Leica M-E Typ 240 vs Ricoh GR II

The Leica M-E (Typ 240) and the Ricoh GR II are two digital cameras that were officially introduced, respectively, in June 2019 and June 2015. The M-E Typ 240 is a rangefinder-focusing mirrorless camera, while the GR II is a fixed lens compact. The cameras are based on a full frame (M-E Typ 240) and an APS-C (GR II) sensor. The Leica has a resolution of 23.7 megapixels, whereas the Ricoh provides 16.1 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		Ricoh GR II
Rangefinder camera		Fixed lens compact camera
Leica M mount lenses		28mm f/2.8
23.7 MP – Full Frame sensor		16.1 MP – APS-C sensor
1080/25p Video		1080/30p Video
ISO 200-6,400		ISO 100-25,600
Optical viewfinder		Viewfinder optional
3.0" LCD – 920k dots		3.0" LCD – 1230k dots
Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)		Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)
3 shutter flaps per second		4 shutter flaps per second
Weathersealed body		not weather sealed
500 shots per battery charge		320 shots per battery charge
139 x 80 x 42 mm, 680 g		117 x 63 x 35 mm, 251 g

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

Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Leica M-E (Typ 240) and the Ricoh GR II? Which one should you buy? Read on to find out how these two cameras compare with respect to their body size, their imaging sensors, their shooting features, their input-output connections, and their reception by expert reviewers.

Body comparison

An illustration of the physical size and weight of the Leica M-E Typ 240 and the Ricoh GR II 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 size dimensions 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 Ricoh GR II 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 GR II does not feature any corresponding weather-sealing.

The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete and possibly misleading, as the GR II 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 GR II can take 320 images on a single charge of its Ricoh DB-65 power pack. The power pack in the GR II can be charged via the USB port, which can be very convenient when travelling.

The following table provides a synthesis of the main physical specifications of the two cameras and other similar ones. If you want to switch the focus of the display and review another camera pair, you can move across to the CAM-parator tool and choose from the broad selection of possible camera comparisons there.

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.		Ricoh GR II	117 mm	63 mm	35 mm	251 g	320	n	Jun 2015	699	ebay.com
3.		Canon G7 X	103 mm	60 mm	40 mm	304 g	210	n	Sep 2014	699	ebay.com
4.		Fujifilm X70	113 mm	64 mm	44 mm	340 g	330	n	Jan 2016	799	ebay.com
5.		Leica M11	139 mm	80 mm	39 mm	640 g	700	Y	Jan 2022	8,995	amazon.com
6.		Leica M10-R	139 mm	80 mm	39 mm	660 g	210	Y	Jul 2020	8,295	ebay.com
7.		Leica Q2	130 mm	80 mm	92 mm	718 g	370	Y	Mar 2019	4,995	amazon.com
8.		Leica M10-P	139 mm	80 mm	39 mm	660 g	210	Y	Aug 2018	7,995	ebay.com
9.		Leica M10	139 mm	80 mm	39 mm	660 g	210	Y	Jan 2017	6,595	ebay.com
10.		Leica M Typ 262	139 mm	80 mm	42 mm	680 g	400	Y	Nov 2015	5,195	ebay.com
11.		Leica Q Typ 116	130 mm	80 mm	93 mm	640 g	300	n	Jun 2015	4,249	ebay.com
12.		Leica M Typ 240	139 mm	80 mm	42 mm	680 g	500	Y	Sep 2012	6,950	ebay.com
13.		Panasonic GM5	99 mm	60 mm	36 mm	211 g	220	n	Sep 2014	749	ebay.com
14.		Ricoh GR	117 mm	61 mm	35 mm	245 g	290	n	Apr 2013	799	ebay.com
15.		Sony A9 II	129 mm	96 mm	76 mm	678 g	690	Y	Oct 2019	4,499	amazon.com
16.		Sony A7 III	127 mm	96 mm	74 mm	650 g	610	Y	Feb 2018	1,999	amazon.com
17.		Sony RX100 III	102 mm	58 mm	41 mm	290 g	320	n	May 2014	799	ebay.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 manufacturer’s suggested retail prices give an idea on the placement of the camera in the maker’s lineup and the broader market. The GR II 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 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 tend to have larger individual pixels that provide better low-light sensitivity, wider dynamic range, and richer color-depth than smaller pixel-units in a sensor of the same technological generation. Furthermore, a large sensor camera will give the photographer more possibilities to use shallow depth-of-field in order to isolate a subject from the background. On the downside, larger sensors 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 Ricoh GR II an APS-C sensor. The sensor area in the GR II is 57 percent smaller. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 1.0 and 1.5. Both cameras have a native aspect ratio (sensor width to sensor height) of 3:2.

With 23.7MP, the M-E Typ 240 offers a higher resolution than the GR II (16.1MP), but the M-E Typ 240 nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 6.01μm versus 4.79μm for the GR II) due to its larger sensor. Moreover, the M-E Typ 240 is a much more recent model (by 4 years) than the GR II, 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 GR II 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 Ricoh GR II are 24.6 x 16.3 inches or 62.6 x 41.5 cm for good quality, 19.7 x 13.1 inches or 50.1 x 33.2 cm for very good quality, and 16.4 x 10.9 inches or 41.7 x 27.6 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 Ricoh GR II are ISO 100 to ISO 25600 (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.

