Olympus E-M10 II vs Leica Q Typ 116
The Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark II and the Leica Q (Typ 116) are two digital cameras that were officially introduced, respectively, in August 2015 and June 2015. The E-M10 II is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera, while the Q Typ 116 is a fixed lens compact. The cameras are based on a Four Thirds (E-M10 II) and a full frame (Q Typ 116) sensor. The Olympus has a resolution of 15.9 megapixels, whereas the Leica provides 24 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 Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark II and the Leica Q (Typ 116)? 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 Olympus E-M10 II and the Leica Q Typ 116 is provided 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.
The E-M10 II can be obtained in three different colors (black, silver, brown), while the Q Typ 116 is available in two color-versions (black, silver).
If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Leica Q Typ 116 is somewhat larger (4 percent) than the Olympus E-M10 II. In this context, it is worth noting that neither the E-M10 II nor the Q Typ 116 are weather-sealed.
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-M10 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-M10 II and their specifications in the Micro Four Thirds Lens Catalog.
Concerning battery life, the E-M10 II gets 320 shots out of its Olympus BLS-50 battery, while the Q Typ 116 can take 300 images on a single charge of its Leica BP-DC12 power pack.
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.
# | Camera Model |
Camera Width |
Camera Height |
Camera Depth |
Camera Weight |
Battery Life |
Weather Sealing |
Camera Launch |
Launch Price (USD) |
Street Price |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Olympus E-M10 II | 120 mm | 83 mm | 47 mm | 390 g | 320 | n | Aug 2015 | 649 | ebay.com | |
2. | Leica Q Typ 116 | 130 mm | 80 mm | 93 mm | 640 g | 300 | n | Jun 2015 | 4,249 | ebay.com | |
3. | Canon T6i | 132 mm | 101 mm | 78 mm | 555 g | 440 | n | Feb 2015 | 749 | ebay.com | |
4. | Canon T6s | 132 mm | 101 mm | 78 mm | 565 g | 440 | n | Feb 2015 | 649 | ebay.com | |
5. | Canon G7 X | 103 mm | 60 mm | 40 mm | 304 g | 210 | n | Sep 2014 | 699 | ebay.com | |
6. | Leica Q2 | 130 mm | 80 mm | 92 mm | 718 g | 370 | Y | Mar 2019 | 4,995 | amazon.com | |
7. | Olympus E-PL9 | 117 mm | 68 mm | 39 mm | 380 g | 350 | n | Feb 2018 | 599 | ebay.com | |
8. | Olympus E-M10 III | 122 mm | 84 mm | 50 mm | 410 g | 330 | n | Aug 2017 | 649 | ebay.com | |
9. | Olympus E-PL8 | 115 mm | 67 mm | 38 mm | 357 g | 350 | n | Sep 2016 | 549 | ebay.com | |
10. | Olympus PEN-F | 125 mm | 72 mm | 37 mm | 427 g | 330 | n | Jan 2016 | 1,199 | ebay.com | |
11. | Olympus E-M10 | 119 mm | 82 mm | 46 mm | 396 g | 320 | n | Jan 2014 | 699 | ebay.com | |
12. | Olympus E-PL7 | 115 mm | 67 mm | 38 mm | 357 g | 350 | n | Aug 2014 | 599 | ebay.com | |
13. | Olympus E-P5 | 122 mm | 69 mm | 37 mm | 420 g | 330 | n | May 2013 | 999 | ebay.com | |
14. | Olympus E-PL6 | 111 mm | 64 mm | 38 mm | 325 g | 360 | n | May 2013 | 599 | ebay.com | |
15. | Olympus E-PL5 | 111 mm | 64 mm | 38 mm | 325 g | 360 | n | Sep 2012 | 599 | ebay.com | |
16. | Panasonic GX85 | 122 mm | 71 mm | 44 mm | 426 g | 290 | n | Apr 2016 | 799 | amazon.com | |
17. | Sony RX100 IV | 102 mm | 58 mm | 41 mm | 298 g | 280 | n | Jun 2015 | 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 naturally be influenced heavily by the price. 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 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 tend to be associated with larger, more expensive camera bodies and lenses.
