Leica Q2 vs Olympus E-M1 II
The Leica Q2 and the Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II are two enthusiast cameras that were revealed to the public, respectively, in March 2019 and September 2016. The Q2 is a fixed lens compact, while the E-M1 II is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera. The cameras are based on a full frame (Q2) and a Four Thirds (E-M1 II) sensor. The Leica has a resolution of 46.7 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 Q2 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 Q2 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 consecutive perspectives from the front, the top, and the back are available. All width, height and depth dimensions are rounded to the nearest millimeter.
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 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 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 Q2 gets 370 shots out of its Leica BP-SCL4 battery, while the E-M1 II can take 440 images on a single charge of its Olympus BLH-1 power pack.
The adjacent table lists the principal physical characteristics of the two cameras alongside a wider set of alternatives. 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.
# | 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 II | 134 mm | 91 mm | 67 mm | 574 g | 440 | Y | Sep 2016 | 1,999 | ebay.com | |
3. | Canon R | 139 mm | 98 mm | 84 mm | 660 g | 370 | Y | Sep 2018 | 2,299 | ebay.com | |
4. | Fujifilm GFX 50R | 161 mm | 97 mm | 66 mm | 775 g | 400 | Y | Sep 2018 | 4,499 | ebay.com | |
5. | Leica Q3 | 130 mm | 80 mm | 93 mm | 743 g | 350 | Y | May 2023 | 5,995 | amazon.com | |
6. | Leica M10-R | 139 mm | 80 mm | 39 mm | 660 g | 210 | Y | Jul 2020 | 8,295 | ebay.com | |
7. | Leica M10-P | 139 mm | 80 mm | 39 mm | 660 g | 210 | Y | Aug 2018 | 7,995 | ebay.com | |
8. | Leica M10 | 139 mm | 80 mm | 39 mm | 660 g | 210 | Y | Jan 2017 | 6,595 | ebay.com | |
9. | Leica M Typ 262 | 139 mm | 80 mm | 42 mm | 680 g | 400 | Y | Nov 2015 | 5,195 | ebay.com | |
10. | Leica Q Typ 116 | 130 mm | 80 mm | 93 mm | 640 g | 300 | n | Jun 2015 | 4,249 | ebay.com | |
11. | Nikon Z7 | 134 mm | 101 mm | 67 mm | 675 g | 330 | Y | Aug 2018 | 3,399 | ebay.com | |
12. | Olympus E-M1 III | 134 mm | 91 mm | 69 mm | 580 g | 420 | Y | Feb 2020 | 1,799 | ebay.com | |
13. | Olympus PEN-F | 125 mm | 72 mm | 37 mm | 427 g | 330 | n | Jan 2016 | 1,199 | ebay.com | |
14. | Olympus E-M1 | 130 mm | 94 mm | 63 mm | 497 g | 350 | Y | Sep 2013 | 1,399 | ebay.com | |
15. | Panasonic GH5 | 139 mm | 98 mm | 87 mm | 725 g | 410 | Y | Jan 2017 | 1,999 | ebay.com | |
16. | Panasonic G85 | 128 mm | 89 mm | 74 mm | 505 g | 330 | Y | Sep 2016 | 899 | ebay.com | |
17. | Zeiss ZX1 | 142 mm | 93 mm | 46 mm | 800 g | 250 | n | Sep 2018 | 5,999 | ebay.com | |
Note: Measurements and pricing do not include easily detachable parts, such as add-on or interchangeable lenses or optional viewfinders. | |||||||||||
Any camera decision will obviously take relative prices into account. 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. 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. Moreover, a large sensor camera will give the photographer more control over depth-of-field in the image and, thus, the ability to better 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 Q2 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 Q2 has a native 3:2 aspect ratio, while the one in the E-M1 II offers a 4:3 aspect.
With 46.7MP, the Q2 offers a higher resolution than the E-M1 II (20.2MP), but the Q2 nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 4.30μm versus 3.34μm for the E-M1 II) due to its larger sensor. Moreover, the Q2 is a much more recent model (by 2 years and 5 months) than the E-M1 II, 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 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 Q2, 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 Q2 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 50 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 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 Q2 provides substantially higher image quality than the E-M1 II, with an overall score that is 16 points higher. This advantage is based on 2.7 bits higher color depth, 0.7 EV in additional dynamic range, and 0.9 stops in additional low light sensitivity. The table below summarizes the physical sensor characteristics and sensor quality findings and compares them across a set of similar cameras.