For many cameras, data on sensor performance has been reported by DXO Mark. 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.

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.		Ricoh GR II	APS-C	16.1	4928	3264	1080/30p	23.6	13.7	1078	80
3.		Canon G7 X	1-inch	20.0	5472	3648	1080/60p	23.0	12.7	556	71
4.		Fujifilm X70	APS-C	16.0	4896	3264	1080/60p	23.7	13.0	1608	80
5.		Leica M11	Full Frame	60.3	9528	6328	none	26.3	14.8	3376	100
6.		Leica M10-R	Full Frame	40.9	7864	5200	none	25.3	14.3	2924	95
7.		Leica Q2	Full Frame	46.7	8368	5584	4K/30p	26.4	13.5	2491	96
8.		Leica M10-P	Full Frame	23.8	5952	3992	none	25.1	14.1	2739	93
9.		Leica M10	Full Frame	23.8	5952	3992	none	24.4	13.2	2133	86
10.		Leica M Typ 262	Full Frame	23.7	5952	3976	none	24.8	13.7	2478	90
11.		Leica Q Typ 116	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	1080/60p	24.3	12.7	2221	85
12.		Leica M Typ 240	Full Frame	23.7	5952	3976	1080/25p	24.0	13.3	1860	84
13.		Panasonic GM5	Four Thirds	15.8	4592	3448	1080/60p	22.1	11.7	721	66
14.		Ricoh GR	APS-C	16.1	4928	3264	1080/30p	23.6	13.5	972	78
15.		Sony A9 II	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	4K/30p	25.0	14.0	3434	93
16.		Sony A7 III	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	4K/30p	25.0	14.7	3730	96
17.		Sony RX100 III	1-inch	20.0	5472	3648	1080/60p	22.4	12.3	495	67
Note: DXO values in italics represent estimates based on sensor size and age.

Many modern cameras are not only capable of taking still images, but can also record movies. Both cameras under consideration are equipped with sensors that have a sufficiently high read-out speed for moving images, but the GR II 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 GR II relies on live view and the rear LCD for framing. That said, the GR II can be equipped with an optional viewfinder – the GV-1. The adjacent table lists some of the other core features of the Leica M-E Typ 240 and Ricoh GR II along with similar information for a selection of comparators.

Core Features

#		Camera Model	Viewfinder (Type or 000 dots)	Control Panel (yes/no)	LCD Specifications (inch/000 dots)	LCD Attach- ment	Touch Screen (yes/no)	Max Shutter Speed *	Max Shutter Flaps *	Built-in Flash (yes/no)	Built-in Image Stab
1.		Leica M-E Typ 240	optical	n	3.0 / 920	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	n	n
2.		Ricoh GR II	optional	n	3.0 / 1230	fixed	n	1/4000s	4.0/s	Y	n
3.		Canon G7 X	none	n	3.0 / 1040	tilting	Y	1/2000s	6.5/s	Y	Y
4.		Fujifilm X70	optional	n	3.0 / 1040	tilting	Y	1/4000s	8.0/s	Y	n
5.		Leica M11	optical	n	3.0 / 2333	fixed	Y	1/4000s	4.5/s	n	n
6.		Leica M10-R	optical	n	3.0 / 1037	fixed	Y	1/4000s	4.5/s	n	n
7.		Leica Q2	3680	n	3.0 / 1040	fixed	Y	1/2000s	10.0/s	n	Y
8.		Leica M10-P	optical	n	3.0 / 1037	fixed	Y	1/4000s	5.0/s	n	n
9.		Leica M10	optical	n	3.0 / 1037	fixed	n	1/4000s	5.0/s	n	n
10.		Leica M Typ 262	optical	n	3.0 / 921	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	n	n
11.		Leica Q Typ 116	3680	n	3.0 / 1040	fixed	Y	1/2000s	10.0/s	n	Y
12.		Leica M Typ 240	optical	n	3.0 / 920	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	n	n
13.		Panasonic GM5	1166	n	3.0 / 921	fixed	Y	1/500s	5.8/s	n	n
14.		Ricoh GR	optional	n	3.0 / 1230	fixed	n	1/4000s	4.0/s	Y	n
15.		Sony A9 II	3686	n	3.0 / 1440	tilting	Y	1/8000s	20.0/s	n	Y
16.		Sony A7 III	2359	n	3.0 / 922	tilting	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
17.		Sony RX100 III	1440	n	3.0 / 1229	tilting	n	1/2000s	10.0/s	Y	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 GR II has one, while the M-E Typ 240 does not. While the built-in flash of the GR II is not very powerful, it can at times be useful as a fill-in light.

The Ricoh GR II has an intervalometer built-in. This enables the photographer to capture time lapse sequences, such as flower blooming, a sunset or moon rise, without purchasing an external camera trigger and related software.

Concerning the storage of imaging data, both the M-E Typ 240 and the GR II 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 Ricoh GR II and, in particular, the interfaces the cameras (and selected comparators) provide for accessory control and data transfer.

