Leica Q2 vs Olympus E-M1

The Leica Q2 and the Olympus OM-D E-M1 are two enthusiast cameras that were announced, respectively, in March 2019 and September 2013. The Q2 is a fixed lens compact, while the E-M1 is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera. The cameras are based on a full frame (Q2) and a Four Thirds (E-M1) sensor. The Leica has a resolution of 46.7 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 Q2		Olympus E-M1
Fixed lens compact camera		Mirrorless system camera
28mm f/1.7		Micro Four Thirds lenses
46.7 MP – Full Frame sensor		15.9 MP – Four Thirds sensor
4K/30p Video		1080/30p Video
ISO 50-50,000		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
20 shutter flaps per second		10 shutter flaps per second
Lens-based stabilization		In-body stabilization
Weathersealed body		Weathersealed body
370 shots per battery charge		350 shots per battery charge
130 x 80 x 92 mm, 718 g		130 x 94 x 63 mm, 497 g

Check Q2 price at
amazon.com
Check E-M1 offers at
ebay.com

Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Leica Q2 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

An illustration of the physical size and weight of the Leica Q2 and the Olympus E-M1 is provided in the side-by-side display below. The two cameras are presented according to their relative size. 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.

The E-M1 can be obtained in two different colors (black, silver), while the Q2 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 is notably larger (18 percent) than the Leica Q2. In this context, it is worth noting that both cameras are splash and dust-proof and can, hence, be used in inclement weather conditions or harsh environments.

The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete and possibly misleading, as the Q2 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.

The adjacent table lists the principal physical characteristics of the two cameras alongside a wider set of alternatives. 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.

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 Q2	130 mm	80 mm	92 mm	718 g	370	Y	Mar 2019	4,995	amazon.com
2.		Olympus E-M1	130 mm	94 mm	63 mm	497 g	350	Y	Sep 2013	1,399	ebay.com
3.		Fujifilm GFX 50R	161 mm	97 mm	66 mm	775 g	400	Y	Sep 2018	4,499	amazon.com
4.		Hasselblad X1D II	148 mm	97 mm	70 mm	766 g	..	Y	Jun 2019	5,750	amazon.com
5.		Hasselblad X1D	150 mm	98 mm	71 mm	725 g	..	Y	Jun 2016	8,995	ebay.com
6.		Leica M10-R	139 mm	80 mm	39 mm	660 g	210	Y	Jul 2020	8,295	amazon.com
7.		Leica X-U Typ 113	140 mm	79 mm	88 mm	635 g	450	Y	Jan 2016	2,950	ebay.com
8.		Leica M Typ 262	139 mm	80 mm	42 mm	680 g	..	Y	Nov 2015	5,195	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	..	Y	Sep 2012	6,950	ebay.com
12.		Olympus E-M1 II	134 mm	91 mm	67 mm	574 g	440	Y	Sep 2016	1,999	ebay.com
13.		Olympus E-M5 II	124 mm	85 mm	45 mm	469 g	310	Y	Feb 2015	1,099	ebay.com
14.		Olympus E-P5	122 mm	69 mm	37 mm	420 g	330	n	May 2013	999	ebay.com
15.		Olympus E-M5	122 mm	89 mm	43 mm	425 g	360	Y	Feb 2012	1,299	ebay.com
16.		Panasonic GH4	133 mm	93 mm	84 mm	560 g	500	Y	Feb 2014	1,499	ebay.com
17.		Zeiss ZX1	142 mm	93 mm	46 mm	800 g	250	n	Sep 2018	5,999	amazon.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 manufacturer’s suggested retail prices give an idea on the placement of the camera in the maker’s lineup and the broader market. 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 imaging sensor is a crucial determinant 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. 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 Q2 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 Q2 has a native 3:2 aspect ratio, while the one in the E-M1 offers a 4:3 aspect.

With 46.7MP, the Q2 offers a higher resolution than the E-M1 (15.9MP), but the Q2 nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 4.30μm versus 3.76μm for the E-M1) due to its larger sensor. Moreover, the Q2 is a much more recent model (by 5 years and 5 months) than the E-M1, 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 neither of the two cameras has an anti-alias filter installed, so they are able to capture all the detail the sensor resolves.

