Leica Q2 vs Olympus TG-6
The Leica Q2 and the Olympus Tough TG-6 are two digital cameras that were announced, respectively, in March 2019 and May 2019. Both the Q2 and the TG-6 are fixed lens compact cameras that are based on a full frame (Q2) and a 1/2.3-inch (TG-6) sensor. The Leica has a resolution of 46.7 megapixels, whereas the Olympus provides 12 MP.
Below is an overview of the main specs of the two cameras as a starting point for the comparison.
|Leica Q2||Olympus TG-6|
|Fixed lens compact camera||Fixed lens compact camera|
|28mm f/1.7||25-100mm f/2.0-4.9|
|46.7 MP, Full Frame Sensor||12 MP, 1/2.3" Sensor|
|4K/30p Video||4K/30p Video|
|ISO 50-50000||ISO 100-12800|
|Electronic viewfinder (3680k dots)||No viewfinder, LCD framing|
|3.0" LCD, 1040k dots||3.0" LCD, 1040k dots|
|Fixed touchscreen||Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)|
|20 shutter flaps per second||20 shutter flaps per second|
|Lens-based stabilization||In-body stabilization|
|Weathersealed body||Waterproof body (15m)|
|370 shots per battery charge||340 shots per battery charge|
|130 x 80 x 92 mm, 718 g||113 x 66 x 32 mm, 253 g|
Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Leica Q2 and the Olympus Tough TG-6? 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: Leica Q2 vs Olympus TG-6
An illustration of the physical size and weight of the Leica Q2 and the Olympus TG-6 is provided 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 TG-6 can be obtained in two different colors (black, red), 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 TG-6 is notably smaller (28 percent) than the Leica Q2. Moreover, the TG-6 is substantially lighter (65 percent) than the 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. More than that, the TG-6 is water-proof up to 15m and can, thus, be used for underwater photography.
The power pack in the TG-6 can be charged via the USB port, which can be very convenient when travelling.
The table below summarizes the key physical specs of the two cameras alongside a broader set of comparators. If you want to switch the focus of the display and review another camera pair, just select a new right or left comparator from among the camera models in the table. Alternatively, you can also move across to the CAM-parator tool and choose from the broad selection of possible camera comparisons there.
|Leica Q2»||5.1 in||3.1 in||3.6 in||25.3 oz||370||Y||Mar 2019||4,995||Leica Q2|
|Olympus TG-6«||4.4 in||2.6 in||1.3 in||8.9 oz||340||Y||May 2019||449||Olympus TG-6|
|Canon R« »||5.5 in||3.9 in||3.3 in||23.3 oz||370||Y||Sep 2018||2,299||Canon R|
|Fujifilm GFX 50R« »||6.3 in||3.8 in||2.6 in||27.3 oz||400||Y||Sep 2018||4,499||Fujifilm GFX 50R|
|Leica M10-P« »||5.5 in||3.1 in||1.5 in||23.3 oz||210||n||Aug 2018||7,995||Leica M10-P|
|Leica X-U Typ 113« »||5.5 in||3.1 in||3.5 in||22.4 oz||450||Y||Jan 2016||2,950||Leica X-U Typ 113|
|Leica M Typ 262« »||5.5 in||3.1 in||1.7 in||24.0 oz||..||Y||Nov 2015||5,195||-||Leica M Typ 262|
|Leica Q Typ 116« »||5.1 in||3.1 in||3.7 in||22.6 oz||300||n||Jun 2015||4,249||-||Leica Q Typ 116|
|Leica SL« »||5.8 in||4.1 in||1.5 in||29.9 oz||400||Y||Oct 2015||7,450||Leica SL|
|Leica M Typ 240« »||5.5 in||3.1 in||1.7 in||24.0 oz||..||Y||Sep 2012||6,950||-||Leica M Typ 240|
|Nikon Z7« »||5.3 in||4.0 in||2.6 in||23.8 oz||330||Y||Aug 2018||3,399||Nikon Z7|
|Nikon W300« »||4.4 in||2.6 in||1.1 in||8.1 oz||280||Y||May 2017||389||Nikon W300|
|Olympus TG-5« »||4.4 in||2.6 in||1.3 in||8.8 oz||340||Y||May 2017||449||-||Olympus TG-5|
|Olympus TG-4« »||4.4 in||2.6 in||1.2 in||8.7 oz||380||Y||Apr 2015||379||-||Olympus TG-4|
|Olympus XZ-1« »||4.4 in||2.6 in||1.7 in||9.7 oz||320||n||Jan 2011||499||-||Olympus XZ-1|
|Ricoh WG-6« »||4.6 in||2.6 in||1.3 in||8.7 oz||340||Y||Feb 2019||399||Ricoh WG-6|
|Zeiss ZX1« »||5.6 in||3.7 in||1.8 in||28.2 oz||..||n||Sep 2018||4,199||Zeiss ZX1|
