Leica Q Typ 116 vs Olympus E-M1

The Leica Q (Typ 116) and the Olympus OM-D E-M1 are two enthusiast cameras that were officially introduced, respectively, in June 2015 and September 2013. The Q Typ 116 is a fixed lens compact, while the E-M1 is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera. The cameras are based on a full frame (Q Typ 116) and a Four Thirds (E-M1) sensor. The Leica has a resolution of 24 megapixels, whereas the Olympus provides 15.9 MP.

Below is an overview of the main specs of the two cameras as a starting point for the comparison.

Headline Specifications

Leica Q Typ 116		Olympus E-M1
Fixed lens compact camera		Mirrorless system camera
28mm f/1.7		Micro Four Thirds lenses
24 MP – Full Frame sensor		15.9 MP – Four Thirds sensor
1080/60p Video		1080/30p Video
ISO 100-50,000		ISO 200-25,600
Electronic viewfinder (3680k dots)		Electronic viewfinder (2360k dots)
3.0" LCD – 1040k dots		3.0" LCD – 1037k dots
Fixed touchscreen		Tilting touchscreen
10 shutter flaps per second		10 shutter flaps per second
Lens-based stabilization		In-body stabilization
not weather sealed		Weathersealed body
300 shots per battery charge		350 shots per battery charge
130 x 80 x 93 mm, 640 g		130 x 94 x 63 mm, 497 g

Check Q Typ 116 offers at
ebay.com
Check E-M1 offers at
ebay.com

Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Leica Q (Typ 116) and the Olympus OM-D E-M1? 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

The side-by-side display below illustrates the physical size and weight of the Leica Q Typ 116 and the Olympus E-M1. The two cameras are presented according to their relative size. 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.

Both cameras are available in two different colors (black, silver).

If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Olympus E-M1 is notably larger (18 percent) than the Leica Q Typ 116. It is noteworthy in this context that the E-M1 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 built in, whereas the E-M1 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 E-M1 and their specifications in the Micro Four Thirds Lens Catalog.

Concerning battery life, the Q Typ 116 gets 300 shots out of its Leica BP-DC12 battery, while the E-M1 can take 350 images on a single charge of its Olympus BLN-1 power pack.

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, you can move across to the CAM-parator tool and choose from the broad selection of possible camera comparisons there.

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 Q Typ 116	130 mm	80 mm	93 mm	640 g	300	n	Jun 2015	4,249	ebay.com
2.		Olympus E-M1	130 mm	94 mm	63 mm	497 g	350	Y	Sep 2013	1,399	ebay.com
3.		Canon T6i	132 mm	101 mm	78 mm	555 g	440	n	Feb 2015	749	ebay.com
4.		Canon T6s	132 mm	101 mm	78 mm	565 g	440	n	Feb 2015	649	ebay.com
5.		Canon G7 X	103 mm	60 mm	40 mm	304 g	210	n	Sep 2014	699	ebay.com
6.		Kodak AZ901	139 mm	104 mm	119 mm	777 g	400	n	Jan 2016	499	amazon.com
7.		Leica Q2	130 mm	80 mm	92 mm	718 g	370	Y	Mar 2019	4,995	amazon.com
8.		Leica M10	139 mm	80 mm	39 mm	660 g	210	Y	Jan 2017	6,595	ebay.com
9.		Leica X Vario	133 mm	73 mm	95 mm	680 g	450	n	Jun 2013	2,850	ebay.com
10.		Olympus E-M1 II	134 mm	91 mm	67 mm	574 g	440	Y	Sep 2016	1,999	ebay.com
11.		Olympus PEN-F	125 mm	72 mm	37 mm	427 g	330	n	Jan 2016	1,199	ebay.com
12.		Olympus E-M5 II	124 mm	85 mm	45 mm	469 g	310	Y	Feb 2015	1,099	ebay.com
13.		Olympus E-P5	122 mm	69 mm	37 mm	420 g	330	n	May 2013	999	ebay.com
14.		Olympus E-M5	122 mm	89 mm	43 mm	425 g	360	Y	Feb 2012	1,299	ebay.com
15.		Sony RX100 V	102 mm	58 mm	41 mm	299 g	220	n	Oct 2016	999	ebay.com
16.		Sony RX100 IV	102 mm	58 mm	41 mm	298 g	280	n	Jun 2015	999	ebay.com
17.		Sony HX400V	130 mm	93 mm	103 mm	660 g	300	n	Feb 2014	499	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

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. Normally, street prices remain initially close to the MSRP, but after a couple of months, the first discounts appear. 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.