The resolution advantage of the Leica Q2 implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the Q2 for good quality output (200 dots per inch) amounts to 41.8 x 27.9 inches or 106.3 x 70.9 cm, for very good quality (250 dpi) 33.5 x 22.3 inches or 85 x 56.7 cm, and for excellent quality (300 dpi) 27.9 x 18.6 inches or 70.8 x 47.3 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 Q2 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 50 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 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 Q2 provides substantially higher image quality than the E-M1, with an overall score that is 23 points higher. This advantage is based on 3.4 bits higher color depth, 0.8 EV in additional dynamic range, and 1.7 stops in additional low light sensitivity. 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 Q2	Full Frame	46.7	8368	5584	4K/30p	26.4	13.5	2491	96
2.		Olympus E-M1	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	23.0	12.7	757	73
3.		Fujifilm GFX 50R	Medium Format	51.1	8256	6192	1080/30p	25.7	14.4	3169	98
4.		Hasselblad X1D II	Medium Format	51.3	8272	6200	none	25.7	14.5	3234	99
5.		Hasselblad X1D	Medium Format	51.3	8272	6200	1080/25p	26.2	14.8	4489	102
6.		Leica M10-R	Full Frame	40.9	7864	5200	none	25.3	14.3	2924	95
7.		Leica X-U Typ 113	APS-C	16.1	4928	3264	1080/30p	23.8	13.0	1614	80
8.		Leica M Typ 262	Full Frame	23.7	5952	3976	none	24.8	13.7	2478	90
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.		Olympus E-M1 II	Four Thirds	20.2	5184	3888	4K/30p	23.7	12.8	1312	80
13.		Olympus E-M5 II	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/60p	23.0	12.5	842	73
14.		Olympus E-P5	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	22.8	12.4	895	72
15.		Olympus E-M5	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/60i	22.8	12.3	826	71
16.		Panasonic GH4	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	4K/30p	23.2	12.8	791	74
17.		Zeiss ZX1	Full Frame	37.4	7488	4992	4K/30p	25.2	14.1	2759	94
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 also of capturing video footage. The two cameras under consideration both have sensors whose read-out speed is fast enough to capture moving pictures, but the Q2 provides a higher video resolution than the E-M1. It can shoot video footage at 4K/30p, while the Olympus is limited to 1080/30p.

Feature comparison

Apart from 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 Q2 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 Q2 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 Q2	3680	n	3.0 / 1040	fixed	Y	1/2000s	20.0/s	n	Y
2.		Olympus E-M1	2360	n	3.0 / 1037	tilting	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
3.		Fujifilm GFX 50R	3690	n	3.2 / 2360	tilting	Y	1/4000s	3.0/s	n	n
4.		Hasselblad X1D II	3690	n	3.6 / 2360	fixed	Y	1/2000s	2.7/s	n	n
5.		Hasselblad X1D	2360	n	3.0 / 920	fixed	Y	1/2000s	2.3/s	n	n
6.		Leica M10-R	optical	n	3.0 / 1037	fixed	Y	1/4000s	4.5/s	n	n
7.		Leica X-U Typ 113	optional	n	3.0 / 920	fixed	n	1/2000s	5.0/s	Y	n
8.		Leica M Typ 262	optical	n	3.0 / 921	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/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.		Olympus E-M1 II	2360	n	3.0 / 1037	swivel	Y	1/8000s	18.0/s	n	Y
13.		Olympus E-M5 II	2360	n	3.0 / 1037	swivel	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
14.		Olympus E-P5	optional	n	3.0 / 1037	tilting	Y	1/8000s	9.0/s	Y	Y
15.		Olympus E-M5	1440	n	3.0 / 610	tilting	Y	1/4000s	9.0/s	n	Y
16.		Panasonic GH4	2359	n	3.0 / 1036	swivel	Y	1/8000s	12.0/s	Y	n
17.		Zeiss ZX1	6221	n	4.3 / 2765	fixed	Y	1/1000s	3.0/s	n	n
Notes: *) 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 Q2 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 Q2 and the E-M1 write their files to SDXC cards. The Q2 supports UHS-II cards (Ultra High Speed data transfer of up to 312 MB/s), while the E-M1 can use UHS-I cards (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 Q2 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 Q2	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	-	-	Y	-	Y
2.		Olympus E-M1	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
3.		Fujifilm GFX 50R	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.0	Y	-	Y
4.		Hasselblad X1D II	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	-	3.0	Y	-	-
5.		Hasselblad X1D	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	mini	3.0	Y	-	-
6.		Leica M10-R	Y	- / -	-	-	-	-	Y	-	-
7.		Leica X-U Typ 113	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
8.		Leica M Typ 262	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
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.		Olympus E-M1 II	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.0	Y	-	-
13.		Olympus E-M5 II	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
14.		Olympus E-P5	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
15.		Olympus E-M5	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
16.		Panasonic GH4	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
17.		Zeiss ZX1	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	-	3.1	Y	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 Q2 does not feature such a mic input.

