Leica Q Typ 116 vs Olympus E-M1 II
The Leica Q (Typ 116) and the Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II are two enthusiast cameras that were revealed to the public, respectively, in June 2015 and September 2016. The Q Typ 116 is a fixed lens compact, while the E-M1 II is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera. The cameras are based on a full frame (Q Typ 116) and a Four Thirds (E-M1 II) sensor. The Leica has a resolution of 24 megapixels, whereas the Olympus provides 20.2 MP.
Below is an overview of the main specs of the two cameras as a starting point for the comparison.
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 Mark II? 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 physical size and weight of the Leica Q Typ 116 and the Olympus E-M1 II are illustrated in the side-by-side display below. 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.
The Q Typ 116 can be obtained in two different colors (black, silver), while the E-M1 II is only available in black.
If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Olympus E-M1 II is notably larger (17 percent) than the Leica Q Typ 116. It is noteworthy in this context that the E-M1 II 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 II 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 II 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 II can take 440 images on a single charge of its Olympus BLH-1 power pack.
The following table provides a synthesis of the main physical specifications of the two cameras and other similar ones. If you would like to visualize and compare a different camera combination, you can navigate to the CAM-parator app and make your selection from a broad list of cameras there.
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 II | 134 mm | 91 mm | 67 mm | 574 g | 440 | Y | Sep 2016 | 1,999 | ebay.com | |
3. | Canon G7 X | 103 mm | 60 mm | 40 mm | 304 g | 210 | n | Sep 2014 | 699 | ebay.com | |
4. | Canon T6i | 132 mm | 101 mm | 78 mm | 555 g | 440 | n | Feb 2015 | 749 | ebay.com | |
5. | Canon T6s | 132 mm | 101 mm | 78 mm | 565 g | 440 | n | Feb 2015 | 649 | ebay.com | |
6. | Kodak AZ901 | 139 mm | 104 mm | 119 mm | 777 g | 400 | n | Jan 2016 | 499 | amazon.com | |
7. | Leica M10 | 139 mm | 80 mm | 39 mm | 660 g | 210 | Y | Jan 2017 | 6,595 | ebay.com | |
8. | Leica Q2 | 130 mm | 80 mm | 92 mm | 718 g | 370 | Y | Mar 2019 | 4,995 | amazon.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 | 130 mm | 94 mm | 63 mm | 497 g | 350 | Y | Sep 2013 | 1,399 | ebay.com | |
11. | Olympus E-M1 III | 134 mm | 91 mm | 69 mm | 580 g | 420 | Y | Feb 2020 | 1,799 | ebay.com | |
12. | Olympus PEN-F | 125 mm | 72 mm | 37 mm | 427 g | 330 | n | Jan 2016 | 1,199 | ebay.com | |
13. | Panasonic G85 | 128 mm | 89 mm | 74 mm | 505 g | 330 | Y | Sep 2016 | 899 | ebay.com | |
14. | Panasonic GH5 | 139 mm | 98 mm | 87 mm | 725 g | 410 | Y | Jan 2017 | 1,999 | ebay.com | |
15. | Sony HX400V | 130 mm | 93 mm | 103 mm | 660 g | 300 | n | Feb 2014 | 499 | ebay.com | |
16. | Sony RX100 IV | 102 mm | 58 mm | 41 mm | 298 g | 280 | n | Jun 2015 | 999 | ebay.com | |
17. | Sony RX100 V | 102 mm | 58 mm | 41 mm | 299 g | 220 | n | Oct 2016 | 999 | ebay.com | |
Note: Measurements and pricing do not include easily detachable parts, such as add-on or interchangeable lenses or optional viewfinders. | |||||||||||
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.
Sensor comparison
The size of the imaging sensor is a crucial determinant 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 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 II a Four Thirds sensor. The sensor area in the E-M1 II 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 II offers a 4:3 aspect.
With 24MP, the Q Typ 116 offers a higher resolution than the E-M1 II (20.2MP), but the Q Typ 116 nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 6.00μm versus 3.34μm for the E-M1 II) due to its larger sensor. However, the E-M1 II is a somewhat more recent model (by 1 year and 3 months) than the Q Typ 116, and its sensor might have benefitted from technological advances during this time that enhance the light gathering capacity of its pixels. Coming back to sensor resolution, it should be mentioned that the E-M1 II 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 II are 25.9 x 19.4 inches or 65.8 x 49.4 cm for good quality, 20.7 x 15.6 inches or 52.7 x 39.5 cm for very good quality, and 17.3 x 13 inches or 43.9 x 32.9 cm for excellent quality prints.
