Olympus PEN-F vs Leica M Typ 262
The Olympus PEN-F and the Leica M (Typ 262) are two enthusiast cameras that were officially introduced, respectively, in January 2016 and November 2015. The PEN-F is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera, while the M Typ 262 is a rangefinder-focusing mirrorless. The cameras are based on a Four Thirds (PEN-F) and a full frame (M Typ 262) sensor. The Olympus has a resolution of 20.2 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.
Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Olympus PEN-F 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
An illustration of the physical size and weight of the Olympus PEN-F and the Leica M Typ 262 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.
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 notably larger (24 percent) than the Olympus PEN-F. Moreover, the M Typ 262 is substantially heavier (59 percent) than the PEN-F. It is noteworthy in this context that the M Typ 262 is splash and dust-proof, while the PEN-F does not feature any corresponding weather-sealing.
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 (PEN-F) and the Leica M Lens Catalog (M Typ 262).
Concerning battery life, the PEN-F gets 330 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 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.
# | Camera Model |
Camera Width |
Camera Height |
Camera Depth |
Camera Weight |
Battery Life |
Weather Sealing |
Camera Launch |
Launch Price (USD) |
Street Price |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Olympus PEN-F | 125 mm | 72 mm | 37 mm | 427 g | 330 | n | Jan 2016 | 1,199 | 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-E Typ 240 | 139 mm | 80 mm | 42 mm | 680 g | 500 | Y | Jun 2019 | 3,999 | ebay.com | |
5. | Leica M10 | 139 mm | 80 mm | 39 mm | 660 g | 210 | Y | Jan 2017 | 6,595 | ebay.com | |
6. | Leica Q Typ 116 | 130 mm | 80 mm | 93 mm | 640 g | 300 | n | Jun 2015 | 4,249 | ebay.com | |
7. | Leica M Typ 240 | 139 mm | 80 mm | 42 mm | 680 g | 500 | Y | Sep 2012 | 6,950 | 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 E-M5 II | 124 mm | 85 mm | 45 mm | 469 g | 310 | Y | Feb 2015 | 1,099 | 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-PL7 | 115 mm | 67 mm | 38 mm | 357 g | 350 | n | Aug 2014 | 599 | ebay.com | |
13. | Olympus E-M1 | 130 mm | 94 mm | 63 mm | 497 g | 350 | Y | Sep 2013 | 1,399 | ebay.com | |
14. | Olympus E-P5 | 122 mm | 69 mm | 37 mm | 420 g | 330 | n | May 2013 | 999 | ebay.com | |
15. | Olympus E-M5 | 122 mm | 89 mm | 43 mm | 425 g | 360 | Y | Feb 2012 | 1,299 | ebay.com | |
16. | Panasonic GX8 | 133 mm | 78 mm | 63 mm | 487 g | 330 | Y | Jul 2015 | 1,199 | ebay.com | |
17. | Panasonic GX7 | 123 mm | 71 mm | 55 mm | 402 g | 350 | n | Aug 2013 | 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 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 PEN-F was launched at a markedly lower price (by 77 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 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 tend to be associated with larger, more expensive camera bodies and lenses.
Of the two cameras under consideration, the Olympus PEN-F 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 PEN-F 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 PEN-F (20.2MP), but the M Typ 262 nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 6.01μm versus 3.34μm for the PEN-F) 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 neither of the two cameras has an anti-alias filter installed, so they are able to capture all the detail the sensor resolves.
The resolution advantage of the Leica 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 PEN-F are 25.9 x 19.4 inches or 65.8 x 49.4 cm for good quality, 20.7 x 15.6 inches or 52.7 x 39.5 cm for very good quality, and 17.3 x 13 inches or 43.9 x 32.9 cm for excellent quality prints.
Unlike the M Typ 262, the PEN-F 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 PEN-F has a native sensitivity range from ISO 80 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 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"). The adjacent table reports on the physical sensor characteristics and the outcomes of the DXO sensor quality tests for a sample of comparator-cameras.
