Leica M Typ 240 vs Olympus E-M5
The Leica M (Typ 240) and the Olympus OM-D E-M5 are two enthusiast cameras that were revealed to the public, respectively, in September 2012 and February 2012. The M Typ 240 is a rangefinder-focusing mirrorless, while the E-M5 is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera. The cameras are based on a full frame (M Typ 240) and a Four Thirds (E-M5) sensor. The Leica has a resolution of 23.7 megapixels, whereas the Olympus provides 15.9 MP.
Below is an overview of the main specs of the two cameras as a starting point for the comparison.
Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Leica M (Typ 240) and the Olympus OM-D E-M5? 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 Typ 240 and the Olympus E-M5 is provided in the side-by-side display below. The two cameras are presented according to their relative size. Three consecutive perspectives from the front, the top, and the back are available. All size dimensions are rounded to the nearest millimeter.
Both cameras are available in two different colors (black, silver).
If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Olympus E-M5 is somewhat smaller (2 percent) than the Leica M Typ 240. Moreover, the E-M5 is substantially lighter (38 percent) than the M 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. A larger imaging sensor will tend to go along with bigger and heavier lenses, although exceptions exist. You can compare the optics available for the two cameras in the Leica M Lens Catalog (M Typ 240) and the Micro Four Thirds Lens Catalog (E-M5).
Concerning battery life, the M Typ 240 gets 500 shots out of its Leica BP-SCL2 battery, while the E-M5 can take 360 images on a single charge of its Olympus BLN-1 power pack.
The table below summarizes the key physical specs of the two cameras alongside a broader set of comparators. In case you want to display and compare another camera duo, you can use the CAM-parator app to select your camera combination among a large number of options.
Camera Model |
Camera Width |
Camera Height |
Camera Depth |
Camera Weight |
Battery Life |
Weather Sealing |
Camera Launch |
Launch Price (USD) |
Street Price |
||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Leica M Typ 240 | 139 mm | 80 mm | 42 mm | 680 g | 500 | Y | Sep 2012 | 6,950 | ebay.com | |
2. | Olympus E-M5 | 122 mm | 89 mm | 43 mm | 425 g | 360 | Y | Feb 2012 | 1,299 | ebay.com | |
3. | Canon 6D | 145 mm | 111 mm | 71 mm | 770 g | 1090 | Y | Sep 2012 | 2,099 | ebay.com | |
4. | Canon 6D Mark II | 144 mm | 111 mm | 75 mm | 765 g | 1200 | Y | Jun 2017 | 1,999 | amazon.com | |
5. | Leica M-E Typ 240 | 139 mm | 80 mm | 42 mm | 680 g | 500 | Y | Jun 2019 | 3,999 | ebay.com | |
6. | Leica M Typ 262 | 139 mm | 80 mm | 42 mm | 680 g | 400 | Y | Nov 2015 | 5,195 | ebay.com | |
7. | Leica M9 | 139 mm | 80 mm | 37 mm | 585 g | 550 | n | Sep 2009 | 7,999 | ebay.com | |
8. | Leica M10 | 139 mm | 80 mm | 39 mm | 660 g | 210 | Y | Jan 2017 | 6,595 | ebay.com | |
9. | Leica M10-P | 139 mm | 80 mm | 39 mm | 660 g | 210 | Y | Aug 2018 | 7,995 | ebay.com | |
10. | Leica M10-R | 139 mm | 80 mm | 39 mm | 660 g | 210 | Y | Jul 2020 | 8,295 | ebay.com | |
11. | Leica M11 | 139 mm | 80 mm | 39 mm | 640 g | 700 | Y | Jan 2022 | 8,995 | amazon.com | |
12. | Leica SL | 147 mm | 104 mm | 39 mm | 847 g | 400 | Y | Oct 2015 | 7,450 | ebay.com | |
13. | Olympus E-M1 | 130 mm | 94 mm | 63 mm | 497 g | 350 | Y | Sep 2013 | 1,399 | ebay.com | |
14. | Olympus E-M5 II | 124 mm | 85 mm | 45 mm | 469 g | 310 | Y | Feb 2015 | 1,099 | ebay.com | |
15. | Olympus E-P5 | 122 mm | 69 mm | 37 mm | 420 g | 330 | n | May 2013 | 999 | ebay.com | |
16. | Olympus PEN-F | 125 mm | 72 mm | 37 mm | 427 g | 330 | n | Jan 2016 | 1,199 | ebay.com | |
17. | Panasonic GX7 | 123 mm | 71 mm | 55 mm | 402 g | 350 | n | Aug 2013 | 999 | ebay.com | |
Note: Measurements and pricing do not include easily detachable parts, such as add-on or interchangeable lenses or optional viewfinders. | |||||||||||
Any camera decision will obviously take relative prices into account. The listed launch prices provide an indication of the market segment that the manufacturer of the cameras have been targeting. The E-M5 was launched at a markedly lower price (by 81 percent) than the M Typ 240, which puts it into a different market segment. 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
The imaging sensor is at the core of digital cameras and its size is one of the main determining factors 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. 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 tend to be more expensive and lead to bigger and heavier cameras and lenses.
