Leica Q Typ 116 versus Fujifilm X-Pro2
The Leica Q (Typ 116) and the Fujifilm X-Pro2 are two enthusiast cameras that were officially introduced, respectively, in June 2015 and January 2016. The Q Typ 116 is a fixed lens compact, while the X-Pro2 is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera. The cameras are based on a full frame (Q Typ 116) and an APS-C (X-Pro2) sensor. Both cameras offer a resolution of 24 megapixel. Read on to find out how these two cameras compare with respect to their size, their sensors, their features, and their reception by expert reviewers.
Body comparison: Leica Q Typ 116 vs Fujifilm X-Pro2
The physical size and weight of the Leica Q Typ 116 and the Fujifilm X-Pro2 are illustrated 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 dimensions are rounded to the nearest millimeter. If you prefer, you can also use the toggle button to switch to a comparison in percentage terms (in this case, the camera on the left – the Q Typ 116 – represents the basis or 100 percent across all the size and weight measures).
If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Fujifilm X-Pro2 is notably larger (13 percent) than the Leica Q Typ 116. It is noteworthy in this context that the X-Pro2 is splash and dust-proof, while the Q Typ 116 does not feature any corresponding weather-sealing.
The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete and possibly misleading, as the Q Typ 116 has a lens build in, whereas the X-Pro2 is an interchangeable lens camera that requires a separate lens. Attaching the latter will add extra weight and bulk to the setup. You can find an overview of optics for the X-Pro2 and their specifications in the Fujinon X 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 camera comparisons there.
|Camera Body Specifications|
|Leica Q Typ 116»||5.1 in||3.1 in||3.7 in||22.6 oz||300||n||Jun 2015||4,249|
|Fujifilm X-Pro2«||5.6 in||3.3 in||1.8 in||17.5 oz||350||Y||Jan 2016||1,699|
|Canon 6D Mark II« »||5.7 in||4.4 in||3.0 in||27.0 oz||1200||Y||Jun 2017||1,999|
|Canon T6i« »||5.2 in||4.0 in||3.1 in||19.6 oz||440||n||Feb 2015||749||-|
|Canon T6s« »||5.2 in||4.0 in||3.1 in||19.9 oz||440||n||Feb 2015||849||-|
|Canon G7 X« »||4.1 in||2.4 in||1.6 in||10.7 oz||210||n||Sep 2014||699||-|
|Fujifilm X-E3« »||4.8 in||2.9 in||1.7 in||11.9 oz||350||n||Sep 2017||899|
|Fujifilm X-A3« »||4.6 in||2.6 in||1.6 in||12.0 oz||410||n||Aug 2016||399|
|Fujifilm X-T2« »||5.2 in||3.6 in||1.9 in||17.9 oz||340||Y||Jul 2016||1,599|
|Fujifilm X-Pro1« »||5.5 in||3.2 in||1.7 in||15.9 oz||300||n||Jan 2012||1,699||-|
|Kodak AZ901« »||5.5 in||4.1 in||4.7 in||27.4 oz||400||n||Jan 2016||499|
|Leica M10« »||5.5 in||3.1 in||1.5 in||23.3 oz||210||n||Jan 2017||6,595|
|Leica V-LUX Typ 114« »||5.4 in||3.9 in||5.2 in||29.3 oz||360||n||Sep 2014||1,349|
|Leica X Vario« »||5.2 in||2.9 in||3.7 in||24.0 oz||450||n||Jun 2013||2,850|
|Sony RX100 V« »||4.0 in||2.3 in||1.6 in||10.5 oz||220||n||Oct 2016||999|
|Sony RX100 IV« »||4.0 in||2.3 in||1.6 in||10.5 oz||280||n||Jun 2015||999||-|
|Sony HX400V« »||5.1 in||3.7 in||4.1 in||23.3 oz||300||n||Feb 2014||499|
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. 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: Leica Q Typ 116 vs Fujifilm X-Pro2
The size of the sensor inside a digital camera is one of the key determinants 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 Q Typ 116 features a full frame sensor and the Fujifilm X-Pro2 an APS-C sensor. The sensor area in the X-Pro2 is 57 percent smaller. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 1.0 and 1.5. Both cameras have a native aspect ratio (sensor width to sensor height) of 3:2.
Even though the Q Typ 116 has a larger sensor, both cameras offer the same resolution of 24 megapixel. This implies that the Q Typ 116 has a lower pixel density and larger individual pixels (with a pixel pitch of 6.00μm versus 3.92μm for the X-Pro2), which gives it a potential advantage in terms of light gathering capacity. It should, however, be noted that the X-Pro2 is a somewhat more recent model (by 7 months) than the Q Typ 116, 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 the X-Pro2 has no anti-alias filter installed, so that it can capture all the detail its sensor resolves.
