Olympus E-M5 II vs Leica Q Typ 116

The Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark II and the Leica Q (Typ 116) are two enthusiast cameras that were announced, respectively, in February 2015 and June 2015. The E-M5 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-M5 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.

Headline Specifications

Olympus E-M5 II		Leica Q Typ 116
Mirrorless system camera		Fixed lens compact camera
Micro Four Thirds lenses		28mm f/1.7
15.9 MP – Four Thirds sensor		24 MP – Full Frame sensor
1080/60p Video		1080/60p Video
ISO 200-25,600		ISO 100-50,000
Electronic viewfinder (2360k dots)		Electronic viewfinder (3680k dots)
3.0" LCD – 1037k dots		3.0" LCD – 1040k dots
Swivel touchscreen		Fixed touchscreen
10 shutter flaps per second		10 shutter flaps per second
In-body stabilization		Lens-based stabilization
Weathersealed body		not weather sealed
310 shots per battery charge		300 shots per battery charge
124 x 85 x 45 mm, 469 g		130 x 80 x 93 mm, 640 g

Check E-M5 II offers at
ebay.com
Check Q Typ 116 offers at
ebay.com

Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Olympus OM-D E-M5 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

The physical size and weight of the Olympus E-M5 II and the Leica Q Typ 116 are illustrated in the side-by-side display below. The two cameras are presented according to their relative size. Three successive views from the front, the top, and the rear are shown. All width, height and depth dimensions are rounded to the nearest millimeter.

Both cameras are available in two different colors (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 smaller (1 percent) than the Olympus E-M5 II. It is worth mentioning in this context that the E-M5 II is splash and dust resistant, while the Q Typ 116 does not feature any corresponding weather-sealing.

The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete and possibly misleading, as the Q Typ 116 has a lens built in, whereas the E-M5 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-M5 II and their specifications in the Micro Four Thirds Lens Catalog.

Concerning battery life, the E-M5 II gets 310 shots out of its Olympus BLN-1 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. In case you want to display and compare another camera duo, you can use the CAM-parator app to select your camera combination among a large number of options.

Body Specifications

		Camera Model	Camera Width	Camera Height	Camera Depth	Camera Weight	Battery Life	Weather Sealing	Camera Launch	Launch Price (USD)	Street Price
1.		Olympus E-M5 II	124 mm	85 mm	45 mm	469 g	310	Y	Feb 2015	1,099	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 G7 X	103 mm	60 mm	40 mm	304 g	210	n	Sep 2014	699	ebay.com
4.		Canon T6i	132 mm	101 mm	78 mm	555 g	440	n	Feb 2015	749	ebay.com
5.		Canon T6s	132 mm	101 mm	78 mm	565 g	440	n	Feb 2015	649	ebay.com
6.		Leica Q2	130 mm	80 mm	92 mm	718 g	370	Y	Mar 2019	4,995	amazon.com
7.		Olympus E-M1	130 mm	94 mm	63 mm	497 g	350	Y	Sep 2013	1,399	ebay.com
8.		Olympus E-M5	122 mm	89 mm	43 mm	425 g	360	Y	Feb 2012	1,299	ebay.com
9.		Olympus E-M5 III	125 mm	85 mm	50 mm	414 g	310	Y	Oct 2019	1,199	ebay.com
10.		Olympus E-M10	119 mm	82 mm	46 mm	396 g	320	n	Jan 2014	699	ebay.com
11.		Olympus E-M10 II	120 mm	83 mm	47 mm	390 g	320	n	Aug 2015	649	ebay.com
12.		Olympus E-P5	122 mm	69 mm	37 mm	420 g	330	n	May 2013	999	ebay.com
13.		Olympus PEN-F	125 mm	72 mm	37 mm	427 g	330	n	Jan 2016	1,199	ebay.com
14.		Panasonic G85	128 mm	89 mm	74 mm	505 g	330	Y	Sep 2016	899	ebay.com
15.		Panasonic GX8	133 mm	78 mm	63 mm	487 g	330	Y	Jul 2015	1,199	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.
Convert to Imperial

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. Usually, retail prices stay at first close to the launch price, but after several months, discounts become available. Later in the product cycle and, in particular, when the replacement model is about to appear, further discounting and stock clearance sales often push the camera price considerably down.

Sensor comparison

The size of the sensor inside a digital camera is one of the key determinants of image quality. A large sensor will generally have larger individual pixels that offer better low-light sensitivity, provide wider dynamic range, and have richer color-depth than smaller pixels 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-M5 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-M5 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-M5 II (15.9MP), but the Q Typ 116 nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 6.00μm versus 3.76μm for the E-M5 II) due to its larger sensor. Moreover, the Q Typ 116 is a somewhat more recent model (by 4 months) than the E-M5 II, and its sensor might have benefitted from technological advances during this time that further enhance the light gathering capacity of its pixel-units.

