Ur-Leica Tamron Camera Ranking
Leica 1600mm Vivitar Shutter count
A potelyt.com – Photography & Imaging Resources
ad
PW

Leica M-E Typ 240 vs Sony A9 II

The Leica M-E (Typ 240) and the Sony Alpha A9 II are two digital cameras that were officially introduced, respectively, in June 2019 and October 2019. The M-E Typ 240 is a rangefinder-style mirrorless, while the A9 II is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera. Both cameras are equipped with a full frame sensor. The Leica has a resolution of 23.7 megapixels, whereas the Sony provides 24 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 Sony A9 II
Leica M-E Typ 240 Sony A9 II
Rangefinder camera Mirrorless system camera
Leica M mount lenses Sony E mount lenses
23.7 MP, Full Frame Sensor 24 MP, Full Frame Sensor
1080/25p Video 4K/30p Video
ISO 200-6,400 ISO 100-51,200 (50 - 204,800)
Optical viewfinder Electronic viewfinder (3686k dots)
3.0 LCD, 920k dots 3.0 LCD, 1440k dots
Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive) Tilting touchscreen
3 shutter flaps per second 10 shutter flaps per second
no shake reductionIn-body stabilization
Weathersealed bodyWeathersealed body
139 x 80 x 42 mm, 680 g 129 x 96 x 76 mm, 678 g

Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Leica M-E (Typ 240) and the Sony Alpha A9 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 Sony A9 II is provided 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 dimensions are rounded to the nearest millimeter.

Size Leica M-E Typ 240 vs Sony A9 II
Compare M-E Typ 240 versus A9 II top
Comparison M-E Typ 240 or A9 II rear

If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Sony A9 II is notably larger (11 percent) than the Leica M-E Typ 240. However, the A9 II is slightly lighter (0 percent) than the 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.

The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete since they do not consider the interchangeable lenses that both of these cameras require. Both cameras have similarly sized sensors, but DSLRs have a larger flange-to-focal plane distance than mirrorless cameras, which imposes contraints on the optical engineering process and generally leads to bigger and heavier lenses. You can compare the optics available for the two cameras in the Leica M Lens Catalog (M-E Typ 240) and the Sony FE Lens Catalog (A9 II).

The power pack in the A9 II can be charged via the USB port, which can be very convenient when travelling.

The table below summarizes the key physical specs of the two cameras alongside a broader set of comparators. 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.

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.
 
Sony A9 II 129 mm 96 mm 76 mm 678 g 690 Y Oct 2019 4,499 i
3.
 
Fujifilm GFX 50R 161 mm 97 mm 66 mm 775 g 400 Y Sep 2018 4,499 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 V-LUX 5 136 mm 97 mm 131 mm 812 g 350 n Jul 2019 1,249 i
7.
 
Leica M10-P 139 mm 80 mm 39 mm 660 g 210 Y Aug 2018 7,995 i
8.
 
Leica M10 139 mm 80 mm 39 mm 660 g 210 Y Jan 2017 6,595 i
9.
 
Leica M Typ 262 139 mm 80 mm 42 mm 680 g .. Y Nov 2015 5,195i
10.
 
Leica Q Typ 116 130 mm 80 mm 93 mm 640 g 300 n Jun 2015 4,249i
11.
 
Leica M Typ 240 139 mm 80 mm 42 mm 680 g .. Y Sep 2012 6,950i
12.
 
Sony A7S III 127 mm 97 mm 81 mm 699 g 600 Y Jul 2020 3,499 i
13.
 
Sony A7C 124 mm 71 mm 60 mm 509 g 740 Y Sep 2020 1,799 i
14.
 
Sony A7R IV 129 mm 96 mm 78 mm 665 g 670 Y Jul 2019 3,499 i
15.
 
Sony A7 III 127 mm 96 mm 74 mm 650 g 610 Y Feb 2018 1,999 i
16.
 