# | 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 II | Four Thirds | 20.2 | 5184 | 3888 | 4K/30p | 23.7 | 12.8 | 1312 | 80 | |
3. | Canon R | Full Frame | 30.1 | 6720 | 4480 | 4K/30p | 24.5 | 13.5 | 2742 | 89 | |
4. | Fujifilm GFX 50R | Medium Format | 51.1 | 8256 | 6192 | 1080/30p | 25.7 | 14.4 | 3169 | 98 | |
5. | Leica Q3 | Full Frame | 60.3 | 9528 | 6328 | 8K/30p | 25.4 | 14.7 | 3216 | 96 | |
6. | Leica M10-R | Full Frame | 40.9 | 7864 | 5200 | none | 25.3 | 14.3 | 2924 | 95 | |
7. | Leica M10-P | Full Frame | 23.8 | 5952 | 3992 | none | 25.1 | 14.1 | 2739 | 93 | |
8. | Leica M10 | Full Frame | 23.8 | 5952 | 3992 | none | 24.4 | 13.2 | 2133 | 86 | |
9. | Leica M Typ 262 | Full Frame | 23.7 | 5952 | 3976 | none | 24.8 | 13.7 | 2478 | 90 | |
10. | Leica Q Typ 116 | Full Frame | 24.0 | 6000 | 4000 | 1080/60p | 24.3 | 12.7 | 2221 | 85 | |
11. | Nikon Z7 | Full Frame | 45.4 | 8256 | 5504 | 4K/30p | 26.3 | 14.6 | 2668 | 99 | |
12. | Olympus E-M1 III | Four Thirds | 20.2 | 5184 | 3888 | 4K/30p | 23.3 | 13.1 | 1356 | 76 | |
13. | Olympus PEN-F | Four Thirds | 20.2 | 5184 | 3888 | 1080/60p | 23.1 | 12.4 | 894 | 74 | |
14. | Olympus E-M1 | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/30p | 23.0 | 12.7 | 757 | 73 | |
15. | Panasonic GH5 | Four Thirds | 20.2 | 5184 | 3888 | 4K/60p | 23.9 | 13.0 | 807 | 77 | |
16. | Panasonic G85 | Four Thirds | 15.8 | 4592 | 3448 | 4K/30p | 22.8 | 12.5 | 656 | 71 | |
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 can also record movies. Both cameras under consideration have a sensor with sufficiently fast read-out times for moving pictures, and both provide the same movie specifications (4K/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 Q2 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 Q2 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 Q2 | 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 R | 3690 | Y | 3.2 / 2100 | swivel | Y | 1/8000s | 8.0/s | n | n | |
4. | Fujifilm GFX 50R | 3690 | n | 3.2 / 2360 | tilting | Y | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | n | n | |
5. | Leica Q3 | 5760 | n | 3.0 / 1840 | tilting | Y | 1/2000s | 15.0/s | n | Y | |
6. | Leica M10-R | optical | n | 3.0 / 1037 | fixed | Y | 1/4000s | 4.5/s | n | n | |
7. | Leica M10-P | optical | n | 3.0 / 1037 | fixed | Y | 1/4000s | 5.0/s | n | n | |
8. | Leica M10 | optical | n | 3.0 / 1037 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 5.0/s | n | n | |
9. | Leica M Typ 262 | optical | n | 3.0 / 921 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | n | n | |
10. | Leica Q Typ 116 | 3680 | n | 3.0 / 1040 | fixed | Y | 1/2000s | 10.0/s | n | Y | |
11. | Nikon Z7 | 3690 | Y | 3.2 / 2100 | tilting | Y | 1/8000s | 9.0/s | n | Y | |
12. | Olympus E-M1 III | 2360 | n | 3.0 / 1037 | swivel | Y | 1/8000s | 18.0/s | n | Y | |
13. | Olympus PEN-F | 2360 | n | 3.0 / 1037 | swivel | Y | 1/8000s | 10.0/s | n | Y | |
14. | Olympus E-M1 | 2360 | n | 3.0 / 1037 | tilting | Y | 1/8000s | 10.0/s | n | Y | |
15. | Panasonic GH5 | 3680 | n | 3.2 / 1620 | swivel | Y | 1/8000s | 12.0/s | n | Y | |
16. | Panasonic G85 | 2360 | n | 3.0 / 1040 | swivel | Y | 1/4000s | 9.0/s | Y | Y | |
17. | Zeiss ZX1 | 6221 | n | 4.3 / 2765 | fixed | Y | 1/1000s | 3.0/s | n | n | |
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 Q2 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 Q2 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 Q2 only has one slot. Both the Q2 and the E-M1 II support UHS-II cards, which provide for Ultra High Speed data transfer of up to 312 MB/s (the second slot of the E-M1 II only offers slower UHS-I transfer rates, though).