|Note: Measurements and pricing do not include easily detachable parts, such as interchangeable lenses or optional viewfinders.|
The price is, of course, an important factor in any camera decision. The retail prices at the time of the camera’s release place the model in the market relative to other models in the producer’s line-up and the competition. The TG-6 was launched at a markedly lower price (by 91 percent) than the Q2, which puts it into a different market segment. 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: Leica Q2 vs Olympus TG-6
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. 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 TG-6 a 1/2.3-inch sensor. The sensor area in the TG-6 is 97 percent smaller. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 1.0 and 5.6. The sensor in the Q2 has a native 3:2 aspect ratio, while the one in the TG-6 offers a 4:3 aspect.
With 46.7MP, the Q2 offers a higher resolution than the TG-6 (12MP), but the Q2 nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 4.30μm versus 1.53μm for the TG-6) due to its larger sensor. It is noteworthy in this context that the two cameras were released in close succession, so that their sensors are from the same technological generation. Coming back to sensor resolution, it should be mentioned that the Q2 has no anti-alias filter installed, so that it can capture all the detail its 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 inch or 106.3 x 70.9 cm, for very good quality (250 dpi) 33.5 x 22.3 inch or 85 x 56.7 cm, and for excellent quality (300 dpi) 27.9 x 18.6 inch or 70.8 x 47.3 cm. The corresponding values for the Olympus TG-6 are 20 x 15 inch or 50.8 x 38.1 cm for good quality, 16 x 12 inch or 40.6 x 30.5 cm for very good quality, and 13.3 x 10 inch or 33.9 x 25.4 cm for excellent quality prints.
The Leica Q2 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 50 to ISO 50000. The corresponding ISO settings for the Olympus Tough TG-6 are ISO 100 to ISO 12800 (no boost).
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"). The following table provides an overview of the physical sensor characteristics, as well as the sensor quality measurements for a selection of comparators.
|Leica Q2»||Full Frame||46.7||8368||5584||4K/30p||26.4||13.5||2491||96||Leica Q2|
|Olympus TG-6«||1/2.3||12.0||4000||3000||4K/30p||-||-||-||-||Olympus TG-6|
|Canon R« »||Full Frame||30.1||6720||4480||4K/30p||24.5||13.5||2742||89||Canon R|
|Fujifilm GFX 50R« »||Medium Format||51.1||8256||6192||1080/30p||-||-||-||-||Fujifilm GFX 50R|
|Leica M10-P« »||Full Frame||23.8||5952||3992||-||-||-||-||-||Leica M10-P|
|Leica X-U Typ 113« »||APS-C||16.1||4928||3264||1080/30p||-||-||-||-||Leica X-U Typ 113|
|Leica M Typ 262« »||Full Frame||23.7||5952||3976||-||-||-||-||-||Leica M Typ 262|
|Leica Q Typ 116« »||Full Frame||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||24.3||12.7||2221||85||Leica Q Typ 116|
|Leica SL« »||Full Frame||24.0||6000||4000||4K/30p||25.0||13.4||1821||88||Leica SL|
|Leica M Typ 240« »||Full Frame||23.7||5952||3976||1080/25p||24.0||13.3||1860||84||Leica M Typ 240|
|Nikon Z7« »||Full Frame||45.4||8256||5504||4K/30p||26.3||14.6||2668||99||Nikon Z7|
|Nikon W300« »||1/2.3||15.9||4608||3456||4K/30p||-||-||-||-||Nikon W300|
|Olympus TG-5« »||1/2.3||12.0||4000||3000||4K/30p||-||-||-||-||Olympus TG-5|
|Olympus TG-4« »||1/2.3||15.9||4608||3456||1080/30p||-||-||-||-||Olympus TG-4|
|Olympus XZ-1« »||1/1.7||10.1||3664||2752||720/30p||18.8||10.4||117||34||Olympus XZ-1|
|Ricoh WG-6« »||1/2.3||20.2||5184||3888||4K/30p||-||-||-||-||Ricoh WG-6|
|Zeiss ZX1« »||Full Frame||37.4||7488||4992||4K/30p||-||-||-||-||Zeiss ZX1|
Many modern cameras are not only capable of taking still images, but also of capturing video footage. Both cameras under consideration have a sensor with sufficiently fast read-out times for moving pictures, and both provide the same movie specifications (4K/30p).
