ad stars
ad Bestseller
A potelyt.com – Photography & Imaging Resources
PW

Leica M-E Typ 240 vs Ricoh WG-6

The Leica M-E (Typ 240) and the Ricoh WG-6 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 WG-6 is a fixed lens compact. The cameras are based on a full frame (M-E Typ 240) and a 1/2.3-inch (WG-6) sensor. The Leica has a resolution of 23.7 megapixels, whereas the Ricoh provides 20.2 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
Ricoh WG-6
Leica M-E Typ 240   Ricoh WG-6
Rangefinder camera Fixed lens compact camera
Leica M mount lenses 28-140mm f/3.5-5.5
23.7 MP, Full Frame Sensor 20.2 MP, 1/2.3" Sensor
1080/25p Video 4K/30p Video
ISO 200-6,400 ISO 125-6,400
Optical viewfinder No viewfinder, LCD framing
3.0 LCD, 920k dots 3.0 LCD, 1040k dots
Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive) Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)
3 shutter flaps per second 1 shutter flaps per second
Weathersealed bodyWaterproof body (20m)
139 x 80 x 42 mm, 680 g 118 x 66 x 33 mm, 246 g

Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Leica M-E (Typ 240) and the Ricoh WG-6? Which one should you buy? Read on to find out how these two cameras compare with respect to their body size, their imaging sensors, their shooting features, their input-output connections, and their reception by expert reviewers.

Body comparison

The physical size and weight of the Leica M-E Typ 240 and the Ricoh WG-6 are illustrated in the side-by-side display below. The two cameras are presented according to their relative size. Three successive views from the front, the top, and the rear are shown. All width, height and depth measures are rounded to the nearest millimeter.

The WG-6 can be obtained in two different colors (black, orange), while the M-E Typ 240 is only available in silver.

Size Leica M-E Typ 240 vs Ricoh WG-6
Compare M-E Typ 240 versus WG-6 top
Comparison M-E Typ 240 or WG-6 rear

If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Ricoh WG-6 is considerably smaller (30 percent) than the Leica M-E Typ 240. In this context, it is worth noting that both cameras are splash and dust-proof and can, hence, be used in inclement weather conditions or harsh environments. More than that, the WG-6 is water-proof up to 20m and can, thus, be used for underwater photography.

The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete and possibly misleading, as the WG-6 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 power pack in the WG-6 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 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
    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 .. Y Jun 2019 3,999 i
2.
 
Ricoh WG-6 118 mm 66 mm 33 mm 246 g 340 Y Feb 2019 399 i
3.
 
Canon SX740 110 mm 64 mm 40 mm 299 g 265 n Jul 2018 399 i
4.
 
Leica M10-R 139 mm 80 mm 39 mm 660 g 210 Y Jul 2020 8,295 i
5.
 
Leica Q2 130 mm 80 mm 92 mm 718 g 370 Y Mar 2019 4,995 i
6.
 
Leica M10-P 139 mm 80 mm 39 mm 660 g 210 Y Aug 2018 7,995 i
7.
 
Leica M10 139 mm 80 mm 39 mm 660 g 210 Y Jan 2017 6,595 i
8.
 
Leica M Typ 262 139 mm 80 mm 42 mm 680 g .. Y Nov 2015 5,195i
9.
 
Leica Q Typ 116 130 mm 80 mm 93 mm 640 g 300 n Jun 2015 4,249i
10.
 
Leica M Typ 240 139 mm 80 mm 42 mm 680 g .. Y Sep 2012 6,950i
11.
 
Nikon Z6 134 mm 101 mm 67 mm 675 g 310 Y Aug 2018 1,999i
12.
 
Panasonic TS7 117 mm 76 mm 37 mm 319 g 300 Y May 2018 449 i
13.
 
Sony A9 II 129 mm 96 mm 76 mm 678 g 690 Y Oct 2019 4,499 i
14.
 
Sony A7 III 127 mm 96 mm 74 mm 650 g 610 Y Feb 2018 1,999 i
15.
 
Sony HX99 102 mm 58 mm 36 mm 242 g 370 n Aug 2018 449 i
16.
 
Sony HX95 102 mm 58 mm 36 mm 242 g 370 n Aug 2018 429 i
17.
 
