Leica M Typ 240 vs Olympus E-P1

The Leica M (Typ 240) and the Olympus PEN E-P1 are two enthusiast cameras that were officially introduced, respectively, in September 2012 and June 2009. The M Typ 240 is a rangefinder-focusing mirrorless, while the E-P1 is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera. The cameras are based on a full frame (M Typ 240) and a Four Thirds (E-P1) sensor. The Leica has a resolution of 23.7 megapixels, whereas the Olympus provides 12.2 MP.

Below is an overview of the main specs of the two cameras as a starting point for the comparison.

Headline Specifications

Leica M Typ 240		Olympus E-P1
Rangefinder camera		Mirrorless system camera
Leica M mount lenses		Micro Four Thirds lenses
23.7 MP – Full Frame sensor		12.2 MP – Four Thirds sensor
1080/25p Video		720/30p Video
ISO 200-6,400		ISO 100-6,400
Optical viewfinder		No viewfinder, LCD framing
3.0" LCD – 920k dots		3.0" LCD – 230k dots
Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)		Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)
3 shutter flaps per second		3 shutter flaps per second
no shake reduction		In-body stabilization
Weathersealed body		not weather sealed
500 shots per battery charge		300 shots per battery charge
139 x 80 x 42 mm, 680 g		121 x 70 x 36 mm, 355 g

Check M Typ 240 offers at
ebay.com
Check E-P1 offers at
ebay.com

Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Leica M (Typ 240) and the Olympus PEN E-P1? 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 side-by-side display below illustrates the physical size and weight of the Leica M Typ 240 and the Olympus E-P1. 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.

The M Typ 240 can be obtained in two different colors (black, silver), while the E-P1 is available in three color-versions (black, silver, white).

If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Olympus E-P1 is notably smaller (24 percent) than the Leica M Typ 240. Moreover, the E-P1 is substantially lighter (48 percent) than the M Typ 240. It is worth mentioning in this context that the M Typ 240 is splash and dust resistant, while the E-P1 does not feature any corresponding weather-sealing.

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-P1).

Concerning battery life, the M Typ 240 gets 500 shots out of its Leica BP-SCL2 battery, while the E-P1 can take 300 images on a single charge of its Olympus BLS-1 power pack.

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.

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 Typ 240	139 mm	80 mm	42 mm	680 g	500	Y	Sep 2012	6,950	ebay.com
2.		Olympus E-P1	121 mm	70 mm	36 mm	355 g	300	n	Jun 2009	799	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-P2	121 mm	70 mm	36 mm	355 g	300	n	Nov 2009	799	ebay.com
14.		Olympus E-P3	122 mm	69 mm	34 mm	369 g	330	n	Jun 2011	799	ebay.com
15.		Olympus E-PL2	114 mm	72 mm	42 mm	362 g	280	n	Jan 2011	599	ebay.com
16.		Olympus E-PL3	110 mm	64 mm	37 mm	313 g	300	n	Jun 2011	599	ebay.com
17.		Panasonic GH1	124 mm	90 mm	45 mm	385 g	300	n	Mar 2009	899	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 listed launch prices provide an indication of the market segment that the manufacturer of the cameras have been targeting. The E-P1 was launched at a markedly lower price (by 89 percent) than the M Typ 240, which puts it into a different market segment. 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 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 tend to 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-P1 a Four Thirds sensor. The sensor area in the E-P1 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-P1 offers a 4:3 aspect.

With 23.7MP, the M Typ 240 offers a higher resolution than the E-P1 (12.2MP), but the M Typ 240 nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 6.01μm versus 4.29μm for the E-P1) due to its larger sensor. Moreover, the M Typ 240 is a much more recent model (by 3 years and 3 months) than the E-P1, and its sensor will 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-P1 are 20.2 x 15.1 inches or 51.2 x 38.4 cm for good quality, 16.1 x 12.1 inches or 41 x 30.7 cm for very good quality, and 13.4 x 10.1 inches or 34.1 x 25.6 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 PEN E-P1 are ISO 100 to ISO 6400 (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 determines an overall sensor rating, as well as sub-scores for low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports"), dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), and color depth ("DXO Portrait"). Of the two cameras under review, the M Typ 240 provides substantially higher image quality than the E-P1, with an overall score that is 29 points higher. This advantage is based on 2.6 bits higher color depth, 2.9 EV in additional dynamic range, and 1.8 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.

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 Typ 240	Full Frame	23.7	5952	3976	1080/25p	24.0	13.3	1860	84
2.		Olympus E-P1	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.4	10.4	536	55
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-P2	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.5	10.4	505	56
14.		Olympus E-P3	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	20.8	10.1	536	51
15.		Olympus E-PL2	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.4	10.2	573	55
16.		Olympus E-PL3	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	20.9	10.3	499	52
17.		Panasonic GH1	Four Thirds	12.0	4000	3000	1080/24p	21.6	11.6	772	64
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. Both cameras under consideration are equipped with sensors that have a sufficiently high read-out speed for moving images, but the M Typ 240 provides a higher video resolution than the E-P1. It can shoot video footage at 1080/25p, while the Olympus is limited to 720/30p.

