PW

Leica M Typ 240 versus Leica Q Typ 116

The Leica M (Typ 240) and the Leica Q (Typ 116) are two enthusiast cameras that were officially introduced, respectively, in September 2012 and June 2015. The M Typ 240 is a rangefinder-style mirrorless camera, while the Q Typ 116 is a fixed lens compact. Both cameras are equipped with a full frame sensor. The M Typ 240 has a resolution of 23.7 megapixel, whereas the Q Typ 116 provides 24 MP. Read on to find out how these two cameras compare with respect to their size, their sensors, their features, and their reception by expert reviewers.

Body comparison: Leica M Typ 240 vs Leica Q Typ 116

An illustration of the physical size and weight of the Leica M Typ 240 and the Leica Q Typ 116 is provided in the side-by-side display below. Three consecutive views from the front, the top, and the rear side are shown. All width, height and depth measures 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).

Snapsort Leica M Typ 240 vs Leica Q Typ 116
Compare M Typ 240 versus Q Typ 116 top
Compare M Typ 240 and Q Typ 116 rear

If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Leica Q Typ 116 is notably smaller (6 percent) than the Leica M Typ 240. It is worth mentioning in this context that the M Typ 240 is splash and dust resistant, while the Q Typ 116 does not feature any corresponding weather-sealing.

The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete and possibly misleading, as the Q Typ 116 has a lens build in, whereas the M 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 find an overview of optics for the M Typ 240 and their specifications 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 camera comparisons there.

Camera Body Specifications
  Camera
Model
Camera
Width
Camera
Height
Camera
Depth
Camera
Weight
Battery
Life
(CIPA)
Weather
Sealing
(yes/no)
Camera
Launch
(announced)
Launch
Price
(USD)
Street
Price
(USD)
Used
Price
(USD)
Leica M Typ 240» 139 mm 80 mm 42 mm 680 g .. Y Sep 2012 6,950- i
Leica Q Typ 116« 130 mm 80 mm 93 mm 640 g 300 n Jun 2015 4,249 i i
Canon 1D X Mark II« » 158 mm 168 mm 83 mm 1530 g 1210 Y Feb 2016 5,999 i i
Canon 750D« » 132 mm 101 mm 78 mm 555 g 440 n Feb 2015 749- i
Canon G7 X« » 103 mm 60 mm 40 mm 304 g 210 n Sep 2014 699- i
Canon 6D« » 145 mm 111 mm 71 mm 770 g 1090 Y Sep 2012 2,099- i
Leica M10« » 139 mm 80 mm 39 mm 660 g 210 n Jan 2017 6,595 i i
Leica SL« » 147 mm 104 mm 39 mm 847 g 400 Y Oct 2015 7,450 i i
Leica M Typ 262« » 139 mm 80 mm 42 mm 680 g .. Y Nov 2015 5,195- i
Leica M9« » 139 mm 80 mm 37 mm 585 g .. n Sep 2009 7,999- i
Nikon D5« » 160 mm 159 mm 92 mm 1415 g 3780 Y Jan 2016 6,499 i i
Nikon D7100« » 136 mm 107 mm 76 mm 765 g 950 Y Feb 2013 1,199- i
Nikon D610« » 141 mm 113 mm 82 mm 850 g 900 Y Oct 2013 1,999 i i
Sony RX100 V« » 102 mm 58 mm 41 mm 299 g 220 n Oct 2016 999 i i
Sony RX100 IV« » 102 mm 58 mm 41 mm 298 g 280 n Jun 2015 999- i
Sony RX10« » 129 mm 88 mm 102 mm 813 g 420 Y Oct 2013 1,299- i

The price is, of course, an important factor in any camera decision. The listed launch prices provide an indication of the market segment that the manufacturer of the cameras have been targeting. The Q Typ 116 was launched at a lower price than the M Typ 240, despite having a lens build 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. Then, after the new model is out, very good deals can frequently be found on the pre-owned market.

 

Sensor comparison: Leica M Typ 240 vs Leica Q Typ 116

The size of the sensor inside a digital camera is one of the key determinants of image quality. A large sensor will tend to have larger individual pixels that provide better low-light sensitivity, wider dynamic range, and richer color depth than smaller pixel-units in a sensor of the same technological generation. Moreover, a large sensor camera will give the photographer more control over depth-of-field in the image and, thus, the ability to better 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 Q Typ 116 is 1 percent bigger. 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 Typ 240 and Leica Q Typ 116 sensor measures

With 24MP, the Q Typ 116 offers a higher resolution than the M Typ 240 (23.7MP), but the Q Typ 116 has marginally smaller individual pixels (pixel pitch of 6.00μm versus 6.01μm for the M Typ 240). Yet, the Q Typ 116 is a much more recent model (by 2 years and 8 months) than the M Typ 240, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that enhance the light gathering capacity of its pixel-units.

