Leica M Typ 240 vs Olympus XZ-1
The Leica M (Typ 240) and the Olympus XZ-1 are two digital cameras that were revealed to the public, respectively, in September 2012 and January 2011. The M Typ 240 is a rangefinder-focusing mirrorless camera, while the XZ-1 is a fixed lens compact. The cameras are based on a full frame (M Typ 240) and a 1/1.7-inch (XZ-1) sensor. The Leica has a resolution of 23.7 megapixels, whereas the Olympus provides 10.1 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 XZ-1? 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 XZ-1 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.
The M Typ 240 can be obtained in two different colors (black, silver), while the XZ-1 is also available in two color-versions, but different ones (black, white).
If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Olympus XZ-1 is considerably smaller (35 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 XZ-1 does not feature any corresponding weather-sealing.
The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete and possibly misleading, as the XZ-1 has a lens built 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 compare the optics available for the M Typ 240 and their specifications in the Leica M Lens Catalog.
The following table provides a synthesis of the main physical specifications of the two cameras and other similar ones. 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.
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 XZ-1 | 111 mm | 65 mm | 42 mm | 275 g | 320 | n | Jan 2011 | 499 | 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-PL1 | 115 mm | 72 mm | 42 mm | 334 g | 290 | n | Feb 2010 | 599 | ebay.com | |
14. | Olympus E-PL3 | 110 mm | 64 mm | 37 mm | 313 g | 300 | n | Jun 2011 | 599 | ebay.com | |
15. | Olympus E-PM1 | 110 mm | 64 mm | 34 mm | 265 g | 330 | n | Jun 2011 | 499 | ebay.com | |
16. | Olympus XZ-2 | 113 mm | 65 mm | 48 mm | 346 g | 340 | n | Sep 2012 | 599 | ebay.com | |
17. | Panasonic LX5 | 110 mm | 65 mm | 43 mm | 271 g | 400 | n | Jul 2010 | 499 | 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 naturally be influenced heavily by the price. 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 XZ-1 was launched at a lower price than the M Typ 240, despite having a lens built 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
The size of the sensor inside a digital camera is one of the key determinants of image quality. A large sensor will generally have larger individual pixels that offer better low-light sensitivity, provide wider dynamic range, and have richer color-depth than smaller pixels in a sensor of the same technological generation. Further, a large sensor camera will give the photographer additional creative options when using shallow depth-of-field to isolate a subject from its 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 XZ-1 a 1/1.7-inch sensor. The sensor area in the XZ-1 is 95 percent smaller. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 1.0 and 4.4. The sensor in the M Typ 240 has a native 3:2 aspect ratio, while the one in the XZ-1 offers a 4:3 aspect.
With 23.7MP, the M Typ 240 offers a higher resolution than the XZ-1 (10.1MP), but the M Typ 240 nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 6.01μm versus 2.13μm for the XZ-1) due to its larger sensor. Moreover, the M Typ 240 is a somewhat more recent model (by 1 year and 8 months) than the XZ-1, 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 XZ-1 are 18.3 x 13.8 inches or 46.5 x 35 cm for good quality, 14.7 x 11 inches or 37.2 x 28 cm for very good quality, and 12.2 x 9.2 inches or 31 x 23.3 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 XZ-1 are ISO 100 to ISO 6400 (no boost).
In terms of underlying technology, the M Typ 240 is build around a CMOS sensor, while the XZ-1 uses a CCD imager. 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 XZ-1, with an overall score that is 50 points higher. This advantage is based on 5.2 bits higher color depth, 2.9 EV in additional dynamic range, and 4 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 XZ-1 | 1/1.7 | 10.1 | 3664 | 2752 | 720/30p | 18.8 | 10.4 | 117 | 34 | |
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-PL1 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 720/30p | 21.5 | 10.1 | 487 | 54 | |
14. | Olympus E-PL3 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 1080/60i | 20.9 | 10.3 | 499 | 52 | |
15. | Olympus E-PM1 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 1080/60i | 21.0 | 10.3 | 499 | 52 | |
16. | Olympus XZ-2 | 1/1.7 | 11.8 | 3968 | 2976 | 1080/30p | 20.4 | 11.3 | 216 | 49 | |
17. | Panasonic LX5 | 1/1.7 | 10.0 | 3648 | 2736 | 720/60p | 19.6 | 10.8 | 132 | 41 | |
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 M Typ 240 provides a higher video resolution than the XZ-1. It can shoot video footage at 1080/25p, while the Olympus is limited to 720/30p.