Of the two cameras under consideration, the Olympus E-M10 II features a Four Thirds sensor and the Leica Q Typ 116 a full frame sensor. The sensor area in the Q Typ 116 is 284 percent bigger. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 2.0 and 1.0. The sensor in the E-M10 II has a native 4:3 aspect ratio, while the one in the Q Typ 116 offers a 3:2 aspect.
With 24MP, the Q Typ 116 offers a higher resolution than the E-M10 II (15.9MP), but the Q Typ 116 nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 6.00μm versus 3.76μm for the E-M10 II) 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 E-M10 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-M10 II 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 Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark II has a native sensitivity range from ISO 200 to ISO 25600, which can be extended to ISO 100-25600. The corresponding ISO settings for the Leica Q (Typ 116) are ISO 100 to ISO 50000 (no boost).
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 consideration, the Q Typ 116 offers substantially better image quality than the E-M10 II (overall score 12 points higher). The advantage is based on 1.2 bits higher color depth, 0.2 EV in additional dynamic range, and 1.4 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. | Olympus E-M10 II | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/60p | 23.1 | 12.5 | 842 | 73 | |
2. | Leica Q Typ 116 | Full Frame | 24.0 | 6000 | 4000 | 1080/60p | 24.3 | 12.7 | 2221 | 85 | |
3. | Canon T6i | APS-C | 24.0 | 6000 | 4000 | 1080/30p | 22.7 | 12.0 | 919 | 71 | |
4. | Canon T6s | APS-C | 24.0 | 6000 | 4000 | 1080/30p | 22.6 | 12.0 | 915 | 70 | |
5. | Canon G7 X | 1-inch | 20.0 | 5472 | 3648 | 1080/60p | 23.0 | 12.7 | 556 | 71 | |
6. | Leica Q2 | Full Frame | 46.7 | 8368 | 5584 | 4K/30p | 26.4 | 13.5 | 2491 | 96 | |
7. | Olympus E-PL9 | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 4K/30p | 23.1 | 12.8 | 1162 | 74 | |
8. | Olympus E-M10 III | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 4K/30p | 23.1 | 12.8 | 1120 | 74 | |
9. | Olympus E-PL8 | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/30p | 23.0 | 12.6 | 1030 | 73 | |
10. | Olympus PEN-F | Four Thirds | 20.2 | 5184 | 3888 | 1080/60p | 23.1 | 12.4 | 894 | 74 | |
11. | Olympus E-M10 | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/30p | 22.8 | 12.3 | 884 | 72 | |
12. | Olympus E-PL7 | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/30p | 22.7 | 12.4 | 873 | 72 | |
13. | Olympus E-P5 | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/30p | 22.8 | 12.4 | 895 | 72 | |
14. | Olympus E-PL6 | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/30p | 22.5 | 12.0 | 717 | 68 | |
15. | Olympus E-PL5 | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/30p | 22.8 | 12.3 | 889 | 72 | |
16. | Panasonic GX85 | Four Thirds | 15.8 | 4592 | 3448 | 4K/30p | 22.9 | 12.6 | 662 | 71 | |
17. | Sony RX100 IV | 1-inch | 20.0 | 5472 | 3648 | 4K/30p | 22.8 | 12.6 | 591 | 70 | |
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, and both provide the same movie specifications (1080/60p).
Feature comparison
Beyond body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. The two cameras under review 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-M10 II (3680k vs 2360k dots). The following table reports on some other key feature differences and similarities of the Olympus E-M10 II, the Leica Q Typ 116, and comparable cameras.
