Leica M Typ 240 versus Leica M Typ 262
The Leica M (Typ 240) and the Leica M (Typ 262) are two enthusiast cameras that were announced, respectively, in September 2012 and November 2015. Both the M Typ 240 and the M Typ 262 are rangefinder-style mirrorless cameras that are equipped with a full frame sensor. Both cameras offer a resolution of 23.7 megapixel.
An illustration of the physical size and weight of the Leica M Typ 240 and the Leica M Typ 262 is provided in the side-by-side display below. Three successive views from the front, the top, and the rear are shown. All size dimensions are rounded to the nearest millimeter. If you prefer, you can also use the toggle button to switch to a comparison in percentage terms (in this case, the camera on the left – the M Typ 240 – represents 100 percent across all the size and weight measures).
In this particular case, the Leica M Typ 240 and the Leica M Typ 262 have exactly the same width and height, and, thus, have identically-sized bodies. Moreover, the two cameras also share the same weight. Cameras intended for semi-professional or professional use tend to be a bit bulkier in order to give them the necessary ruggedness. 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. In this particular case, both cameras feature the same lens mount, so that they can use the same lenses. You can find an overview of suitable optics in the Leica M Lens Catalog.
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, just select a new right or left comparator from among the camera models in the table. Alternatively, you can also move across to the CAM-parator tool and choose from the broad selection of possible comparisons there.
|Camera Body Specifications
|Leica M Typ 240 (⇒ rgt)||5.5 in||3.1 in||1.7 in||24.0 oz||..||YES||2012||6,950||discont.||check|
|Leica M Typ 262 (⇒ lft)||5.5 in||3.1 in||1.7 in||24.0 oz||..||YES||2015||5,195||discont.||check|
|Canon M5 (⇒ lft | rgt)||4.6 in||3.5 in||2.4 in||15.1 oz||295||no||2016||979||latest||check|
|Canon 1D X Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||6.2 in||6.6 in||3.3 in||54.0 oz||1210||YES||2016||5,999||latest||check|
|Leica M10 (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.5 in||3.1 in||1.5 in||23.3 oz||210||no||2017||6,595||latest||check|
|Leica SL (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.8 in||4.1 in||1.5 in||29.9 oz||400||YES||2015||7,450||latest||check|
|Leica Q Typ 116 (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.1 in||3.1 in||3.7 in||22.6 oz||..||no||2015||4,249||latest||check|
|Leica M9 (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.5 in||3.1 in||1.5 in||20.6 oz||..||no||2009||7,999||discont.||check|
|Nikon D5 (⇒ lft | rgt)||6.3 in||6.3 in||3.6 in||49.9 oz||3780||YES||2016||6,499||latest||check|
|Nikon D7100 (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.4 in||4.2 in||3.0 in||27.0 oz||950||YES||2013||1,199||discont.||check|
|Nikon D610 (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.6 in||4.4 in||3.2 in||30.0 oz||900||YES||2013||1,999||latest||check|
|Sony A7 (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.0 in||3.7 in||1.9 in||16.7 oz||340||YES||2013||1,699||discont.||check|
|Sony RX10 (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.1 in||3.5 in||4.0 in||28.7 oz||420||YES||2013||1,299||discont.||check|
The listed prices provide an indication of the market segment that the manufacturer of the cameras have been targeting. The M Typ 262 was launched at a somewhat lower price (by 25 percent) than the M Typ 240, which makes it more attractive for photographers on a tight budget. Usually, retail prices stay at first close to the launch price, but after several months, discounts become available. Later in the product cycle and, in particular, when the replacement model is about to appear, further discounting and stock clearance sales often push the camera price considerably down. Then, after the new model is out, very good deals can frequently be found on the pre-owned market.
The imaging sensor is at the core of digital cameras and its size is one of the main determining factors 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 tent to lead to bigger and heavier cameras and lenses.
Both cameras under consideration feature a full frame sensor and have a format factor (sometimes also referred to as "crop factor") of 1.0. Within the spectrum of camera sensors, this places the review cameras among the large-sensor cameras that aim for top notch image quality. Both cameras have a native aspect ratio (sensor width to sensor height) of 3:2.