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 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 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 Olympus E-M1 a Four Thirds sensor. The sensor area in the E-M1 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 Q Typ 116 has a native 3:2 aspect ratio, while the one in the E-M1 offers a 4:3 aspect.

With 24MP, the Q Typ 116 offers a higher resolution than the E-M1 (15.9MP), but the Q Typ 116 nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 6.00μm versus 3.76μm for the E-M1) due to its larger sensor. Moreover, the Q Typ 116 is a somewhat more recent model (by 1 year and 8 months) than the E-M1, and its sensor might 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 E-M1 has no anti-alias filter installed, so that it can capture all the detail its sensor resolves.

The resolution advantage of the Leica Q Typ 116 implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the Q Typ 116 for good quality output (200 dots per inch) amounts to 30 x 20 inches or 76.2 x 50.8 cm, for very good quality (250 dpi) 24 x 16 inches or 61 x 40.6 cm, and for excellent quality (300 dpi) 20 x 13.3 inches or 50.8 x 33.9 cm. The corresponding values for the Olympus E-M1 are 23 x 17.3 inches or 58.5 x 43.9 cm for good quality, 18.4 x 13.8 inches or 46.8 x 35.1 cm for very good quality, and 15.4 x 11.5 inches or 39 x 29.3 cm for excellent quality prints.

The E-M1 has on-sensor phase detect pixels, which results in fast and reliable autofocus acquisition even during live view operation.

The Leica Q (Typ 116) has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 50000. The corresponding ISO settings for the Olympus OM-D E-M1 are ISO 200 to ISO 25600, with the possibility to increase the ISO range to 100-25600.

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.

Since 2007, DXO Mark has published sensor performance measurements that have been derived using a consistent methodology. 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"). Of the two cameras under review, the Q Typ 116 provides substantially higher image quality than the E-M1, with an overall score that is 12 points higher. This advantage is based on 1.3 bits higher color depth, and 1.6 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.

Sensor Characteristics

#		Camera Model	Sensor Class	Resolution (MP)	Horiz. Pixels	Vert. Pixels	Video Format	DXO Portrait	DXO Landscape	DXO Sports	DXO Overall
1.		Leica Q Typ 116	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	1080/60p	24.3	12.7	2221	85
2.		Olympus E-M1	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	23.0	12.7	757	73
3.		Canon T6i	APS-C	24.0	6000	4000	1080/30p	22.7	12.0	919	71
4.		Canon T6s	APS-C	24.0	6000	4000	1080/30p	22.6	12.0	915	70
5.		Canon G7 X	1-inch	20.0	5472	3648	1080/60p	23.0	12.7	556	71
6.		Kodak AZ901	1/2.3	20.2	5184	3888	1080/30p	20.3	11.7	806	48
7.		Leica Q2	Full Frame	46.7	8368	5584	4K/30p	26.4	13.5	2491	96
8.		Leica M10	Full Frame	23.8	5952	3992	none	24.4	13.2	2133	86
9.		Leica X Vario	APS-C	16.1	4928	3272	1080/30p	23.4	12.7	1320	78
10.		Olympus E-M1 II	Four Thirds	20.2	5184	3888	4K/30p	23.7	12.8	1312	80
11.		Olympus PEN-F	Four Thirds	20.2	5184	3888	1080/60p	23.1	12.4	894	74
12.		Olympus E-M5 II	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/60p	23.0	12.5	842	73
13.		Olympus E-P5	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	22.8	12.4	895	72
14.		Olympus E-M5	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/60i	22.8	12.3	826	71
15.		Sony RX100 V	1-inch	20.0	5472	3648	4K/30p	22.8	12.4	586	70
16.		Sony RX100 IV	1-inch	20.0	5472	3648	4K/30p	22.8	12.6	591	70
17.		Sony HX400V	1/2.3	20.2	5184	3888	1080/60p	20.1	11.4	629	45
Note: DXO values in italics represent estimates based on sensor size and age.

Many modern cameras cannot only take still pictures, but also record videos. Both cameras under consideration are equipped with sensors that have a sufficiently high read-out speed for moving images, but the Q Typ 116 provides a higher frame rate than the E-M1. It can shoot video footage at 1080/60p, while the Olympus is limited to 1080/30p.