# | 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. | Olympus E-M10 II | 2360 | n | 3.0 / 1040 | tilting | Y | 1/4000s | 8.0/s | Y | Y | |
2. | Leica Q Typ 116 | 3680 | n | 3.0 / 1040 | fixed | Y | 1/2000s | 10.0/s | n | Y | |
3. | Canon T6i | optical | n | 3.0 / 1040 | swivel | Y | 1/4000s | 5.0/s | Y | n | |
4. | Canon T6s | optical | Y | 3.0 / 1040 | swivel | Y | 1/4000s | 5.0/s | Y | n | |
5. | Canon G7 X | none | n | 3.0 / 1040 | tilting | Y | 1/2000s | 6.5/s | Y | Y | |
6. | Leica Q2 | 3680 | n | 3.0 / 1040 | fixed | Y | 1/2000s | 10.0/s | n | Y | |
7. | Olympus E-PL9 | none | n | 3.0 / 1040 | tilting | Y | 1/4000s | 8.6/s | Y | Y | |
8. | Olympus E-M10 III | 2360 | n | 3.0 / 1040 | tilting | Y | 1/4000s | 8.6/s | Y | Y | |
9. | Olympus E-PL8 | optional | n | 3.0 / 1037 | tilting | Y | 1/4000s | 8.0/s | n | Y | |
10. | Olympus PEN-F | 2360 | n | 3.0 / 1037 | swivel | Y | 1/8000s | 10.0/s | n | Y | |
11. | Olympus E-M10 | 1440 | n | 3.0 / 1037 | tilting | Y | 1/4000s | 8.0/s | Y | Y | |
12. | Olympus E-PL7 | optional | n | 3.0 / 1037 | tilting | Y | 1/4000s | 8.0/s | n | Y | |
13. | Olympus E-P5 | optional | n | 3.0 / 1037 | tilting | Y | 1/8000s | 9.0/s | Y | Y | |
14. | Olympus E-PL6 | optional | n | 3.0 / 460 | tilting | Y | 1/4000s | 8.0/s | n | Y | |
15. | Olympus E-PL5 | optional | n | 3.0 / 460 | tilting | Y | 1/4000s | 8.0/s | n | Y | |
16. | Panasonic GX85 | 2765 | n | 3.0 / 1040 | tilting | Y | 1/4000s | 8.0/s | Y | Y | |
17. | Sony RX100 IV | 2359 | n | 3.0 / 1228 | tilting | n | 1/2000s | 16.0/s | Y | Y | |
Note: *) Information refers to the mechanical shutter, unless the camera only has an electronic one. |
One difference between the cameras concerns the presence of an on-board flash. The E-M10 II has one, while the Q Typ 116 does not. While the built-in flash of the E-M10 II is not very powerful, it can at times be useful as a fill-in light.
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 Olympus E-M10 II and the Leica Q Typ 116 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 E-M10 II and the Q Typ 116 write their files to SDXC cards. Both cameras can use UHS-I cards, which provide for Ultra High Speed data transfer of up to 104 MB/s.
Connectivity comparison
For some imaging applications, the extent to which a camera can communicate with its environment can be an important aspect in the camera decision process. The table below provides an overview of the connectivity of the Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark II and Leica Q (Typ 116) 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. | Olympus E-M10 II | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
2. | Leica Q Typ 116 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | Y | - | |
3. | Canon T6i | Y | stereo / mono | Y | - | mini | 2.0 | Y | Y | - | |
4. | Canon T6s | Y | stereo / mono | Y | - | mini | 2.0 | Y | Y | - | |
5. | Canon G7 X | - | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | Y | - | |
6. | Leica Q2 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | - | - | Y | - | Y | |
7. | Olympus E-PL9 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | Y | |
8. | Olympus E-M10 III | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
9. | Olympus E-PL8 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
10. | Olympus PEN-F | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
11. | Olympus E-M10 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
12. | Olympus E-PL7 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
13. | Olympus E-P5 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
14. | Olympus E-PL6 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
15. | Olympus E-PL5 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
16. | Panasonic GX85 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
17. | Sony RX100 IV | - | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | Y | - |
Both the E-M10 II and the Q Typ 116 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The Q Typ 116 was replaced by the Leica Q2, while the E-M10 II was followed by the Olympus E-M10 III. Further information on the features and operation of the E-M10 II and Q Typ 116 can be found, respectively, in the Olympus E-M10 II Manual (free pdf) or the online Leica Q Typ 116 Manual.
Review summary
So what is the bottom line? Is there a clear favorite between the Olympus E-M10 II and the Leica Q Typ 116? Which camera is better? A synthesis of the relative strong points of each of the models is listed below.
Arguments in favor of the Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark II:
- Maximized detail: Lacks an anti-alias filter to exploit the sensor's full resolution potential.
- More flexible LCD: Has a tilting screen for odd-angle shots in landscape orientation.
- Faster shutter: Has higher mechanical shutter speed (1/4000s vs 1/2000s) to freeze action.