The two cameras under review do not only share the same sensor size, but also offer an identical resolution of 23.7 megapixel. This similarity in sensor specs implies that both the M Typ 240 and the M Typ 262 have the same pixel density, as well as the same pixel size. It should, however, be noted that the M Typ 262 is much more recent (by 3 years and 2 months) than the M Typ 240, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time. Coming back sensor resolution, it should be mentioned that the M Typ 262 has no anti-alias filter installed, so that it can capture all the detail its sensor resolves.
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 table below summarizes the physical sensor characteristics and sensor quality findings and compares them across a set of similar cameras.
|Leica M Typ 240 (⇒ rgt)||Full Frame||23.7||5952||3976||1080/25p||24.0||13.3||1860||84|
|Leica M Typ 262 (⇒ lft)||Full Frame||23.7||5952||3976||no||-||-||-||-|
|Canon M5 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||23.4||12.4||1262||77|
|Canon 1D X Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||Full Frame||20.0||5472||3648||4K/60p||24.1||13.5||3207||88|
|Leica M10 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Full Frame||23.8||5952||3992||no||..||..||..||..|
|Leica SL (⇒ lft | rgt)||Full Frame||24.0||6000||4000||4K/30p||25.0||13.4||1821||88|
|Leica Q Typ 116 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Full Frame||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||24.3||12.7||2221||85|
|Leica M9 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Full Frame||18.1||5212||3472||no||22.5||11.7||884||69|
|Nikon D5 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Full Frame||20.7||5588||3712||4K/30p||25.1||12.3||2343||88|
|Nikon D7100 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||24.2||13.7||1256||83|
|Nikon D610 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Full Frame||24.2||6016||4016||1080/30p||25.1||14.4||2925||94|
|Sony A7 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Full Frame||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||24.8||14.2||2248||90|
|Sony RX10 (⇒ lft | rgt)||1-inch||20.0||5472||3648||1080/60p||22.9||12.6||474||69|
Many modern cameras cannot only take still pictures, but also record videos. The M Typ 240 indeed provides movie recording capabilities, while the M Typ 262 does not. The highest resolution format that the M Typ 240 can use is 1080/25p.
Beyond body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. The M Typ 240 and the M Typ 262 are similar in the sense that both have an optical viewfinder. The latter is useful for getting a clear image for framing even in brightly lit environments. The table below summarizes some of the other core capabilities of the Leica M Typ 240 and Leica M Typ 262 in connection with corresponding information for a sample of similar cameras. If you need more detail on the specs, you can find comprehensive listings, for example, in the dpreview camera hub.
|Leica M Typ 240 (⇒ rgt)||optical||no||3.0||920||fixed||no||4000||3.0||no||no|
|Leica M Typ 262 (⇒ lft)||optical||no||3.0||921||fixed||no||4000||3.0||no||no|
|Canon M5 (⇒ lft | rgt)||2360||no||3.2||1620||tilting||YES||4000||9.0||5||no|
|Canon 1D X Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||3.2||1620||fixed||YES||8000||16.0||no||no|
|Leica M10 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||3.0||1037||fixed||no||4000||5.0||no||no|
|Leica SL (⇒ lft | rgt)||4400||YES||3.0||1040||fixed||YES||8000||11.0||no||no|
|Leica Q Typ 116 (⇒ lft | rgt)||3680||no||3.0||1040||fixed||YES||2000||10.0||no||no|
|Leica M9 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||2.5||230||fixed||no||4000||2.0||no||no|
|Nikon D5 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||3.2||2359||fixed||YES||8000||14.0||no||no|
|Nikon D7100 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||3.2||1229||fixed||no||8000||6.0||12||no|
|Nikon D610 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||3.2||921||fixed||no||4000||6.0||12||no|
|Sony A7 (⇒ lft | rgt)||2400||no||3.0||1230||tilting||no||8000||5.0||no||no|
|Sony RX10 (⇒ lft | rgt)||1440||YES||3.0||1229||tilting||no||3200||10.0||10.2||no|
Both the M Typ 240 and the M Typ 262 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The M Typ 240 was replaced by the Leica M Typ 262, while the M Typ 262 was followed by the Leica M10.