M Typ 240 versus Q Typ 116 MP

For most cameras, data on sensor performance has been reported by DXO Mark. This service assesses and scores the color depth ("DXO Portrait"), dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), and low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports") of camera sensors, and also publishes an overall camera score. The Overall DXO ratings for the two cameras under consideration are close, suggesting that they provide similar image quality. 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 Sensor
Class
Resolution
(MP)
Horiz.
Pixels
Vert.
Pixels
Video
Format
DXO
Portrait
DXO
Landscape
DXO
Sports
DXO
Overall
Leica M Typ 240» Full Frame 23.7 5952 39761080/25p24.013.3186084
Leica Q Typ 116« Full Frame 24.0 6000 40001080/60p24.312.7222185
Canon 1D X Mark II« » Full Frame 20.0 5472 36484K/60p24.113.5320788
Canon 750D« » APS-C 24.0 6000 40001080/60p22.712.091971
Canon G7 X« » 1-inch 20.0 5472 36481080/60p23.012.755671
Canon 6D« » Full Frame 20.0 5472 36481080/30p23.812.1234082
Leica M10« » Full Frame 23.8 5952 3992-24.413.2213386
Leica SL« » Full Frame 24.0 6000 40004K/30p25.013.4182188
Leica M Typ 262« » Full Frame 23.7 5952 3976-----
Leica M9« » Full Frame 18.1 5212 3472-22.511.788469
Nikon D5« » Full Frame 20.7 5588 37124K/30p25.112.3234388
Nikon D7100« » APS-C 24.0 6000 40001080/60p24.213.7125683
Nikon D610« » Full Frame 24.2 6016 40161080/30p25.114.4292594
Sony RX100 V« » 1-inch 20.0 5472 36484K/30p22.812.458670
Sony RX100 IV« » 1-inch 20.0 5472 36484K/30p22.812.659170
Sony RX10« » 1-inch 20.0 5472 36481080/60p22.912.647469

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 Q Typ 116 provides a faster frame rate than the M Typ 240. It can shoot movie footage at 1080/60p, while the M Typ 240 is limited to 1080/25p.

 

Feature comparison: Leica M Typ 240 vs Leica Q Typ 116

Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. For example, the Q Typ 116 has an electronic viewfinder (3680k dots), while the M 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 table below summarizes some of the other core capabilities of the Leica M Typ 240 and Leica Q Typ 116 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.

Core Features
  Camera Viewfinder
(Type or
'000 dots)
Control
Panel
(yes/no)
LCD
Size
(inch)
LCD
Resolution
('000 dots)
LCD
Attach-
ment
Touch
Screen
(yes/no)
Shutter
speed
(1/sec)
Shutter
flaps
(1/sec))
Build-in
Flash
(yes/no)
Build-in
Image
Stab
Leica M Typ 240»optical n 3.0 920 fixed n 4000 3.0 n n
Leica Q Typ 116«3680 n 3.0 1040 fixed Y 2000 10.0 n n
Canon 1D X Mark II« »optical Y 3.2 1620 fixed Y 8000 16.0 n n
Canon 750D« »optical n 3.0 1040 swivel Y 4000 5.0 Y n
Canon G7 X« »- n 3.0 1040 tilting Y 2000 6.5 Y Y
Canon 6D« »optical Y 3.0 1040 fixed n 4000 4.5 n n
Leica M10« »optical n 3.0 1037 fixed n 4000 5.0 n n
Leica SL« »4400 Y 3.0 1040 fixed Y 8000 11.0 n n
Leica M Typ 262« »optical n 3.0 921 fixed n 4000 3.0 n n
Leica M9« »optical n 2.5 230 fixed n 4000 2.0 n n
Nikon D5« »optical Y 3.2 2359 fixed Y 8000 14.0 n n
Nikon D7100« »optical Y 3.2 1229 fixed n 8000 6.0 Y n
Nikon D610« »optical Y 3.2 921 fixed n 4000 6.0 Y n
Sony RX100 V« »2359 n 3.0 1229 tilting n 2000 24.0 Y Y
Sony RX100 IV« »2359 n 3.0 1228 tilting n 2000 16.0 Y Y
Sony RX10« »1440 Y 3.0 1229 tilting n 3200 10.0 Y Y

The Q Typ 116 is a current model that online retailers, such as amazon, will have in stock. In contrast, the M Typ 240 has been discontinued (but it can be found pre-owned on eBay). As a replacement in the same line of cameras, the M Typ 240 was succeeded by the Leica M Typ 262.