Feature comparison

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 E-M1 (3680k vs 2360k dots). The adjacent table lists some of the other core features of the Leica Q Typ 116 and Olympus E-M1 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 Q Typ 116	3680	n	3.0 / 1040	fixed	Y	1/2000s	10.0/s	n	Y
2.		Olympus E-M1	2360	n	3.0 / 1037	tilting	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
3.		Canon T6i	optical	n	3.0 / 1040	swivel	Y	1/4000s	5.0/s	Y	n
4.		Canon T6s	optical	Y	3.0 / 1040	swivel	Y	1/4000s	5.0/s	Y	n
5.		Canon G7 X	none	n	3.0 / 1040	tilting	Y	1/2000s	6.5/s	Y	Y
6.		Kodak AZ901	202	n	3.0 / 920	swivel	n	1/2000s	5.0/s	Y	Y
7.		Leica Q2	3680	n	3.0 / 1040	fixed	Y	1/2000s	10.0/s	n	Y
8.		Leica M10	optical	n	3.0 / 1037	fixed	n	1/4000s	5.0/s	n	n
9.		Leica X Vario	optional	n	3.0 / 920	fixed	n	1/2000s	5.0/s	Y	n
10.		Olympus E-M1 II	2360	n	3.0 / 1037	swivel	Y	1/8000s	18.0/s	n	Y
11.		Olympus PEN-F	2360	n	3.0 / 1037	swivel	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
12.		Olympus E-M5 II	2360	n	3.0 / 1037	swivel	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
13.		Olympus E-P5	optional	n	3.0 / 1037	tilting	Y	1/8000s	9.0/s	Y	Y
14.		Olympus E-M5	1440	n	3.0 / 610	tilting	Y	1/4000s	9.0/s	n	Y
15.		Sony RX100 V	2359	n	3.0 / 1229	tilting	n	1/2000s	24.0/s	Y	Y
16.		Sony RX100 IV	2359	n	3.0 / 1228	tilting	n	1/2000s	16.0/s	Y	Y
17.		Sony HX400V	210	n	3.0 / 921	tilting	n	1/4000s	10.0/s	Y	Y
Note: *) Information refers to the mechanical shutter, unless the camera only has an electronic one.

The reported shutter speed information refers to the use of the mechanical shutter. Yet, some cameras only have an electronic shutter, while others have an electronic shutter in addition to a mechanical one. In fact, both cameras under consideration feature an electronic shutter, which makes completely silent shooting possible. However, this mode is less suitable for photographing moving objects (risk of rolling shutter) or shooting under artificial light sources (risk of flickering).

The Leica Q Typ 116 and the Olympus E-M1 both have 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 Q Typ 116 and the E-M1 write their files to SDXC cards. Both cameras can use UHS-I cards, which provide for Ultra High Speed data transfer of up to 104 MB/s.

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 Q (Typ 116) and Olympus OM-D E-M1 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 Q Typ 116	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
2.		Olympus E-M1	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
3.		Canon T6i	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	mini	2.0	Y	Y	-
4.		Canon T6s	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	mini	2.0	Y	Y	-
5.		Canon G7 X	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
6.		Kodak AZ901	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
7.		Leica Q2	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	-	-	Y	-	Y
8.		Leica M10	Y	- / -	-	-	-	-	Y	-	-
9.		Leica X Vario	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
10.		Olympus E-M1 II	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.0	Y	-	-
11.		Olympus PEN-F	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
12.		Olympus E-M5 II	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
13.		Olympus E-P5	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
14.		Olympus E-M5	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
15.		Sony RX100 V	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
16.		Sony RX100 IV	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
17.		Sony HX400V	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-

It is notable that the E-M1 has a microphone port, which can help to improve the quality of audio recordings by attaching an external microphone. The Q Typ 116 does not feature such a mic input.

Studio photographers will appreciate that the Olympus E-M1 (unlike the Q Typ 116) features a PC Sync socket, so that professional strobe lights can be controlled by the camera.

Both the Q Typ 116 and the E-M1 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The E-M1 was replaced by the Olympus E-M1 II, while the Q Typ 116 was followed by the Leica Q2. Further information on the features and operation of the Q Typ 116 and E-M1 can be found, respectively, in the Leica Q Typ 116 Manual (free pdf) or the online Olympus E-M1 Manual.

Review summary

So what conclusions can be drawn? Is the Leica Q Typ 116 better than the Olympus E-M1 or vice versa? A synthesis of the relative strong points of each of the models is listed below.