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 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 Q2 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | - | - | Y | - | Y | |
2. | Olympus E-M1 II | Y | stereo / mono | Y | Y | micro | 3.0 | Y | - | - | |
3. | Canon R | Y | stereo / mono | Y | Y | mini | 3.1 | Y | - | Y | |
4. | Fujifilm GFX 50R | Y | stereo / mono | Y | Y | micro | 3.0 | Y | - | Y | |
5. | Leica Q3 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 3.1 | Y | - | Y | |
6. | Leica M10-R | Y | - / - | - | - | - | - | Y | - | - | |
7. | Leica M10-P | Y | - / - | - | - | - | - | Y | - | - | |
8. | Leica M10 | Y | - / - | - | - | - | - | Y | - | - | |
9. | Leica M Typ 262 | Y | - / - | - | - | - | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
10. | Leica Q Typ 116 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | Y | - | |
11. | Nikon Z7 | Y | stereo / mono | Y | Y | micro | 3.1 | Y | - | Y | |
12. | Olympus E-M1 III | Y | stereo / mono | Y | Y | micro | 3.1 | Y | - | Y | |
13. | Olympus PEN-F | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
14. | Olympus E-M1 | Y | stereo / mono | Y | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
15. | Panasonic GH5 | Y | stereo / mono | Y | Y | full | 3.1 | Y | - | Y | |
16. | Panasonic G85 | Y | stereo / mono | Y | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
17. | Zeiss ZX1 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | - | 3.1 | Y | 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 Q2 does not feature such a mic input.
Studio photographers will appreciate that the Olympus E-M1 II (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 II has been discontinued (but can be found pre-owned on ebay). As a replacement in the same line of cameras, the E-M1 II was succeeded by the Olympus E-M1 III. Further information on the features and operation of the Q2 and E-M1 II can be found, respectively, in the Leica Q2 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 Q2 and the Olympus E-M1 II? Which camera is better? 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 20.2MP) with a 55% higher linear resolution.
- Better image quality: Scores substantially higher (16 points) in the DXO overall assessment.
- Richer colors: Generates images with noticeably better colors (2.7 bits more color depth).
- More dynamic range: Captures a larger spectrum of light and dark details (0.7 EV of extra DR).
- Better low-light sensitivity: Requires less light for good images (0.9 stops ISO advantage).
- 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).
- 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 wireless transfer: Supports Bluetooth for image sharing without cables.
- More prestigious: Has the Leica luxury appeal, which ensures a high resale price.
- More modern: Reflects 2 years and 5 months of technical progress since the E-M1 II launch.
Advantages of the Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II:
- High quality composites: Can combine several shots after pixel-shifting its sensor.
- 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 370) out of a single battery charge.
- 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.
- More heavily discounted: Has been around for much longer (launched in September 2016).
If the count of individual advantages (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the E-M1 II comes out slightly ahead of the Q2 (13 : 12 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 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 Q2 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 specs-based evaluation of cameras can be instructive in revealing their potential as photographic tools, it remains incomplete and does no justice, for example, to the way the Q2 or the E-M1 II perform in practice. 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 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.