Feature comparison: Leica Q2 vs Olympus TG-6
Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. For example, the Q2 has an electronic viewfinder (3680k dots), which can be very helpful when shooting in bright sunlight. In contrast, the TG-6 relies on live view and the rear LCD for framing. The following table reports on some other key feature differences and similarities of the Leica Q2, the Olympus TG-6, and comparable cameras.
|Leica Q2»||3680||n||3.0||1040||fixed||Y||1/2000s||20.0||n||Y||Leica Q2|
|Olympus TG-6«||-||n||3.0||1040||fixed||n||1/2000s||20.0||Y||Y||Olympus TG-6|
|Canon R« »||3690||Y||3.2||2100||swivel||Y||1/8000s||8.0||n||n||Canon R|
|Fujifilm GFX 50R« »||3690||n||3.2||2360||tilting||Y||1/4000s||3.0||n||n||Fujifilm GFX 50R|
|Leica M10-P« »||optical||n||3.0||1037||fixed||Y||1/4000s||5.0||n||n||Leica M10-P|
|Leica X-U Typ 113« »||-||n||3.0||920||fixed||n||1/2000s||5.0||Y||n||Leica X-U Typ 113|
|Leica M Typ 262« »||optical||n||3.0||921||fixed||n||1/4000s||3.0||n||n||Leica M Typ 262|
|Leica Q Typ 116« »||3680||n||3.0||1040||fixed||Y||1/2000s||10.0||n||Y||Leica Q Typ 116|
|Leica SL« »||4400||Y||3.0||1040||fixed||Y||1/8000s||11.0||n||n||Leica SL|
|Leica M Typ 240« »||optical||n||3.0||920||fixed||n||1/4000s||3.0||n||n||Leica M Typ 240|
|Nikon Z7« »||3690||Y||3.2||2100||tilting||Y||1/8000s||9.0||n||Y||Nikon Z7|
|Nikon W300« »||-||n||3.0||921||fixed||n||1/4000s||7.0||Y||Y||Nikon W300|
|Olympus TG-5« »||-||n||3.0||460||fixed||n||1/2000s||20.0||Y||Y||Olympus TG-5|
|Olympus TG-4« »||-||n||3.0||460||fixed||n||1/2000s||5.0||Y||Y||Olympus TG-4|
|Olympus XZ-1« »||-||n||3.0||614||fixed||n||1/2000s||2.0||Y||Y||Olympus XZ-1|
|Ricoh WG-6« »||-||n||3.0||1040||fixed||n||1/4000s||1.0||Y||n||Ricoh WG-6|
|Zeiss ZX1« »||6221||n||4.3||2765||fixed||Y||1/1000s||3.0||n||n||Zeiss ZX1|
One differentiating feature between the two cameras concerns the touch sensitivity of the rear screen. The Q2 has a touchscreen, while the TG-6 has a conventional panel. Touch control can be particularly helpful, for example, for setting the focus point.
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, the Q2 is one of those camera that have an additional 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 TG-6 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.