The E-M1 II has on-sensor phase detect pixels, which results in fast and reliable autofocus acquisition even during live view operation.
Unlike the Q Typ 116, the E-M1 II has the capacity to capture high quality composite images (50MP) by combining multiple shots after shifting its sensor by miniscule distances. This multi-shot, pixel-shift mode is most suitable for photography of stationary objects (landscapes, studio scenes).
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 Mark II are ISO 200 to ISO 25600, with the possibility to increase the ISO range to 64-25600.
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.
Consistent information on actual sensor performance is available from DXO Mark for many cameras. 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"). Of the two cameras under review, the Q Typ 116 has a notably higher overall DXO score than the E-M1 II (overall score 5 points higher), which gives it an advantage in terms of imaging quality. This advantage is based on 0.6 bits higher color depth, 0.1 EV of lower dynamic range, and 0.8 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.
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 II | Four Thirds | 20.2 | 5184 | 3888 | 4K/30p | 23.7 | 12.8 | 1312 | 80 | |
3. | Canon G7 X | 1-inch | 20.0 | 5472 | 3648 | 1080/60p | 23.0 | 12.7 | 556 | 71 | |
4. | Canon T6i | APS-C | 24.0 | 6000 | 4000 | 1080/30p | 22.7 | 12.0 | 919 | 71 | |
5. | Canon T6s | APS-C | 24.0 | 6000 | 4000 | 1080/30p | 22.6 | 12.0 | 915 | 70 | |
6. | Kodak AZ901 | 1/2.3 | 20.2 | 5184 | 3888 | 1080/30p | 20.3 | 11.7 | 806 | 48 | |
7. | Leica M10 | Full Frame | 23.8 | 5952 | 3992 | none | 24.4 | 13.2 | 2133 | 86 | |
8. | Leica Q2 | Full Frame | 46.7 | 8368 | 5584 | 4K/30p | 26.4 | 13.5 | 2491 | 96 | |
9. | Leica X Vario | APS-C | 16.1 | 4928 | 3272 | 1080/30p | 23.4 | 12.7 | 1320 | 78 | |
10. | Olympus E-M1 | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/30p | 23.0 | 12.7 | 757 | 73 | |
11. | Olympus E-M1 III | Four Thirds | 20.2 | 5184 | 3888 | 4K/30p | 23.3 | 13.1 | 1356 | 76 | |
12. | Olympus PEN-F | Four Thirds | 20.2 | 5184 | 3888 | 1080/60p | 23.1 | 12.4 | 894 | 74 | |
13. | Panasonic G85 | Four Thirds | 15.8 | 4592 | 3448 | 4K/30p | 22.8 | 12.5 | 656 | 71 | |
14. | Panasonic GH5 | Four Thirds | 20.2 | 5184 | 3888 | 4K/60p | 23.9 | 13.0 | 807 | 77 | |
15. | Sony HX400V | 1/2.3 | 20.2 | 5184 | 3888 | 1080/60p | 20.1 | 11.4 | 629 | 45 | |
16. | Sony RX100 IV | 1-inch | 20.0 | 5472 | 3648 | 4K/30p | 22.8 | 12.6 | 591 | 70 | |
17. | Sony RX100 V | 1-inch | 20.0 | 5472 | 3648 | 4K/30p | 22.8 | 12.4 | 586 | 70 | |
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 E-M1 II provides a better video resolution than the Q Typ 116. It can shoot movie footage at 4K/30p, while the Leica is limited to 1080/60p.
Feature comparison
Beyond body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range 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 II (3680k vs 2360k dots). The adjacent table lists some of the other core features of the Leica Q Typ 116 and Olympus E-M1 II along with similar information for a selection of comparators.