Of the two cameras under consideration, the Leica M Typ 240 features a full frame sensor and the Olympus E-M5 a Four Thirds sensor. The sensor area in the E-M5 is 74 percent smaller. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 1.0 and 2.0. The sensor in the M Typ 240 has a native 3:2 aspect ratio, while the one in the E-M5 offers a 4:3 aspect.
With 23.7MP, the M Typ 240 offers a higher resolution than the E-M5 (15.9MP), but the M Typ 240 nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 6.01μm versus 3.76μm for the E-M5) due to its larger sensor. Moreover, the M Typ 240 is a somewhat more recent model (by 7 months) than the E-M5, and its sensor might have benefitted from technological advances during this time that further enhance the light gathering capacity of its pixels.
The resolution advantage of the Leica M Typ 240 implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the M 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 Olympus E-M5 are 23 x 17.3 inches or 58.5 x 43.9 cm for good quality, 18.4 x 13.8 inches or 46.8 x 35.1 cm for very good quality, and 15.4 x 11.5 inches or 39 x 29.3 cm for excellent quality prints.
The Leica M (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 Olympus OM-D E-M5 are ISO 200 to ISO 25600 (no boost).
Technology-wise, both cameras are equipped with CMOS (Complementary Metal–Oxide–Semiconductor) sensors. Both cameras use a Bayer filter for capturing RGB colors on a square grid of photosensors. This arrangement is found in most digital cameras.
Since 2007, DXO Mark has published sensor performance measurements that have been derived using a consistent methodology. 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. Of the two cameras under review, the M Typ 240 provides substantially higher image quality than the E-M5, with an overall score that is 13 points higher. This advantage is based on 1.2 bits higher color depth, 1 EV in additional dynamic range, and 1.2 stops in additional low light sensitivity. The adjacent table reports on the physical sensor characteristics and the outcomes of the DXO sensor quality tests for a sample of comparator-cameras.