The TG-6 is equipped with a zoom lens, while the Q2 comes with a built-in prime. The TG-6 has a 25-100mm f/2.0-4.9 optic and the Q2 offers a 28mm f/1.7 (focal lengths in full frame equivalent terms). Hence, the Olympus provides a wider angle of view at the short end, as well as more tele-photo reach at the long end than the Leica. The Q2 offers the faster maximum aperture.
Concerning the storage of imaging data, both the Q2 and the TG-6 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 TG-6 can use UHS-I cards (up to 104 MB/s).
Connectivity comparison: Leica Q2 vs Olympus TG-6
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 Tough TG-6 and, in particular, the interfaces the cameras (and selected comparators) provide for accessory control and data transfer.
|Leica Q2»||Y||stereo||mono||-||-||-||-||Y||-||Y||Leica Q2|
|Olympus TG-6«||-||stereo||mono||-||-||micro||2.0||Y||-||-||Olympus TG-6|
|Canon R« »||Y||stereo||mono||Y||-||mini||3.1||Y||-||Y||Canon R|
|Fujifilm GFX 50R« »||Y||stereo||mono||Y||Y||micro||3.0||Y||-||Y||Fujifilm GFX 50R|
|Leica M10-P« »||Y||-||-||-||-||-||-||Y||-||-||Leica M10-P|
|Leica X-U Typ 113« »||Y||stereo||mono||-||-||-||2.0||-||-||-||Leica X-U Typ 113|
|Leica M Typ 262« »||Y||-||-||-||-||-||2.0||-||-||-||Leica M Typ 262|
|Leica Q Typ 116« »||Y||stereo||mono||-||-||micro||2.0||Y||Y||-||Leica Q Typ 116|
|Leica SL« »||Y||stereo||mono||Y||Y||full||3.0||Y||-||-||Leica SL|
|Leica M Typ 240« »||Y||stereo||mono||-||-||-||2.0||Y||-||-||Leica M Typ 240|
|Nikon Z7« »||Y||stereo||mono||Y||Y||micro||3.1||Y||-||Y||Nikon Z7|
|Nikon W300« »||-||stereo||mono||-||-||micro||2.0||Y||-||Y||Nikon W300|
|Olympus TG-5« »||-||stereo||mono||-||-||micro||2.0||Y||-||-||Olympus TG-5|
|Olympus TG-4« »||-||stereo||mono||-||-||micro||2.0||Y||-||-||Olympus TG-4|
|Olympus XZ-1« »||Y||mono||-||-||-||mini||2.0||-||-||-||Olympus XZ-1|
|Ricoh WG-6« »||-||mono||mono||-||-||micro||3.0||-||-||-||Ricoh WG-6|
|Zeiss ZX1« »||Y||stereo||mono||-||-||-||3.1||Y||Y||Y||Zeiss ZX1|
It is notable that the Q2 has a hotshoe, while the TG-6 does not. This socket makes it possible to easily attach optional accessories, such as an external flash gun.
Both the Q2 and the TG-6 are recent models that are part of the current product line-up. The Q2 replaced the earlier Leica Q Typ 116, while the TG-6 followed on from the Olympus TG-5. 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: Leica Q2 vs Olympus TG-6
So what conclusions can be drawn? Which of the two cameras – the Leica Q2 or the Olympus TG-6 – has the upper hand? Is one clearly better than the other? 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 12MP) with a 101% higher linear resolution.
- Maximized detail: Lacks an anti-alias filter to exploit the sensor's full resolution potential.
- Better image quality: Features bigger pixels on a larger sensor for higher quality imaging.
- Richer colors: The pixel size advantage translates into images with better, more accurate colors.
- More dynamic range: Larger pixels capture a wider spectrum of light and dark details.
- Better low-light sensitivity: Larger pixels means good image quality even under poor lighting.
- Easier framing: Has an electronic viewfinder for image framing and settings control.
- Fewer buttons to press: Is equipped with a touch-sensitive rear screen to facilitate handling.
- Less disturbing: Has an electronic shutter option for completely silent shooting.
- Better light gathering: Has a lens with a wider maximum aperture (f/1.7 vs f/2.0).
