Olympus E-M5 vs Leica M Typ 262

The Olympus OM-D E-M5 and the Leica M (Typ 262) are two enthusiast cameras that were officially introduced, respectively, in February 2012 and November 2015. The E-M5 is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera, while the M Typ 262 is a rangefinder-focusing mirrorless. The cameras are based on a Four Thirds (E-M5) and a full frame (M Typ 262) sensor. The Olympus has a resolution of 15.9 megapixels, whereas the Leica provides 23.7 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		Leica M Typ 262
Mirrorless system camera		Rangefinder camera
Micro Four Thirds lenses		Leica M mount lenses
15.9 MP – Four Thirds sensor		23.7 MP – Full Frame sensor
1080/60i Video		no Video
ISO 200-25,600		ISO 200-6,400
Electronic viewfinder (1440k dots)		Optical viewfinder
3.0" LCD – 610k dots		3.0" LCD – 921k dots
Tilting touchscreen		Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)
9 shutter flaps per second		3 shutter flaps per second
In-body stabilization		no shake reduction
Weathersealed body		Weathersealed body
360 shots per battery charge		400 shots per battery charge
122 x 89 x 43 mm, 425 g		139 x 80 x 42 mm, 680 g

Check E-M5 offers at
ebay.com
Check M Typ 262 offers at
ebay.com

Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Olympus OM-D E-M5 and the Leica M (Typ 262)? 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 and the Leica M Typ 262 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 measures 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 M Typ 262 is somewhat larger (2 percent) than the Olympus E-M5. Moreover, the M Typ 262 is substantially heavier (60 percent) than the E-M5. 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 since they do not consider the interchangeable lenses that both of these cameras require. A larger imaging sensor will tend to go along with bigger and heavier lenses, although exceptions exist. You can compare the optics available for the two cameras in the Micro Four Thirds Lens Catalog (E-M5) and the Leica M Lens Catalog (M Typ 262).

Concerning battery life, the E-M5 gets 360 shots out of its Olympus BLN-1 battery, while the M Typ 262 can take 400 images on a single charge of its Leica BP-SCL2 power pack.

The following table provides a synthesis of the main physical specifications of the two cameras and other similar ones. 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.

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	122 mm	89 mm	43 mm	425 g	360	Y	Feb 2012	1,299	ebay.com
2.		Leica M Typ 262	139 mm	80 mm	42 mm	680 g	400	Y	Nov 2015	5,195	ebay.com
3.		Canon 1D X Mark II	158 mm	168 mm	83 mm	1530 g	1210	Y	Feb 2016	5,999	ebay.com
4.		Leica M Typ 240	139 mm	80 mm	42 mm	680 g	500	Y	Sep 2012	6,950	ebay.com
5.		Leica M-E Typ 240	139 mm	80 mm	42 mm	680 g	500	Y	Jun 2019	3,999	ebay.com
6.		Leica M10	139 mm	80 mm	39 mm	660 g	210	Y	Jan 2017	6,595	ebay.com
7.		Leica Q Typ 116	130 mm	80 mm	93 mm	640 g	300	n	Jun 2015	4,249	ebay.com
8.		Olympus E-M1	130 mm	94 mm	63 mm	497 g	350	Y	Sep 2013	1,399	ebay.com
9.		Olympus E-M5 II	124 mm	85 mm	45 mm	469 g	310	Y	Feb 2015	1,099	ebay.com
10.		Olympus E-P5	122 mm	69 mm	37 mm	420 g	330	n	May 2013	999	ebay.com
11.		Olympus E-PL5	111 mm	64 mm	38 mm	325 g	360	n	Sep 2012	599	ebay.com
12.		Olympus E-PL7	115 mm	67 mm	38 mm	357 g	350	n	Aug 2014	599	ebay.com
13.		Olympus E-PM2	110 mm	64 mm	34 mm	269 g	360	n	Sep 2012	499	ebay.com
14.		Olympus PEN-F	125 mm	72 mm	37 mm	427 g	330	n	Jan 2016	1,199	ebay.com
15.		Panasonic GH3	133 mm	93 mm	82 mm	550 g	540	Y	Sep 2012	1,299	ebay.com
16.		Panasonic GX7	123 mm	71 mm	55 mm	402 g	350	n	Aug 2013	999	ebay.com
17.		Panasonic GX8	133 mm	78 mm	63 mm	487 g	330	Y	Jul 2015	1,199	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 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. The E-M5 was launched at a markedly lower price (by 75 percent) than the M Typ 262, 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

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. Furthermore, a large sensor camera will give the photographer more possibilities to use shallow depth-of-field in order to isolate a subject from the background. On the downside, larger sensors tend to be more expensive and lead to bigger and heavier cameras and lenses.