Camera Model |
Sensor Class |
Resolution (MP) |
Horiz. Pixels |
Vert. Pixels |
Video Format |
DXO Portrait |
DXO Landscape |
DXO Sports |
DXO Overall |
||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Leica M Typ 240 | Full Frame | 23.7 | 5952 | 3976 | 1080/25p | 24.0 | 13.3 | 1860 | 84 | |
2. | Olympus E-M5 | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/60i | 22.8 | 12.3 | 826 | 71 | |
3. | Canon 6D | Full Frame | 20.0 | 5472 | 3648 | 1080/30p | 23.8 | 12.1 | 2340 | 82 | |
4. | Canon 6D Mark II | Full Frame | 26.0 | 6240 | 4160 | 1080/60p | 24.4 | 11.9 | 2862 | 85 | |
5. | Leica M-E Typ 240 | Full Frame | 23.7 | 5952 | 3976 | 1080/25p | 25.2 | 14.2 | 2821 | 94 | |
6. | Leica M Typ 262 | Full Frame | 23.7 | 5952 | 3976 | none | 24.8 | 13.7 | 2478 | 90 | |
7. | Leica M9 | Full Frame | 18.1 | 5212 | 3472 | none | 22.5 | 11.7 | 884 | 69 | |
8. | Leica M10 | Full Frame | 23.8 | 5952 | 3992 | none | 24.4 | 13.2 | 2133 | 86 | |
9. | Leica M10-P | Full Frame | 23.8 | 5952 | 3992 | none | 25.1 | 14.1 | 2739 | 93 | |
10. | Leica M10-R | Full Frame | 40.9 | 7864 | 5200 | none | 25.3 | 14.3 | 2924 | 95 | |
11. | Leica M11 | Full Frame | 60.3 | 9528 | 6328 | none | 26.3 | 14.8 | 3376 | 100 | |
12. | Leica SL | Full Frame | 24.0 | 6000 | 4000 | 4K/30p | 25.0 | 13.4 | 1821 | 88 | |
13. | Olympus E-M1 | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/30p | 23.0 | 12.7 | 757 | 73 | |
14. | Olympus E-M5 II | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/60p | 23.0 | 12.5 | 842 | 73 | |
15. | Olympus E-P5 | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/30p | 22.8 | 12.4 | 895 | 72 | |
16. | Olympus PEN-F | Four Thirds | 20.2 | 5184 | 3888 | 1080/60p | 23.1 | 12.4 | 894 | 74 | |
17. | Panasonic GX7 | Four Thirds | 15.8 | 4592 | 3448 | 1080/60p | 22.6 | 12.2 | 718 | 70 | |
Note: DXO values in italics represent estimates based on sensor size and age. |
Many modern cameras are not only capable of taking still images, but can also record movies. Both cameras under consideration are equipped with sensors that have a sufficiently high read-out speed for moving images, but the E-M5 provides a faster frame rate than the M Typ 240. It can shoot movie footage at 1080/60i, while the Leica is limited to 1080/25p.
Feature comparison
Beyond body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. For example, the E-M5 has an electronic viewfinder (1440k 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 viewfinders of both cameras offer the same field of view (100%), but the viewfinder of the M Typ 240 has a higher magnification than the one of the E-M5 (0.68x vs 0.58x), so that the size of the image transmitted appears closer to the size seen with the naked human eye. The table below summarizes some of the other core capabilities of the Leica M Typ 240 and Olympus E-M5 in connection with corresponding information for a sample of similar cameras.
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 Typ 240 | optical | n | 3.0 / 920 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | n | n | |
2. | Olympus E-M5 | 1440 | n | 3.0 / 610 | tilting | Y | 1/4000s | 9.0/s | n | Y | |
3. | Canon 6D | optical | Y | 3.0 / 1040 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 4.5/s | n | n | |
4. | Canon 6D Mark II | optical | Y | 3.0 / 1040 | swivel | Y | 1/4000s | 6.5/s | n | n | |
5. | Leica M-E Typ 240 | optical | n | 3.0 / 920 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | n | n | |
6. | Leica M Typ 262 | optical | n | 3.0 / 921 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | n | n | |
7. | Leica M9 | optical | n | 2.5 / 230 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 2.0/s | n | n | |
8. | Leica M10 | optical | n | 3.0 / 1037 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 5.0/s | n | n | |
9. | Leica M10-P | optical | n | 3.0 / 1037 | fixed | Y | 1/4000s | 5.0/s | n | n | |
10. | Leica M10-R | optical | n | 3.0 / 1037 | fixed | Y | 1/4000s | 4.5/s | n | n | |
11. | Leica M11 | optical | n | 3.0 / 2333 | fixed | Y | 1/4000s | 4.5/s | n | n | |
12. | Leica SL | 4400 | Y | 3.0 / 1040 | fixed | Y | 1/8000s | 11.0/s | n | n | |
13. | Olympus E-M1 | 2360 | n | 3.0 / 1037 | tilting | Y | 1/8000s | 10.0/s | n | Y | |
14. | Olympus E-M5 II | 2360 | n | 3.0 / 1037 | swivel | Y | 1/8000s | 10.0/s | n | Y | |
15. | Olympus E-P5 | optional | n | 3.0 / 1037 | tilting | Y | 1/8000s | 9.0/s | Y | Y | |
16. | Olympus PEN-F | 2360 | n | 3.0 / 1037 | swivel | Y | 1/8000s | 10.0/s | n | Y | |
17. | Panasonic GX7 | 2760 | n | 3.0 / 1040 | tilting | Y | 1/8000s | 5.0/s | Y | Y | |
Note: *) Information refers to the mechanical shutter, unless the camera only has an electronic one. |
One differentiating feature between the two cameras concerns the touch sensitivity of the rear screen. The E-M5 has a touchscreen, while the M Typ 240 has a conventional panel. Touch control can be particularly helpful, for example, for setting the focus point.