# | 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 II | 5/5 | + + | 5/5 | 85/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Sep 2016 | 1,999 | ebay.com | |
3. | Canon R | 4/5 | o | 4/5 | 79/100 | 4.5/5 | 4/5 | Sep 2018 | 2,299 | ebay.com | |
4. | Fujifilm GFX 50R | 5/5 | .. | 5/5 | 84/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Sep 2018 | 4,499 | ebay.com | |
5. | Leica Q3 | 5/5 | .. | 4.5/5 | .. | .. | 4.5/5 | May 2023 | 5,995 | amazon.com | |
6. | Leica M10-R | 4.5/5 | .. | 4/5 | .. | .. | 4/5 | Jul 2020 | 8,295 | ebay.com | |
7. | Leica M10-P | .. | .. | 3/5 | .. | .. | 4/5 | Aug 2018 | 7,995 | ebay.com | |
8. | Leica M10 | 4.5/5 | .. | .. | .. | 4/5 | 4.5/5 | Jan 2017 | 6,595 | ebay.com | |
9. | Leica M Typ 262 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | Nov 2015 | 5,195 | ebay.com | |
10. | Leica Q Typ 116 | 5/5 | .. | .. | 80/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jun 2015 | 4,249 | ebay.com | |
11. | Nikon Z7 | 5/5 | + | 4.8/5 | 89/100 | 4.5/5 | 5/5 | Aug 2018 | 3,399 | ebay.com | |
12. | Olympus E-M1 III | 5/5 | .. | 5/5 | 83/100 | 4.5/5 | 4/5 | Feb 2020 | 1,799 | ebay.com | |
13. | Olympus PEN-F | .. | .. | 4/5 | 82/100 | 4.5/5 | 5/5 | Jan 2016 | 1,199 | ebay.com | |
14. | Olympus E-M1 | 5/5 | + + | .. | 84/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Sep 2013 | 1,399 | ebay.com | |
15. | Panasonic GH5 | 4.5/5 | + + | .. | 85/100 | 4.5/5 | 5/5 | Jan 2017 | 1,999 | ebay.com | |
16. | Panasonic G85 | .. | + + | .. | 84/100 | 5/5 | 4.5/5 | Sep 2016 | 899 | ebay.com | |
17. | Zeiss ZX1 | 3/5 | .. | .. | 83/100 | 4/5 | 4/5 | Sep 2018 | 5,999 | ebay.com | |
Note: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available. |
Care should be taken when interpreting the review scores above, though. The ratings were established in reference to similarly priced cameras that were available in the market at the time of the review. 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. 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? If you would like to see a different side-by-side camera review, just use the search menu below. There is also a set of direct links to comparison reviews that other users of the CAM-parator app explored.
- Canon 1D X Mark II vs Leica Q2
- Canon R3 vs Olympus E-M1 II
- Canon R7 vs Olympus E-M1 II
- Fujifilm XP140 vs Leica Q2
- Leica Q2 vs Leica SL2-S
- Leica Q2 vs Panasonic TZ100
- Leica Q2 vs Sony A9 III
- Leica Q2 vs Sony RX1
- Olympus E-M1 II vs Panasonic G85
- Olympus E-M1 II vs Panasonic GF6
- Olympus E-M1 II vs Sony HX400V
- Olympus E-M1 II vs Sony NEX-F3
Specifications: Leica Q2 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 Q2 | 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 | March 2019 | September 2016 |
Launch Price | USD 4,995 | USD 1,999 |
Sensor Specs | Leica Q2 | 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 | 46.7 Megapixels | 20.2 Megapixels |
Image Resolution | 8368 x 5584 pixels | 5184 x 3888 pixels |
Pixel Pitch | 4.30 μm | 3.34 μm |
Pixel Density | 5.41 MP/cm2 | 8.96 MP/cm2 |
Moiré control | no AA filter | no AA filter |
Movie Capability | 4K/30p Video | 4K/30p Video |
ISO Setting | 50 - 50,000 ISO | 200 - 25,600 ISO |
ISO Boost | no Enhancement | 64 - 25,600 ISO |
DXO Sensor Quality (score) | 96 | 80 |
DXO Color Depth (bits) | 26.4 | 23.7 |
DXO Dynamic Range (EV) | 13.5 | 12.8 |
DXO Low Light (ISO) | 2491 | 1312 |
Screen Specs | Leica Q2 | Olympus E-M1 II |
Viewfinder Type | Electronic viewfinder | Electronic viewfinder |
Viewfinder Field of View | 100% | 100% |
Viewfinder Magnification | 0.76x | 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 Q2 | 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 1/40000s | 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-II | Single UHS-II |
Connectivity Specs | Leica Q2 | Olympus E-M1 II |
External Flash | Hotshoe | Hotshoe |
Studio Flash | no PC Sync | PC Sync socket |
USB Connector | no USB | USB 3.0 |
HDMI Port | no 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 |
Bluetooth Support | Bluetooth built-in | no Bluetooth |
Body Specs | Leica Q2 | Olympus E-M1 II |
Environmental Sealing | Weathersealed body | Weathersealed body |
Battery Type | Leica BP-SCL4 | Olympus BLH-1 |
Battery Life (CIPA) | 370 shots per charge | 440 shots per charge |
Body Dimensions |
130 x 80 x 92 mm (5.1 x 3.1 x 3.6 in) |
134 x 91 x 67 mm (5.3 x 3.6 x 2.6 in) |
Camera Weight | 718 g (25.3 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.