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 II | 2360 | n | 3.0 / 1037 | swivel | Y | 1/8000s | 18.0/s | n | Y | |
3. | Canon G7 X | none | n | 3.0 / 1040 | tilting | Y | 1/2000s | 6.5/s | Y | Y | |
4. | Canon T6i | optical | n | 3.0 / 1040 | swivel | Y | 1/4000s | 5.0/s | Y | n | |
5. | Canon T6s | optical | Y | 3.0 / 1040 | swivel | Y | 1/4000s | 5.0/s | Y | n | |
6. | Kodak AZ901 | 202 | n | 3.0 / 920 | swivel | n | 1/2000s | 5.0/s | Y | Y | |
7. | Leica M10 | optical | n | 3.0 / 1037 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 5.0/s | n | n | |
8. | Leica Q2 | 3680 | n | 3.0 / 1040 | fixed | Y | 1/2000s | 10.0/s | n | Y | |
9. | Leica X Vario | optional | n | 3.0 / 920 | fixed | n | 1/2000s | 5.0/s | Y | n | |
10. | Olympus E-M1 | 2360 | n | 3.0 / 1037 | tilting | Y | 1/8000s | 10.0/s | n | Y | |
11. | Olympus E-M1 III | 2360 | n | 3.0 / 1037 | swivel | Y | 1/8000s | 18.0/s | n | Y | |
12. | Olympus PEN-F | 2360 | n | 3.0 / 1037 | swivel | Y | 1/8000s | 10.0/s | n | Y | |
13. | Panasonic G85 | 2360 | n | 3.0 / 1040 | swivel | Y | 1/4000s | 9.0/s | Y | Y | |
14. | Panasonic GH5 | 3680 | n | 3.2 / 1620 | swivel | Y | 1/8000s | 12.0/s | n | Y | |
15. | Sony HX400V | 210 | n | 3.0 / 921 | tilting | n | 1/4000s | 10.0/s | Y | Y | |
16. | Sony RX100 IV | 2359 | n | 3.0 / 1228 | tilting | n | 1/2000s | 16.0/s | Y | Y | |
17. | Sony RX100 V | 2359 | n | 3.0 / 1229 | tilting | n | 1/2000s | 24.0/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 II 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 II write their files to SDXC cards. The E-M1 II features dual card slots, which can be very useful in case a memory card fails. In contrast, the Q Typ 116 only has one slot. The E-M1 II supports UHS-II cards (on its first slot), while the Q Typ 116 can use UHS-I 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 Q (Typ 116) and Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II and, in particular, the interfaces the cameras (and selected comparators) provide for accessory control and data transfer.
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 II | Y | stereo / mono | Y | Y | micro | 3.0 | Y | - | - | |
3. | Canon G7 X | - | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | Y | - | |
4. | Canon T6i | Y | stereo / mono | Y | - | mini | 2.0 | Y | Y | - | |
5. | Canon T6s | Y | stereo / mono | Y | - | mini | 2.0 | Y | Y | - | |
6. | Kodak AZ901 | - | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
7. | Leica M10 | Y | - / - | - | - | - | - | Y | - | - | |
8. | Leica Q2 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | - | - | Y | - | Y | |
9. | Leica X Vario | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
10. | Olympus E-M1 | Y | stereo / mono | Y | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
11. | Olympus E-M1 III | Y | stereo / mono | Y | Y | micro | 3.1 | Y | - | Y | |
12. | Olympus PEN-F | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
13. | Panasonic G85 | Y | stereo / mono | Y | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
14. | Panasonic GH5 | Y | stereo / mono | Y | Y | full | 3.1 | Y | - | Y | |
15. | Sony HX400V | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | Y | - | |
16. | Sony RX100 IV | - | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | Y | - | |
17. | Sony RX100 V | - | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | Y | - |
It is notable that the E-M1 II 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 II (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 II have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The Q Typ 116 was replaced by the Leica Q2, while the E-M1 II was followed by the Olympus E-M1 III. Further information on the features and operation of the Q Typ 116 and E-M1 II can be found, respectively, in the Leica Q Typ 116 Manual (free pdf) or the online Olympus E-M1 II Manual.
Review summary
So how do things add up? Is there a clear favorite between the Leica Q Typ 116 and the Olympus E-M1 II? Which camera is better? The listing below highlights the relative strengths of the two models.
Arguments in favor of the Leica Q (Typ 116):
- More detail: Offers more megapixels (24 vs 20.2MP) with a 11% higher linear resolution.
- Better moiré control: Has an anti-alias filter to avoid artificial patterns to appear in images.
- Better image quality: Scores markedly higher (5 points) in the DXO overall assessment.
- Better low-light sensitivity: Requires less light for good images (0.8 stops ISO advantage).
- More detailed viewfinder: Has higher resolution electronic viewfinder (3680k vs 2360k dots).
- Ready to shoot: Has a lens built-in, whereas the E-M1 II requires a separate lens.
- More compact: Is smaller (130x80mm vs 134x91mm) 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 heavily discounted: Has been on the market for longer (launched in June 2015).
Advantages of the Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II:
- Maximized detail: Lacks an anti-alias filter to exploit the sensor's full resolution potential.
- High quality composites: Can combine several shots after pixel-shifting its sensor.
- Better video: Provides higher definition movie capture (4K/30p vs 1080/60p).
- 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.
- Better sound control: Has a headphone port that enables audio monitoring while recording.