Sony A9 127 mm 96 mm 63 mm 673 g 650 Y Apr 2017 4,499i
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 manufacturer’s suggested retail prices give an idea on the placement of the camera in the maker’s lineup and the broader market. The M-E Typ 240 was launched at a somewhat lower price (by 11 percent) than the A9 II, which makes it more attractive for photographers on a tight budget. 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.

ad

Sensor comparison

The size of the sensor inside a digital camera is one of the key determinants of image quality. All other things equal, a large sensor will have larger individual pixel-units that offer better low-light sensitivity, wider dynamic range, and 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 are more costly to manufacture and tend to lead to bigger and heavier cameras and lenses.

Both cameras under consideration feature a full frame sensor, but their sensors differ slightly in size. The sensor area in the A9 II is 1 percent smaller. They nevertheless have the same format factor of 1.0. Both cameras have a native aspect ratio (sensor width to sensor height) of 3:2.

Leica M-E Typ 240 and Sony A9 II sensor measures

Despite having a slightly smaller sensor, the A9 II 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 5.94μm versus 6.01μm for the M-E Typ 240). However, it should be noted that the A9 II is a somewhat more recent model (by 3 months) than the M-E Typ 240, and its sensor might have benefitted from technological advances during this time that partly offset its pixel-size disadvantage.

The A9 II 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 Sony Alpha A9 II are ISO 100 to ISO 51200, with the possibility to increase the ISO range to 50-204800.

M-E Typ 240 versus A9 II MP

Since 2007, DXO Mark has published sensor performance measurements that have been derived using a consistent methodology. 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 adjacent table reports on the physical sensor characteristics and the outcomes of the DXO sensor quality tests for a sample of comparator-cameras.

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.
 
Sony A9 II Full Frame 24.0 6000 40004K/30p25.014.0343493
3.
 
Fujifilm GFX 50R Medium Format 51.1 8256 61921080/30p........
4.
 
Leica M10-R Full Frame 40.9 7864 5200none........
5.
 
Leica Q2 Full Frame 46.7 8368 55844K/30p26.413.5249196
6.
 
Leica V-LUX 5 1-inch 20.0 5472 36484K/30p........
7.
 
Leica M10-P Full Frame 23.8 5952 3992none........
8.
 
Leica M10 Full Frame 23.8 5952 3992none24.413.2213386
9.
 
Leica M Typ 262 Full Frame 23.7 5952 3976none........
10.
 
Leica Q Typ 116 Full Frame 24.0 6000 40001080/60p24.312.7222185
11.
 
Leica M Typ 240 Full Frame 23.7 5952 39761080/25p24.013.3186084
12.
 
Sony A7S III Full Frame 12.0 4240 28324K/120p23.713.9252086
13.
 
Sony A7C Full Frame 24.0 6000 40004K/30p25.014.7340795
14.
 
Sony A7R IV Full Frame 60.2 9504 63364K/30p26.014.8334499
15.
 
Sony A7 III Full Frame 24.0 6000 40004K/30p25.014.7373096
16.
 
Sony A9 Full Frame 24.0 6000 40004K/30p24.913.3351792

Many modern cameras cannot only take still pictures, but also record videos. Both cameras under consideration are equipped with sensors that have a sufficiently high read-out speed for moving images, but the A9 II 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.

ad

Feature comparison

Beyond body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. For example, the A9 II has an electronic viewfinder (3686k dots), while the M-E Typ 240 has an optical one. Both systems have their advantages, with the electronic viewfinder making it possible to project supplementary shooting information into the framing view, whereas the optical viewfinder offers lag-free viewing and a very clear framing image. The viewfinders of both cameras offer the same field of view (100%), but the viewfinder of the A9 II has a higher magnification than the one of the M-E Typ 240 (0.78x vs 0.68x), so that the size of the image transmitted appears closer to the size seen with the naked human eye. The adjacent table lists some of the other core features of the Leica M-E Typ 240 and Sony A9 II along with similar information for a selection of comparators.

scroll hint
Core Features
    Camera
Model
Viewfinder
(Type or
000 dots)
Control
Panel
(yes/no)
LCD
Size
(inch)
LCD
Resolution
(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 n 3.0 920 fixed n 1/4000s 3.0 n n
2.
 
Sony A9 II3686 n 3.0 1440 tilting Y 1/8000s 10.0 n Y
3.
 