Of the two cameras under consideration, the Olympus E-M5 features a Four Thirds sensor and the Leica M Typ 262 a full frame sensor. The sensor area in the M Typ 262 is 280 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 has a native 4:3 aspect ratio, while the one in the M Typ 262 offers a 3:2 aspect.

With 23.7MP, the M Typ 262 offers a higher resolution than the E-M5 (15.9MP), but the M Typ 262 nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 6.01μm versus 3.76μm for the E-M5) due to its larger sensor. Moreover, the M Typ 262 is a much more recent model (by 3 years and 9 months) than the E-M5, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that further enhance the light gathering capacity of its pixel-units. Coming back to sensor resolution, it should be mentioned that the M Typ 262 has no anti-alias filter installed, so that it can capture all the detail its sensor resolves.

The resolution advantage of the Leica M Typ 262 implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the M Typ 262 for good quality output (200 dots per inch) amounts to 29.8 x 19.9 inches or 75.6 x 50.5 cm, for very good quality (250 dpi) 23.8 x 15.9 inches or 60.5 x 40.4 cm, and for excellent quality (300 dpi) 19.8 x 13.3 inches or 50.4 x 33.7 cm. The corresponding values for the Olympus E-M5 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-M5 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 200 to ISO 25600. The corresponding ISO settings for the Leica M (Typ 262) are ISO 200 to ISO 6400, with the possibility to increase the ISO range to 100-6400.

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 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 table below summarizes the physical sensor characteristics and sensor quality findings and compares them across a set of similar cameras.

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	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/60i	22.8	12.3	826	71
2.		Leica M Typ 262	Full Frame	23.7	5952	3976	none	24.8	13.7	2478	90
3.		Canon 1D X Mark II	Full Frame	20.0	5472	3648	4K/60p	24.1	13.5	3207	88
4.		Leica M Typ 240	Full Frame	23.7	5952	3976	1080/25p	24.0	13.3	1860	84
5.		Leica M-E Typ 240	Full Frame	23.7	5952	3976	1080/25p	25.2	14.2	2821	94
6.		Leica M10	Full Frame	23.8	5952	3992	none	24.4	13.2	2133	86
7.		Leica Q Typ 116	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	1080/60p	24.3	12.7	2221	85
8.		Olympus E-M1	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	23.0	12.7	757	73
9.		Olympus E-M5 II	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/60p	23.0	12.5	842	73
10.		Olympus E-P5	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	22.8	12.4	895	72
11.		Olympus E-PL5	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	22.8	12.3	889	72
12.		Olympus E-PL7	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	22.7	12.4	873	72
13.		Olympus E-PM2	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	22.7	12.2	932	72
14.		Olympus PEN-F	Four Thirds	20.2	5184	3888	1080/60p	23.1	12.4	894	74
15.		Panasonic GH3	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/60p	22.7	12.4	812	71
16.		Panasonic GX7	Four Thirds	15.8	4592	3448	1080/60p	22.6	12.2	718	70
17.		Panasonic GX8	Four Thirds	20.2	5184	3888	4K/30p	23.5	12.6	806	75
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 E-M5 indeed provides movie recording capabilities, while the M Typ 262 does not. The highest resolution format that the E-M5 can use is 1080/60i.

Feature comparison

Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a variety of features. For example, the E-M5 has an electronic viewfinder (1440k dots), while the M Typ 262 has an optical one. Both systems have their advantages, with the electronic viewfinder making it possible to project supplementary shooting information into the framing view, whereas the optical viewfinder offers lag-free viewing and a very clear framing image. The viewfinders of both cameras offer the same field of view (100%), but the viewfinder of the M Typ 262 has a higher magnification than the one of the E-M5 (0.68x vs 0.58x), so that the size of the image transmitted appears closer to the size seen with the naked human eye. The following table reports on some other key feature differences and similarities of the Olympus E-M5, the Leica M Typ 262, and comparable cameras.