Sony WX800 102 mm 58 mm 36 mm 233 g 370 n Oct 2018 399 i
Notes: 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 retail prices at the time of the camera’s release place the model in the market relative to other models in the producer’s line-up and the competition. The WG-6 was launched at a lower price than the M-E Typ 240, despite having a lens built in. Normally, street prices remain initially close to the MSRP, but after a couple of months, the first discounts appear. 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 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. Further, a large sensor camera will give the photographer additional creative options when using shallow depth-of-field to isolate a subject from its background. On the downside, larger sensors are more costly to manufacture and tend to 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 WG-6 a 1/2.3-inch sensor. The sensor area in the WG-6 is 97 percent smaller. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 1.0 and 5.6. The sensor in the M-E Typ 240 has a native 3:2 aspect ratio, while the one in the WG-6 offers a 4:3 aspect.

Leica M-E Typ 240 and Ricoh WG-6 sensor measures

With 23.7MP, the M-E Typ 240 offers a higher resolution than the WG-6 (20.2MP), but the M-E Typ 240 nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 6.01μm versus 1.18μm for the WG-6) due to its larger sensor. Moreover, the M-E Typ 240 is a somewhat more recent model (by 4 months) than the WG-6, 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 WG-6 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 WG-6 are 25.9 x 19.4 inches or 65.8 x 49.4 cm for good quality, 20.7 x 15.6 inches or 52.7 x 39.5 cm for very good quality, and 17.3 x 13 inches or 43.9 x 32.9 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 WG-6 are ISO 125 to ISO 6400 (no boost).

M-E Typ 240 versus WG-6 MP

Consistent information on actual sensor performance is available from DXO Mark for many cameras. This service is based on lab testing and assigns an overall score to each camera sensor, as well as ratings for dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), color depth ("DXO Portrait"), and low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports"). The following table provides an overview of the physical sensor characteristics, as well as the sensor quality measurements for a selection of comparators.

scroll hint
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 39761080/25p........
2.
 
Ricoh WG-6 1/2.3 20.2 5184 38884K/30p........
3.
 
Canon SX740 1/2.3 20.2 5184 38884K/30p........
4.
 
Leica M10-R Full Frame 40.9 7864 5200none........
5.
 
Leica Q2 Full Frame 46.7 8368 55844K/30p26.413.5249196
6.
 
Leica M10-P Full Frame 23.8 5952 3992none........
7.
 
Leica M10 Full Frame 23.8 5952 3992none24.413.2213386
8.
 
Leica M Typ 262 Full Frame 23.7 5952 3976none........
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.
 
Nikon Z6 Full Frame 24.3 6048 40244K/30p25.314.3329995
12.
 
Panasonic TS7 1/2.3 20.2 5184 38884K/30p........
13.
 
Sony A9 II Full Frame 24.0 6000 40004K/30p25.014.0343493
14.
 
Sony A7 III Full Frame 24.0 6000 40004K/30p25.014.7373096
15.
 
Sony HX99 1/2.3 18.0 4896 36724K/30p........
16.
 
Sony HX95 1/2.3 18.0 4896 36724K/30p........
17.
 
Sony WX800 1/2.3 18.0 4896 36724K/30p........

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 WG-6 provides a better video resolution than the M-E Typ 240. It can shoot movie footage at 4K/30p, while the Leica is limited to 1080/25p.

Feature comparison

Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a variety of features. For example, the M-E Typ 240 has an optical viewfinder, which can be very useful when shooting in bright sunlight. In contrast, the WG-6 relies on live view and the rear LCD for framing. The following table reports on some other key feature differences and similarities of the Leica M-E Typ 240, the Ricoh WG-6, and comparable cameras.

scroll hint
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)
Mech
Shutter
Speed
Shutter
Flaps
(1/sec)
Built-in
Flash
(yes/no)
Built-in
Image
Stab
1.
 
Leica M-E Typ 240optical n3.0 / 920 fixed n 1/4000s 3.0 n n
2.
 
Ricoh WG-6none n3.0 / 1040 fixed n 1/4000s 1.0 Y n
3.
 
Canon SX740none n3.0 / 922 tilting n 1/3200s 10.0 Y Y
4.
 
Leica M10-Roptical n3.0 / 1037 fixed Y 1/4000s 4.5 n n
5.
 
Leica Q23680 n3.0 / 1040 fixed Y 1/2000s 20.0 n Y
6.
 
Leica M10-Poptical n3.0 / 1037 fixed Y 1/4000s 5.0 n n
7.
 
Leica M10optical n3.0 / 1037 fixed n 1/4000s 5.0 n n
8.
 
Leica M Typ 262optical n3.0 / 921 fixed n 1/4000s 3.0 n n
9.
 
Leica Q Typ 1163680 n3.0 / 1040 fixed Y 1/2000s 10.0 n Y
10.
 