- Better lighting: Features a hotshoe and can thus hold and trigger an external flash gun.
- 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.
Reasons to prefer the Olympus Tough TG-6:
- Better moiré control: Has an anti-alias filter to avoid artificial patterns to appear in images.
- Wider view: Has a wider-angle lens that facilitates landscape or interior shots.
- More compact: Is smaller (113x66mm vs 130x80mm) and will fit more readily into a bag.
- Less heavy: Has a lower weight (by 465g or 65 percent) and is thus easier to take along.
- Easier travel charging: Can be conveniently charged via its USB port.
- Water-proof: Is rugged and sealed and can thus be used for underwater photography (up to 15m).
- Easier fill-in: Has a small integrated flash to brighten shadows of backlit subjects.
- More affordable: Was introduced into a lower priced category (91 percent cheaper at launch).
If the count of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a measure, the Q2 is the clear winner of the match-up (14 : 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 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 TG-6 place the cameras among the top in their class? Find out in the latest Best Prime Lens Compact Camera and Best Travel-Zoom Camera listings whether the two cameras rank among the cream of the crop.
In any case, while the comparison of the spec-sheets of cameras can offer a general idea of their imaging potential, it remains incomplete and does no justice, for example, to the way the Q2 or the TG-6 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: Leica Q2 vs Olympus TG-6
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 (cameralabs, dpreview, ephotozine, imaging-resource, and photographyblog). 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.
|Leica Q2»||-||84/100||-||-||-||Mar 2019||4,995||Leica Q2|
|Olympus TG-6«||-||-||4/5||-||-||May 2019||449||Olympus TG-6|
|Canon R« »||o||79/100||4.5/5||4/5||4/5||Sep 2018||2,299||Canon R|
|Fujifilm GFX 50R« »||-||84/100||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||Sep 2018||4,499||Fujifilm GFX 50R|
|Leica M10-P« »||-||-||-||-||4/5||Aug 2018||7,995||Leica M10-P|
|Leica X-U Typ 113« »||-||-||-||-||3.5/5||Jan 2016||2,950||Leica X-U Typ 113|
|Leica M Typ 262« »||-||-||-||-||-||Nov 2015||5,195||-||Leica M Typ 262|
|Leica Q Typ 116« »||-||80/100||4.5/5||-||4.5/5||Jun 2015||4,249||-||Leica Q Typ 116|
|Leica SL« »||-||84/100||4.5/5||4/5||4/5||Oct 2015||7,450||Leica SL|
|Leica M Typ 240« »||-||-||4/5||-||-||Sep 2012||6,950||-||Leica M Typ 240|
|Nikon Z7« »||+||89/100||4.5/5||4.5/5||5/5||Aug 2018||3,399||Nikon Z7|
|Nikon W300« »||+||-||4/5||-||4/5||May 2017||389||Nikon W300|
|Olympus TG-5« »||+ +||-||4/5||o||4/5||May 2017||449||-||Olympus TG-5|
|Olympus TG-4« »||+||79/100||4/5||4/5||4/5||Apr 2015||379||-||Olympus TG-4|
|Olympus XZ-1« »||-||74/100||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||Jan 2011||499||-||Olympus XZ-1|
|Ricoh WG-6« »||-||-||-||-||-||Feb 2019||399||Ricoh WG-6|
|Zeiss ZX1« »||-||-||-||-||-||Sep 2018||4,199||Zeiss ZX1|
|Notes: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (-) not available.|
The above review scores should be interpreted with care, 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 rating-comparisons among cameras that span long time periods or concern very differently equipped models make little sense. It should also be noted that some of the review sites have over time altered the way they render their verdicts.
Other camera comparisons
Did this review help to inform your camera decision process? In case you would like to check on the differences and similarities of other camera models, just use the search menu below. Alternatively, you can follow any of the listed hyperlinks for comparisons that others found interesting.
