Sony A7 II vs Leica M Typ 240

The Sony Alpha A7 II and the Leica M (Typ 240) are two enthusiast cameras that were revealed to the public, respectively, in November 2014 and September 2012. The A7 II is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera, while the M Typ 240 is a rangefinder-focusing mirrorless. Both cameras are equipped with a full frame sensor. The Sony has a resolution of 24 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

Sony A7 II		Leica M Typ 240
Mirrorless system camera		Rangefinder camera
Sony E mount lenses		Leica M mount lenses
24 MP – Full Frame sensor		23.7 MP – Full Frame sensor
1080/60p Video		1080/25p Video
ISO 100-25,600 (50 - 51,200)		ISO 200-6,400
Electronic viewfinder (2400k dots)		Optical viewfinder
3.0" LCD – 1230k dots		3.0" LCD – 920k dots
Tilting screen (no touchscreen)		Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)
5 shutter flaps per second		3 shutter flaps per second
In-body stabilization		no shake reduction
Weathersealed body		Weathersealed body
350 shots per battery charge		500 shots per battery charge
127 x 96 x 60 mm, 599 g		139 x 80 x 42 mm, 680 g

Check A7 II offers at
ebay.com
Check M Typ 240 offers at
ebay.com

Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Sony Alpha A7 II and the Leica M (Typ 240)? 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 Sony A7 II and the Leica M Typ 240 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 measures are rounded to the nearest millimeter.

The M Typ 240 can be obtained in two different colors (black, silver), while the A7 II is only available in black.

If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Leica M Typ 240 is notably smaller (9 percent) than the Sony A7 II. However, the M Typ 240 is markedly heavier (14 percent) than the A7 II. 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. Both cameras have similarly sized sensors, but DSLRs have a larger flange-to-focal plane distance than mirrorless cameras, which imposes contraints on the optical engineering process and generally leads to bigger and heavier lenses. You can compare the optics available for the two cameras in the Sony FE Lens Catalog (A7 II) and the Leica M Lens Catalog (M Typ 240).

Concerning battery life, the A7 II gets 350 shots out of its Sony NP-FW50 battery, while the M Typ 240 can take 500 images on a single charge of its Leica BP-SCL2 power pack. The power pack in the A7 II can be charged via the USB port, so that it is not always necessary to take the battery charger along when travelling.

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.		Sony A7 II	127 mm	96 mm	60 mm	599 g	350	Y	Nov 2014	1,999	ebay.com
2.		Leica M Typ 240	139 mm	80 mm	42 mm	680 g	500	Y	Sep 2012	6,950	ebay.com
3.		Leica M Typ 262	139 mm	80 mm	42 mm	680 g	400	Y	Nov 2015	5,195	ebay.com
4.		Leica M9	139 mm	80 mm	37 mm	585 g	550	n	Sep 2009	7,999	ebay.com
5.		Leica M10	139 mm	80 mm	39 mm	660 g	210	Y	Jan 2017	6,595	ebay.com
6.		Leica M10-P	139 mm	80 mm	39 mm	660 g	210	Y	Aug 2018	7,995	ebay.com
7.		Leica SL	147 mm	104 mm	39 mm	847 g	400	Y	Oct 2015	7,450	ebay.com
8.		Sony A7	127 mm	94 mm	48 mm	474 g	340	Y	Oct 2013	1,699	ebay.com
9.		Sony A7 III	127 mm	96 mm	74 mm	650 g	610	Y	Feb 2018	1,999	amazon.com
10.		Sony A7C	124 mm	71 mm	60 mm	509 g	740	Y	Sep 2020	1,799	amazon.com
11.		Sony A7R	127 mm	94 mm	48 mm	465 g	340	Y	Oct 2013	2,299	ebay.com
12.		Sony A7R II	127 mm	96 mm	60 mm	625 g	290	Y	Jun 2015	3,199	ebay.com
13.		Sony A7R III	127 mm	96 mm	74 mm	650 g	650	Y	Oct 2017	3,199	ebay.com
14.		Sony A7S II	127 mm	96 mm	60 mm	627 g	370	Y	Sep 2015	2,999	ebay.com
15.		Sony A9	127 mm	96 mm	63 mm	673 g	650	Y	Apr 2017	4,499	ebay.com
16.		Sony A9 II	129 mm	96 mm	76 mm	678 g	690	Y	Oct 2019	4,499	amazon.com
17.		Sony A77	143 mm	104 mm	81 mm	732 g	470	Y	Aug 2011	1,399	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

The price is, of course, an important factor in any camera decision. The listed launch prices provide an indication of the market segment that the manufacturer of the cameras have been targeting. The A7 II was launched at a markedly lower price (by 71 percent) than the M Typ 240, 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. All other things equal, a large sensor will have larger individual pixel-units that offer better low-light sensitivity, wider dynamic range, and richer color-depth than smaller pixels 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.