Arguments in favor of the Leica Q (Typ 116):

• More detail: Offers more megapixels (24 vs 15.9MP) with a 25% higher linear resolution.
• Better moiré control: Has an anti-alias filter to avoid artificial patterns to appear in images.
• Better image quality: Scores substantially higher (12 points) in the DXO overall assessment.
• Richer colors: Generates images with noticeably better colors (1.3 bits more color depth).
• Better low-light sensitivity: Requires less light for good images (1.6 stops ISO advantage).
• Better video: Provides higher movie framerates (1080/60p versus 1080/30p).
• More detailed viewfinder: Has higher resolution electronic viewfinder (3680k vs 2360k dots).
• Ready to shoot: Has a lens built-in, whereas the E-M1 requires a separate lens.
• More compact: Is smaller (130x80mm vs 130x94mm) and thus needs less room in the bag.
• Easier device pairing: Supports NFC for fast wireless image transfer over short distances.
• 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 E-M1).

Advantages of the Olympus OM-D E-M1:

• Maximized detail: Lacks an anti-alias filter to exploit the sensor's full resolution potential.
• Better live-view autofocus: Features on-sensor phase-detection for more confident autofocus.
• Better sound: Can connect to an external microphone for higher quality sound recording.
• More flexible LCD: Has a tilting screen for odd-angle shots in landscape orientation.
• Faster shutter: Has higher mechanical shutter speed (1/8000s vs 1/2000s) 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.
• Better studio light control: Has a PC Sync socket to connect to professional strobe lights.
• More heavily discounted: Has been on the market for longer (launched in September 2013).

If the count of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a measure, the Q Typ 116 emerges as the winner of the contest (12 : 10 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 when reflecting and deciding on a new camera. A professional sports photographer will view the differences between cameras in a way that diverges from the perspective of a street photog, and a person interested in family portraits has distinct needs from a landscape shooter. Hence, the decision which camera is best and worth buying is often a very personal one.

How about other alternatives? Do the specifications of the Leica Q Typ 116 and the Olympus E-M1 place the cameras among the top in their class? Find out in the latest Best Prime Lens Compact Camera and Best Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera listings whether the two cameras rank among the cream of the crop.

In any case, while the specs-based evaluation of cameras can be instructive in revealing their potential as photographic tools, it says little about, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance of the Q Typ 116 and the E-M1 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 why expert reviews are important. 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.

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 Q Typ 116	5/5	..	..	80/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2015	4,249	ebay.com
2.		Olympus E-M1	5/5	+ +	..	84/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2013	1,399	ebay.com
3.		Canon T6i	5/5	..	..	75/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Feb 2015	749	ebay.com
4.		Canon T6s	5/5	+	..	77/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Feb 2015	649	ebay.com
5.		Canon G7 X	4/5	+ +	..	77/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2014	699	ebay.com
6.		Kodak AZ901	..	..	..	..	3.5/5	3/5	Jan 2016	499	amazon.com
7.		Leica Q2	..	..	4.5/5	84/100	4.5/5	4/5	Mar 2019	4,995	amazon.com
8.		Leica M10	4.5/5	..	..	..	4/5	4.5/5	Jan 2017	6,595	ebay.com
9.		Leica X Vario	3/5	..	..	..	4/5	4/5	Jun 2013	2,850	ebay.com
10.		Olympus E-M1 II	5/5	+ +	5/5	85/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2016	1,999	ebay.com
11.		Olympus PEN-F	..	..	4/5	82/100	4.5/5	5/5	Jan 2016	1,199	ebay.com
12.		Olympus E-M5 II	5/5	+ +	4.5/5	81/100	5/5	5/5	Feb 2015	1,099	ebay.com
13.		Olympus E-P5	5/5	+ +	..	78/100	4.5/5	5/5	May 2013	999	ebay.com
14.		Olympus E-M5	4/5	+ +	..	80/100	4.5/5	5/5	Feb 2012	1,299	ebay.com
15.		Sony RX100 V	4.5/5	+ +	..	83/100	4/5	4.5/5	Oct 2016	999	ebay.com
16.		Sony RX100 IV	4.5/5	+ +	..	85/100	4/5	4.5/5	Jun 2015	999	ebay.com
17.		Sony HX400V	4/5	+ +	..	..	4/5	4/5	Feb 2014	499	ebay.com
Note: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available.

Care should be taken when interpreting the review scores above, though. The assessments were made in relation to similar cameras of the same technological generation. A score, therefore, has to be seen in close connection to the price and market introduction time of the camera, and comparisons of ratings among very different cameras or across long time periods have little meaning. Also, please note that some of the review sites have changed their methodology and reporting over time.

Check Q Typ 116 offers at
ebay.com
Check E-M1 offers at
ebay.com

Other camera comparisons

Did this review help to inform your camera decision process? In case you are interested in seeing how other cameras pair up, just make a corresponding selection in the search boxes below. There is also a set of direct links to comparison reviews that other users of the CAM-parator app explored.

~

Check Q Typ 116 offers at
ebay.com
Check E-M1 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.