Leica M9 versus Leica M Typ 262

The Leica M9 and the Leica M (Typ 262) are two enthusiast cameras that were announced, respectively, in September 2009 and November 2015. Both the M9 and the M Typ 262 are rangefinder-style mirrorless cameras that are equipped with a full frame sensor. The M9 has a resolution of 18.1 megapixel, whereas the M Typ 262 provides 23.7 MP.

Body comparison

The physical size and weight of the Leica M9 and the Leica M Typ 262 are illustrated in the side-by-side display below. 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. You can also toggle the display 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 – the M9 – represents 100 percent across all the size and weight measures).

In this particular case, the Leica M9 and the Leica M Typ 262 have exactly the same width and height, and, thus, have identically-sized bodies. However, the M Typ 262 is markedly heavier (16 percent) than the M9. It is noteworthy in this context that the M Typ 262 is splash and dust-proof, while the M9 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.

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 markedly lower price (by 35 percent) than the M9, 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 are more costly to manufacture and tent to lead to bigger and heavier cameras and lenses.

Both cameras under consideration feature a full frame sensor, but their sensors differ slightly in size. The sensor area in the M Typ 262 is 1 percent smaller. They nevertheless have the same format factor of 1.0. Both cameras have a native aspect ratio (sensor width to sensor height) of 3:2.

Despite having a slightly smaller sensor, the M Typ 262 offers a higher resolution of 23.7 megapixel, compared with 18.1 MP of the M9. This megapixel advantage comes at the cost of a higher pixel density and a smaller size of the individual pixel (with a pixel pitch of 6.01μm versus 6.91μm for the M9). However, it should be noted that the M Typ 262 is much more recent (by 6 years and 2 months) than the M9, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that make it possible to gather light more efficiently. 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.

For most cameras, data on sensor performance has been reported by DXO Mark. 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 table below summarizes the physical sensor characteristics and sensor quality findings and compares them across a set of similar cameras.

Feature comparison

Beyond body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. The M9 and the M Typ 262 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 M9 and Leica M Typ 262 along with similar information for a selection of comparators. The full specs-sheets can be found in the camera manual or, for example, in the dpreview camera hub.

Both the M9 and the M Typ 262 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The M9 was replaced by the Leica M Typ 240, while the M Typ 262 was followed by the Leica M10.

Summary

So what is the bottom line? Which of the two cameras – the Leica M9 or the Leica M Typ 262 – has the upper hand? The listing below highlights the relative strengths of the two models.

Arguments in favor of the Leica M9:

• Less heavy: Is lighter (by 95g or 14 percent) and hence easier to carry around.
• More heavily discounted: Has been available for much longer (launched in September 2009).

Advantages of the Leica M (Typ 262):

• More detail: Has more megapixels (23.7 vs 18.1MP), which boosts linear resolution by 14%.
• Larger screen: Has a bigger rear LCD (3.0" vs 2.5") for image review and settings control.
• More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (921k vs 230k dots).
• Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (3 vs 2 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
• Better sealing: Is splash and dust sealed for shooting in inclement weather conditions.
• More affordable: Was introduced into a lower priced category (35 percent cheaper at launch).
• More modern: Reflects 6 years and 2 months of technical progress since the M9 launch.

If the number of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the M Typ 262 is the clear winner of the contest (7 : 2 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.

In any case, while the specs-based evaluation of cameras is instructive in revealing their potential as photographic tools, it remains incomplete and does no justice, for example, to the way the M9 or the M Typ 262 handle or perform in practice. User reviews, such as those found at amazon, can sometimes inform about these issues, but such feedback is often incomplete, inconsistent, and biased. This is where reviews by experts come in. The following table reports the overall rankings of the cameras as published by some of the major camera review sites. The detailed reviews can be accessed, respectively, on the websites of cameralabs.com, dpreview.com, ephotozine.com, imaging-resource.com, and photographyblog.com.

Care should be taken when interpreting the review scores above, though. The ratings are only valid when refering 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 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 comparisons

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. If the camera you are interested in is not available, kindly get in touch, and I will try to update the database with the necessary infos.