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-M5 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.

Unlike the Q Typ 116, the E-M5 II has the capacity to capture high quality composite images (40MP) 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 Olympus OM-D E-M5 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.

For many cameras, data on sensor performance has been reported by DXO Mark. 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 consideration, the Q Typ 116 offers substantially better image quality than the E-M5 II (overall score 12 points higher). The advantage is based on 1.3 bits higher color depth, 0.2 EV in additional dynamic range, and 1.4 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.		Olympus E-M5 II	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/60p	23.0	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 G7 X	1-inch	20.0	5472	3648	1080/60p	23.0	12.7	556	71
4.		Canon T6i	APS-C	24.0	6000	4000	1080/30p	22.7	12.0	919	71
5.		Canon T6s	APS-C	24.0	6000	4000	1080/30p	22.6	12.0	915	70
6.		Leica Q2	Full Frame	46.7	8368	5584	4K/30p	26.4	13.5	2491	96
7.		Olympus E-M1	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	23.0	12.7	757	73
8.		Olympus E-M5	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/60i	22.8	12.3	826	71
9.		Olympus E-M5 III	Four Thirds	20.2	5184	3888	4K/30p	23.3	13.1	1324	76
10.		Olympus E-M10	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	22.8	12.3	884	72
11.		Olympus E-M10 II	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/60p	23.1	12.5	842	73
12.		Olympus E-P5	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	22.8	12.4	895	72
13.		Olympus PEN-F	Four Thirds	20.2	5184	3888	1080/60p	23.1	12.4	894	74
14.		Panasonic G85	Four Thirds	15.8	4592	3448	4K/30p	22.8	12.5	656	71
15.		Panasonic GX8	Four Thirds	20.2	5184	3888	4K/30p	23.5	12.6	806	75
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 can also record movies. Both cameras under consideration are equipped with sensors that have a sufficiently high read-out speed for moving images, 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-M5 II (3680k vs 2360k dots). The adjacent table lists some of the other core features of the Olympus E-M5 II and Leica Q Typ 116 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.		Olympus E-M5 II	2360	n	3.0 / 1037	swivel	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
2.		Leica Q Typ 116	3680	n	3.0 / 1040	fixed	Y	1/2000s	10.0/s	n	Y
3.		Canon G7 X	none	n	3.0 / 1040	tilting	Y	1/2000s	6.5/s	Y	Y
4.		Canon T6i	optical	n	3.0 / 1040	swivel	Y	1/4000s	5.0/s	Y	n
5.		Canon T6s	optical	Y	3.0 / 1040	swivel	Y	1/4000s	5.0/s	Y	n
6.		Leica Q2	3680	n	3.0 / 1040	fixed	Y	1/2000s	10.0/s	n	Y
7.		Olympus E-M1	2360	n	3.0 / 1037	tilting	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
8.		Olympus E-M5	1440	n	3.0 / 610	tilting	Y	1/4000s	9.0/s	n	Y
9.		Olympus E-M5 III	2360	n	3.0 / 1040	swivel	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
10.		Olympus E-M10	1440	n	3.0 / 1037	tilting	Y	1/4000s	8.0/s	Y	Y
11.		Olympus E-M10 II	2360	n	3.0 / 1040	tilting	Y	1/4000s	8.0/s	Y	Y
12.		Olympus E-P5	optional	n	3.0 / 1037	tilting	Y	1/8000s	9.0/s	Y	Y
13.		Olympus PEN-F	2360	n	3.0 / 1037	swivel	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
14.		Panasonic G85	2360	n	3.0 / 1040	swivel	Y	1/4000s	9.0/s	Y	Y
15.		Panasonic GX8	2360	n	3.0 / 1040	swivel	Y	1/8000s	10.0/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.

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-M5 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-M5 II and the Q Typ 116 write their files to SDXC cards. The E-M5 II supports UHS-II cards (Ultra High Speed data transfer of up to 312 MB/s), while the Q Typ 116 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 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark II and Leica Q (Typ 116) 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.		Olympus E-M5 II	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
2.		Leica Q Typ 116	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
3.		Canon G7 X	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
4.		Canon T6i	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	mini	2.0	Y	Y	-
5.		Canon T6s	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	mini	2.0	Y	Y	-
6.		Leica Q2	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	-	-	Y	-	Y
7.		Olympus E-M1	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
8.		Olympus E-M5	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
9.		Olympus E-M5 III	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	Y
10.		Olympus E-M10	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
11.		Olympus E-M10 II	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
12.		Olympus E-P5	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
13.		Olympus PEN-F	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
14.		Panasonic G85	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
15.		Panasonic GX8	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
16.		Panasonic GX85	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
17.		Sony RX100 IV	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-

It is notable that the E-M5 II has a microphone port, which is missing on the Q Typ 116. Such an external microphone input can help to substantially improve the quality of audio recordings when a good external microphone is used.

