 XZ-2 is provided in the side-by-side display below. The two cameras are presented according to their relative size. Three consecutive perspectives from the front, the top, and the back are available. All width, height and depth measures 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 Olympus XZ-2 is considerably smaller (34 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 XZ-2 does not feature any corresponding weather-sealing.
The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete and possibly misleading, as the XZ-2 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 following table provides a synthesis of the main physical specifications of the two cameras and other similar ones. 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.
# | 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 XZ-2 | 113 mm | 65 mm | 48 mm | 346 g | 340 | n | Sep 2012 | 599 | 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 Stylus 1 | 116 mm | 87 mm | 57 mm | 402 g | 410 | n | Oct 2013 | 699 | ebay.com | |
12. | Olympus E-PL2 | 114 mm | 72 mm | 42 mm | 362 g | 280 | n | Jan 2011 | 599 | ebay.com | |
13. | Olympus E-PL3 | 110 mm | 64 mm | 37 mm | 313 g | 300 | n | Jun 2011 | 599 | ebay.com | |
14. | Olympus XZ-1 | 111 mm | 65 mm | 42 mm | 275 g | 320 | n | Jan 2011 | 499 | ebay.com | |
15. | Pentax MX-1 | 122 mm | 61 mm | 51 mm | 391 g | 290 | n | Jan 2013 | 499 | 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. | |||||||||||
The price is, of course, an important factor in any camera decision. The listed launch prices provide an indication of the market segment that the manufacturer of the cameras have been targeting. The XZ-2 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. Then, after the new model is out, very good deals can frequently be found on the pre-owned market.
Sensor comparison
The size of the sensor inside a digital camera is one of the key determinants 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 associated with larger, more expensive camera bodies and lenses.
Of the two cameras under consideration, the Leica M-E Typ 240 features a full frame sensor and the Olympus XZ-2 a 1/1.7-inch sensor. The sensor area in the XZ-2 is 95 percent smaller. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 1.0 and 4.4. The sensor in the M-E Typ 240 has a native 3:2 aspect ratio, while the one in the XZ-2 offers a 4:3 aspect.
With 23.7MP, the M-E Typ 240 offers a higher resolution than the XZ-2 (11.8MP), but the M-E Typ 240 nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 6.01μm versus 1.91μm for the XZ-2) due to its larger sensor. Moreover, the M-E Typ 240 is a much more recent model (by 6 years and 9 months) than the XZ-2, 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 XZ-2 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 XZ-2 are ISO 100 to ISO 12800 (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 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.
# | 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 XZ-2 | 1/1.7 | 11.8 | 3968 | 2976 | 1080/30p | 20.4 | 11.3 | 216 | 49 | |
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 Stylus 1 | 1/1.7 | 11.8 | 3968 | 2976 | 1080/30p | 20.7 | 11.6 | 179 | 51 | |
12. | Olympus E-PL2 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 720/30p | 21.4 | 10.2 | 573 | 55 | |
13. | Olympus E-PL3 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 1080/60i | 20.9 | 10.3 | 499 | 52 | |
14. | Olympus XZ-1 | 1/1.7 | 10.1 | 3664 | 2752 | 720/30p | 18.8 | 10.4 | 117 | 34 | |
15. | Pentax MX-1 | 1/1.7 | 12.0 | 4000 | 3000 | 1080/30p | 20.4 | 11.3 | 208 | 49 | |
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 cannot only take still pictures, but also record videos. Both cameras under consideration have a sensor with sufficiently fast read-out times for moving pictures, but the XZ-2 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 range 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 XZ-2 relies on live view and the rear LCD for framing. That said, the XZ-2 can be equipped with an optional viewfinder – the VF-2. The following table reports on some other key feature differences and similarities of the Leica M-E Typ 240, the Olympus XZ-2, and comparable cameras.
# | 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 XZ-2 | optional | n | 3.0 / 920 | tilting | Y | 1/2000s | 5.0/s | Y | 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 Stylus 1 | 1440 | n | 3.0 / 1040 | tilting | Y | 1/2000s | 7.0/s | Y | Y | |
12. | Olympus E-PL2 | optional | n | 3.0 / 460 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | Y | Y | |
13. | Olympus E-PL3 | optional | n | 3.0 / 460 | tilting | n | 1/4000s | 5.5/s | n | Y | |
14. | Olympus XZ-1 | optional | n | 3.0 / 614 | fixed | n | 1/2000s | 2.0/s | Y | Y | |
15. | Pentax MX-1 | none | n | 3.0 / 920 | tilting | n | 1/8000s | 1.0/s | Y | 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 XZ-2 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 XZ-2 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 XZ-2 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 XZ-2 cannot take advantage of Ultra High Speed SD cards.
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 XZ-2 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. | Olympus XZ-2 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
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 Stylus 1 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
12. | Olympus E-PL2 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
13. | Olympus E-PL3 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
14. | Olympus XZ-1 | Y | mono / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
15. | Pentax MX-1 | - | 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 |
Both the M-E Typ 240 and the XZ-2 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. Neither of the two has a direct successor, so they represent the end of the respective camera lines from Leica and Olympus. 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? Is there a clear favorite between the Leica M-E Typ 240 and the Olympus XZ-2? Which camera is better? A synthesis of the relative strong points of each of the models is listed below.