Review summary: Leica M Typ 240 vs Leica Q Typ 116

So what conclusions can be drawn? Is the Leica M Typ 240 better than the Leica Q Typ 116 or vice versa? The listing below highlights the relative strengths of the two models.


Advantages of the Leica M (Typ 240):

  • More dynamic range: Captures a larger spectrum of light and dark details (0.6 EV of extra DR).
  • Brighter framing: Features an optical viewfinder for clear, lag-free composition.
  • Faster shutter: Has higher mechanical shutter speed (4000/sec vs 2000/sec) to freeze action.
  • More flexible: Accepts interchangeable lenses, so that lens characteristics can be altered.
  • Better sealing: Is weather sealed to enable shooting in dusty or wet environments.
  • More heavily discounted: Has been available for much longer (launched in September 2012).


Reasons to prefer the Leica Q (Typ 116):

  • Better video: Provides higher movie framerates (1080/60p versus 1080/25p).
  • More framing info: Has an electronic viewfinder that displays shooting data.
  • More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1040k vs 920k dots).
  • Fewer buttons to press: Has a touchscreen to facilitate handling and shooting adjustments.
  • Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (10 vs 3 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
  • Ready to shoot: Has an integrated lens, whereas the M Typ 240 necessitates an extra lens.
  • Less heavy: Has a lower weight even though it has a lens build in (unlike the M Typ 240).
  • More affordable: Was introduced at a lower price, despite coming with a build-in lens.
  • More modern: Reflects 2 years and 8 months of technical progress since the M Typ 240 launch.

If the number of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the Q Typ 116 emerges as the winner of the match-up (9 : 6 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.

M Typ 240 06:09 Q Typ 116

In any case, while the comparison of technical specifications can provide a useful overview of the capabilities of different cameras, it remains incomplete and does no justice, for example, to the way the M Typ 240 or the Q Typ 116 handle or perform in practice. 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 why hands-on reviews by experts are important. The following table reports the overall rankings of the cameras as published by some of the major camera review sites (cameralabs, dpreview, ephotozine, imaging-resource, photographyblog). The full reviews are available by clicking on the site logo in the table header.

Review scores
  Camera cameralabs dpreview ephotozine imaging-resource photographyblog Camera
Launch
(announced)
Launch
Price
(USD)
Street
Price
(USD)
Used
Price
(USD)
Leica M Typ 240»--4/5-- Sep 2012 6,950- i
Leica Q Typ 116«-80/1004.5/5-4.5/5 Jun 2015 4,249 i i
Canon 1D X Mark II« »-89/1004.5/55/54.5/5 Feb 2016 5,999 i i
Canon 750D« »-75/1004.5/54.5/54.5/5 Feb 2015 749- i
Canon G7 X« »HiRec77/1004.5/53.5/54.5/5 Sep 2014 699- i
Canon 6D« »HiRec83/1004.5/54.5/54.5/5 Sep 2012 2,099- i
Leica M10« »--4/5-4.5/5 Jan 2017 6,595 i i
Leica SL« »-84/1004.5/54/54/5 Oct 2015 7,450 i i
Leica M Typ 262« »----- Nov 2015 5,195- i
Leica M9« »--4.5/54.5/5- Sep 2009 7,999- i
Nikon D5« »-89/1004.5/55/55/5 Jan 2016 6,499 i i
Nikon D7100« »HiRec85/1004.5/55/54.5/5 Feb 2013 1,199- i
Nikon D610« »HiRec87/1004.5/54.5/54.5/5 Oct 2013 1,999 i i
Sony RX100 V« »HiRec83/1004/55/54.5/5 Oct 2016 999 i i
Sony RX100 IV« »HiRec85/1004/54.5/54.5/5 Jun 2015 999- i
Sony RX10« »Rec80/1004.5/54.5/54.5/5 Oct 2013 1,299- i

The above review scores should be interpreted with care, though. The ratings are only valid when refering to cameras in the same category and of the same age. 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? If you would like to see a different side-by-side camera review, just use the search menu below. There is also a set of direct links to comparison reviews that other users of the CAM-parator app explored. If you do not see the camera that you are looking for, kindly get in touch, and I will try to add information on that model to the database.

vs

    You are here  »   »