Feature comparison

Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a variety of features. For example, the M Typ 240 has an optical viewfinder, which can be very useful when shooting in bright sunlight. In contrast, the E-P1 relies on live view and the rear LCD for framing. The adjacent table lists some of the other core features of the Leica M Typ 240 and Olympus E-P1 along with similar information for a selection of comparators.

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 Typ 240	optical	n	3.0 / 920	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	n	n
2.		Olympus E-P1	none	n	3.0 / 230	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/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-P2	optional	n	3.0 / 230	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	n	Y
14.		Olympus E-P3	optional	n	3.0 / 614	fixed	Y	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
15.		Olympus E-PL2	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
16.		Olympus E-PL3	optional	n	3.0 / 460	tilting	n	1/4000s	5.5/s	n	Y
17.		Panasonic GH1	1440	n	3.0 / 460	swivel	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	n
Note: *) Information refers to the mechanical shutter, unless the camera only has an electronic one.

The M Typ 240 writes its imaging data to SDXC cards, while the E-P1 uses SDHC cards. The M Typ 240 supports UHS-I cards (Ultra High Speed data transfer of up to 104 MB/s), while the E-P1 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 (Typ 240) and Olympus PEN E-P1 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 Typ 240	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
2.		Olympus E-P1	Y	stereo / -	-	-	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-P2	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
14.		Olympus E-P3	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
15.		Olympus E-PL2	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
16.		Olympus E-PL3	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
17.		Panasonic GH1	Y	stereo / -	Y	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-

Both the M Typ 240 and the E-P1 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The E-P1 was replaced by the Olympus E-P2, 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-P1 can be found, respectively, in the Leica M Typ 240 Manual (free pdf) or the online Olympus E-P1 Manual.

Review summary

So what conclusions can be drawn? Is the Leica M Typ 240 better than the Olympus E-P1 or vice versa? A synthesis of the relative strong points of each of the models is listed below.

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

• More detail: Offers more megapixels (23.7 vs 12.2MP) with a 42% higher linear resolution.
• Better image quality: Scores substantially higher (29 points) in the DXO overall assessment.
• Richer colors: Generates images with noticeably better colors (2.6 bits more color depth).
• More dynamic range: Captures a larger spectrum of light and dark details (2.9 EV of extra DR).
• Better low-light sensitivity: Requires less light for good images (1.8 stops ISO advantage).
• Better video: Provides higher definition movie capture (1080/25p vs 720/30p).
• Easier framing: Has an optical viewfinder for image composition and settings control.
• More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (920k vs 230k dots).
• Longer lasting: Can take more shots (500 versus 300) on a single battery charge.
• Better sealing: Is weather sealed to enable shooting in dusty or wet environments.
• 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: Reflects 3 years and 3 months of technical progress since the E-P1 launch.

Advantages of the Olympus PEN E-P1:

• More compact: Is smaller (121x70mm vs 139x80mm) and will fit more readily into a bag.
• Less heavy: Has a lower weight (by 325g or 48 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 (89 percent cheaper at launch).
• More heavily discounted: Has been around for much longer (launched in June 2009).

If the count of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a measure, the M Typ 240 is the clear winner of the match-up (13 : 5 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 sports photographer will view the differences between cameras in a way that diverges from the perspective of a street photog, and a person interested in family portraits has distinct needs from a landscape 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 partial and cannot reveal, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance when actually working with the M Typ 240 or the E-P1. 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 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], 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 Typ 240	4/5	..	..	..	4/5	..	Sep 2012	6,950	ebay.com
2.		Olympus E-P1	..	+	..	66/100	4/5	4.5/5	Jun 2009	799	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-P2	3/5	+	..	69/100	4/5	4.5/5	Nov 2009	799	ebay.com
14.		Olympus E-P3	..	83/100	..	74/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2011	799	ebay.com
15.		Olympus E-PL2	3/5	83/100	..	71/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jan 2011	599	ebay.com
16.		Olympus E-PL3	3/5	+ +	..	72/100	4.5/5	4/5	Jun 2011	599	ebay.com
17.		Panasonic GH1	..	+ +	..	72/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Mar 2009	899	ebay.com
Note: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available.

Care should be taken when interpreting the review scores above, though. The assessments were made in relation to similar cameras of the same technological generation. 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.

Check M Typ 240 offers at
ebay.com
Check E-P1 offers at
ebay.com

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.

~

Check M Typ 240 offers at
ebay.com
Check E-P1 offers at
ebay.com

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