Leica M Typ 240optical n3.0 / 920 fixed n 1/4000s 3.0 n n
11.
 
Nikon Z63690 Y3.2 / 2100 tilting Y 1/8000s 12.0 n Y
12.
 
Panasonic TS71170 n3.0 / 1040 fixed n 1/1300s 10.0 Y Y
13.
 
Sony A9 II3686 n3.0 / 1440 tilting Y 1/8000s 20.0 n Y
14.
 
Sony A7 III2359 n3.0 / 922 tilting Y 1/8000s 10.0 n Y
15.
 
Sony HX99638 n3.0 / 922 tilting Y 1/2000s 10.0 Y Y
16.
 
Sony HX95638 n3.0 / 922 tilting n 1/2000s 10.0 Y Y
17.
 
Sony WX800none n3.0 / 922 tilting Y 1/2000s 10.0 Y Y

One difference between the cameras concerns the presence of an on-board flash. The WG-6 has one, while the M-E Typ 240 does not. While the built-in flash of the WG-6 is not very powerful, it can at times be useful as a fill-in light.

The Ricoh WG-6 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 WG-6 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 WG-6 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 Ricoh WG-6 and, in particular, the interfaces the cameras (and selected comparators) provide for accessory control and data transfer.

scroll hint
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 240Ymono / ----2.0---
2.
 
Ricoh WG-6-mono / mono--micro3.0---
3.
 
Canon SX740-stereo / mono--micro2.0Y-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.
 
Nikon Z6Ystereo / monoYYmicro3.1Y-Y
12.
 
Panasonic TS7-stereo / mono--micro2.0Y--
13.
 
Sony A9 IIYstereo / monoYYmicro3.1YYY
14.
 
Sony A7 IIIYstereo / monoYYmicro3.1YYY
15.
 
Sony HX99-stereo / mono--micro2.0YYY
16.
 
Sony HX95-stereo / mono--micro2.0YYY
17.
 
Sony WX800-stereo / mono--micro2.0YY-

It is notable that the M-E Typ 240 has a hotshoe, while the WG-6 does not. This socket makes it possible to easily attach optional accessories, such as an external flash gun.

Travel and landscape photographers will find it useful that the WG-6 has an internal geolocalization sensor and can record GPS coordinates in its EXIF data.

Both the M-E Typ 240 and the WG-6 are recent models that are part of the current product line-up. The WG-6 replaced the earlier Ricoh WG-5, while the M-E Typ 240 does not have a direct predecessor. 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 WG-6 or vice versa? Below is a summary of the relative strengths of each of the two contestants.

ilogo

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

  • More detail: Offers more megapixels (23.7 vs 20.2MP) with a 10% higher linear resolution.
  • 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.
  • Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (3 vs 1 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
  • More flexible: Accepts interchangeable lenses, so that lens characteristics can be altered.
  • Better lighting: Features a hotshoe and can thus hold and trigger an external flash gun.
  • 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: Is somewhat more recent (announced 4 months after the WG-6).

ilogo

Reasons to prefer the Ricoh WG-6:

  • Maximized detail: Lacks an anti-alias filter to exploit the sensor's full resolution potential.
  • Better video: Provides higher definition movie capture (4K/30p vs 1080/25p).
  • More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1040k vs 920k dots).
  • 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 (118x66mm 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.
  • Water-proof: Is rugged and sealed and can thus be used for underwater photography (up to 20m).
  • Easier fill-in: Has a small integrated flash to brighten shadows of backlit subjects.
  • Easier geotagging: Features an internal GPS sensor to log localization data.
  • Faster data transfer: Supports a more advanced USB protocol (3.0 vs 2.0).
  • 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 number of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the WG-6 comes out slightly ahead of the M-E Typ 240 (14 : 13 points). However, the relevance of individual strengths will vary across photographers, so that you might want to apply your own weighing scheme to the summary points when reflecting and deciding 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.

M-E Typ 240 13:14 WG-6

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 WG-6 perform in practice. At times, user reviews, such as those published at amazon, address these issues in a useful manner, but such feedback is on many occasions incomplete, inconsistent, and unreliable.

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.

scroll hint
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 i
2.
 
Ricoh WG-6........3.5/53.5/5 Feb 2019 399 i
3.
 
Canon SX740..+3.5/5..4/54/5 Jul 2018 399 i
4.
 
Leica M10-R4.5/5..4/5....4/5 Jul 2020 8,295 i
5.
 
Leica Q2......84/1004.5/54/5 Mar 2019 4,995 i
6.
 