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	1440	n	3.0 / 610	tilting	Y	1/4000s	9.0/s	n	Y
2.		Leica M Typ 262	optical	n	3.0 / 921	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	n	n
3.		Canon 1D X Mark II	optical	Y	3.2 / 1620	fixed	Y	1/8000s	16.0/s	n	n
4.		Leica M Typ 240	optical	n	3.0 / 920	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	n	n
5.		Leica M-E Typ 240	optical	n	3.0 / 920	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	n	n
6.		Leica M10	optical	n	3.0 / 1037	fixed	n	1/4000s	5.0/s	n	n
7.		Leica Q Typ 116	3680	n	3.0 / 1040	fixed	Y	1/2000s	10.0/s	n	Y
8.		Olympus E-M1	2360	n	3.0 / 1037	tilting	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
9.		Olympus E-M5 II	2360	n	3.0 / 1037	swivel	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
10.		Olympus E-P5	optional	n	3.0 / 1037	tilting	Y	1/8000s	9.0/s	Y	Y
11.		Olympus E-PL5	optional	n	3.0 / 460	tilting	Y	1/4000s	8.0/s	n	Y
12.		Olympus E-PL7	optional	n	3.0 / 1037	tilting	Y	1/4000s	8.0/s	n	Y
13.		Olympus E-PM2	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	Y	1/4000s	8.0/s	n	Y
14.		Olympus PEN-F	2360	n	3.0 / 1037	swivel	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
15.		Panasonic GH3	1746	n	3.0 / 614	swivel	Y	1/4000s	6.0/s	Y	n
16.		Panasonic GX7	2760	n	3.0 / 1040	tilting	Y	1/8000s	5.0/s	Y	Y
17.		Panasonic GX8	2360	n	3.0 / 1040	swivel	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
Note: *) Information refers to the mechanical shutter, unless the camera only has an electronic one.

One differentiating feature between the two cameras concerns the touch sensitivity of the rear screen. The E-M5 has a touchscreen, while the M Typ 262 has a conventional panel. Touch control can be particularly helpful, for example, for setting the focus point.

Concerning the storage of imaging data, both the E-M5 and the M Typ 262 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-M5 and Leica M (Typ 262) 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	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
2.		Leica M Typ 262	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
3.		Canon 1D X Mark II	Y	mono / mono	Y	Y	mini	3.0	-	-	-
4.		Leica M Typ 240	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
5.		Leica M-E Typ 240	Y	mono / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
6.		Leica M10	Y	- / -	-	-	-	-	Y	-	-
7.		Leica Q Typ 116	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
8.		Olympus E-M1	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
9.		Olympus E-M5 II	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
10.		Olympus E-P5	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
11.		Olympus E-PL5	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
12.		Olympus E-PL7	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
13.		Olympus E-PM2	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
14.		Olympus PEN-F	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
15.		Panasonic GH3	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	mini	2.0	Y	-	-
16.		Panasonic GX7	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	Y	Y	-
17.		Panasonic GX8	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-

Both the E-M5 and the M Typ 262 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The E-M5 was replaced by the Olympus E-M5 II, while the M Typ 262 was followed by the Leica M10. Further information on the features and operation of the E-M5 and M Typ 262 can be found, respectively, in the Olympus E-M5 Manual (free pdf) or the online Leica M Typ 262 Manual.

Review summary

So what is the bottom line? Is the Olympus E-M5 better than the Leica M Typ 262 or vice versa? Below is a summary of the relative strengths of each of the two contestants.