Both cameras under consideration feature a full frame sensor and have a format factor (sometimes also referred to as "crop factor") of 1.0. Within the spectrum of camera sensors, this places the review cameras among the large-sensor cameras that aim for top notch image quality. Both cameras have a native aspect ratio (sensor width to sensor height) of 3:2.

While the two cameras under review share the same sensor size, the A7 II offers a slightly higher resolution of 24 megapixels, compared with 23.7 MP of the M Typ 240. This megapixels advantage translates into a 0.8 percent gain in linear resolution. On the other hand, these sensor specs imply that the A7 II has a higher pixel density and a smaller size of the individual pixel (with a pixel pitch of 5.97μm versus 6.01μm for the M Typ 240). In this context, it should be noted, however, that the A7 II is much more recent (by 2 years and 2 months) than the M Typ 240, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that compensate for the smaller pixel size.

The A7 II has on-sensor phase detect pixels, which results in fast and reliable autofocus acquisition even during live view operation.

The Sony Alpha A7 II has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 25600, which can be extended to ISO 50-51200. The corresponding ISO settings for the Leica M (Typ 240) 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"). Of the two cameras under review, the A7 II has a notably higher overall DXO score than the M Typ 240 (overall score 6 points higher), which gives it an advantage in terms of imaging quality. This advantage is based on 0.9 bits higher color depth, 0.3 EV in additional dynamic range, and 0.4 stops in additional low light sensitivity. The adjacent table reports on the physical sensor characteristics and the outcomes of the DXO sensor quality tests for a sample of comparator-cameras.

Sensor Characteristics

		Camera Model	Sensor Class	Resolution (MP)	Horiz. Pixels	Vert. Pixels	Video Format	DXO Portrait	DXO Landscape	DXO Sports	DXO Overall
1.		Sony A7 II	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	1080/60p	24.9	13.6	2449	90
2.		Leica M Typ 240	Full Frame	23.7	5952	3976	1080/25p	24.0	13.3	1860	84
3.		Leica M Typ 262	Full Frame	23.7	5952	3976	none	24.8	13.7	2478	90
4.		Leica M9	Full Frame	18.1	5212	3472	none	22.5	11.7	884	69
5.		Leica M10	Full Frame	23.8	5952	3992	none	24.4	13.2	2133	86
6.		Leica M10-P	Full Frame	23.8	5952	3992	none	25.1	14.1	2739	93
7.		Leica SL	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	4K/30p	25.0	13.4	1821	88
8.		Sony A7	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	1080/60p	24.8	14.2	2248	90
9.		Sony A7 III	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	4K/30p	25.0	14.7	3730	96
10.		Sony A7C	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	4K/30p	25.0	14.7	3407	95
11.		Sony A7R	Full Frame	36.2	7360	4912	1080/60p	25.6	14.1	2746	95
12.		Sony A7R II	Full Frame	42.2	7952	5304	4K/30p	26.0	13.9	3434	98
13.		Sony A7R III	Full Frame	42.2	7952	5304	4K/30p	26.0	14.7	3523	100
14.		Sony A7S II	Full Frame	12.0	4240	2832	4K/30p	23.6	13.3	2993	85
15.		Sony A9	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	4K/30p	24.9	13.3	3517	92
16.		Sony A9 II	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	4K/30p	25.0	14.0	3434	93
17.		Sony A77	APS-C	24.0	6000	4000	1080/60p	24.0	13.2	801	78
Note: DXO values in italics represent estimates based on sensor size and age.

Many modern cameras cannot only take still pictures, but also record videos. Both cameras under consideration have a sensor with sufficiently fast read-out times for moving pictures, but the A7 II provides a higher frame rate than the M Typ 240. It can shoot video footage at 1080/60p, while the Leica is limited to 1080/25p.