Feature comparison
Beyond body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range 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 XZ-1 relies on live view and the rear LCD for framing. That said, the XZ-1 can be equipped with an optional viewfinder – the VF-2. The table below summarizes some of the other core capabilities of the Leica M Typ 240 and Olympus XZ-1 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 XZ-1 | optional | n | 3.0 / 614 | fixed | n | 1/2000s | 2.0/s | Y | 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-PL1 | optional | n | 2.7 / 230 | fixed | n | 1/2000s | 3.0/s | Y | Y | |
14. | Olympus E-PL3 | optional | n | 3.0 / 460 | tilting | n | 1/4000s | 5.5/s | n | Y | |
15. | Olympus E-PM1 | optional | n | 3.0 / 460 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 5.5/s | n | Y | |
16. | Olympus XZ-2 | optional | n | 3.0 / 920 | tilting | Y | 1/2000s | 5.0/s | Y | Y | |
17. | Panasonic LX5 | optional | n | 3.0 / 460 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 2.5/s | Y | Y | |
Note: *) Information refers to the mechanical shutter, unless the camera only has an electronic one. |
One difference between the cameras concerns the presence of an on-board flash. The XZ-1 has one, while the M Typ 240 does not. While the built-in flash of the XZ-1 is not very powerful, it can at times be useful as a fill-in light.
The Olympus XZ-1 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 Typ 240 and the XZ-1 write their files to SDXC cards. The M Typ 240 supports UHS-I cards (Ultra High Speed data transfer of up to 104 MB/s), while the XZ-1 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 XZ-1 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 XZ-1 | Y | 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-PL1 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
14. | Olympus E-PL3 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
15. | Olympus E-PM1 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
16. | Olympus XZ-2 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
17. | Panasonic LX5 | Y | mono / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - |
Both the M Typ 240 and the XZ-1 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The XZ-1 was replaced by the Olympus XZ-2, 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 XZ-1 can be found, respectively, in the Leica M Typ 240 Manual (free pdf) or the online Olympus XZ-1 Manual.
Review summary
So how do things add up? Is there a clear favorite between the Leica M Typ 240 and the Olympus XZ-1? 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 10.1MP) with a 56% higher linear resolution.
- Better image quality: Scores substantially higher (50 points) in the DXO overall assessment.
- Richer colors: Generates images with noticeably better colors (5.2 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 (4 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 614k dots).
- Faster shutter: Has higher mechanical shutter speed (1/4000s vs 1/2000s) to freeze action.
- Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (3 vs 2 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
- More flexible: Accepts interchangeable lenses, so that lens characteristics can be altered.
- Longer lasting: Can take more shots (500 versus 320) 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: Is somewhat more recent (announced 1 year and 8 months after the XZ-1).
Reasons to prefer the Olympus XZ-1:
- Easier time-lapse photography: Has an intervalometer built-in for low frequency shooting.
- Ready to shoot: Has an integrated lens, whereas the M Typ 240 necessitates an extra lens.
- More compact: Is smaller (111x65mm vs 139x80mm) and will fit more readily into a bag.
- Less heavy: Has a lower weight even though it has a lens built in (unlike the M Typ 240).
- Sharper images: Has stabilization technology built-in to reduce the impact of hand-shake.
- Easier fill-in: Has a small integrated flash to brighten shadows of backlit subjects.
- More affordable: Was introduced at a lower price, despite coming with a built-in lens.
- More heavily discounted: Has been on the market for longer (launched in January 2011).