- More flexible: Accepts interchangeable lenses, so that lens characteristics can be altered.
- Easier fill-in: Is equipped with a small onboard flash to brighten deep shadow areas.
Reasons to prefer the Leica Q (Typ 116):
- More detail: Has more megapixels (24 vs 15.9MP), which boosts linear resolution by 25%.
- Better moiré control: Has an anti-alias filter to avoid artificial patterns to appear in images.
- Better image quality: Scores substantially higher (12 points) in the DXO overall evaluation.
- Richer colors: Generates noticeably more natural colors (1.2 bits more color depth).
- Better low-light sensitivity: Can shoot in dim conditions (1.4 stops ISO advantage).
- More detailed viewfinder: Has higher resolution electronic viewfinder (3680k vs 2360k dots).
- Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (10 vs 8 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
- Ready to shoot: Has an integrated lens, whereas the E-M10 II necessitates an extra lens.
- 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 value.
If the number of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the Q Typ 116 is the clear winner of the contest (10 : 5 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 Olympus E-M10 II and the Leica Q Typ 116 place the cameras among the top in their class? Find out in the latest Best Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera and Best Prime Lens Compact 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 partial and cannot reveal, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance when actually working with the E-M10 II or the Q Typ 116. 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. | Olympus E-M10 II | 4.5/5 | + + | .. | 80/100 | 5/5 | 5/5 | Aug 2015 | 649 | ebay.com | |
2. | Leica Q Typ 116 | 5/5 | .. | .. | 80/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jun 2015 | 4,249 | ebay.com | |
3. | Canon T6i | 5/5 | .. | .. | 75/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Feb 2015 | 749 | ebay.com | |
4. | Canon T6s | 5/5 | + | .. | 77/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Feb 2015 | 649 | ebay.com | |
5. | Canon G7 X | 4/5 | + + | .. | 77/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Sep 2014 | 699 | ebay.com | |
6. | Leica Q2 | .. | .. | 4.5/5 | 84/100 | 4.5/5 | 4/5 | Mar 2019 | 4,995 | amazon.com | |
7. | Olympus E-PL9 | .. | + | .. | .. | 4.5/5 | 4/5 | Feb 2018 | 599 | ebay.com | |
8. | Olympus E-M10 III | .. | + | 5/5 | 80/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Aug 2017 | 649 | ebay.com | |
9. | Olympus E-PL8 | .. | .. | .. | .. | 4.5/5 | 4/5 | Sep 2016 | 549 | ebay.com | |
10. | Olympus PEN-F | .. | .. | 4/5 | 82/100 | 4.5/5 | 5/5 | Jan 2016 | 1,199 | ebay.com | |
11. | Olympus E-M10 | 4/5 | .. | .. | 80/100 | 5/5 | 5/5 | Jan 2014 | 699 | ebay.com | |
12. | Olympus E-PL7 | 4/5 | + | .. | .. | 5/5 | 4/5 | Aug 2014 | 599 | ebay.com | |
13. | Olympus E-P5 | 5/5 | + + | .. | 78/100 | 4.5/5 | 5/5 | May 2013 | 999 | ebay.com | |
14. | Olympus E-PL6 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | May 2013 | 599 | ebay.com | |
15. | Olympus E-PL5 | 3/5 | + + | .. | .. | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Sep 2012 | 599 | ebay.com | |
16. | Panasonic GX85 | 4.5/5 | + + | .. | 82/100 | 5/5 | 5/5 | Apr 2016 | 799 | amazon.com | |
17. | Sony RX100 IV | 4.5/5 | + + | .. | 85/100 | 4/5 | 4.5/5 | Jun 2015 | 999 | ebay.com | |
Note: (+ +) 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. Thus, a score needs to be put into the context of the launch date and the launch price 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? 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.
