Leica M Typ 262 vs Olympus E-PL3

The Leica M (Typ 262) and the Olympus PEN E-PL3 are two digital cameras that were announced, respectively, in November 2015 and June 2011. The M Typ 262 is a rangefinder-focusing mirrorless, while the E-PL3 is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera. The cameras are based on a full frame (M Typ 262) and a Four Thirds (E-PL3) 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 262		Olympus E-PL3
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
no Video		1080/60i Video
ISO 200-6,400		ISO 200-12,800
Optical viewfinder		Viewfinder optional
3.0" LCD – 921k dots		3.0" LCD – 460k dots
Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)		Tilting screen (no touchscreen)
3 shutter flaps per second		5.5 shutter flaps per second
no shake reduction		In-body stabilization
Weathersealed body		not weather sealed
400 shots per battery charge		300 shots per battery charge
139 x 80 x 42 mm, 680 g		110 x 64 x 37 mm, 313 g

Check M Typ 262 offers at
ebay.com
Check E-PL3 offers at
ebay.com

Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Leica M (Typ 262) and the Olympus PEN E-PL3? 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 262 and the Olympus E-PL3 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 262 can be obtained in two different colors (black, silver), while the E-PL3 is available in four color-versions (black, silver, red, white).

If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Olympus E-PL3 is considerably smaller (37 percent) than the Leica M Typ 262. Moreover, the E-PL3 is substantially lighter (54 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 E-PL3 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 262) and the Micro Four Thirds Lens Catalog (E-PL3).

Concerning battery life, the M Typ 262 gets 400 shots out of its Leica BP-SCL2 battery, while the E-PL3 can take 300 images on a single charge of its Olympus BLS-5 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.

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 262	139 mm	80 mm	42 mm	680 g	400	Y	Nov 2015	5,195	ebay.com
2.		Olympus E-PL3	110 mm	64 mm	37 mm	313 g	300	n	Jun 2011	599	ebay.com
3.		Canon 1D X Mark II	158 mm	168 mm	83 mm	1530 g	1210	Y	Feb 2016	5,999	ebay.com
4.		Leica M10-R	139 mm	80 mm	39 mm	660 g	210	Y	Jul 2020	8,295	ebay.com
5.		Leica Q2	130 mm	80 mm	92 mm	718 g	370	Y	Mar 2019	4,995	amazon.com
6.		Leica M-E Typ 240	139 mm	80 mm	42 mm	680 g	500	Y	Jun 2019	3,999	ebay.com
7.		Leica M10-P	139 mm	80 mm	39 mm	660 g	210	Y	Aug 2018	7,995	ebay.com
8.		Leica M10	139 mm	80 mm	39 mm	660 g	210	Y	Jan 2017	6,595	ebay.com
9.		Leica Q Typ 116	130 mm	80 mm	93 mm	640 g	300	n	Jun 2015	4,249	ebay.com
10.		Leica SL	147 mm	104 mm	39 mm	847 g	400	Y	Oct 2015	7,450	ebay.com
11.		Leica M Typ 240	139 mm	80 mm	42 mm	680 g	500	Y	Sep 2012	6,950	ebay.com
12.		Nikon D750	141 mm	113 mm	78 mm	750 g	1230	Y	Sep 2014	2,299	ebay.com
13.		Olympus E-PL5	111 mm	64 mm	38 mm	325 g	360	n	Sep 2012	599	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-PM1	110 mm	64 mm	34 mm	265 g	330	n	Jun 2011	499	ebay.com
17.		Olympus E-PL1	115 mm	72 mm	42 mm	334 g	290	n	Feb 2010	599	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

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-PL3 was launched at a markedly lower price (by 88 percent) than the M Typ 262, 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 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 262 features a full frame sensor and the Olympus E-PL3 a Four Thirds sensor. The sensor area in the E-PL3 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 262 has a native 3:2 aspect ratio, while the one in the E-PL3 offers a 4:3 aspect.

With 23.7MP, the M Typ 262 offers a higher resolution than the E-PL3 (12.2MP), but the M Typ 262 nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 6.01μm versus 4.29μm for the E-PL3) due to its larger sensor. Moreover, the M Typ 262 is a much more recent model (by 4 years and 4 months) than the E-PL3, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that further enhance the light gathering capacity of its pixels. Coming back to sensor resolution, it should be mentioned that the M Typ 262 has no anti-alias filter installed, so that it can capture all the detail its sensor resolves.

The resolution advantage of the Leica M Typ 262 implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the M Typ 262 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-PL3 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 262) 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-PL3 are ISO 200 to ISO 12800 (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.