Input-Output Connections

#		Camera Model	Hotshoe Port	Internal Mic / Speaker	Microphone Port	Headphone Port	HDMI Port	USB Port	WiFi Support	NFC Support	Bluetooth Support
1.		Leica M-E Typ 240	Y	mono / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
2.		Ricoh GR II	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
3.		Canon G7 X	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
4.		Fujifilm X70	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
5.		Leica M11	Y	- / -	-	-	-	3.2	Y	-	Y
6.		Leica M10-R	Y	- / -	-	-	-	-	Y	-	-
7.		Leica Q2	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	-	-	Y	-	Y
8.		Leica M10-P	Y	- / -	-	-	-	-	Y	-	-
9.		Leica M10	Y	- / -	-	-	-	-	Y	-	-
10.		Leica M Typ 262	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
11.		Leica Q Typ 116	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
12.		Leica M Typ 240	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
13.		Panasonic GM5	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
14.		Ricoh GR	Y	mono / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	-	-	-
15.		Sony A9 II	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.1	Y	Y	Y
16.		Sony A7 III	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.1	Y	Y	Y
17.		Sony RX100 III	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-

It is notable that the GR II offers wifi support, which can be a very convenient means to transfer image data to an off-camera location. In contrast, the M-E Typ 240 does not provide wifi capability.

Both the M-E Typ 240 and the GR II have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The GR II was replaced by the Ricoh GR III, while the M-E Typ 240 does not have a direct successor. Further information on the two cameras (e.g. user guides, manuals), as well as related accessories, can be found on the official Leica and Ricoh websites.

Review summary

So what is the bottom line? Is the Leica M-E Typ 240 better than the Ricoh GR II or vice versa? Below is a summary of the relative strengths of each of the two contestants.

Arguments in favor of the Leica M-E (Typ 240):

• More detail: Offers more megapixels (23.7 vs 16.1MP) with a 21% 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.
• Easier framing: Has an optical viewfinder for image composition and settings control.
• More flexible: Accepts interchangeable lenses, so that lens characteristics can be altered.
• Longer lasting: Can take more shots (500 versus 320) on a single battery charge.
• Better sealing: Is weather sealed to enable shooting in dusty or wet environments.
• More prestigious: Has the Leica luxury appeal, which ensures a high resale price.
• More modern: Reflects 4 years of technical progress since the GR II launch.

Advantages of the Ricoh GR II:

• 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 detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1230k vs 920k dots).
• Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (4 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 (117x63mm 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.
• 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.
• Easier device pairing: Supports NFC for fast wireless image transfer over short distances.
• 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 June 2015).

If the number of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the GR II emerges as the winner of the match-up (14 : 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 wildlife photographer will view the differences between cameras in a way that diverges from the perspective of a family photog, and a person interested in architecture has distinct needs from a sports 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 GR II 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 why expert reviews are important. The adjacent summary-table relays the overall verdicts of several of the most popular 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.		Ricoh GR II	..	..	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2015	699	ebay.com
3.		Canon G7 X	4/5	+ +	..	77/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2014	699	ebay.com
4.		Fujifilm X70	4.5/5	..	..	76/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jan 2016	799	ebay.com
5.		Leica M11	4.5/5	..	4.5/5	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jan 2022	8,995	amazon.com
6.		Leica M10-R	4.5/5	..	4/5	..	..	4/5	Jul 2020	8,295	ebay.com
7.		Leica Q2	..	..	4.5/5	84/100	4.5/5	4/5	Mar 2019	4,995	amazon.com
8.		Leica M10-P	..	..	3/5	..	..	4/5	Aug 2018	7,995	ebay.com
9.		Leica M10	4.5/5	..	..	..	4/5	4.5/5	Jan 2017	6,595	ebay.com
10.		Leica M Typ 262	..	..	..	..	..	..	Nov 2015	5,195	ebay.com
11.		Leica Q Typ 116	5/5	..	..	80/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2015	4,249	ebay.com
12.		Leica M Typ 240	4/5	..	..	..	4/5	..	Sep 2012	6,950	ebay.com
13.		Panasonic GM5	3.5/5	+	..	77/100	5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2014	749	ebay.com
14.		Ricoh GR	5/5	..	..	79/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Apr 2013	799	ebay.com
15.		Sony A9 II	..	..	5/5	90/100	5/5	5/5	Oct 2019	4,499	amazon.com
16.		Sony A7 III	..	+ +	4.5/5	89/100	5/5	5/5	Feb 2018	1,999	amazon.com
17.		Sony RX100 III	5/5	+ +	..	82/100	4.5/5	5/5	May 2014	799	ebay.com
Note: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available.

The review scores listed above should be treated 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. A score, therefore, has to be seen in close connection to the price and market introduction time of the camera, and comparing ratings of very distinct cameras or ones that are far apart in terms of their release date 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 GR II offers at
ebay.com

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 make a corresponding selection in the search boxes below. As an alternative, you can also directly jump to any one of the listed comparisons that were previously generated by the CAM-parator tool.

~

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

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