Studio photographers will appreciate that the Olympus E-M5 II (unlike the Q Typ 116) features a PC Sync socket, so that professional strobe lights can be controlled by the camera.

Both the E-M5 II and the Q Typ 116 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The E-M5 II was replaced by the Olympus E-M5 III, while the Q Typ 116 was followed by the Leica Q2. Further information on the features and operation of the E-M5 II and Q Typ 116 can be found, respectively, in the Olympus E-M5 II Manual (free pdf) or the online Leica Q Typ 116 Manual.

Review summary

So what conclusions can be drawn? Is the Olympus E-M5 II better than the Leica Q Typ 116 or vice versa? A synthesis of the relative strong points of each of the models is listed below.

Advantages of the Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark II:

• High quality composites: Can combine several shots after pixel-shifting its sensor.
• Better sound: Can connect to an external microphone for higher quality sound 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.
• More flexible: Accepts interchangeable lenses, so that lens characteristics can be altered.
• Better sealing: Is weather sealed to enable shooting in dusty or wet environments.
• Better studio light control: Has a PC Sync socket to connect to professional strobe lights.
• Faster buffer clearing: Supports a more advanced SD data transfer standard (UHS-II vs UHS-I).
• More heavily discounted: Has been on the market for longer (launched in February 2015).

Arguments in favor of the Leica Q (Typ 116):

• More detail: Has more megapixels (24 vs 15.9MP), which boosts linear resolution by 25%.
• Better image quality: Scores substantially higher (12 points) in the DXO overall evaluation.
• Richer colors: Generates noticeably more natural colors (1.3 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).
• Ready to shoot: Has an integrated lens, whereas the E-M5 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.
• More modern: Was introduced somewhat (4 months) more recently.

If the count of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a measure, the E-M5 II comes out slightly ahead of the Q Typ 116 (10 : 9 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 Olympus E-M5 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 incomplete and does no justice, for example, to the way the E-M5 II or the Q Typ 116 perform in practice. 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.		Olympus E-M5 II	5/5	+ +	4.5/5	81/100	5/5	5/5	Feb 2015	1,099	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 G7 X	4/5	+ +	..	77/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2014	699	ebay.com
4.		Canon T6i	5/5	..	..	75/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Feb 2015	749	ebay.com
5.		Canon T6s	5/5	+	..	77/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Feb 2015	649	ebay.com
6.		Leica Q2	..	..	4.5/5	84/100	4.5/5	4/5	Mar 2019	4,995	amazon.com
7.		Olympus E-M1	5/5	+ +	..	84/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2013	1,399	ebay.com
8.		Olympus E-M5	4/5	+ +	..	80/100	4.5/5	5/5	Feb 2012	1,299	ebay.com
9.		Olympus E-M5 III	5/5	+	5/5	82/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Oct 2019	1,199	ebay.com
10.		Olympus E-M10	4/5	..	..	80/100	5/5	5/5	Jan 2014	699	ebay.com
11.		Olympus E-M10 II	4.5/5	+ +	..	80/100	5/5	5/5	Aug 2015	649	ebay.com
12.		Olympus E-P5	5/5	+ +	..	78/100	4.5/5	5/5	May 2013	999	ebay.com
13.		Olympus PEN-F	..	..	4/5	82/100	4.5/5	5/5	Jan 2016	1,199	ebay.com
14.		Panasonic G85	..	+ +	..	84/100	5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2016	899	ebay.com
15.		Panasonic GX8	5/5	+	..	82/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jul 2015	1,199	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. A score, therefore, has to be seen in close connection to the price and market introduction time of the camera, and comparing ratings of very distinct cameras or ones that are far apart in terms of their release date have little meaning. Also, please note that some of the review sites have changed their methodology and reporting over time.

Check E-M5 II offers at
ebay.com
Check Q Typ 116 offers at
ebay.com

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 make your choice using the following search menu. Alternatively, you can follow any of the listed hyperlinks for comparisons that others found interesting.

~

Check E-M5 II offers at
ebay.com
Check Q Typ 116 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.