Leica M-E Typ 240 vs Ricoh GR III
The Leica M-E (Typ 240) and the Ricoh GR III are two digital cameras that were announced, respectively, in June 2019 and February 2019. The M-E Typ 240 is a rangefinder-focusing mirrorless camera, while the GR III is a fixed lens compact. The cameras are based on a full frame (M-E Typ 240) and an APS-C (GR III) sensor. The Leica has a resolution of 23.7 megapixels, whereas the Ricoh provides 24 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 Ricoh GR III? Which one should you buy? Read on to find out how these two cameras compare with respect to their body size, their imaging sensors, their shooting features, their input-output connections, and their reception by expert reviewers.
Body comparison
The side-by-side display below illustrates the physical size and weight of the Leica M-E Typ 240 and the Ricoh GR III. The two cameras are presented according to their relative size. Three successive views from the front, the top, and the rear are shown. 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 III is considerably smaller (39 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 III does not feature any corresponding weather-sealing.
The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete and possibly misleading, as the GR III 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 III can take 200 images on a single charge of its Ricoh DB-110 power pack. The power pack in the GR III 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. 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.
# | 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 III | 109 mm | 62 mm | 33 mm | 257 g | 200 | n | Feb 2019 | 899 | amazon.com | |
3. | Fujifilm XF10 | 113 mm | 64 mm | 41 mm | 279 g | 330 | n | Jul 2018 | 499 | ebay.com | |
4. | Leica M11 | 139 mm | 80 mm | 39 mm | 640 g | 700 | Y | Jan 2022 | 8,995 | amazon.com | |
5. | Leica M10-R | 139 mm | 80 mm | 39 mm | 660 g | 210 | Y | Jul 2020 | 8,295 | ebay.com | |
6. | Leica Q2 | 130 mm | 80 mm | 92 mm | 718 g | 370 | Y | Mar 2019 | 4,995 | amazon.com | |
7. | Leica M10-P | 139 mm | 80 mm | 39 mm | 660 g | 210 | Y | Aug 2018 | 7,995 | ebay.com | |
8. | Leica M10 | 139 mm | 80 mm | 39 mm | 660 g | 210 | Y | Jan 2017 | 6,595 | ebay.com | |
9. | Leica M Typ 262 | 139 mm | 80 mm | 42 mm | 680 g | 400 | Y | Nov 2015 | 5,195 | 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 M Typ 240 | 139 mm | 80 mm | 42 mm | 680 g | 500 | Y | Sep 2012 | 6,950 | ebay.com | |
12. | Panasonic ZS200 | 111 mm | 65 mm | 45 mm | 340 g | 370 | n | Feb 2018 | 799 | amazon.com | |
13. | Ricoh GR IIIx | 109 mm | 62 mm | 35 mm | 262 g | 200 | n | Sep 2021 | 999 | amazon.com | |
14. | Ricoh GR II | 117 mm | 63 mm | 35 mm | 251 g | 320 | n | Jun 2015 | 699 | ebay.com | |
15. | Ricoh GR | 117 mm | 61 mm | 35 mm | 245 g | 290 | n | Apr 2013 | 799 | 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. | |||||||||||
Any camera decision will obviously take relative prices into account. 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 III 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 size of the imaging sensor is a crucial determinant 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. 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 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 Ricoh GR III an APS-C sensor. The sensor area in the GR III 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.
Despite having a smaller sensor, the GR III offers a slightly higher resolution of 24 megapixels, compared with 23.7 MP of the M-E Typ 240. This megapixels advantage comes at the cost of a higher pixel density and a smaller size of the individual pixel (with a pixel pitch of 3.91μm versus 6.01μm for the M-E Typ 240). Moreover, it should be noted that the M-E Typ 240 is a somewhat more recent model (by 4 months) than the GR III, and its sensor might 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 III has no anti-alias filter installed, so that it can capture all the detail its sensor resolves.
The GR III has on-sensor phase detect pixels, which results in fast and reliable autofocus acquisition even during live view operation.
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 III are ISO 100 to ISO 102400 (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.
