Leica M Typ 262 versus Leica M10
The Leica M (Typ 262) and the Leica M10 (Typ 3656) are two enthusiast cameras that were announced, respectively, in November 2015 and January 2017. Both the M Typ 262 and the M10 Typ 3656 are rangefinder-style mirrorless cameras that are equipped with a full frame sensor. The M Typ 262 has a resolution of 23.7 megapixel, whereas the M10 Typ 3656 provides 23.8 MP.
An illustration of the physical size and weight of the Leica M Typ 262 and the Leica M10 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. You can also use the toggle button to switch to a percentage comparison if you prefer that the measures are being expressed in relative terms (in this case, the camera on the left side – the M Typ 262 – represents the basis for the calculations across all the size and weight measures).
In this particular case, the Leica M Typ 262 and the Leica M10 have exactly the same width and height, and, thus, have identically-sized bodies. However, the M10 Typ 3656 is slightly lighter (3 percent) than the M Typ 262. It is worth mentioning in this context that the M Typ 262 is splash and dust resistant, while the M10 Typ 3656 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. 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 262 (⇒ rgt)||139 mm||80 mm||42 mm||680 g||..||YES||2015||5,195||discont.||check|
|Leica M10 (⇒ lft)||139 mm||80 mm||39 mm||660 g||210||no||2017||6,595||latest||check|
|Canon 6D Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||144 mm||111 mm||75 mm||765 g||1200||YES||2017||1,999||latest||check|
|Canon SL2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||122 mm||93 mm||70 mm||453 g||650||no||2017||549||latest||check|
|Canon 80D (⇒ lft | rgt)||139 mm||105 mm||79 mm||730 g||960||YES||2016||1,199||latest||check|
|Canon G3 X (⇒ lft | rgt)||123 mm||77 mm||105 mm||733 g||300||YES||2015||999||latest||check|
|Leica X-U Typ 113 (⇒ lft | rgt)||140 mm||79 mm||88 mm||635 g||450||YES||2016||2,950||latest||check|
|Leica SL (⇒ lft | rgt)||147 mm||104 mm||39 mm||847 g||400||YES||2015||7,450||latest||check|
|Leica Q Typ 116 (⇒ lft | rgt)||130 mm||80 mm||93 mm||640 g||300||no||2015||4,249||latest||check|
|Leica M Typ 240 (⇒ lft | rgt)||139 mm||80 mm||42 mm||680 g||..||YES||2012||6,950||discont.||check|
|Nikon D7500 (⇒ lft | rgt)||136 mm||104 mm||73 mm||720 g||950||YES||2017||1,299||latest||check|
|Nikon D7200 (⇒ lft | rgt)||136 mm||107 mm||76 mm||765 g||1110||YES||2015||1,199||discont.||check|
|Nikon D750 (⇒ lft | rgt)||141 mm||113 mm||78 mm||750 g||1230||YES||2014||2,299||latest||check|
|Sony RX10 II (⇒ lft | rgt)||129 mm||88 mm||102 mm||813 g||400||YES||2015||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 21 percent) than the M10 Typ 3656, 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 size of the imaging sensor is a crucial determinant 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. 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 associated with larger, more expensive camera bodies 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.
While the two cameras under review share the same sensor size, the M10 Typ 3656 offers a slightly higher resolution of 23.8 megapixel, compared with 23.7 MP of the M Typ 262. This megapixel advantage translates into a 0 percent gain in linear resolution. On the other hand, these sensor specs imply that the M10 Typ 3656 has a higher pixel density and a smaller size of the individual pixel (with a pixel pitch of 6.00μm versus 6.01μm for the M Typ 262). However, it should be noted that the M10 Typ 3656 is a somewhat more recent model (by 1 year and 2 months) than the M Typ 262, and its sensor might have benefitted from technological advances during this time that at least partly compensate for the smaller pixel size. Coming back to sensor resolution, it should be mentioned that neither of the two cameras has an anti-alias filter installed, so they are able to capture all the detail the sensor resolves.
Consistent information on actual sensor performance is available from DXO Mark for most cameras. 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"). The adjacent table reports on the physical sensor characteristics and the outcomes of the DXO sensor quality tests for a sample of comparator-cameras.
|Leica M Typ 262 (⇒ rgt)||Full Frame||23.7||5952||3976||no||-||-||-||-|
|Leica M10 (⇒ lft)||Full Frame||23.8||5952||3992||no||24.4||13.2||2133||86|
|Canon 6D Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||Full Frame||26.0||6240||4160||1080/60p||24.4||11.9||2862||85|
|Canon SL2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||23.6||13.4||1041||79|
|Canon 80D (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||23.6||13.2||1135||79|
|Canon G3 X (⇒ lft | rgt)||1-inch||20.0||5472||3648||1080/60p||21.4||12.3||521||63|
|Leica X-U Typ 113 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||16.1||4928||3264||1080/30p||-||-||-||-|
|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 M Typ 240 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Full Frame||23.7||5952||3976||1080/25p||24.0||13.3||1860||84|
|Nikon D7500 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||20.7||5568||3712||4K/30p||24.3||14.0||1483||86|
|Nikon D7200 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||24.5||14.6||1333||87|
|Nikon D750 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Full Frame||24.2||6016||4016||1080/60p||24.8||14.5||2956||93|
|Sony RX10 II (⇒ lft | rgt)||1-inch||20.0||5472||3648||4K/30p||23.0||12.6||531||70|
Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. The M Typ 262 and the M10 Typ 3656 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 adjacent table lists some of the other core features of the Leica M Typ 262 and Leica M10 along with similar information for a selection of comparators. If needed, the dpreview camera hub, for example, contains further detail on the cameras' specs.