- Canon 250D vs Olympus E-M10 II
- Canon 300D vs Olympus E-M10 II
- Canon 350D vs Leica Q Typ 116
- Canon 500D vs Leica Q Typ 116
- Canon T100 vs Leica Q Typ 116
- Leica M-E Typ 240 vs Leica Q Typ 116
- Leica Q Typ 116 vs Panasonic G6
- Leica Q Typ 116 vs Panasonic GF2
- Leica TL2 vs Olympus E-M10 II
- Nikon D780 vs Olympus E-M10 II
- Olympus E-M10 II vs Panasonic GH2
- Olympus E-M10 II vs Sony A900
Specifications: Olympus E-M10 II vs Leica Q Typ 116
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 | Olympus E-M10 II | Leica Q Typ 116 |
---|---|---|
Camera Type | Mirrorless system camera | Fixed lens compact camera |
Camera Lens | Micro Four Thirds lenses | 28mm f/1.7 |
Launch Date | August 2015 | June 2015 |
Launch Price | USD 649 | USD 4,249 |
Sensor Specs | Olympus E-M10 II | Leica Q Typ 116 |
Sensor Technology | CMOS | CMOS |
Sensor Format | Four Thirds Sensor | Full Frame Sensor |
Sensor Size | 17.3 x 13.0 mm | 36.0 x 24.0 mm |
Sensor Area | 224.9 mm2 | 864 mm2 |
Sensor Diagonal | 21.6 mm | 43.3 mm |
Crop Factor | 2.0x | 1.0x |
Sensor Resolution | 15.9 Megapixels | 24 Megapixels |
Image Resolution | 4608 x 3456 pixels | 6000 x 4000 pixels |
Pixel Pitch | 3.76 μm | 6.00 μm |
Pixel Density | 7.08 MP/cm2 | 2.78 MP/cm2 |
Moiré control | no AA filter | Anti-Alias filter |
Movie Capability | 1080/60p Video | 1080/60p Video |
ISO Setting | 200 - 25,600 ISO | 100 - 50,000 ISO |
ISO Boost | 100 - 25,600 ISO | no Enhancement |
Image Processor | TruePic VII | Maestro II |
DXO Sensor Quality (score) | 73 | 85 |
DXO Color Depth (bits) | 23.1 | 24.3 |
DXO Dynamic Range (EV) | 12.5 | 12.7 |
DXO Low Light (ISO) | 842 | 2221 |
Screen Specs | Olympus E-M10 II | Leica Q Typ 116 |
Viewfinder Type | Electronic viewfinder | Electronic viewfinder |
Viewfinder Field of View | 100% | 100% |
Viewfinder Magnification | 0.62x | |
Viewfinder Resolution | 2360k dots | 3680k dots |
LCD Framing | Live View | Live View |
Rear LCD Size | 3.0inch | 3.0inch |
LCD Resolution | 1040k dots | 1040k dots |
LCD Attachment | Tilting screen | Fixed screen |
Touch Input | Touchscreen | Touchscreen |
Shooting Specs | Olympus E-M10 II | Leica Q Typ 116 |
Focus System | Contrast-detect AF | Contrast-detect AF |
Manual Focusing Aid | Focus Peaking | Focus Peaking |
Max Shutter Speed (mechanical) | 1/4000s | 1/2000s |
Continuous Shooting | 8 shutter flaps/s | 10 shutter flaps/s |
Electronic Shutter | up to 1/16000s | up to 1/16000s |
Time-Lapse Photography | Intervalometer built-in | Intervalometer built-in |
Image Stabilization | In-body stabilization | Lens-based stabilization |
Fill Flash | Built-in Flash | no On-Board Flash |
Storage Medium | SDXC cards | SDXC cards |
Single or Dual Card Slots | Single card slot | Single card slot |
UHS card support | UHS-I | UHS-I |
Connectivity Specs | Olympus E-M10 II | Leica Q Typ 116 |
External Flash | Hotshoe | Hotshoe |
USB Connector | USB 2.0 | USB 2.0 |
HDMI Port | micro HDMI | micro HDMI |
Wifi Support | Wifi built-in | Wifi built-in |
Near-Field Communication | no NFC | NFC built-in |
Body Specs | Olympus E-M10 II | Leica Q Typ 116 |
Battery Type | Olympus BLS-50 | Leica BP-DC12 |
Battery Life (CIPA) | 320 shots per charge | 300 shots per charge |
Body Dimensions |
120 x 83 x 47 mm (4.7 x 3.3 x 1.9 in) |
130 x 80 x 93 mm (5.1 x 3.1 x 3.7 in) |
Camera Weight | 390 g (13.8 oz) | 640 g (22.6 oz) |
Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.