Fujifilm GFX 50R3690 n 3.2 2360 tilting Y 1/4000s 3.0 n n
4.
 
Leica M10-Roptical n 3.0 1037 fixed Y 1/4000s 4.5 n n
5.
 
Leica Q23680 n 3.0 1040 fixed Y 1/2000s 20.0 n Y
6.
 
Leica V-LUX 52360 n 3.0 1240 swivel Y 1/4000s 12.0 Y Y
7.
 
Leica M10-Poptical n 3.0 1037 fixed Y 1/4000s 5.0 n n
8.
 
Leica M10optical n 3.0 1037 fixed n 1/4000s 5.0 n n
9.
 
Leica M Typ 262optical n 3.0 921 fixed n 1/4000s 3.0 n n
10.
 
Leica Q Typ 1163680 n 3.0 1040 fixed Y 1/2000s 10.0 n Y
11.
 
Leica M Typ 240optical n 3.0 920 fixed n 1/4000s 3.0 n n
12.
 
Sony A7S III9440 n 3.0 1440 swivel Y 1/8000s 10.0 n Y
13.
 
Sony A7C2360 n 3.0 922 swivel Y 1/4000s 10.0 n Y
14.
 
Sony A7R IV5760 n 3.0 1440 tilting Y 1/8000s 10.0 n Y
15.
 
Sony A7 III2359 n 3.0 922 tilting Y 1/8000s 10.0 n Y
16.
 
Sony A93686 n 3.0 1440 tilting Y 1/8000s 20.0 n Y

One differentiating feature between the two cameras concerns the touch sensitivity of the rear screen. The A9 II 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 reported shutter speed information refers to the use of the mechanical shutter. Yet, some cameras only have an electronic shutter, while others have an electronic shutter in addition to a mechanical one. In fact, the A9 II is one of those camera that have an additional electronic shutter, which makes completely silent shooting possible. However, this mode is less suitable for photographing moving objects (risk of rolling shutter) or shooting under artificial light sources (risk of flickering).

The Sony A9 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 A9 II write their files to SDXC cards. The A9 II features dual card slots, which can be very useful in case a memory card fails. In contrast, the M-E Typ 240 only has one slot. The A9 II supports UHS-II cards (on both slots), while the M-E Typ 240 can use UHS-I cards.

ad

Connectivity comparison

For some imaging applications, the extent to which a camera can communicate with its environment can be an important aspect in the camera decision process. The table below provides an overview of the connectivity of the Leica M-E (Typ 240) and Sony Alpha A9 II 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
Microphone
Internal
Speaker
Microphone
Port
Headphone
Port
HDMI
Port
USB
Port
WiFi
Support
NFC
Support
Bluetooth
Support
1.
 
Leica M-E Typ 240Ymono----2.0---
2.
 
Sony A9 IIYstereomonoYYmicro3.1YYY
3.
 
Fujifilm GFX 50RYstereomonoYYmicro3.0Y-Y
4.
 
Leica M10-RY------Y--
5.
 
Leica Q2Ystereomono----Y-Y
6.
 
Leica V-LUX 5Ystereomono--micro2.0Y-Y
7.
 
Leica M10-PY------Y--
8.
 
Leica M10Y------Y--
9.
 
Leica M Typ 262Y-----2.0---
10.
 
Leica Q Typ 116Ystereomono--micro2.0YY-
11.
 
Leica M Typ 240Ystereomono---2.0---
12.
 
Sony A7S IIIYstereomonoYYfull3.2Y-Y
13.
 
Sony A7CYstereomonoYYmicro3.2YYY
14.
 
Sony A7R IVYstereomonoYYmicro3.1YYY
15.
 
Sony A7 IIIYstereomonoYYmicro3.1YYY
16.
 
Sony A9YstereomonoYYmicro2.0YYY

It is notable that the A9 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.

Studio photographers will appreciate that the Sony A9 II (unlike the M-E Typ 240) features a PC Sync socket, so that professional strobe lights can be controlled by the camera.