Concerning the storage of imaging data, both the M Typ 240 and the E-M5 write their files to SDXC cards. Both cameras can use UHS-I cards, which provide for Ultra High Speed data transfer of up to 104 MB/s.
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 (Typ 240) and Olympus OM-D E-M5 and, in particular, the interfaces the cameras (and selected comparators) provide for accessory control and data transfer.
Camera Model |
Hotshoe Port |
Internal Mic / Speaker |
Microphone Port |
Headphone Port |
HDMI Port |
USB Port |
WiFi Support |
NFC Support |
Bluetooth Support |
||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Leica M Typ 240 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | - | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
2. | Olympus E-M5 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
3. | Canon 6D | Y | mono / mono | Y | - | mini | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
4. | Canon 6D Mark II | Y | stereo / mono | Y | - | mini | 2.0 | Y | Y | Y | |
5. | Leica M-E Typ 240 | Y | mono / - | - | - | - | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
6. | Leica M Typ 262 | Y | - / - | - | - | - | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
7. | Leica M9 | Y | - / - | - | - | - | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
8. | Leica M10 | Y | - / - | - | - | - | - | Y | - | - | |
9. | Leica M10-P | Y | - / - | - | - | - | - | Y | - | - | |
10. | Leica M10-R | Y | - / - | - | - | - | - | Y | - | - | |
11. | Leica M11 | Y | - / - | - | - | - | 3.2 | Y | - | Y | |
12. | Leica SL | Y | stereo / mono | Y | Y | full | 3.0 | Y | - | - | |
13. | Olympus E-M1 | Y | stereo / mono | Y | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
14. | Olympus E-M5 II | Y | stereo / mono | Y | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
15. | Olympus E-P5 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
16. | Olympus PEN-F | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
17. | Panasonic GX7 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | Y | Y | - |
Both the M Typ 240 and the E-M5 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The E-M5 was replaced by the Olympus E-M5 II, while the M Typ 240 was followed by the Leica M Typ 262. Further information on the features and operation of the M Typ 240 and E-M5 can be found, respectively, in the Leica M Typ 240 Manual (free pdf) or the online Olympus E-M5 Manual.
Review summary
So how do things add up? Is there a clear favorite between the Leica M Typ 240 and the Olympus E-M5? Which camera is better? A synthesis of the relative strong points of each of the models is listed below.
Advantages of the Leica M (Typ 240):
- More detail: Offers more megapixels (23.7 vs 15.9MP) with a 24% higher linear resolution.
- Better image quality: Scores substantially higher (13 points) in the DXO overall assessment.
- Richer colors: Generates images with noticeably better colors (1.2 bits more color depth).
- More dynamic range: Captures a larger spectrum of light and dark details (1 EV of extra DR).
- Better low-light sensitivity: Requires less light for good images (1.2 stops ISO advantage).
- Brighter framing: Features an optical viewfinder for clear, lag-free composition.
- Larger viewfinder image: Features a viewfinder with a higher magnification (0.68x vs 0.58x).
- More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (920k vs 610k dots).
- Longer lasting: Can take more shots (500 versus 360) on a single battery charge.
- More prestigious: Has the Leica luxury appeal, which ensures a high resale price.
- More modern: Is somewhat more recent (announced 7 months after the E-M5).
Reasons to prefer the Olympus OM-D E-M5:
- Better video: Provides higher movie framerates (1080/60i versus 1080/25p).
- More framing info: Has an electronic viewfinder that displays shooting data.
- 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 burst: Shoots at higher frequency (9 vs 3 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
- Less heavy: Has a lower weight (by 255g or 37 percent) and is thus easier to take along.