Consistent information on actual sensor performance is available from DXO Mark for many cameras. This service determines an overall sensor rating, as well as sub-scores for low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports"), dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), and color depth ("DXO Portrait"). The adjacent table reports on the physical sensor characteristics and the outcomes of the DXO sensor quality tests for a sample of comparator-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. | Ricoh GR III | APS-C | 24.0 | 6000 | 4000 | 1080/60p | 24.1 | 13.5 | 1897 | 83 | |
3. | Fujifilm XF10 | APS-C | 24.0 | 6000 | 4000 | 4K/15p | 24.0 | 13.4 | 1844 | 83 | |
4. | Leica M11 | Full Frame | 60.3 | 9528 | 6328 | none | 26.3 | 14.8 | 3376 | 100 | |
5. | Leica M10-R | Full Frame | 40.9 | 7864 | 5200 | none | 25.3 | 14.3 | 2924 | 95 | |
6. | Leica Q2 | Full Frame | 46.7 | 8368 | 5584 | 4K/30p | 26.4 | 13.5 | 2491 | 96 | |
7. | Leica M10-P | Full Frame | 23.8 | 5952 | 3992 | none | 25.1 | 14.1 | 2739 | 93 | |
8. | Leica M10 | Full Frame | 23.8 | 5952 | 3992 | none | 24.4 | 13.2 | 2133 | 86 | |
9. | Leica M Typ 262 | Full Frame | 23.7 | 5952 | 3976 | none | 24.8 | 13.7 | 2478 | 90 | |
10. | Leica Q Typ 116 | Full Frame | 24.0 | 6000 | 4000 | 1080/60p | 24.3 | 12.7 | 2221 | 85 | |
11. | Leica M Typ 240 | Full Frame | 23.7 | 5952 | 3976 | 1080/25p | 24.0 | 13.3 | 1860 | 84 | |
12. | Panasonic ZS200 | 1-inch | 20.0 | 5472 | 3648 | 4K/30p | 22.0 | 12.2 | 449 | 64 | |
13. | Ricoh GR IIIx | APS-C | 24.0 | 6000 | 4000 | 1080/60p | 24.2 | 13.8 | 2146 | 85 | |
14. | Ricoh GR II | APS-C | 16.1 | 4928 | 3264 | 1080/30p | 23.6 | 13.7 | 1078 | 80 | |
15. | Ricoh GR | APS-C | 16.1 | 4928 | 3264 | 1080/30p | 23.6 | 13.5 | 972 | 78 | |
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. The two cameras under consideration both have sensors whose read-out speed is fast enough to capture moving pictures, but the GR III provides a faster frame rate than the M-E Typ 240. It can shoot movie footage at 1080/60p, 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 GR III relies on live view and the rear LCD for framing. That said, the GR III 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 III along with similar information for a selection of comparators.
# | 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 III | optional | n | 3.0 / 1037 | fixed | Y | 1/4000s | 4.0/s | n | Y | |
3. | Fujifilm XF10 | none | n | 3.0 / 1040 | fixed | Y | 1/4000s | 6.0/s | Y | n | |
4. | Leica M11 | optical | n | 3.0 / 2333 | fixed | Y | 1/4000s | 4.5/s | n | n | |
5. | Leica M10-R | optical | n | 3.0 / 1037 | fixed | Y | 1/4000s | 4.5/s | n | n | |
6. | Leica Q2 | 3680 | n | 3.0 / 1040 | fixed | Y | 1/2000s | 10.0/s | n | Y | |
7. | Leica M10-P | optical | n | 3.0 / 1037 | fixed | Y | 1/4000s | 5.0/s | n | n | |
8. | Leica M10 | optical | n | 3.0 / 1037 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 5.0/s | n | n | |
9. | Leica M Typ 262 | optical | n | 3.0 / 921 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | n | n | |
10. | Leica Q Typ 116 | 3680 | n | 3.0 / 1040 | fixed | Y | 1/2000s | 10.0/s | n | Y | |
11. | Leica M Typ 240 | optical | n | 3.0 / 920 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | n | n | |
12. | Panasonic ZS200 | 2330 | n | 3.0 / 1240 | fixed | Y | 1/2000s | 10.0/s | Y | Y | |
13. | Ricoh GR IIIx | optional | n | 3.0 / 1037 | fixed | Y | 1/4000s | 4.0/s | n | Y | |
14. | Ricoh GR II | optional | n | 3.0 / 1230 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 4.0/s | Y | n | |
15. | Ricoh GR | optional | n | 3.0 / 1230 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 4.0/s | Y | n | |
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 GR III 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 Ricoh GR III 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 III 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 III 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. | Ricoh GR III | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | - | 3.0 | Y | - | Y | |
3. | Fujifilm XF10 | - | stereo / mono | Y | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | Y | |
4. | Leica M11 | Y | - / - | - | - | - | 3.2 | Y | - | Y | |
5. | Leica M10-R | Y | - / - | - | - | - | - | Y | - | - | |
6. | Leica Q2 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | - | - | Y | - | Y | |
7. | Leica M10-P | Y | - / - | - | - | - | - | Y | - | - | |
8. | Leica M10 | Y | - / - | - | - | - | - | Y | - | - | |
9. | Leica M Typ 262 | Y | - / - | - | - | - | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
10. | Leica Q Typ 116 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | Y | - | |
11. | Leica M Typ 240 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | - | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
12. | Panasonic ZS200 | - | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | Y | |
13. | Ricoh GR IIIx | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | - | 3.0 | Y | - | Y | |
14. | Ricoh GR II | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | Y | - | |
15. | Ricoh GR | Y | mono / mono | - | - | micro | 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 |
It is notable that the GR III offers wifi support, which can be a very convenient means to transfer image data to an off-camera location. In contrast, the M-E Typ 240 does not provide wifi capability.