|Leica M Typ 262 (⇒ rgt)||optical||no||3.0||921||fixed||no||4000||3.0||no||no|
|Leica M10 (⇒ lft)||optical||no||3.0||1037||fixed||no||4000||5.0||no||no|
|Canon 6D Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||3.0||1040||swivel||YES||4000||6.5||no||no|
|Canon SL2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||3.0||1040||swivel||YES||4000||5.0||9.8||no|
|Canon 80D (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||3.0||1040||swivel||YES||8000||7.0||12||no|
|Canon G3 X (⇒ lft | rgt)||no||no||3.2||1620||tilting||YES||2000||5.9||6.8||YES|
|Leica X-U Typ 113 (⇒ lft | rgt)||no||no||3.0||920||fixed||no||2000||5.0||YES||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 M Typ 240 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||3.0||920||fixed||no||4000||3.0||no||no|
|Nikon D7500 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||3.2||922||tilting||YES||8000||8.0||12||no|
|Nikon D7200 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||3.2||1229||fixed||no||8000||6.0||12||no|
|Nikon D750 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||3.2||1229||tilting||no||4000||6.0||12||no|
|Sony RX10 II (⇒ lft | rgt)||2359||YES||3.0||1229||tilting||no||3200||14.0||10.2||YES|
The M10 Typ 3656 is a current model that online retailers, such as amazon, will have in stock. In contrast, the M Typ 262 has been discontinued (but it can be found pre-owned on ebay). As a replacement in the same line of cameras, the M Typ 262 was succeeded by the Leica M10.
So what conclusions can be drawn? Is the Leica M Typ 262 better than the Leica M10 or vice versa? The listing below highlights the relative strengths of the two models.
Advantages of the Leica M (Typ 262):
- Better sealing: Is weather sealed to enable shooting in dusty or wet environments.
- More affordable: Was introduced into a lower priced segment (21 percent cheaper at launch).
- More heavily discounted: Has been on the market for longer (launched in November 2015).
Arguments in favor of the Leica M10 (Typ 3656):
- More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1037k vs 921k dots).
- Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (5 vs 3 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
- More modern: Was introduced somewhat (1 year and 2 months) more recently.
If the number of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the match-up finishes in a tie (3 points each). 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.
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 262 or the M10 Typ 3656 handle or perform in practice. User reviews that are available, for instance, at amazon can sometimes shed light on these issues, but such feedback is all too often partial, inconsistent, and inaccurate. 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. The full reviews are available, respectively, at cameralabs.com, dpreview.com, ephotozine.com, imaging-resource.com, and photographyblog.com.
|Leica M Typ 262 (⇒ rgt)||-||-||-||-||-||2015||5,195||discont.||check|
|Leica M10 (⇒ lft)||-||-||4/5||-||4.5/5||2017||6,595||latest||check|
|Canon 6D Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||Rec||80/100||4.5/5||4/5||4/5||2017||1,999||latest||check|
|Canon SL2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||78/100 Silver||4.5/5||-||4.5/5||2017||549||latest||check|
|Canon 80D (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||84/100 Silver||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||2016||1,199||latest||check|
|Canon G3 X (⇒ lft | rgt)||Rec||-||4.5/5||3.5/5||4/5||2015||999||latest||check|
|Leica X-U Typ 113 (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||-||-||-||3.5/5||2016||2,950||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 M Typ 240 (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||-||4/5||-||-||2012||6,950||discont.||check|
|Nikon D7500 (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||86/100 Silver||5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||2017||1,299||latest||check|
|Nikon D7200 (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||84/100 Silver||4.5/5||4/5||4.5/5||2015||1,199||discont.||check|
|Nikon D750 (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||90/100 Gold||4.5/5||5/5||4.5/5||2014||2,299||latest||check|
|Sony RX10 II (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||82/100 Gold||4.5/5||4.5/5||4/5||2015||1,299||discont.||check|
The review scores listed above should be treated with care, 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 comparing ratings of very distinct cameras or ones that are far apart in terms of their release date have little meaning. Also, kindly note that some of the listed sites have over time developped their review approaches and their reporting style.
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.
- Canon 4000D vs Ricoh GR II
- Canon 600D vs Canon M3
- Canon G9 X vs Canon G7 X Mark II
- Canon T5 vs Canon T6
- Nikon D700 vs Nikon D300
- Nikon D7000 vs Sony RX100 V
- Olympus E-M1 vs Olympus E-M10 II
- Panasonic G7 vs Canon SX60
- Pentax 645Z vs Nikon D7200
- Sony A6500 vs Nikon D850
- Sony A7R II vs Olympus TG-5
- Sony A9 vs YI M1