For many cameras, data on sensor performance has been reported by DXO Mark. This service is based on lab testing and assigns an overall score to each camera sensor, as well as ratings for dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), color depth ("DXO Portrait"), and low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports"). 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 Model	Sensor Class	Resolution (MP)	Horiz. Pixels	Vert. Pixels	Video Format	DXO Portrait	DXO Landscape	DXO Sports	DXO Overall
1.		Leica M Typ 262	Full Frame	23.7	5952	3976	none	24.8	13.7	2478	90
2.		Olympus E-PL3	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	20.9	10.3	499	52
3.		Canon 1D X Mark II	Full Frame	20.0	5472	3648	4K/60p	24.1	13.5	3207	88
4.		Leica M10-R	Full Frame	40.9	7864	5200	none	25.3	14.3	2924	95
5.		Leica Q2	Full Frame	46.7	8368	5584	4K/30p	26.4	13.5	2491	96
6.		Leica M-E Typ 240	Full Frame	23.7	5952	3976	1080/25p	25.2	14.2	2821	94
7.		Leica M10-P	Full Frame	23.8	5952	3992	none	25.1	14.1	2739	93
8.		Leica M10	Full Frame	23.8	5952	3992	none	24.4	13.2	2133	86
9.		Leica Q Typ 116	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	1080/60p	24.3	12.7	2221	85
10.		Leica SL	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	4K/30p	25.0	13.4	1821	88
11.		Leica M Typ 240	Full Frame	23.7	5952	3976	1080/25p	24.0	13.3	1860	84
12.		Nikon D750	Full Frame	24.2	6016	4016	1080/60p	24.8	14.5	2956	93
13.		Olympus E-PL5	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	22.8	12.3	889	72
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-PM1	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	21.0	10.3	499	52
17.		Olympus E-PL1	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.5	10.1	487	54
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. The E-PL3 indeed provides for movie recording, while the M Typ 262 does not. The highest resolution format that the E-PL3 can use is 1080/60i.

Feature comparison

Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. For example, the M Typ 262 has an optical viewfinder, which can be very useful when shooting in bright sunlight. In contrast, the E-PL3 relies on live view and the rear LCD for framing. That said, the E-PL3 can be equipped with an optional viewfinder – the VF-2. The adjacent table lists some of the other core features of the Leica M Typ 262 and Olympus E-PL3 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 262	optical	n	3.0 / 921	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	n	n
2.		Olympus E-PL3	optional	n	3.0 / 460	tilting	n	1/4000s	5.5/s	n	Y
3.		Canon 1D X Mark II	optical	Y	3.2 / 1620	fixed	Y	1/8000s	16.0/s	n	n
4.		Leica M10-R	optical	n	3.0 / 1037	fixed	Y	1/4000s	4.5/s	n	n
5.		Leica Q2	3680	n	3.0 / 1040	fixed	Y	1/2000s	10.0/s	n	Y
6.		Leica M-E Typ 240	optical	n	3.0 / 920	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	n	n
7.		Leica M10-P	optical	n	3.0 / 1037	fixed	Y	1/4000s	5.0/s	n	n
8.		Leica M10	optical	n	3.0 / 1037	fixed	n	1/4000s	5.0/s	n	n
9.		Leica Q Typ 116	3680	n	3.0 / 1040	fixed	Y	1/2000s	10.0/s	n	Y
10.		Leica SL	4400	Y	3.0 / 1040	fixed	Y	1/8000s	11.0/s	n	n
11.		Leica M Typ 240	optical	n	3.0 / 920	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	n	n
12.		Nikon D750	optical	Y	3.2 / 1229	tilting	n	1/4000s	6.0/s	Y	n
13.		Olympus E-PL5	optional	n	3.0 / 460	tilting	Y	1/4000s	8.0/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-PM1	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/4000s	5.5/s	n	Y
17.		Olympus E-PL1	optional	n	2.7 / 230	fixed	n	1/2000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
Note: *) Information refers to the mechanical shutter, unless the camera only has an electronic one.

Concerning the storage of imaging data, both the M Typ 262 and the E-PL3 write their files to SDXC cards. The M Typ 262 supports UHS-I cards (Ultra High Speed data transfer of up to 104 MB/s), while the E-PL3 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 262) and Olympus PEN E-PL3 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 262	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
2.		Olympus E-PL3	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
3.		Canon 1D X Mark II	Y	mono / mono	Y	Y	mini	3.0	-	-	-
4.		Leica M10-R	Y	- / -	-	-	-	-	Y	-	-
5.		Leica Q2	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	-	-	Y	-	Y
6.		Leica M-E Typ 240	Y	mono / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
7.		Leica M10-P	Y	- / -	-	-	-	-	Y	-	-
8.		Leica M10	Y	- / -	-	-	-	-	Y	-	-
9.		Leica Q Typ 116	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
10.		Leica SL	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	full	3.0	Y	-	-
11.		Leica M Typ 240	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
12.		Nikon D750	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	mini	2.0	Y	-	-
13.		Olympus E-PL5	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
14.		Olympus E-P3	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
15.		Olympus E-PL2	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
16.		Olympus E-PM1	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
17.		Olympus E-PL1	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-

Both the M Typ 262 and the E-PL3 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The E-PL3 was replaced by the Olympus E-PL5, while the M Typ 262 was followed by the Leica M10. Further information on the features and operation of the M Typ 262 and E-PL3 can be found, respectively, in the Leica M Typ 262 Manual (free pdf) or the online Olympus E-PL3 Manual.