Both the M-E Typ 240 and the A9 II are recent models that are part of the current product line-up. The A9 II replaced the earlier Sony A9, 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 Sony websites.

ad

Review summary

So what conclusions can be drawn? Is the Leica M-E Typ 240 better than the Sony A9 II or vice versa? A synthesis of the relative strong points of each of the models is listed below.

ilogo

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

  • Brighter framing: Features an optical viewfinder for clear, lag-free composition.
  • More prestigious: Has the Leica luxury appeal, which ensures a high resale price.
  • More affordable: Was introduced into a lower priced segment (11 percent cheaper at launch).
  • More heavily discounted: Has been on the market for longer (launched in June 2019).

ilogo

Advantages of the Sony Alpha A9 II:

  • Better video: Provides higher definition movie capture (4K/30p vs 1080/25p).
  • Better live-view autofocus: Features on-sensor phase-detection for more confident autofocus.
  • Better sound: Can connect to an external microphone for higher quality sound recording.
  • Better sound control: Has a headphone port that enables audio monitoring while recording.
  • More framing info: Has an electronic viewfinder that displays shooting data.
  • Larger viewfinder image: Features a viewfinder with a higher magnification (0.78x vs 0.68x).
  • More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1440k vs 920k dots).
  • More flexible LCD: Has a tilting screen for odd-angle shots in landscape orientation.
  • Fewer buttons to press: Has a touchscreen to facilitate handling and shooting adjustments.
  • Faster shutter: Has higher mechanical shutter speed (1/8000s vs 1/4000s) to freeze action.
  • Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (10 vs 3 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
  • Less disturbing: Has an electronic shutter option for completely silent shooting.
  • Easier time-lapse photography: Has an intervalometer built-in for low frequency shooting.
  • 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 (3.1 vs 2.0).
  • 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.
  • Easier wireless transfer: Supports Bluetooth for image sharing without cables.
  • Better studio light control: Has a PC Sync socket to connect to professional strobe lights.
  • Greater peace of mind: Features a second card slot as a backup in case of memory card failure.
  • Faster buffer clearing: Supports a more advanced SD data transfer standard (UHS-II vs UHS-I).
  • More modern: Was introduced somewhat (3 months) more recently.

If the count of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a measure, the A9 II is the clear winner of the contest (23 : 4 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 04:23 A9 II

In any case, while the specs-based evaluation of cameras can be instructive in revealing their potential as photographic tools, it remains partial and cannot reveal, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance when actually working with the M-E Typ 240 or the A9 II. 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 following table reports the overall ratings of the cameras as published by some of the major camera review sites (amateurphotographer [AP], cameralabs [CL], 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 
 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.
 
Sony A9 II....90/1005/55/5 Oct 2019 4,499 i
3.
 
Fujifilm GFX 50R5/5..84/1004.5/54.5/5 Sep 2018 4,499 i
4.
 
Leica M10-R4.5/5......4/5 Jul 2020 8,295 i
5.
 
Leica Q2....84/1004.5/54/5 Mar 2019 4,995 i
6.
 
Leica V-LUX 5......4/54/5 Jul 2019 1,249 i
7.
 
Leica M10-P........4/5 Aug 2018 7,995 i
8.
 
Leica M104.5/5....4/54.5/5 Jan 2017 6,595 i
9.
 
Leica M Typ 262.......... Nov 2015 5,195i
10.
 
Leica Q Typ 1165/5..80/1004.5/54.5/5 Jun 2015 4,249i
11.
 
Leica M Typ 2404/5....4/5.. Sep 2012 6,950i
12.
 
Sony A7S III..+ +91/1004.5/55/5 Jul 2020 3,499 i
13.
 
Sony A7C3.5/5..86/1004/54/5 Sep 2020 1,799 i
14.
 
Sony A7R IV5/5+91/1004.5/55/5 Jul 2019 3,499 i
15.
 
Sony A7 III..+ +89/1005/55/5 Feb 2018 1,999 i
16.
 
Sony A95/5+ +89/1005/55/5 Apr 2017 4,499i
Notes: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available.

Care should be taken when interpreting the review scores above, though. The ratings were established in reference to similarly priced cameras that were available in the market at the time of the review. Hence, a score should always be seen in the context of the camera's market launch date and its price, and comparisons of ratings among very different cameras or across long time periods have little meaning. Also, please note that some of the review sites have changed their methodology and reporting over time.