The GR III is a recent model that features in the current product line-up of Ricoh. In contrast, the M-E Typ 240 has been discontinued (but can be found pre-owned on ebay). There has not been a direct replacement model for the M-E Typ 240 from Leica. 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 how do things add up? Which of the two cameras – the Leica M-E Typ 240 or the Ricoh GR III – has the upper hand? Is one clearly better than the other? A synthesis of the relative strong points of each of the models is listed below.
Arguments in favor of the Leica M-E (Typ 240):
- Better moiré control: Has an anti-alias filter to avoid artificial patterns to appear in images.
- Better image quality: Features bigger pixels on a larger sensor for higher quality imaging.
- Richer colors: The pixel size advantage translates into images with better, more accurate colors.
- More dynamic range: Larger pixels capture a wider spectrum of light and dark details.
- Better low-light sensitivity: Larger pixels means good image quality even under poor lighting.
- 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 200) 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: Is somewhat more recent (announced 4 months after the GR III).
Advantages of the Ricoh GR III:
- Maximized detail: Lacks an anti-alias filter to exploit the sensor's full resolution potential.
- Better video: Provides higher movie framerates (1080/60p versus 1080/25p).
- Better live-view autofocus: Features on-sensor phase-detection for more confident autofocus.
- More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1037k vs 920k dots).
- Fewer buttons to press: Has a touchscreen to facilitate handling and shooting adjustments.
- 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 (109x62mm 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.
- Faster data transfer: Supports a more advanced USB protocol (3.0 vs 2.0).
- Easier file upload: Has wifi built in for automatic backup or image transfer to the web.
- Easier wireless transfer: Supports Bluetooth for image sharing without cables.
- More affordable: Was introduced at a lower price, despite coming with a built-in lens.
- More heavily discounted: Has been on the market for longer (launched in February 2019).
If the count of individual advantages (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the GR III is the clear winner of the contest (17 : 11 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 says little about, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance of the M-E Typ 240 and the GR III in practical situations. 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 table below provides a synthesis of the camera assessments of some of the best known photo-gear 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. | Ricoh GR III | 4/5 | .. | 3.5/5 | 81/100 | 4/5 | .. | Feb 2019 | 899 | amazon.com | |
3. | Fujifilm XF10 | .. | .. | 4/5 | 75/100 | 4/5 | 4.5/5 | Jul 2018 | 499 | ebay.com | |
4. | Leica M11 | 4.5/5 | .. | 4.5/5 | .. | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jan 2022 | 8,995 | amazon.com | |
5. | Leica M10-R | 4.5/5 | .. | 4/5 | .. | .. | 4/5 | Jul 2020 | 8,295 | ebay.com | |
6. | Leica Q2 | .. | .. | 4.5/5 | 84/100 | 4.5/5 | 4/5 | Mar 2019 | 4,995 | amazon.com | |
7. | Leica M10-P | .. | .. | 3/5 | .. | .. | 4/5 | Aug 2018 | 7,995 | ebay.com | |
8. | Leica M10 | 4.5/5 | .. | .. | .. | 4/5 | 4.5/5 | Jan 2017 | 6,595 | ebay.com | |
9. | Leica M Typ 262 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | Nov 2015 | 5,195 | 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 M Typ 240 | 4/5 | .. | .. | .. | 4/5 | .. | Sep 2012 | 6,950 | ebay.com | |
12. | Panasonic ZS200 | .. | + + | 4.5/5 | 81/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Feb 2018 | 799 | amazon.com | |
13. | Ricoh GR IIIx | .. | .. | 4.5/5 | .. | .. | .. | Sep 2021 | 999 | amazon.com | |
14. | Ricoh GR II | .. | .. | .. | .. | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jun 2015 | 699 | ebay.com | |
15. | Ricoh GR | 5/5 | .. | .. | 79/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Apr 2013 | 799 | 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 assessments were made in relation to similar cameras of the same technological generation. A score, therefore, has to be seen in close connection to the price and market introduction time of the camera, and comparisons of ratings among very different cameras or across long time periods have little meaning. It should also be noted that some of the review sites have over time altered the way they render their verdicts.