Arguments in favor of the Olympus OM-D E-M5:

• Better moiré control: Has an anti-alias filter to avoid artificial patterns to appear in images.
• Broader imaging potential: Can record not only still images but also 1080/60i movies.
• More framing info: Has an electronic viewfinder that displays shooting data.
• More flexible LCD: Has a tilting screen for odd-angle shots in landscape orientation.
• Fewer buttons to press: Is equipped with a touch-sensitive rear screen to facilitate handling.
• Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (9 vs 3 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
• Less heavy: Is lighter (by 255g or 37 percent) and hence easier to carry around.
• Sharper images: Has hand-shake reducing image stabilization built-in.
• More affordable: Was introduced into a lower priced category (75 percent cheaper at launch).
• More heavily discounted: Has been available for much longer (launched in February 2012).

Advantages of the Leica M (Typ 262):

• More detail: Has more megapixels (23.7 vs 15.9MP), which boosts linear resolution by 24%.
• Maximized detail: Lacks an anti-alias filter to exploit the sensor's full resolution potential.
• Better image quality: Is equipped with a larger and more technologically advanced sensor.
• Richer colors: The sensor size advantage translates into images with better, more accurate colors.
• More dynamic range: Larger sensor captures a wider spectrum of light and dark details.
• Better low-light sensitivity: Larger sensor produces good images even in poorly lit environments.
• Brighter framing: Features an optical viewfinder for clear, lag-free composition.
• Larger viewfinder image: Features a viewfinder with a higher magnification (0.68x vs 0.58x).
• More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (921k vs 610k dots).
• Longer lasting: Gets more shots (400 versus 360) out of a single battery charge.
• More prestigious: Has the Leica luxury appeal, which ensures a high resale value.
• More modern: Reflects 3 years and 9 months of technical progress since the E-M5 launch.

If the number of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the M Typ 262 emerges as the winner of the match-up (12 : 10 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 wildlife photographer will view the differences between cameras in a way that diverges from the perspective of a family photog, and a person interested in architecture has distinct needs from a sports shooter. Hence, the decision which camera is best and worth buying is often a very personal one.

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 E-M5 or the M Typ 262 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 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	4/5	+ +	..	80/100	4.5/5	5/5	Feb 2012	1,299	ebay.com
2.		Leica M Typ 262	..	..	..	..	..	..	Nov 2015	5,195	ebay.com
3.		Canon 1D X Mark II	..	..	4.5/5	89/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Feb 2016	5,999	ebay.com
4.		Leica M Typ 240	4/5	..	..	..	4/5	..	Sep 2012	6,950	ebay.com
5.		Leica M-E Typ 240	..	..	..	..	..	..	Jun 2019	3,999	ebay.com
6.		Leica M10	4.5/5	..	..	..	4/5	4.5/5	Jan 2017	6,595	ebay.com
7.		Leica Q Typ 116	5/5	..	..	80/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2015	4,249	ebay.com
8.		Olympus E-M1	5/5	+ +	..	84/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2013	1,399	ebay.com
9.		Olympus E-M5 II	5/5	+ +	4.5/5	81/100	5/5	5/5	Feb 2015	1,099	ebay.com
10.		Olympus E-P5	5/5	+ +	..	78/100	4.5/5	5/5	May 2013	999	ebay.com
11.		Olympus E-PL5	3/5	+ +	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2012	599	ebay.com
12.		Olympus E-PL7	4/5	+	..	..	5/5	4/5	Aug 2014	599	ebay.com
13.		Olympus E-PM2	3/5	..	..	77/100	5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2012	499	ebay.com
14.		Olympus PEN-F	..	..	4/5	82/100	4.5/5	5/5	Jan 2016	1,199	ebay.com
15.		Panasonic GH3	5/5	+ +	..	79/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2012	1,299	ebay.com
16.		Panasonic GX7	4/5	+	..	79/100	5/5	5/5	Aug 2013	999	ebay.com
17.		Panasonic GX8	5/5	+	..	82/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jul 2015	1,199	ebay.com
Note: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available.

The review scores listed above should be treated with care, though. The ratings were established in reference to similarly priced cameras that were available in the market at the time of the review. 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 offers at
ebay.com
Check M Typ 262 offers at
ebay.com

Other camera comparisons

Did this review help to inform your camera decision process? If you would like to see a different side-by-side camera review, just make a corresponding selection in the search boxes below. As an alternative, you can also directly jump to any one of the listed comparisons that were previously generated by the CAM-parator tool.

~

Check E-M5 offers at
ebay.com
Check M Typ 262 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.