Leica M10-P....3/5....4/5 Aug 2018 7,995 i
7.
 
Leica M104.5/5......4/54.5/5 Jan 2017 6,595 i
8.
 
Leica M Typ 262............ Nov 2015 5,195i
9.
 
Leica Q Typ 1165/5....80/1004.5/54.5/5 Jun 2015 4,249i
10.
 
Leica M Typ 2404/5......4/5.. Sep 2012 6,950i
11.
 
Nikon Z65/5..5/589/1004.5/55/5 Aug 2018 1,999i
12.
 
Panasonic TS7..+......3.5/5 May 2018 449 i
13.
 
Sony A9 II....5/590/1005/55/5 Oct 2019 4,499 i
14.
 
Sony A7 III..+ +4.5/589/1005/55/5 Feb 2018 1,999 i
15.
 
Sony HX99........4/54.5/5 Aug 2018 449 i
16.
 
Sony HX95............ Aug 2018 429 i
17.
 
Sony WX800............ Oct 2018 399 i
Notes: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available.

Care should be taken when interpreting the review scores above, 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 rating-comparisons among cameras that span long time periods or concern very differently equipped models make little sense. It should also be noted that some of the review sites have over time altered the way they render their verdicts.

Leica M-E Typ 240:
Check Amazon price
Ricoh WG-6:
Check Amazon price

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.

~
    loader

    Specifications: Leica M-E Typ 240 vs Ricoh WG-6

    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 Ricoh WG-6
    Camera Type Rangefinder camera Fixed lens compact camera
    Camera Lens Leica M mount lenses 28-140mm f/3.5-5.5
    Launch Date June 2019 February 2019
    Launch Price USD 3,999 USD 399
    Sensor Specs Leica M-E Typ 240 Ricoh WG-6
    Sensor Technology CMOS BSI-CMOS
    Sensor Format Full Frame Sensor 1/2.3" Sensor
    Sensor Size 35.8 x 23.9 mm 6.17 x 4.55 mm
    Sensor Area 855.62 mm2 28.0735 mm2
    Sensor Diagonal 43 mm 7.7 mm
    Crop Factor 1.0x 5.6x
    Sensor Resolution 23.7 Megapixels 20.2 Megapixels
    Image Resolution 5952 x 3976 pixels 5184 x 3888 pixels
    Pixel Pitch 6.01 μm 1.18 μm
    Pixel Density 2.77 MP/cm2 71.80 MP/cm2
    Moiré control Anti-Alias filter no AA filter
    Movie Capability 1080/25p Video 4K/30p Video
    ISO Setting 200 - 6,400 ISO 125 - 6,400 ISO
    ISO Boost 100 - 6,400 ISO no Enhancement
    Screen Specs Leica M-E Typ 240 Ricoh WG-6
    Viewfinder Type Optical viewfinder no viewfinder
    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 1040k dots
    LCD Attachment Fixed screen Fixed screen
    Shooting Specs Leica M-E Typ 240 Ricoh WG-6
    Focus System Manual Focus Contrast-detect AF
    Manual Focusing AidFocus Peakingno Peaking Feature
    Continuous Shooting 3 shutter flaps/s 1 shutter flaps/s
    Time-Lapse Photographyno IntervalometerIntervalometer built-in
    Fill Flash no On-Board Flash Built-in Flash
    Storage Medium SDXC cards SDXC cards
    Second Storage Option Single card slot Single card slot
    UHS card support UHS-I no
    Connectivity Specs Leica M-E Typ 240 Ricoh WG-6
    External Flash Hotshoe no Hotshoe
    USB Connector USB 2.0 USB 3.0
    HDMI Port no HDMI micro HDMI
    Wifi Support no Wifi no Wifi
    Geotagging no internal GPS GPS built-in
    Body Specs Leica M-E Typ 240 Ricoh WG-6
    Environmental SealingWeathersealed bodyWaterproof body (20m)
    Battery Type BP-SCL2 DB-110
    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)
    118 x 66 x 33 mm
    (4.6 x 2.6 x 1.3 in)
    Camera Weight 680 g (24.0 oz) 246 g (8.7 oz)

    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 Ricoh WG-6

    Thanks for your vote!

    You rated this page 4 out of 5.


    Rating

    Any additional comment or suggestion for improvement would be welcome.


    If you like it, make sure you share it:

    • Mention this page to your Facebook friends and Twitter followers.
    • Bookmark it in your browser for future reference.
    • Create a hyperlink by copying the text below into your web-project or discussion forum entry.

    Once again, thanks for taking the time to provide feedback. I appreciate it.