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 (16 : 8 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 XZ-1 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 XZ-1 | 4/5 | .. | .. | 74/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jan 2011 | 499 | 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-PL1 | .. | 86/100 | .. | 69/100 | 4/5 | 4.5/5 | Feb 2010 | 599 | ebay.com | |
14. | Olympus E-PL3 | 3/5 | + + | .. | 72/100 | 4.5/5 | 4/5 | Jun 2011 | 599 | ebay.com | |
15. | Olympus E-PM1 | .. | 86/100 | .. | 71/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jun 2011 | 499 | ebay.com | |
16. | Olympus XZ-2 | 4/5 | + | .. | .. | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Sep 2012 | 599 | ebay.com | |
17. | Panasonic LX5 | 4/5 | + | .. | 73/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jul 2010 | 499 | 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 200D vs Olympus XZ-1
- Canon XT vs Olympus XZ-1
- Fujifilm X-A2 vs Leica M Typ 240
- Leica M Typ 240 vs Nikon D300
- Leica M Typ 240 vs Nikon D3200
- Leica M Typ 240 vs Nikon D3500
- Leica M Typ 240 vs Sony A1
- Leica M Typ 240 vs Sony HX99
- Leica M8 vs Olympus XZ-1
- Nikon D3200 vs Olympus XZ-1
- Olympus XZ-1 vs Panasonic TS7
- Olympus XZ-1 vs Pentax 645D
Specifications: Leica M Typ 240 vs Olympus XZ-1
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 XZ-1 |
---|---|---|
Camera Type | Rangefinder camera | Fixed lens compact camera |
Camera Lens | Leica M mount lenses | 28-112mm f/1.8-2.5 |
Launch Date | September 2012 | January 2011 |
Launch Price | USD 6,950 | USD 499 |
Sensor Specs | Leica M Typ 240 | Olympus XZ-1 |
Sensor Technology | CMOS | CCD |
Sensor Format | Full Frame Sensor | 1/1.7" Sensor |
Sensor Size | 35.8 x 23.9 mm | 7.85 x 5.89 mm |
Sensor Area | 855.62 mm2 | 46.2365 mm2 |
Sensor Diagonal | 43 mm | 9.8 mm |
Crop Factor | 1.0x | 4.4x |
Sensor Resolution | 23.7 Megapixels | 10.1 Megapixels |
Image Resolution | 5952 x 3976 pixels | 3664 x 2752 pixels |
Pixel Pitch | 6.01 μm | 2.13 μm |
Pixel Density | 2.77 MP/cm2 | 21.81 MP/cm2 |
Moiré control | Anti-Alias filter | Anti-Alias filter |
Movie Capability | 1080/25p Video | 720/30p Video |
ISO Setting | 200 - 6,400 ISO | 100 - 6,400 ISO |
ISO Boost | 100 - 6,400 ISO | no Enhancement |
DXO Sensor Quality (score) | 84 | 34 |
DXO Color Depth (bits) | 24.0 | 18.8 |
DXO Dynamic Range (EV) | 13.3 | 10.4 |
DXO Low Light (ISO) | 1860 | 117 |
Screen Specs | Leica M Typ 240 | Olympus XZ-1 |
Viewfinder Type | Optical viewfinder | Viewfinder optional |
Viewfinder Field of View | 100% | |
Viewfinder Magnification | 0.68x | |
LCD Framing | Live View | Live View |
Rear LCD Size | 3.0inch | 3.0inch |
LCD Resolution | 920k dots | 614k dots |
LCD Attachment | Fixed screen | Fixed screen |
Shooting Specs | Leica M Typ 240 | Olympus XZ-1 |
Focus System | Manual Focus | Contrast-detect AF |
Manual Focusing Aid | Focus Peaking | no Peaking Feature |
Continuous Shooting | 3 shutter flaps/s | 2 shutter flaps/s |
Time-Lapse Photography | no Intervalometer | Intervalometer built-in |
Image Stabilization | no shake reduction | In-body stabilization |
Fill Flash | no On-Board Flash | Built-in Flash |
Storage Medium | SDXC cards | SDXC cards |
Single or Dual Card Slots | Single card slot | Single card slot |
UHS card support | UHS-I | no |
Connectivity Specs | Leica M Typ 240 | Olympus XZ-1 |
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 XZ-1 |
Environmental Sealing | Weathersealed body | not weather sealed |
Battery Type | Leica BP-SCL2 | Olympus Li-50B |
Battery Life (CIPA) | 500 shots per charge | 320 shots per charge |
Body Dimensions |
139 x 80 x 42 mm (5.5 x 3.1 x 1.7 in) |
111 x 65 x 42 mm (4.4 x 2.6 x 1.7 in) |
Camera Weight | 680 g (24.0 oz) | 275 g (9.7 oz) |
Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.