- Sharper images: Has stabilization technology built-in to reduce the impact of hand-shake.
- More affordable: Was introduced into a lower priced category (81 percent cheaper at launch).
- More heavily discounted: Has been on the market for longer (launched in February 2012).
If the count of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a measure, the M Typ 240 emerges as the winner of the contest (11 : 9 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. 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 comparison of technical specifications can provide a useful overview of the capabilities of different cameras, it says little about, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance of the M Typ 240 and the E-M5 in practical situations. User reviews, such as those found at amazon, can sometimes inform about these issues, but such feedback is often incomplete, inconsistent, and biased.
Expert reviews
This is where reviews by experts come in. The following table reports the overall ratings of the cameras as published by some of the major 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.
Camera Model |
AP score |
CL score |
DCW score |
DPR score |
EPZ score |
PB score |
Camera Launch |
Launch Price (USD) |
Street Price |
||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Leica M Typ 240 | 4/5 | .. | .. | .. | 4/5 | .. | Sep 2012 | 6,950 | ebay.com | |
2. | Olympus E-M5 | 4/5 | + + | .. | 80/100 | 4.5/5 | 5/5 | Feb 2012 | 1,299 | ebay.com | |
3. | Canon 6D | 5/5 | + + | .. | 83/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Sep 2012 | 2,099 | ebay.com | |
4. | Canon 6D Mark II | 4/5 | + | 4/5 | 80/100 | 4.5/5 | 4/5 | Jun 2017 | 1,999 | amazon.com | |
5. | Leica M-E Typ 240 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | Jun 2019 | 3,999 | ebay.com | |
6. | Leica M Typ 262 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | Nov 2015 | 5,195 | ebay.com | |
7. | Leica M9 | .. | .. | .. | .. | 4.5/5 | .. | Sep 2009 | 7,999 | ebay.com | |
8. | Leica M10 | 4.5/5 | .. | .. | .. | 4/5 | 4.5/5 | Jan 2017 | 6,595 | ebay.com | |
9. | Leica M10-P | .. | .. | 3/5 | .. | .. | 4/5 | Aug 2018 | 7,995 | ebay.com | |
10. | Leica M10-R | 4.5/5 | .. | 4/5 | .. | .. | 4/5 | Jul 2020 | 8,295 | ebay.com | |
11. | Leica M11 | 4.5/5 | .. | 4.5/5 | .. | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jan 2022 | 8,995 | amazon.com | |
12. | Leica SL | 4/5 | .. | 4/5 | 84/100 | 4.5/5 | 4/5 | Oct 2015 | 7,450 | ebay.com | |
13. | Olympus E-M1 | 5/5 | + + | .. | 84/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Sep 2013 | 1,399 | ebay.com | |
14. | Olympus E-M5 II | 5/5 | + + | 4.5/5 | 81/100 | 5/5 | 5/5 | Feb 2015 | 1,099 | ebay.com | |
15. | Olympus E-P5 | 5/5 | + + | .. | 78/100 | 4.5/5 | 5/5 | May 2013 | 999 | ebay.com | |
16. | Olympus PEN-F | .. | .. | 4/5 | 82/100 | 4.5/5 | 5/5 | Jan 2016 | 1,199 | ebay.com | |
17. | Panasonic GX7 | 4/5 | + | .. | 79/100 | 5/5 | 5/5 | Aug 2013 | 999 | ebay.com | |
Note: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available. |
The above review scores should be interpreted with care, though. The assessments were made in relation to similar cameras of the same technological generation. Thus, a score needs to be put into the context of the launch date and the launch price of the camera, and comparisons of ratings among very different cameras or across long time periods have little meaning. Also, kindly note that some of the listed sites have over time developped their review approaches and their reporting style.
Other camera comparisons
Did this review help to inform your camera decision process? In case you would like to check on the differences and similarities of other camera models, 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.