- Canon 250D vs Leica Q2
- Canon 5D Mark III vs Leica Q2
- Canon 800D vs Olympus TG-6
- Fujifilm X-H1 vs Leica Q2
- Fujifilm X70 vs Leica Q2
- Leica Q2 vs Nikon D3300
- Leica Q2 vs Nikon D800
- Leica Q2 vs Sony A7R II
- Nikon D90 vs Olympus TG-6
- Olympus TG-6 vs Panasonic FZ1000 II
- Olympus TG-6 vs Panasonic LX100 II
- Olympus TG-6 vs Pentax KP
Specifications: Leica Q2 vs Olympus TG-6
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 TG-6|
|Camera Type||Fixed lens compact camera||Fixed lens compact camera|
|Camera Lens||28mm f/1.7||25-100mm f/2.0-4.9|
|Launch Date||March 2019||May 2019|
|Launch Price||USD 4995||USD 449|
|Sensor Specs||Leica Q2||Olympus TG-6|
|Sensor Format||Full Frame Sensor||1/2.3" Sensor|
|Sensor Size||36.0 x 24.0 mm||6.17 x 4.55 mm|
|Sensor Area||864 mm2||28.0735 mm2|
|Sensor Diagonal||43.3 mm||7.7 mm|
|Sensor Resolution||46.7 Megapixels||12 Megapixels|
|Image Resolution||8368 x 5584 pixels||4000 x 3000 pixels|
|Pixel Pitch||4.30 μm||1.53 μm|
|Pixel Density||5.41 MP/cm2||42.74 MP/cm2|
|Moiré control||no AA filter||Anti-Alias filter|
|Movie Capability||4K/30p Video||4K/30p Video|
|ISO Setting||50-50000 ISO||100-12800 ISO|
|DXO Sensor Quality (score)||96||..|
|DXO Color Depth (bits)||26.4||..|
|DXO Dynamic Range (EV)||13.5||..|
|DXO Low Light (ISO)||2491||..|
|Screen Specs||Leica Q2||Olympus TG-6|
|Viewfinder Type||Electronic viewfinder||No viewfinder|
|Viewfinder Field of View||100%|
|Viewfinder Resolution||3680k dots|
|LCD Framing||Live View||Live View|
|Rear LCD Size||3.0 inch||3.0 inch|
|LCD Resolution||1040k dots||1040k dots|
|LCD Attachment||Fixed screen||Fixed screen|
|Touch Input||Touchscreen||no Touchscreen|
|Shooting Specs||Leica Q2||Olympus TG-6|
|Autofocus System||Contrast-detect AF||Contrast-detect AF|
|Manual Focusing Aid||Focus Peaking||Focus Peaking|
|Max Shutter Speed (mechanical)||1/2000/s||1/2000/s|
|Continuous Shooting||20 shutter flaps/s||20 shutter flaps/s|
|Electronic Shutter||up to 1/40000s||no E-Shutter|
|Time-Lapse Photography||Intervalometer built-in||Intervalometer built-in|
|Image Stabilization||Lens-based stabilization||In-body stabilization|
|Fill Flash||no On-Board Flash||Build-in Flash|
|Storage Medium||SDXC cards||SDXC cards|
|Second Storage Option||Single card slot||Single card slot|
|UHS card support||UHS-II||UHS-I|
|Connectivity Specs||Leica Q2||Olympus TG-6|
|External Flash||Hotshoe||no Hotshoe|
|USB Connector||USB no||USB 2.0|
|HDMI Port||no HDMI||micro HDMI|
|Wifi Support||Wifi built-in||Wifi built-in|
|Bluetooth Support||Bluetooth built-in||no Bluetooth|
|Body Specs||Leica Q2||Olympus TG-6|
|Environmental Sealing||Weathersealed body||Waterproof body (15m)|
|Battery Type||BP-SCL4 power pack||LI-92B power pack|
|Battery Life (CIPA)||370 shots per charge||340 shots per charge|
|In-Camera Charging||no USB charging||USB charging|
130 x 80 x 92 mm
(5.1 x 3.1 x 3.6 in)
113 x 66 x 32 mm
(4.4 x 2.6 x 1.3 in)
|Camera Weight||718 g (25.3 oz)||253 g (8.9 oz)|
Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.