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 your choice using the following search menu. As an alternative, you can also directly jump to any one of the listed comparisons that were previously generated by the CAM-parator tool.
- Canon 1Ds Mark II vs Leica M-E Typ 240
- Canon 6D Mark II vs Ricoh GR III
- Canon G7 X vs Ricoh GR III
- Leica M-E Typ 240 vs Nikon D2H
- Leica M-E Typ 240 vs Olympus E-PL5
- Leica M-E Typ 240 vs Pentax K-500
- Leica M-E Typ 240 vs Sony HX80
- Leica M-E Typ 240 vs Sony NEX-5
- Olympus E-3 vs Ricoh GR III
- Panasonic LF1 vs Ricoh GR III
- Ricoh GR III vs Sony A900
- Ricoh GR III vs Sony RX100
Specifications: Leica M-E Typ 240 vs Ricoh GR III
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 | Ricoh GR III |
---|---|---|
Camera Type | Rangefinder camera | Fixed lens compact camera |
Camera Lens | Leica M mount lenses | 28mm f/2.8 |
Launch Date | June 2019 | February 2019 |
Launch Price | USD 3,999 | USD 899 |
Sensor Specs | Leica M-E Typ 240 | Ricoh GR III |
Sensor Technology | CMOS | CMOS |
Sensor Format | Full Frame Sensor | APS-C Sensor |
Sensor Size | 35.8 x 23.9 mm | 23.5 x 15.6 mm |
Sensor Area | 855.62 mm2 | 366.6 mm2 |
Sensor Diagonal | 43 mm | 28.2 mm |
Crop Factor | 1.0x | 1.5x |
Sensor Resolution | 23.7 Megapixels | 24 Megapixels |
Image Resolution | 5952 x 3976 pixels | 6000 x 4000 pixels |
Pixel Pitch | 6.01 μm | 3.91 μm |
Pixel Density | 2.77 MP/cm2 | 6.55 MP/cm2 |
Moiré control | Anti-Alias filter | no AA filter |
Movie Capability | 1080/25p Video | 1080/60p Video |
ISO Setting | 200 - 6,400 ISO | 100 - 102,400 ISO |
ISO Boost | 100 - 6,400 ISO | no Enhancement |
Screen Specs | Leica M-E Typ 240 | Ricoh GR III |
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 | 1037k dots |
LCD Attachment | Fixed screen | Fixed screen |
Touch Input | no Touchscreen | Touchscreen |
Shooting Specs | Leica M-E Typ 240 | Ricoh GR III |
Focus System | Manual Focus | On-Sensor Phase-detect |
Manual Focusing Aid | Focus Peaking | no Peaking Feature |
Continuous Shooting | 3 shutter flaps/s | 4 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 | no On-Board Flash |
Storage Medium | SDXC cards | SDXC cards |
Single or Dual Card Slots | Single card slot | Single card slot |
UHS card support | UHS-I | UHS-I |
Connectivity Specs | Leica M-E Typ 240 | Ricoh GR III |
External Flash | Hotshoe | Hotshoe |
USB Connector | USB 2.0 | USB 3.0 |
HDMI Port | no HDMI | no HDMI |
Wifi Support | no Wifi | Wifi built-in |
Bluetooth Support | no Bluetooth | Bluetooth built-in |
Body Specs | Leica M-E Typ 240 | Ricoh GR III |
Environmental Sealing | Weathersealed body | not weather sealed |
Battery Type | Leica BP-SCL2 | Ricoh DB-110 |
Battery Life (CIPA) | 500 shots per charge | 200 shots per charge |
In-Camera Charging | no USB charging | USB charging |
Body Dimensions |
139 x 80 x 42 mm (5.5 x 3.1 x 1.7 in) |
109 x 62 x 33 mm (4.3 x 2.4 x 1.3 in) |
Camera Weight | 680 g (24.0 oz) | 257 g (9.1 oz) |
Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.