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		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 body		Waterproof body (20m)
500 shots per battery charge		340 shots per battery charge
139 x 80 x 42 mm, 680 g		118 x 66 x 33 mm, 246 g

Check M-E Typ 240 offers at
ebay.com
Check WG-6 price at
amazon.com

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.

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.

Concerning battery life, the M-E Typ 240 gets 500 shots out of its Leica BP-SCL2 battery, while the WG-6 can take 340 images on a single charge of its Ricoh DB-110 power pack. 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.

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 WG-6	118 mm	66 mm	33 mm	246 g	340	Y	Feb 2019	399	amazon.com
3.		Canon SX740	110 mm	64 mm	40 mm	299 g	265	n	Jul 2018	399	amazon.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 TS7	117 mm	76 mm	37 mm	319 g	300	Y	May 2018	449	ebay.com
13.		Sony A9 II	129 mm	96 mm	76 mm	678 g	690	Y	Oct 2019	4,499	amazon.com
14.		Sony A7 III	127 mm	96 mm	74 mm	650 g	610	Y	Feb 2018	1,999	amazon.com
15.		Sony HX99	102 mm	58 mm	36 mm	242 g	370	n	Aug 2018	449	ebay.com
16.		Sony HX95	102 mm	58 mm	36 mm	242 g	370	n	Aug 2018	429	ebay.com
17.		Sony WX800	102 mm	58 mm	36 mm	233 g	370	n	Oct 2018	399	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

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.

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).

In terms of underlying technology, the M-E Typ 240 is build around a CMOS sensor, while the WG-6 uses a BSI-CMOS imager. 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 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.

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 WG-6	1/2.3	20.2	5184	3888	4K/30p	20.7	12.2	1104	52
3.		Canon SX740	1/2.3	20.2	5184	3888	4K/30p	20.6	12.1	1050	51
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 TS7	1/2.3	20.2	5184	3888	4K/30p	20.6	12.1	1028	51
13.		Sony A9 II	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	4K/30p	25.0	14.0	3434	93
14.		Sony A7 III	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	4K/30p	25.0	14.7	3730	96
15.		Sony HX99	1/2.3	18.0	4896	3672	4K/30p	20.6	12.1	1058	51
16.		Sony HX95	1/2.3	18.0	4896	3672	4K/30p	20.6	12.1	1057	51
17.		Sony WX800	1/2.3	18.0	4896	3672	4K/30p	20.6	12.2	1070	51
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 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.

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 WG-6	none	n	3.0 / 1040	fixed	n	1/4000s	1.0/s	Y	n
3.		Canon SX740	none	n	3.0 / 922	tilting	n	1/3200s	10.0/s	Y	Y
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 TS7	1170	n	3.0 / 1040	fixed	n	1/1300s	10.0/s	Y	Y
13.		Sony A9 II	3686	n	3.0 / 1440	tilting	Y	1/8000s	20.0/s	n	Y
14.		Sony A7 III	2359	n	3.0 / 922	tilting	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
15.		Sony HX99	638	n	3.0 / 922	tilting	Y	1/2000s	10.0/s	Y	Y
16.		Sony HX95	638	n	3.0 / 922	tilting	n	1/2000s	10.0/s	Y	Y
17.		Sony WX800	none	n	3.0 / 922	tilting	Y	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 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.

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 WG-6	-	mono / mono	-	-	micro	3.0	-	-	-
3.		Canon SX740	-	stereo / mono	-	-	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 TS7	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
13.		Sony A9 II	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.1	Y	Y	Y
14.		Sony A7 III	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.1	Y	Y	Y
15.		Sony HX99	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	Y
16.		Sony HX95	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	Y
17.		Sony WX800	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-

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.

The WG-6 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 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.

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.
• Longer lasting: Can take more shots (500 versus 340) on a single battery charge.
• 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).

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 match-up finishes in a tie (14 points each). 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.

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.

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 WG-6	..	..	..	..	3.5/5	3.5/5	Feb 2019	399	amazon.com
3.		Canon SX740	..	+	3.5/5	..	4/5	4/5	Jul 2018	399	amazon.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 TS7	..	+	..	..	..	3.5/5	May 2018	449	ebay.com
13.		Sony A9 II	..	..	5/5	90/100	5/5	5/5	Oct 2019	4,499	amazon.com
14.		Sony A7 III	..	+ +	4.5/5	89/100	5/5	5/5	Feb 2018	1,999	amazon.com
15.		Sony HX99	..	..	..	..	4/5	4.5/5	Aug 2018	449	ebay.com
16.		Sony HX95	..	..	..	..	..	..	Aug 2018	429	ebay.com
17.		Sony WX800	..	..	..	..	..	..	Oct 2018	399	ebay.com
Note: (+ +) 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.

Check M-E Typ 240 offers at
ebay.com
Check WG-6 price at
amazon.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 WG-6 price at
amazon.com

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