# | Camera Model |
Sensor Class |
Resolution (MP) |
Horiz. Pixels |
Vert. Pixels |
Video Format |
DXO Portrait |
DXO Landscape |
DXO Sports |
DXO Overall |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Olympus PEN-F | Four Thirds | 20.2 | 5184 | 3888 | 1080/60p | 23.1 | 12.4 | 894 | 74 | |
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-E Typ 240 | Full Frame | 23.7 | 5952 | 3976 | 1080/25p | 25.2 | 14.2 | 2821 | 94 | |
5. | Leica M10 | Full Frame | 23.8 | 5952 | 3992 | none | 24.4 | 13.2 | 2133 | 86 | |
6. | Leica Q Typ 116 | Full Frame | 24.0 | 6000 | 4000 | 1080/60p | 24.3 | 12.7 | 2221 | 85 | |
7. | Leica M Typ 240 | Full Frame | 23.7 | 5952 | 3976 | 1080/25p | 24.0 | 13.3 | 1860 | 84 | |
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 E-M5 II | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/60p | 23.0 | 12.5 | 842 | 73 | |
11. | Olympus E-M10 II | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/60p | 23.1 | 12.5 | 842 | 73 | |
12. | Olympus E-PL7 | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/30p | 22.7 | 12.4 | 873 | 72 | |
13. | Olympus E-M1 | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/30p | 23.0 | 12.7 | 757 | 73 | |
14. | Olympus E-P5 | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/30p | 22.8 | 12.4 | 895 | 72 | |
15. | Olympus E-M5 | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/60i | 22.8 | 12.3 | 826 | 71 | |
16. | Panasonic GX8 | Four Thirds | 20.2 | 5184 | 3888 | 4K/30p | 23.5 | 12.6 | 806 | 75 | |
17. | Panasonic GX7 | Four Thirds | 15.8 | 4592 | 3448 | 1080/60p | 22.6 | 12.2 | 718 | 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. The PEN-F indeed provides movie recording capabilities, while the M Typ 262 does not. The highest resolution format that the PEN-F can use is 1080/60p.
Feature comparison
Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. For example, the PEN-F has an electronic viewfinder (2360k 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 PEN-F (0.68x vs 0.62x), 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 PEN-F, the Leica M Typ 262, 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 PEN-F | 2360 | n | 3.0 / 1037 | swivel | Y | 1/8000s | 10.0/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-E Typ 240 | optical | n | 3.0 / 920 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | n | n | |
5. | Leica M10 | optical | n | 3.0 / 1037 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 5.0/s | n | n | |
6. | Leica Q Typ 116 | 3680 | n | 3.0 / 1040 | fixed | Y | 1/2000s | 10.0/s | n | Y | |
7. | Leica M Typ 240 | optical | n | 3.0 / 920 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | n | n | |
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 E-M5 II | 2360 | n | 3.0 / 1037 | swivel | Y | 1/8000s | 10.0/s | n | Y | |
11. | Olympus E-M10 II | 2360 | n | 3.0 / 1040 | 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-M1 | 2360 | n | 3.0 / 1037 | tilting | Y | 1/8000s | 10.0/s | n | Y | |
14. | Olympus E-P5 | optional | n | 3.0 / 1037 | tilting | Y | 1/8000s | 9.0/s | Y | Y | |
15. | Olympus E-M5 | 1440 | n | 3.0 / 610 | tilting | Y | 1/4000s | 9.0/s | n | Y | |
16. | Panasonic GX8 | 2360 | n | 3.0 / 1040 | swivel | Y | 1/8000s | 10.0/s | n | Y | |
17. | Panasonic GX7 | 2760 | n | 3.0 / 1040 | tilting | Y | 1/8000s | 5.0/s | Y | 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 PEN-F 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.
The PEN-F has an articulated LCD that can be turned to be front-facing. This characteristic will be appreciated by vloggers and photographers who are interested in snapping selfies. In contrast, the M Typ 262 does not have a selfie-screen.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 PEN-F 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 Olympus PEN-F has 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 PEN-F and the M Typ 262 write their files to SDXC cards. The PEN-F supports UHS-II cards (Ultra High Speed data transfer of up to 312 MB/s), while the M Typ 262 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 PEN-F and Leica M (Typ 262) 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 PEN-F | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
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-E Typ 240 | Y | mono / - | - | - | - | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
5. | Leica M10 | Y | - / - | - | - | - | - | Y | - | - | |
6. | Leica Q Typ 116 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | Y | - | |
7. | Leica M Typ 240 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | - | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
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 E-M5 II | Y | stereo / mono | Y | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
11. | Olympus E-M10 II | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
12. | Olympus E-PL7 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
13. | Olympus E-M1 | Y | stereo / mono | Y | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
14. | Olympus E-P5 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
15. | Olympus E-M5 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
16. | Panasonic GX8 | Y | stereo / mono | Y | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | Y | - | |
17. | Panasonic GX7 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | Y | Y | - |
It is notable that the PEN-F offers wifi support, while the M Typ 262 does not. Wifi can be a very convenient means to transfer image data to an off-camera location.
Both the PEN-F and the M Typ 262 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The M Typ 262 was replaced by the Leica M10, while the PEN-F does not have a direct successor. Further information on the features and operation of the PEN-F and M Typ 262 can be found, respectively, in the Olympus PEN-F Manual (free pdf) or the online Leica M Typ 262 Manual.