So what conclusions can be drawn? Is the Leica M Typ 240 better than the Leica M Typ 262 or vice versa? The listing below highlights the relative strengths of the two models.
Reasons to prefer the Leica M (Typ 240):
- Better moiré control: Has an anti-alias filter to avoid artificial patterns to appear in images.
- Broader imaging potential: Can record not only still images but also 1080/25p movies.
- More heavily discounted: Has been available for much longer (launched in September 2012).
Advantages of the Leica M (Typ 262):
- Maximized detail: Lacks an anti-alias filter to exploit the sensor's full resolution potential.
- More affordable: Was released into a lower priced segment (25 percent cheaper at launch).
- More modern: Reflects 3 years and 2 months of technical progress since the M Typ 240 launch.
If the count of individual advantages (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the match-up finishes in a tie (3 points each). However, the pertinence of the various camera strengths will differ across photographers, so that you might want to weigh individual camera traits according to their importance for your own imaging needs.
In any case, while the comparison of technical specifications can provide a useful overview of the capabilities of different cameras, it remains partial and cannot reveal, for example, the handling experience and imaging performance when actually working with the M Typ 240 or the M Typ 262. User reviews, such as those found at amazon, can sometimes inform about these issues, but such feedback is often incomplete, inconsistent, and biased. This is where reviews by experts come in. The table below summarizes the assessments of some of the best known camera review sites. You can find the full text of the reviews, respectively, at cameralabs.com, dpreview.com, ephotozine.com, imaging-resource.com, and photographyblog.com.
|Leica M Typ 240 (⇒ rgt)||-||-||4/5||-||-||2012||6,950||discont.||check|
|Leica M Typ 262 (⇒ lft)||-||-||-||-||-||2015||5,195||discont.||check|
|Canon M5 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Rec||82/100 Silver||4/5||4.5/5||4/5||2016||979||latest||check|
|Canon 1D X Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||89/100 Gold||4.5/5||5/5||4.5/5||2016||5,999||latest||check|
|Leica M10 (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||-||4/5||-||4.5/5||2017||6,595||latest||check|
|Leica SL (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||84/100||4.5/5||4/5||4/5||2015||7,450||latest||check|
|Leica Q Typ 116 (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||80/100 Silver||4.5/5||-||4.5/5||2015||4,249||latest||check|
|Leica M9 (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||-||4.5/5||4.5/5||-||2009||7,999||discont.||check|
|Nikon D5 (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||89/100 Gold||4.5/5||5/5||5/5||2016||6,499||latest||check|
|Nikon D7100 (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||85/100 Gold||4.5/5||5/5||4.5/5||2013||1,199||discont.||check|
|Nikon D610 (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||87/100 Gold||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||2013||1,999||latest||check|
|Sony A7 (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||80/100 Silver||5/5||4.5/5||5/5||2013||1,699||discont.||check|
|Sony RX10 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Rec||80/100 Gold||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||2013||1,299||discont.||check|
Care should be taken when interpreting the review scores above, though. The ratings are only valid when refering 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 comparing ratings of very distinct cameras or ones that are far apart in terms of their release date have little meaning. It should also be noted that some of the review sites have over time altered the way they render their verdicts.
If you would like to see a different side-by-side camera review, just make your choice using the following search menu. There is also a set of direct links to comparison reviews that other users of the CAM-parator app explored. If you cannot find the camera you are interested in, please contact me, and I will try to locate and add the respective data to the application.
- Canon 7D II vs Sony A7R III
- Canon G7 X Mark II vs Canon M10
- Canon G7 X Mark II vs Canon M3
- Kodak S-1 vs Panasonic G6
- Leica M10 vs Fujifilm X100T
- Nikon D300 vs Canon 7D II
- Olympus E-M10 II vs Olympus E-M1 II
- Panasonic G2 vs Panasonic L10
- Sony A9 vs Nikon D850
- Sony RX10 IV vs Sony RX100 V
- Sony RX100 II vs Panasonic FZ1000
- Sony RX1R vs Sony RX1R II