- More flexible LCD: Has a swivel screen for odd-angle shots in portrait or landscape orientation.
- More selfie-friendly: Has an articulated screen that can be turned to be front-facing.
- Faster shutter: Has higher mechanical shutter speed (1/8000s vs 1/2000s) to freeze action.
- Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (18 vs 10 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
- More flexible: Takes interchangeable lenses and can thus be used with specialty optics.
- Longer lasting: Gets more shots (440 versus 300) out of a single battery charge.
- Better sealing: Is splash and dust sealed for shooting in inclement weather conditions.
- Faster data transfer: Supports a more advanced USB protocol (3.0 vs 2.0).
- Better studio light control: Has a PC Sync socket to connect to professional strobe lights.
- Greater peace of mind: Features a second card slot as a backup in case of memory card failure.
- Faster buffer clearing: Supports a more advanced SD data transfer standard (UHS-II vs UHS-I).
- More modern: Was introduced somewhat (1 year and 3 months) more recently.
If the number of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the E-M1 II is the clear winner of the contest (18 : 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 wedding photographer will view the differences between cameras in a way that diverges from the perspective of a travel photog, and a person interested in cityscapes has distinct needs from a macro 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 II 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 comparison of technical specifications can provide a useful overview of the capabilities of different cameras, it remains partial and cannot reveal, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance when actually working with the Q Typ 116 or the E-M1 II. 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.
Expert reviews
This is why hands-on reviews by experts are important. The adjacent summary-table relays the overall verdicts of several of the most popular 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.
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 II | 5/5 | + + | 5/5 | 85/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Sep 2016 | 1,999 | ebay.com | |
3. | Canon G7 X | 4/5 | + + | .. | 77/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Sep 2014 | 699 | ebay.com | |
4. | Canon T6i | 5/5 | .. | .. | 75/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Feb 2015 | 749 | ebay.com | |
5. | Canon T6s | 5/5 | + | .. | 77/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Feb 2015 | 649 | ebay.com | |
6. | Kodak AZ901 | .. | .. | .. | .. | 3.5/5 | 3/5 | Jan 2016 | 499 | amazon.com | |
7. | Leica M10 | 4.5/5 | .. | .. | .. | 4/5 | 4.5/5 | Jan 2017 | 6,595 | ebay.com | |
8. | Leica Q2 | .. | .. | 4.5/5 | 84/100 | 4.5/5 | 4/5 | Mar 2019 | 4,995 | amazon.com | |
9. | Leica X Vario | 3/5 | .. | .. | .. | 4/5 | 4/5 | Jun 2013 | 2,850 | ebay.com | |
10. | Olympus E-M1 | 5/5 | + + | .. | 84/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Sep 2013 | 1,399 | ebay.com | |
11. | Olympus E-M1 III | 5/5 | .. | 5/5 | 83/100 | 4.5/5 | 4/5 | Feb 2020 | 1,799 | ebay.com | |
12. | Olympus PEN-F | .. | .. | 4/5 | 82/100 | 4.5/5 | 5/5 | Jan 2016 | 1,199 | ebay.com | |
13. | Panasonic G85 | .. | + + | .. | 84/100 | 5/5 | 4.5/5 | Sep 2016 | 899 | ebay.com | |
14. | Panasonic GH5 | 4.5/5 | + + | .. | 85/100 | 4.5/5 | 5/5 | Jan 2017 | 1,999 | ebay.com | |
15. | Sony HX400V | 4/5 | + + | .. | .. | 4/5 | 4/5 | Feb 2014 | 499 | ebay.com | |
16. | Sony RX100 IV | 4.5/5 | + + | .. | 85/100 | 4/5 | 4.5/5 | Jun 2015 | 999 | ebay.com | |
17. | Sony RX100 V | 4.5/5 | + + | .. | 83/100 | 4/5 | 4.5/5 | Oct 2016 | 999 | ebay.com | |
Note: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available. |
The review scores listed above should be treated with care, 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 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 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. Alternatively, you can follow any of the listed hyperlinks for comparisons that others found interesting.
- Canon G9 X Mark II vs Leica Q Typ 116
- Canon T2i vs Olympus E-M1 II
- Canon T4i vs Leica Q Typ 116
- Fujifilm X-A7 vs Leica Q Typ 116
- Fujifilm X100V vs Olympus E-M1 II
- Leica M10 vs Leica Q Typ 116
- Leica Q Typ 116 vs Panasonic G10
- Leica Q Typ 116 vs Sony RX1
- Leica X Typ 113 vs Olympus E-M1 II
- Nikon D3400 vs Olympus E-M1 II
- Nikon D40X vs Olympus E-M1 II
- Olympus E-300 vs Olympus E-M1 II
Specifications: Leica Q Typ 116 vs Olympus E-M1 II
Below is a side-by-side comparison of the specs of the two cameras to facilitate a quick review of their differences and common features.