Reasons to prefer the Leica M-E (Typ 240):
- More detail: Offers more megapixels (23.7 vs 11.8MP) with a 44% 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.
- 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 340) on a single battery charge.
- 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 6 years and 9 months of technical progress since the XZ-2 launch.
Arguments in favor of the Olympus XZ-2:
- Better video: Provides higher movie framerates (1080/30p versus 1080/25p).
- 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 (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 (113x65mm 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).
- 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.
- 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 September 2012).
If the count of individual advantages (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the M-E Typ 240 comes out slightly ahead of the XZ-2 (13 : 12 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 specs-based evaluation of cameras can be instructive in revealing their potential as photographic tools, it remains incomplete and does no justice, for example, to the way the M-E Typ 240 or the XZ-2 perform in practice. User reviews that are available, for instance, at amazon can sometimes shed light on these issues, but such feedback is all too often partial, inconsistent, and inaccurate.
Expert reviews
This is where reviews by experts come in. 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.
# | 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 XZ-2 | 4/5 | + | .. | .. | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Sep 2012 | 599 | 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 Stylus 1 | .. | + + | .. | .. | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Oct 2013 | 699 | ebay.com | |
12. | Olympus E-PL2 | 3/5 | 83/100 | .. | 71/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jan 2011 | 599 | ebay.com | |
13. | Olympus E-PL3 | 3/5 | + + | .. | 72/100 | 4.5/5 | 4/5 | Jun 2011 | 599 | ebay.com | |
14. | Olympus XZ-1 | 4/5 | .. | .. | 74/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jan 2011 | 499 | ebay.com | |
15. | Pentax MX-1 | 3/5 | .. | .. | 74/100 | 4/5 | 4/5 | Jan 2013 | 499 | 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 review scores listed above should be treated with care, though. The ratings are only valid when referring to cameras in the same category and of the same age. 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.
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 make your choice using the following search menu. Alternatively, you can follow any of the listed hyperlinks for comparisons that others found interesting.
- Canon 80D vs Leica M-E Typ 240
- Canon S120 vs Olympus XZ-2
- Canon T7i vs Olympus XZ-2
- Leica M-E Typ 240 vs Leica S Typ 007
- Leica M-E Typ 240 vs Leica S-E Typ 006
- Leica M-E Typ 240 vs Nikon D2Xs
- Leica M-E Typ 240 vs Olympus E-M10 III
- Leica M-E Typ 240 vs Olympus XZ-1
- Leica Q Typ 116 vs Olympus XZ-2
- Olympus XZ-2 vs Pentax Q
- Olympus XZ-2 vs Sony A58
- Olympus XZ-2 vs Sony NEX-5T
Specifications: Leica M-E Typ 240 vs Olympus XZ-2
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 | Olympus XZ-2 |
---|---|---|
Camera Type | Rangefinder camera | Fixed lens compact camera |
Camera Lens | Leica M mount lenses | 28-112mm f/1.8-2.5 |
Launch Date | June 2019 | September 2012 |
Launch Price | USD 3,999 | USD 599 |
Sensor Specs | Leica M-E Typ 240 | Olympus XZ-2 |
Sensor Technology | CMOS | 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 | 4.4x |
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 | Anti-Alias 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) | .. | 49 |
DXO Color Depth (bits) | .. | 20.4 |
DXO Dynamic Range (EV) | .. | 11.3 |
DXO Low Light (ISO) | .. | 216 |
Screen Specs | Leica M-E Typ 240 | Olympus XZ-2 |
Viewfinder Type | Optical viewfinder | Viewfinder optional |
Viewfinder Field of View | 100% | |
Viewfinder Magnification | 0.68x | |
LCD Framing | Live View | Live View |
Rear LCD Size | 3.0inch | 3.0inch |
LCD Resolution | 920k dots | 920k dots |
LCD Attachment | Fixed screen | Tilting screen |
Touch Input | no Touchscreen | Touchscreen |
Shooting Specs | Leica M-E Typ 240 | Olympus XZ-2 |
Focus System | Manual Focus | Contrast-detect AF |
Manual Focusing Aid | Focus Peaking | no Peaking Feature |
Continuous Shooting | 3 shutter flaps/s | 5 shutter flaps/s |
Time-Lapse Photography | no Intervalometer | Intervalometer built-in |
Image Stabilization | no shake reduction | In-body stabilization |
Fill Flash | no On-Board Flash | Built-in Flash |
Storage Medium | SDXC cards | SDXC cards |
Single or Dual Card Slots | Single card slot | Single card slot |
UHS card support | UHS-I | no |
Connectivity Specs | Leica M-E Typ 240 | Olympus XZ-2 |
External Flash | Hotshoe | Hotshoe |
USB Connector | USB 2.0 | USB 2.0 |
HDMI Port | no HDMI | mini HDMI |
Wifi Support | no Wifi | no Wifi |
Body Specs | Leica M-E Typ 240 | Olympus XZ-2 |
Environmental Sealing | Weathersealed body | not weather sealed |
Battery Type | Leica BP-SCL2 | Olympus Li-90B |
Battery Life (CIPA) | 500 shots per charge | 340 shots per charge |
Body Dimensions |
139 x 80 x 42 mm (5.5 x 3.1 x 1.7 in) |
113 x 65 x 48 mm (4.4 x 2.6 x 1.9 in) |
Camera Weight | 680 g (24.0 oz) | 346 g (12.2 oz) |
Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.