Leica M-E Typ 240:
Check Amazon price
Sony A9 II:
Check Amazon price

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 a corresponding selection in the search boxes below. There is also a set of direct links to comparison reviews that other users of the CAM-parator app explored.

~
    loader

    Specifications: Leica M-E Typ 240 vs Sony A9 II

    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 Sony A9 II
    Camera Type Rangefinder camera Mirrorless system camera
    Camera Lens Leica M mount lenses Sony E mount lenses
    Launch Date June 2019 October 2019
    Launch Price USD 3,999 USD 4,499
    Sensor Specs Leica M-E Typ 240 Sony A9 II
    Sensor Technology CMOS BSI-CMOS
    Sensor Format Full Frame Sensor Full Frame Sensor
    Sensor Size 35.8 x 23.9 mm 35.6 x 23.8 mm
    Sensor Area 855.62 mm2 847.28 mm2
    Sensor Diagonal 43 mm 42.8 mm
    Crop Factor 1.0x 1.0x
    Sensor Resolution 23.7 Megapixels 24 Megapixels
    Image Resolution 5952 x 3976 pixels 6000 x 4000 pixels
    Pixel Pitch 6.01 μm 5.94 μm
    Pixel Density 2.77 MP/cm2 2.83 MP/cm2
    Moiré control Anti-Alias filter Anti-Alias filter
    Movie Capability 1080/25p Video 4K/30p Video
    ISO Setting 200 - 6,400 ISO 100 - 51,200 ISO
    ISO Boost 100 - 6,400 ISO 50 - 204,800 ISO
    DXO Sensor Quality (score) .. 93
    DXO Color Depth (bits) .. 25.0
    DXO Dynamic Range (EV) .. 14.0
    DXO Low Light (ISO) .. 3434
    Screen Specs Leica M-E Typ 240 Sony A9 II
    Viewfinder Type Optical viewfinder Electronic viewfinder
    Viewfinder Field of View 100% 100%
    Viewfinder Magnification 0.68x 0.78x
    Viewfinder Resolution 3686k dots
    LCD Framing Live View Live View
    Rear LCD Size 3.0inch 3.0inch
    LCD Resolution 920k dots 1440k dots
    LCD Attachment Fixed screen Tilting screen
    Touch Input no Touchscreen Touchscreen
    Shooting Specs Leica M-E Typ 240 Sony A9 II
    Focus System Manual Focus On-Sensor Phase-detect
    Manual Focusing AidFocus PeakingFocus Peaking
    Max Shutter Speed (mechanical) 1/4000s 1/8000s
    Continuous Shooting 3 shutter flaps/s 10 shutter flaps/s
    Electronic Shutterno E-Shutterup to 1/32000s
    Time-Lapse Photographyno IntervalometerIntervalometer built-in
    Image Stabilizationno shake reductionIn-body stabilization
    Fill Flash no On-Board Flash no On-Board Flash
    Storage Medium SDXC cards SDXC cards
    Second Storage Option Single card slot Dual card slots
    UHS card support UHS-I Dual UHS-II
    Connectivity Specs Leica M-E Typ 240 Sony A9 II
    External Flash Hotshoe Hotshoe
    Studio Flash no PC Sync PC Sync socket
    USB Connector USB 2.0 USB 3.1
    HDMI Port no HDMI micro HDMI
    Microphone Port no MIC socket External MIC port
    Headphone Socket no Headphone port Headphone port
    Wifi Support no Wifi Wifi built-in
    Near-Field Communication no NFC NFC built-in
    Bluetooth Support no Bluetooth Bluetooth built-in
    Body Specs Leica M-E Typ 240 Sony A9 II
    Environmental SealingWeathersealed bodyWeathersealed body
    Battery Type BP-SCL2 NP-FZ100
    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)
    129 x 96 x 76 mm
    (5.1 x 3.8 x 3.0 in)
    Camera Weight 680 g (24.0 oz) 678 g (23.9 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 Sony A9 II

    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 by pressing "Crtl" + "D".
    • 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.