Review summary
So what conclusions can be drawn? Is there a clear favorite between the Olympus PEN-F and the Leica M Typ 262? Which camera is better? The listing below highlights the relative strengths of the two models.
Arguments in favor of the Olympus PEN-F:
- High quality composites: Can combine several shots after pixel-shifting its sensor.
- Broader imaging potential: Can record not only still images but also 1080/60p movies.
- More framing info: Has an electronic viewfinder that displays shooting data.
- More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1037k vs 921k dots).
- More flexible LCD: Has a swivel screen for odd-angle shots in portrait or landscape orientation.
- Fewer buttons to press: Is equipped with a touch-sensitive rear screen to facilitate handling.
- 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 1/4000s) to freeze action.
- Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (10 vs 3 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
- Less disturbing: Has an electronic shutter option for completely silent shooting.
- Easier time-lapse photography: Has an intervalometer built-in for low frequency shooting.
- More compact: Is smaller (125x72mm vs 139x80mm) and thus needs less room in the bag.
- Less heavy: Is lighter (by 253g or 37 percent) and hence easier to carry around.
- Sharper images: Has hand-shake reducing image stabilization built-in.
- Easier file upload: Has wifi built in for automatic backup or image transfer to the web.
- Faster buffer clearing: Supports a more advanced SD data transfer standard (UHS-II vs UHS-I).
- More affordable: Was introduced into a lower priced category (77 percent cheaper at launch).
Reasons to prefer the Leica M (Typ 262):
- More detail: Has more megapixels (23.7 vs 20.2MP), which boosts linear resolution by 10%.
- 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.
- Brighter framing: Features an optical viewfinder for clear, lag-free composition.
- Larger viewfinder image: Features a viewfinder with a higher magnification (0.68x vs 0.62x).
- Longer lasting: Gets more shots (400 versus 330) out of a single battery charge.
- Better sealing: Is splash and dust sealed for shooting in inclement weather conditions.
- More prestigious: Has the Leica luxury appeal, which ensures a high resale value.
If the count of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a measure, the PEN-F is the clear winner of the match-up (17 : 10 points). However, the pertinence of the various camera strengths will differ across photographers, so that you might want to weigh individual camera traits according to their importance for your own imaging needs before making a camera decision. 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.
In any case, while the specs-based evaluation of cameras can be instructive in revealing their potential as photographic tools, it says little about, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance of the PEN-F and the M Typ 262 in practical situations. 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 hands-on reviews by experts 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.
# | Camera Model |
AP score |
CL score |
DCW score |
DPR score |
EPZ score |
PB score |
Camera Launch |
Launch Price (USD) |
Street Price |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Olympus PEN-F | .. | .. | 4/5 | 82/100 | 4.5/5 | 5/5 | Jan 2016 | 1,199 | 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-E Typ 240 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | Jun 2019 | 3,999 | ebay.com | |
5. | Leica M10 | 4.5/5 | .. | .. | .. | 4/5 | 4.5/5 | Jan 2017 | 6,595 | ebay.com | |
6. | Leica Q Typ 116 | 5/5 | .. | .. | 80/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jun 2015 | 4,249 | ebay.com | |
7. | Leica M Typ 240 | 4/5 | .. | .. | .. | 4/5 | .. | Sep 2012 | 6,950 | 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 E-M5 II | 5/5 | + + | 4.5/5 | 81/100 | 5/5 | 5/5 | Feb 2015 | 1,099 | ebay.com | |
11. | Olympus E-M10 II | 4.5/5 | + + | .. | 80/100 | 5/5 | 5/5 | Aug 2015 | 649 | ebay.com | |
12. | Olympus E-PL7 | 4/5 | + | .. | .. | 5/5 | 4/5 | Aug 2014 | 599 | ebay.com | |
13. | Olympus E-M1 | 5/5 | + + | .. | 84/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Sep 2013 | 1,399 | ebay.com | |
14. | Olympus E-P5 | 5/5 | + + | .. | 78/100 | 4.5/5 | 5/5 | May 2013 | 999 | ebay.com | |
15. | Olympus E-M5 | 4/5 | + + | .. | 80/100 | 4.5/5 | 5/5 | Feb 2012 | 1,299 | ebay.com | |
16. | Panasonic GX8 | 5/5 | + | .. | 82/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jul 2015 | 1,199 | ebay.com | |
17. | Panasonic GX7 | 4/5 | + | .. | 79/100 | 5/5 | 5/5 | Aug 2013 | 999 | ebay.com | |
Note: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available. |
Care should be taken when interpreting the review scores above, 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. Also, kindly note that some of the listed sites have over time developped their review approaches and their reporting style.
