A potelyt.com – Photography & Imaging Resources
ad

When you use links on apotelyt.com to buy products,
the site may earn a commission.

PW

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.

Headline Specifications
Leica M-E Typ 240
versus
Olympus XZ-2
Leica M-E Typ 240   Olympus XZ-2
Rangefinder camera Fixed lens compact camera
Leica M mount lenses 28-112mm f/1.8-2.5
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 Viewfinder optional
3.0" LCD – 920k dots 3.0" LCD – 920k dots
Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive) Tilting touchscreen
3 shutter flaps per second 5 shutter flaps per second
no shake reductionIn-body stabilization
Weathersealed bodynot weather sealed
500 shots per battery charge340 shots per battery charge
139 x 80 x 42 mm, 680 g 113 x 65 x 48 mm, 346 g
logo
Check M-E Typ 240 offers at
ebay.com
logo
Check XZ-2 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 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.

ad

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.

Size Leica M-E Typ 240 vs Olympus XZ-2
Compare M-E Typ 240 versus XZ-2 top
Comparison M-E Typ 240 or XZ-2 rear

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.

scroll hint
Body Specifications
# image 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 3,999ebay.com
2.
 
Olympus XZ-2 113 mm 65 mm 48 mm 346 g 340 n Sep 2012 599ebay.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 8,295ebay.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 7,995ebay.com
7.
 
Leica M10 139 mm 80 mm 39 mm 660 g 210 Y Jan 2017 6,595ebay.com
8.
 
Leica M Typ 262 139 mm 80 mm 42 mm 680 g 400 Y Nov 2015 5,195ebay.com
9.
 
Leica Q Typ 116 130 mm 80 mm 93 mm 640 g 300 n Jun 2015 4,249ebay.com
10.
 
Leica M Typ 240 139 mm 80 mm 42 mm 680 g 500 Y Sep 2012 6,950ebay.com
11.
 
Olympus Stylus 1 116 mm 87 mm 57 mm 402 g 410 n Oct 2013 699ebay.com
12.
 
Olympus E-PL2 114 mm 72 mm 42 mm 362 g 280 n Jan 2011 599ebay.com
13.
 
Olympus E-PL3 110 mm 64 mm 37 mm 313 g 300 n Jun 2011 599ebay.com
14.
 
Olympus XZ-1 111 mm 65 mm 42 mm 275 g 320 n Jan 2011 499ebay.com
15.
 
Pentax MX-1 122 mm 61 mm 51 mm 391 g 290 n Jan 2013 499ebay.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.
padding

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.

Leica M-E Typ 240 and Olympus XZ-2 sensor measures

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.

M-E Typ 240 versus XZ-2 MP

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.

scroll hint
Sensor Characteristics
# image 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 39761080/25p25.214.2282194
2.
 
Olympus XZ-2 1/1.7 11.8 3968 29761080/30p20.411.321649
3.
 
Leica M11 Full Frame 60.3 9528 6328none26.314.83376100
4.
 
Leica M10-R Full Frame 40.9 7864 5200none25.314.3292495
5.
 
Leica Q2 Full Frame 46.7 8368 55844K/30p26.413.5249196
6.
 
Leica M10-P Full Frame 23.8 5952 3992none25.114.1273993
7.
 
Leica M10 Full Frame 23.8 5952 3992none24.413.2213386
8.
 
Leica M Typ 262 Full Frame 23.7 5952 3976none24.813.7247890
9.
 
Leica Q Typ 116 Full Frame 24.0 6000 40001080/60p24.312.7222185
10.
 
Leica M Typ 240 Full Frame 23.7 5952 39761080/25p24.013.3186084
11.
 
Olympus Stylus 1 1/1.7 11.8 3968 29761080/30p20.711.617951
12.
 
Olympus E-PL2 Four Thirds 12.2 4032 3024720/30p21.410.257355
13.
 
Olympus E-PL3 Four Thirds 12.2 4032 30241080/60i20.910.349952
14.
 
Olympus XZ-1 1/1.7 10.1 3664 2752720/30p18.810.411734
15.
 
Pentax MX-1 1/1.7 12.0 4000 30001080/30p20.411.320849
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
Note: DXO values in italics represent estimates based on sensor size and age.
padding

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.

ad

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.

scroll hint
Core Features
# image 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 240optical n3.0 / 920 fixed n 1/4000s 3.0/s n n
2.
 
Olympus XZ-2optional n3.0 / 920 tilting Y 1/2000s 5.0/s Y Y
3.
 
Leica M11optical n3.0 / 2333 fixed Y 1/4000s 4.5/s n n
4.
 
Leica M10-Roptical n3.0 / 1037 fixed Y 1/4000s 4.5/s n n
5.
 
Leica Q23680 n3.0 / 1040 fixed Y 1/2000s 10.0/s n Y
6.
 
Leica M10-Poptical n3.0 / 1037 fixed Y 1/4000s 5.0/s n n
7.
 
Leica M10optical n3.0 / 1037 fixed n 1/4000s 5.0/s n n
8.
 
Leica M Typ 262optical n3.0 / 921 fixed n 1/4000s 3.0/s n n
9.
 