Studio photographers will appreciate that the Olympus E-M1 (unlike the Q2) features a PC Sync socket, so that professional strobe lights can be controlled by the camera.

The Q2 is a recent model that features in the current product line-up of Leica. In contrast, the E-M1 has been discontinued (but can be found pre-owned on ebay). As a replacement in the same line of cameras, the E-M1 was succeeded by the Olympus E-M1 II. Further information on the two cameras (e.g. user guides, manuals), as well as related accessories, can be found on the official Leica and Olympus websites.

Review summary

So what conclusions can be drawn? Is the Leica Q2 better than the Olympus E-M1 or vice versa? Below is a summary of the relative strengths of each of the two contestants.

Arguments in favor of the Leica Q2:

• More detail: Offers more megapixels (46.7 vs 15.9MP) with a 75% higher linear resolution.
• Better image quality: Scores substantially higher (23 points) in the DXO overall assessment.
• Richer colors: Generates images with noticeably better colors (3.4 bits more color depth).
• More dynamic range: Captures a larger spectrum of light and dark details (0.8 EV of extra DR).
• Better low-light sensitivity: Requires less light for good images (1.7 stops ISO advantage).
• Better video: Provides higher definition movie capture (4K/30p vs 1080/30p).
• More detailed viewfinder: Has higher resolution electronic viewfinder (3680k vs 2360k dots).
• Larger viewfinder image: Features a viewfinder with a higher magnification (0.76x vs 0.74x).
• Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (20 vs 10 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
• 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 wireless transfer: Supports Bluetooth for image sharing without cables.
• Faster buffer clearing: Supports a more advanced SD data transfer standard (UHS-II vs UHS-I).
• More prestigious: Has the Leica luxury appeal, which ensures a high resale price.
• More modern: Reflects 5 years and 5 months of technical progress since the E-M1 launch.

Advantages of the Olympus OM-D E-M1:

• 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.
• Better studio light control: Has a PC Sync socket to connect to professional strobe lights.
• More heavily discounted: Has been around for much longer (launched in September 2013).

If the count of individual advantages (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the Q2 is the clear winner of the match-up (15 : 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. 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 Q2 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 comparison of technical specifications can provide a useful overview of the capabilities of different cameras, it says little about, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance of the Q2 and the E-M1 in practical situations. 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 expert reviews 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.

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 Q2	..	..	4.5/5	84/100	4.5/5	4/5	Mar 2019	4,995	amazon.com
2.		Olympus E-M1	5/5	+ +	..	84/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2013	1,399	ebay.com
3.		Fujifilm GFX 50R	5/5	..	5/5	84/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2018	4,499	amazon.com
4.		Hasselblad X1D II	..	..	4/5	..	4/5	4/5	Jun 2019	5,750	amazon.com
5.		Hasselblad X1D	..	o	..	81/100	..	4/5	Jun 2016	8,995	ebay.com
6.		Leica M10-R	4.5/5	..	4/5	..	..	4/5	Jul 2020	8,295	amazon.com
7.		Leica X-U Typ 113	3.5/5	..	..	..	..	3.5/5	Jan 2016	2,950	ebay.com
8.		Leica M Typ 262	..	..	..	..	..	..	Nov 2015	5,195	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.		Olympus E-M1 II	5/5	+ +	5/5	85/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2016	1,999	ebay.com
13.		Olympus E-M5 II	5/5	+ +	4.5/5	81/100	5/5	5/5	Feb 2015	1,099	ebay.com
14.		Olympus E-P5	5/5	+ +	..	78/100	4.5/5	5/5	May 2013	999	ebay.com
15.		Olympus E-M5	4/5	+ +	..	80/100	4.5/5	5/5	Feb 2012	1,299	ebay.com
16.		Panasonic GH4	5/5	+ +	..	85/100	5/5	5/5	Feb 2014	1,499	ebay.com
17.		Zeiss ZX1	3/5	..	..	83/100	4/5	4/5	Sep 2018	5,999	amazon.com
Notes: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available.

The review scores listed above should be treated with care, though. The ratings were established in reference to similarly priced cameras that were available in the market at the time of the review. Thus, a score needs to be put into the context of the launch date and the launch price of the camera, and comparisons of ratings among very different cameras or across long time periods have little meaning. It should also be noted that some of the review sites have over time altered the way they render their verdicts.

Check Q2 price at
amazon.com
Check E-M1 offers at
ebay.com

Other camera comparisons

Did this review help to inform your camera decision process? If you would like to see a different side-by-side camera review, just make a corresponding selection in the search boxes below. Alternatively, you can follow any of the listed hyperlinks for comparisons that others found interesting.

~

Check Q2 price at
amazon.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.