Review summary

So what conclusions can be drawn? Is there a clear favorite between the Leica M Typ 262 and the Olympus E-PL3? 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 262):

• More detail: Offers more megapixels (23.7 vs 12.2MP) with a 42% higher linear resolution.
• Maximized detail: Lacks an anti-alias filter to exploit the sensor's full resolution potential.
• Better image quality: Features a larger and more technologically advanced imaging sensor.
• Richer colors: The sensor size advantage translates into images with better, more accurate colors.
• More dynamic range: Larger sensor captures a wider spectrum of light and dark details.
• Better low-light sensitivity: Larger sensor produces good images even in poorly lit environments.
• Easier framing: Has an optical viewfinder for image composition and settings control.
• More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (921k vs 460k dots).
• Longer lasting: Can take more shots (400 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 4 years and 4 months of technical progress since the E-PL3 launch.

Arguments in favor of the Olympus PEN E-PL3:

• Better moiré control: Has an anti-alias filter to avoid artificial patterns to appear in images.
• Broader imaging potential: Can capture not only stills but also 1080/60i video.
• More flexible LCD: Has a tilting screen for odd-angle shots in landscape orientation.
• More selfie-friendly: Has an articulated screen that can be turned to be front-facing.
• Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (5.5 vs 3 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
• More compact: Is smaller (110x64mm vs 139x80mm) and will fit more readily into a bag.
• Less heavy: Has a lower weight (by 367g or 54 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 (88 percent cheaper at launch).
• More heavily discounted: Has been around for much longer (launched in June 2011).

If the count of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a measure, the M Typ 262 emerges as the winner of the contest (13 : 10 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 the spec-sheets of cameras can offer a general idea of their imaging potential, it remains partial and cannot reveal, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance when actually working with the M Typ 262 or the E-PL3. At times, user reviews, such as those published at amazon, address these issues in a useful manner, but such feedback is on many occasions incomplete, inconsistent, and unreliable.

Expert reviews

This is why hands-on reviews by experts are important. The table below provides a synthesis of the camera assessments of some of the best known photo-gear 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 262	..	..	..	..	..	..	Nov 2015	5,195	ebay.com
2.		Olympus E-PL3	3/5	+ +	..	72/100	4.5/5	4/5	Jun 2011	599	ebay.com
3.		Canon 1D X Mark II	..	..	4.5/5	89/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Feb 2016	5,999	ebay.com
4.		Leica M10-R	4.5/5	..	4/5	..	..	4/5	Jul 2020	8,295	ebay.com
5.		Leica Q2	..	..	4.5/5	84/100	4.5/5	4/5	Mar 2019	4,995	amazon.com
6.		Leica M-E Typ 240	..	..	..	..	..	..	Jun 2019	3,999	ebay.com
7.		Leica M10-P	..	..	3/5	..	..	4/5	Aug 2018	7,995	ebay.com
8.		Leica M10	4.5/5	..	..	..	4/5	4.5/5	Jan 2017	6,595	ebay.com
9.		Leica Q Typ 116	5/5	..	..	80/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2015	4,249	ebay.com
10.		Leica SL	4/5	..	4/5	84/100	4.5/5	4/5	Oct 2015	7,450	ebay.com
11.		Leica M Typ 240	4/5	..	..	..	4/5	..	Sep 2012	6,950	ebay.com
12.		Nikon D750	5/5	+ +	4/5	90/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2014	2,299	ebay.com
13.		Olympus E-PL5	3/5	+ +	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2012	599	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-PM1	..	86/100	..	71/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2011	499	ebay.com
17.		Olympus E-PL1	..	86/100	..	69/100	4/5	4.5/5	Feb 2010	599	ebay.com
Note: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available.

Care should be taken when interpreting the review scores above, though. The ratings are only valid when referring to cameras in the same category and of the same age. Hence, a score should always be seen in the context of the camera's market launch date and its price, and rating-comparisons among cameras that span long time periods or concern very differently equipped models make little sense. It should also be noted that some of the review sites have over time altered the way they render their verdicts.

Check M Typ 262 offers at
ebay.com
Check E-PL3 offers at
ebay.com

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.

~

Check M Typ 262 offers at
ebay.com
Check E-PL3 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.