Camera Model | Leica Q Typ 116 | Olympus E-M1 II |
---|---|---|
Camera Type | Fixed lens compact camera | Mirrorless system camera |
Camera Lens | 28mm f/1.7 | Micro Four Thirds lenses |
Launch Date | June 2015 | September 2016 |
Launch Price | USD 4,249 | USD 1,999 |
Sensor Specs | Leica Q Typ 116 | Olympus E-M1 II |
Sensor Technology | CMOS | CMOS |
Sensor Format | Full Frame Sensor | Four Thirds Sensor |
Sensor Size | 36.0 x 24.0 mm | 17.3 x 13.0 mm |
Sensor Area | 864 mm2 | 224.9 mm2 |
Sensor Diagonal | 43.3 mm | 21.6 mm |
Crop Factor | 1.0x | 2.0x |
Sensor Resolution | 24 Megapixels | 20.2 Megapixels |
Image Resolution | 6000 x 4000 pixels | 5184 x 3888 pixels |
Pixel Pitch | 6.00 μm | 3.34 μm |
Pixel Density | 2.78 MP/cm2 | 8.96 MP/cm2 |
Moiré control | Anti-Alias filter | no AA filter |
Movie Capability | 1080/60p Video | 4K/30p Video |
ISO Setting | 100 - 50,000 ISO | 200 - 25,600 ISO |
ISO Boost | no Enhancement | 64 - 25,600 ISO |
Image Processor | Maestro II | TruePic VIII |
DXO Sensor Quality (score) | 85 | 80 |
DXO Color Depth (bits) | 24.3 | 23.7 |
DXO Dynamic Range (EV) | 12.7 | 12.8 |
DXO Low Light (ISO) | 2221 | 1312 |
Screen Specs | Leica Q Typ 116 | Olympus E-M1 II |
Viewfinder Type | Electronic viewfinder | Electronic viewfinder |
Viewfinder Field of View | 100% | 100% |
Viewfinder Magnification | 0.74x | |
Viewfinder Resolution | 3680k dots | 2360k dots |
LCD Framing | Live View | Live View |
Rear LCD Size | 3.0inch | 3.0inch |
LCD Resolution | 1040k dots | 1037k dots |
LCD Attachment | Fixed screen | Swivel screen |
Touch Input | Touchscreen | Touchscreen |
Shooting Specs | Leica Q Typ 116 | Olympus E-M1 II |
Focus System | Contrast-detect AF | On-Sensor Phase-detect |
Manual Focusing Aid | Focus Peaking | Focus Peaking |
Max Shutter Speed (mechanical) | 1/2000s | 1/8000s |
Continuous Shooting | 10 shutter flaps/s | 18 shutter flaps/s |
Electronic Shutter | up to 1/16000s | up to 1/32000s |
Time-Lapse Photography | Intervalometer built-in | Intervalometer built-in |
Image Stabilization | Lens-based stabilization | In-body stabilization |
Fill Flash | no On-Board Flash | no On-Board Flash |
Storage Medium | SDXC cards | SDXC cards |
Single or Dual Card Slots | Single card slot | Dual card slots |
UHS card support | UHS-I | Single UHS-II |
Connectivity Specs | Leica Q Typ 116 | Olympus E-M1 II |
External Flash | Hotshoe | Hotshoe |
Studio Flash | no PC Sync | PC Sync socket |
USB Connector | USB 2.0 | USB 3.0 |
HDMI Port | micro HDMI | micro HDMI |
Microphone Port | no MIC socket | External MIC port |
Headphone Socket | no Headphone port | Headphone port |
Wifi Support | Wifi built-in | Wifi built-in |
Near-Field Communication | NFC built-in | no NFC |
Body Specs | Leica Q Typ 116 | Olympus E-M1 II |
Environmental Sealing | not weather sealed | Weathersealed body |
Battery Type | Leica BP-DC12 | Olympus BLH-1 |
Battery Life (CIPA) | 300 shots per charge | 440 shots per charge |
Body Dimensions |
130 x 80 x 93 mm (5.1 x 3.1 x 3.7 in) |
134 x 91 x 67 mm (5.3 x 3.6 x 2.6 in) |
Camera Weight | 640 g (22.6 oz) | 574 g (20.2 oz) |
Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.