Leica Q Typ 1163680 n3.0 / 1040 fixed Y 1/2000s 10.0/s n Y
10.
 
Leica M Typ 240optical n3.0 / 920 fixed n 1/4000s 3.0/s n n
11.
 
Olympus Stylus 11440 n3.0 / 1040 tilting Y 1/2000s 7.0/s Y Y
12.
 
Olympus E-PL2optional n3.0 / 460 fixed n 1/4000s 3.0/s Y Y
13.
 
Olympus E-PL3optional n3.0 / 460 tilting n 1/4000s 5.5/s n Y
14.
 
Olympus XZ-1optional n3.0 / 614 fixed n 1/2000s 2.0/s Y Y
15.
 
Pentax MX-1none n3.0 / 920 tilting n 1/8000s 1.0/s Y Y
16.
 
Sony A9 II3686 n3.0 / 1440 tilting Y 1/8000s 20.0/s n Y
17.
 
Sony A7 III2359 n3.0 / 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.
padding

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.

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 XZ-2 and, in particular, the interfaces the cameras (and selected comparators) provide for accessory control and data transfer.

scroll hint
Input-Output Connections
# image 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 240Ymono / ----2.0---
2.
 
Olympus XZ-2Ystereo / mono--mini2.0---
3.
 
Leica M11Y- / ----3.2Y-Y
4.
 
Leica M10-RY- / -----Y--
5.
 
Leica Q2Ystereo / mono----Y-Y
6.
 
Leica M10-PY- / -----Y--
7.
 
Leica M10Y- / -----Y--
8.
 
Leica M Typ 262Y- / ----2.0---
9.
 
Leica Q Typ 116Ystereo / mono--micro2.0YY-
10.
 
Leica M Typ 240Ystereo / mono---2.0---
11.
 
Olympus Stylus 1Ystereo / mono--micro2.0Y--
12.
 
Olympus E-PL2Ystereo / ---mini2.0---
13.
 
Olympus E-PL3Ystereo / ---mini2.0---
14.
 
Olympus XZ-1Ymono / ---mini2.0---
15.
 
Pentax MX-1-stereo / mono--mini2.0---
16.
 
Sony A9 IIYstereo / monoYYmicro3.1YYY
17.
 
Sony A7 IIIYstereo / monoYYmicro3.1YYY
padding

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.

ad

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.

ilogo

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.

ilogo

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.

M-E Typ 240 13:12 XZ-2

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.

scroll hint
Expert Camera Reviews
# image  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 3,999ebay.com
2.
 
Olympus XZ-24/5+....4.5/54.5/5 Sep 2012 599ebay.com
3.
 
Leica M114.5/5..4.5/5..4.5/54.5/5 Jan 2022 8,995 amazon.com
4.
 
Leica M10-R4.5/5..4/5....4/5 Jul 2020 8,295ebay.com
5.
 
Leica Q2....4.5/584/1004.5/54/5 Mar 2019 4,995 amazon.com
6.
 
Leica M10-P....3/5....4/5 Aug 2018 7,995ebay.com
7.
 
Leica M104.5/5......4/54.5/5 Jan 2017 6,595ebay.com
8.
 
Leica M Typ 262............ Nov 2015 5,195ebay.com
9.
 
Leica Q Typ 1165/5....80/1004.5/54.5/5 Jun 2015 4,249ebay.com
10.
 
Leica M Typ 2404/5......4/5.. Sep 2012 6,950ebay.com
11.
 
Olympus Stylus 1..+ +....4.5/54.5/5 Oct 2013 699ebay.com
12.
 
Olympus E-PL23/583/100..71/1004.5/54.5/5 Jan 2011 599ebay.com
13.
 
Olympus E-PL33/5+ +..72/1004.5/54/5 Jun 2011 599ebay.com
14.
 
Olympus XZ-14/5....74/1004.5/54.5/5 Jan 2011 499ebay.com
15.
 
Pentax MX-13/5....74/1004/54/5 Jan 2013 499ebay.com
16.
 
Sony A9 II....5/590/1005/55/5 Oct 2019 4,499 amazon.com
17.
 
Sony A7 III..+ +4.5/589/1005/55/5 Feb 2018 1,999 amazon.com
Note: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available.
padding

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.

logo
Check M-E Typ 240 offers at
ebay.com
logo
Check XZ-2 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 make your choice using the following search menu. Alternatively, you can follow any of the listed hyperlinks for comparisons that others found interesting.

~
    loader
    ad

    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 Specifications
    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 AidFocus Peakingno Peaking Feature
    Continuous Shooting 3 shutter flaps/s 5 shutter flaps/s
    Time-Lapse Photographyno IntervalometerIntervalometer built-in
    Image Stabilizationno shake reductionIn-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 SealingWeathersealed bodynot weather sealed
    Battery Type Leica BP-SCL2 Olympus Li-90B
    Battery Life (CIPA)500 shots per charge340 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)
    logo
    Check M-E Typ 240 offers at
    ebay.com
    logo
    Check XZ-2 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.

    You are here Home  »  CAM-parator  »  Leica M-E Typ 240 vs Olympus XZ-2