- Canon 500D vs Olympus E-M5
- Canon T3i vs Leica M Typ 240
- Fujifilm X-S10 vs Leica M Typ 240
- Kodak AZ901 vs Leica M Typ 240
- Leica M Typ 240 vs Leica M10
- Leica M Typ 240 vs Panasonic LF1
- Leica M-E Typ 240 vs Leica M Typ 240
- Nikon P7800 vs Olympus E-M5
- Olympus E-M10 vs Olympus E-M5
- Olympus E-M5 vs Panasonic G9
- Olympus E-M5 vs Panasonic GH4
- Olympus E-M5 vs Sony HX90V
Specifications: Leica M Typ 240 vs Olympus E-M5
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 Model | Leica M Typ 240 | Olympus E-M5 |
---|---|---|
Camera Type | Rangefinder camera | Mirrorless system camera |
Camera Lens | Leica M mount lenses | Micro Four Thirds lenses |
Launch Date | September 2012 | February 2012 |
Launch Price | USD 6,950 | USD 1,299 |
Sensor Specs | Leica M Typ 240 | Olympus E-M5 |
Sensor Technology | CMOS | CMOS |
Sensor Format | Full Frame Sensor | Four Thirds Sensor |
Sensor Size | 35.8 x 23.9 mm | 17.3 x 13.0 mm |
Sensor Area | 855.62 mm2 | 224.9 mm2 |
Sensor Diagonal | 43 mm | 21.6 mm |
Crop Factor | 1.0x | 2.0x |
Sensor Resolution | 23.7 Megapixels | 15.9 Megapixels |
Image Resolution | 5952 x 3976 pixels | 4608 x 3456 pixels |
Pixel Pitch | 6.01 μm | 3.76 μm |
Pixel Density | 2.77 MP/cm2 | 7.08 MP/cm2 |
Moiré control | Anti-Alias filter | Anti-Alias filter |
Movie Capability | 1080/25p Video | 1080/60i Video |
ISO Setting | 200 - 6,400 ISO | 200 - 25,600 ISO |
ISO Boost | 100 - 6,400 ISO | no Enhancement |
DXO Sensor Quality (score) | 84 | 71 |
DXO Color Depth (bits) | 24.0 | 22.8 |
DXO Dynamic Range (EV) | 13.3 | 12.3 |
DXO Low Light (ISO) | 1860 | 826 |
Screen Specs | Leica M Typ 240 | Olympus E-M5 |
Viewfinder Type | Optical viewfinder | Electronic viewfinder |
Viewfinder Field of View | 100% | 100% |
Viewfinder Magnification | 0.68x | 0.58x |
Viewfinder Resolution | 1440k dots | |
LCD Framing | Live View | Live View |
Rear LCD Size | 3.0inch | 3.0inch |
LCD Resolution | 920k dots | 610k dots |
LCD Attachment | Fixed screen | Tilting screen |
Touch Input | no Touchscreen | Touchscreen |
Shooting Specs | Leica M Typ 240 | Olympus E-M5 |
Focus System | Manual Focus | Contrast-detect AF |
Manual Focusing Aid | Focus Peaking | no Peaking Feature |
Continuous Shooting | 3 shutter flaps/s | 9 shutter flaps/s |
Image Stabilization | no shake reduction | In-body stabilization |
Fill Flash | no On-Board Flash | no On-Board Flash |
Storage Medium | SDXC cards | SDXC cards |
Single or Dual Card Slots | Single card slot | Single card slot |
UHS card support | UHS-I | UHS-I |
Connectivity Specs | Leica M Typ 240 | Olympus E-M5 |
External Flash | Hotshoe | Hotshoe |
USB Connector | USB 2.0 | USB 2.0 |
HDMI Port | no HDMI | mini HDMI |
Wifi Support | no Wifi | no Wifi |
Body Specs | Leica M Typ 240 | Olympus E-M5 |
Environmental Sealing | Weathersealed body | Weathersealed body |
Battery Type | Leica BP-SCL2 | Olympus BLN-1 |
Battery Life (CIPA) | 500 shots per charge | 360 shots per charge |
Body Dimensions |
139 x 80 x 42 mm (5.5 x 3.1 x 1.7 in) |
122 x 89 x 43 mm (4.8 x 3.5 x 1.7 in) |
Camera Weight | 680 g (24.0 oz) | 425 g (15.0 oz) |
Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.