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. As an alternative, you can also directly jump to any one of the listed comparisons that were previously generated by the CAM-parator tool.
- Canon 100D vs Leica M Typ 262
- Canon 10D vs Olympus PEN-F
- Canon 2000D vs Leica M Typ 262
- Canon 7D vs Leica M Typ 262
- Canon D30 vs Leica M Typ 262
- Canon D30 vs Olympus PEN-F
- Canon G7 X Mark III vs Olympus PEN-F
- Fujifilm X-A2 vs Leica M Typ 262
- Fujifilm XF10 vs Olympus PEN-F
- Leica M Typ 262 vs Nikon D60
- Olympus PEN-F vs Panasonic G9
- Olympus PEN-F vs Sony RX1
Specifications: Olympus PEN-F vs Leica M Typ 262
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 PEN-F | Leica M Typ 262 |
---|---|---|
Camera Type | Mirrorless system camera | Rangefinder camera |
Camera Lens | Micro Four Thirds lenses | Leica M mount lenses |
Launch Date | January 2016 | November 2015 |
Launch Price | USD 1,199 | USD 5,195 |
Sensor Specs | Olympus PEN-F | Leica M Typ 262 |
Sensor Technology | CMOS | CMOS |
Sensor Format | Four Thirds Sensor | Full Frame Sensor |
Sensor Size | 17.3 x 13.0 mm | 35.8 x 23.9 mm |
Sensor Area | 224.9 mm2 | 855.62 mm2 |
Sensor Diagonal | 21.6 mm | 43 mm |
Crop Factor | 2.0x | 1.0x |
Sensor Resolution | 20.2 Megapixels | 23.7 Megapixels |
Image Resolution | 5184 x 3888 pixels | 5952 x 3976 pixels |
Pixel Pitch | 3.34 μm | 6.01 μm |
Pixel Density | 8.96 MP/cm2 | 2.77 MP/cm2 |
Moiré control | no AA filter | no AA filter |
Movie Capability | 1080/60p Video | no Video |
ISO Setting | 80 - 25,600 ISO | 200 - 6,400 ISO |
ISO Boost | no Enhancement | 100 - 6,400 ISO |
Image Processor | TruePic VII | Maestro |
DXO Sensor Quality (score) | 74 | .. |
DXO Color Depth (bits) | 23.1 | .. |
DXO Dynamic Range (EV) | 12.4 | .. |
DXO Low Light (ISO) | 894 | .. |
Screen Specs | Olympus PEN-F | Leica M Typ 262 |
Viewfinder Type | Electronic viewfinder | Optical viewfinder |
Viewfinder Field of View | 100% | 100% |
Viewfinder Magnification | 0.62x | 0.68x |
Viewfinder Resolution | 2360k dots | |
LCD Framing | Live View | |
Rear LCD Size | 3.0inch | 3.0inch |
LCD Resolution | 1037k dots | 921k dots |
LCD Attachment | Swivel screen | Fixed screen |
Touch Input | Touchscreen | no Touchscreen |
Shooting Specs | Olympus PEN-F | Leica M Typ 262 |
Focus System | Contrast-detect AF | Manual Focus |
Manual Focusing Aid | Focus Peaking | Focus Peaking |
Max Shutter Speed (mechanical) | 1/8000s | 1/4000s |
Continuous Shooting | 10 shutter flaps/s | 3 shutter flaps/s |
Electronic Shutter | up to 1/16000s | no E-Shutter |
Time-Lapse Photography | Intervalometer built-in | no Intervalometer |
Image Stabilization | In-body stabilization | no handshake reduction |
Fill Flash | no On-Board 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-II | UHS-I |
Connectivity Specs | Olympus PEN-F | Leica M Typ 262 |
External Flash | Hotshoe | Hotshoe |
USB Connector | USB 2.0 | USB 2.0 |
HDMI Port | micro HDMI | no HDMI |
Wifi Support | Wifi built-in | no Wifi |
Body Specs | Olympus PEN-F | Leica M Typ 262 |
Environmental Sealing | not weather sealed | Weathersealed body |
Battery Type | Olympus BLN-1 | Leica BP-SCL2 |
Battery Life (CIPA) | 330 shots per charge | 400 shots per charge |
Body Dimensions |
125 x 72 x 37 mm (4.9 x 2.8 x 1.5 in) |
139 x 80 x 42 mm (5.5 x 3.1 x 1.7 in) |
Camera Weight | 427 g (15.1 oz) | 680 g (24.0 oz) |
Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.