For most 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 adjacent table reports on the physical sensor characteristics and the outcomes of the DXO sensor quality tests for a sample of comparator-cameras.
|Leica Q Typ 116»||Full Frame||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||24.3||12.7||2221||85|
|Canon 6D Mark II« »||Full Frame||26.0||6240||4160||1080/60p||24.4||11.9||2862||85|
|Canon T6i« »||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||22.7||12.0||919||71|
|Canon T6s« »||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/30p||22.6||12.0||915||70|
|Canon G7 X« »||1-inch||20.0||5472||3648||1080/60p||23.0||12.7||556||71|
|Fujifilm X-E3« »||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||4K/30p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X-A3« »||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X-T2« »||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||4K/30p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X-Pro1« »||APS-C||16.0||4896||3264||1080/24p||-||-||-||-|
|Kodak AZ901« »||1/2.3||20.2||5184||3888||1080/30p||-||-||-||-|
|Leica M10« »||Full Frame||23.8||5952||3992||-||24.4||13.2||2133||86|
|Leica V-LUX Typ 114« »||1-inch||20.0||5472||3648||4K/30p||-||-||-||-|
|Leica X Vario« »||APS-C||16.1||4928||3272||1080/30p||23.4||12.7||1320||78|
|Sony RX100 V« »||1-inch||20.0||5472||3648||4K/30p||22.8||12.4||586||70|
|Sony RX100 IV« »||1-inch||20.0||5472||3648||4K/30p||22.8||12.6||591||70|
|Sony HX400V« »||1/2.3||20.2||5184||3888||1080/60p||-||-||-||-|
Many modern cameras are not only capable of taking still images, but also of capturing video footage. Both cameras under consideration have a sensor with sufficiently fast read-out times for moving pictures, and both provide the same movie specifications (1080/60p).
Feature comparison: Leica Q Typ 116 vs Fujifilm X-Pro2
Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a variety of features. The two cameras under consideration are similar with respect to both having an electronic viewfinder. However, the one in the Q Typ 116 offers a substantially higher resolution than the one in the X-Pro2 (3680k vs 2360k dots). The following table reports on some other key feature differences and similarities of the Leica Q Typ 116, the Fujifilm X-Pro2, and comparable cameras. If needed, the dpreview camera hub, for example, contains further detail on the cameras' specs.
|Leica Q Typ 116»||3680||n||3.0||1040||fixed||Y||2000||10.0||n||n|
|Canon 6D Mark II« »||optical||Y||3.0||1040||swivel||Y||4000||6.5||n||n|
|Canon T6i« »||optical||n||3.0||1040||swivel||Y||4000||5.0||Y||n|
|Canon T6s« »||optical||Y||3.0||1040||swivel||Y||4000||5.0||Y||n|
|Canon G7 X« »||-||n||3.0||1040||tilting||Y||2000||6.5||Y||Y|
|Fujifilm X-E3« »||2360||n||3.0||1040||fixed||Y||4000||8.0||n||n|
|Fujifilm X-A3« »||-||n||3.0||1040||tilting||Y||4000||6.0||Y||n|
|Fujifilm X-T2« »||2360||n||3.0||1040||tilting||n||8000||14.0||n||n|
|Fujifilm X-Pro1« »||1440||n||3.0||1230||fixed||n||4000||6.0||n||n|
|Kodak AZ901« »||202||n||3.0||920||swivel||n||2000||5.0||Y||Y|
|Leica M10« »||optical||n||3.0||1037||fixed||n||4000||5.0||n||n|
|Leica V-LUX Typ 114« »||2359||n||3.0||921||swivel||n||4000||12.0||Y||Y|
|Leica X Vario« »||-||n||3.0||920||fixed||n||2000||5.0||Y||n|
|Sony RX100 V« »||2359||n||3.0||1229||tilting||n||2000||24.0||Y||Y|
|Sony RX100 IV« »||2359||n||3.0||1228||tilting||n||2000||16.0||Y||Y|
|Sony HX400V« »||210||n||3.0||921||tilting||n||4000||10.0||Y||Y|
Both the Q Typ 116 and the X-Pro2 are current models that good online retailers will have in stock. You can check the latest prices, for example, at amazon. The X-Pro2 replaced the earlier Fujifilm X-Pro1, while the Q Typ 116 does not have a direct predecessor.
Review summary: Leica Q Typ 116 vs Fujifilm X-Pro2
So how do things add up? Is the Leica Q Typ 116 better than the Fujifilm X-Pro2 or vice versa? A synthesis of the relative strong points of each of the models is listed below.
Reasons to prefer the Leica Q (Typ 116):
- Better moiré control: Has an anti-alias filter to avoid artificial patterns to appear in images.
- Better low-light imaging: Features bigger pixels on a larger sensor for better high-ISO images.
- More detailed viewfinder: Has higher resolution electronic viewfinder (3680k vs 2360k dots).
- Fewer buttons to press: Is equipped with a touch-sensitive rear screen to facilitate handling.
- Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (10 vs 8 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
- Ready to shoot: Has a lens build-in, whereas the X-Pro2 requires a separate lens.
- More compact: Is smaller (130x80mm vs 141x83mm) and thus needs less room in the bag.
- More prestigious: Has the Leica luxury appeal, which ensures a high resale price.
- More heavily discounted: Has been on the market for longer (launched in June 2015).
Arguments in favor of the Fujifilm X-Pro2:
- Maximized detail: Lacks an anti-alias filter to exploit the sensor's full resolution potential.
- More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1620k vs 1040k dots).
- Faster shutter: Has higher mechanical shutter speed (8000/sec vs 2000/sec) to freeze action.
- More flexible: Takes interchangeable lenses and can thus be used with specialty optics.
- Longer lasting: Gets more shots (350 versus 300) out of a single battery charge.
- Better sealing: Is splash and dust sealed for shooting in inclement weather conditions.
- More modern: Was introduced somewhat (7 months) more recently.
If the number of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the Q Typ 116 emerges as the winner of the contest (9 : 7 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.
In any case, while the comparison of technical specifications can provide a useful overview of the capabilities of different cameras, it remains partial and cannot reveal, for example, the handling experience and imaging performance when actually working with the Q Typ 116 or the X-Pro2. 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 why expert reviews are important. The following table reports the overall rankings of the cameras as published by some of the major camera review sites (cameralabs, dpreview, ephotozine, imaging-resource, photographyblog). You can find the full text of the reviews by clicking on the site logo in the table header.
|Leica Q Typ 116»||-||80/100||4.5/5||-||4.5/5||Jun 2015||4,249|
|Fujifilm X-Pro2«||Rec||83/100||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||Jan 2016||1,699|
|Canon 6D Mark II« »||Rec||80/100||4.5/5||4/5||4/5||Jun 2017||1,999|
|Canon T6i« »||-||75/100||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||Feb 2015||749||-|
|Canon T6s« »||Rec||77/100||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||Feb 2015||849||-|
|Canon G7 X« »||HiRec||77/100||4.5/5||3.5/5||4.5/5||Sep 2014||699||-|
|Fujifilm X-E3« »||Rec||84/100||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||Sep 2017||899|
|Fujifilm X-A3« »||-||74/100||4.5/5||-||4/5||Aug 2016||399|
|Fujifilm X-T2« »||HiRec||86/100||4.5/5||5/5||5/5||Jul 2016||1,599|
|Fujifilm X-Pro1« »||HiRec||79/100||4.5/5||4/5||4.5/5||Jan 2012||1,699||-|
|Kodak AZ901« »||-||-||-||-||3/5||Jan 2016||499|
|Leica M10« »||-||-||4/5||-||4.5/5||Jan 2017||6,595|
|Leica V-LUX Typ 114« »||-||-||-||-||5/5||Sep 2014||1,349|
|Leica X Vario« »||-||-||4/5||4/5||4/5||Jun 2013||2,850|
|Sony RX100 V« »||HiRec||83/100||4/5||5/5||4.5/5||Oct 2016||999|
|Sony RX100 IV« »||HiRec||85/100||4/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||Jun 2015||999||-|
|Sony HX400V« »||HiRec||-||4/5||-||4/5||Feb 2014||499|
The review scores listed above should be treated with care, though. The ratings are only valid when refering to cameras in the same category and of the same age. Thus, a score needs to be put into the context of the launch date and the launch price of the camera, and comparing ratings of very distinct cameras or ones that are far apart in terms of their release date have little meaning. It should also be noted that some of the review sites have over time altered the way they render their verdicts.
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 use the search menu below. An an alternative, you can also directly jump to any one of the listed comparisons that were previously generated by the CAM-parator tool. 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.
- Canon 1300D vs Canon 1D Mark II
- Canon 1300D vs Sony NEX-5N
- Canon 50D vs Fujifilm X30
- Canon 750D vs Sony A5000
- Nikon D500 vs Canon 1200D
- Nikon Df vs Canon 5DS R
- Nikon Df vs Canon G3 X
- Olympus E-620 vs Olympus E-PL1
- Olympus E-M10 III vs Sony A6300
- Panasonic LX15 vs Leica TL2
- Panasonic TZ100 vs Fujifilm X-A5
- Sony A6000 vs Fujifilm X-E3