Feature comparison

Beyond body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. For example, the A7 II has an electronic viewfinder (2400k dots), while the M Typ 240 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 A7 II has a higher magnification than the one of the M Typ 240 (0.71x vs 0.68x), so that the size of the image transmitted appears closer to the size seen with the naked human eye. The table below summarizes some of the other core capabilities of the Sony A7 II and Leica M Typ 240 in connection with corresponding information for a sample of similar 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.		Sony A7 II	2400	n	3.0 / 1230	tilting	n	1/8000s	5.0/s	n	Y
2.		Leica M Typ 240	optical	n	3.0 / 920	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	n	n
3.		Leica M Typ 262	optical	n	3.0 / 921	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	n	n
4.		Leica M9	optical	n	2.5 / 230	fixed	n	1/4000s	2.0/s	n	n
5.		Leica M10	optical	n	3.0 / 1037	fixed	n	1/4000s	5.0/s	n	n
6.		Leica M10-P	optical	n	3.0 / 1037	fixed	Y	1/4000s	5.0/s	n	n
7.		Leica SL	4400	Y	3.0 / 1040	fixed	Y	1/8000s	11.0/s	n	n
8.		Sony A7	2400	n	3.0 / 1230	tilting	n	1/8000s	5.0/s	n	n
9.		Sony A7 III	2359	n	3.0 / 922	tilting	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
10.		Sony A7C	2360	n	3.0 / 922	swivel	Y	1/4000s	10.0/s	n	Y
11.		Sony A7R	2400	n	3.0 / 1230	tilting	n	1/8000s	4.0/s	n	n
12.		Sony A7R II	2400	n	3.0 / 1229	tilting	n	1/8000s	5.0/s	n	Y
13.		Sony A7R III	3686	n	3.0 / 1440	tilting	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
14.		Sony A7S II	2400	n	3.0 / 1229	tilting	n	1/8000s	5.0/s	n	Y
15.		Sony A9	3686	n	3.0 / 1440	tilting	Y	1/8000s	20.0/s	n	Y
16.		Sony A9 II	3686	n	3.0 / 1440	tilting	Y	1/8000s	20.0/s	n	Y
17.		Sony A77	2359	Y	3.0 / 921	full-flex	n	1/8000s	12.0/s	Y	Y
Note: *) Information refers to the mechanical shutter, unless the camera only has an electronic one.

The A7 II writes its imaging data to SDXC or Memory Stick PRO Duo cards, while the M Typ 240 uses 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 Sony Alpha A7 II and Leica M (Typ 240) 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.		Sony A7 II	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
2.		Leica M Typ 240	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
3.		Leica M Typ 262	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
4.		Leica M9	Y	- / -	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
5.		Leica M10	Y	- / -	-	-	-	-	Y	-	-
6.		Leica M10-P	Y	- / -	-	-	-	-	Y	-	-
7.		Leica SL	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	full	3.0	Y	-	-
8.		Sony A7	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
9.		Sony A7 III	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.1	Y	Y	Y
10.		Sony A7C	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.2	Y	Y	Y
11.		Sony A7R	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
12.		Sony A7R II	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
13.		Sony A7R III	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.1	Y	Y	Y
14.		Sony A7S II	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
15.		Sony A9	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	2.0	Y	Y	Y
16.		Sony A9 II	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.1	Y	Y	Y
17.		Sony A77	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-

It is notable that the A7 II has a microphone port, which is missing on the M Typ 240. Such an external microphone input can help to substantially improve the quality of audio recordings when a good external microphone is used.

Both the A7 II and the M Typ 240 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The M Typ 240 was replaced by the Leica M Typ 262, while the A7 II was followed by the Sony A7 III. Further information on the features and operation of the A7 II and M Typ 240 can be found, respectively, in the Sony A7 II Manual (free pdf) or the online Leica M Typ 240 Manual.

Review summary

So how do things add up? Is there a clear favorite between the Sony A7 II and the Leica M Typ 240? Which camera is better? The listing below highlights the relative strengths of the two models.

Reasons to prefer the Sony Alpha A7 II:

• Better image quality: Scores markedly higher (6 points) in the DXO overall assessment.
• Better low-light sensitivity: Requires less light for good images (0.4 stops ISO advantage).
• Better video: Provides higher movie framerates (1080/60p versus 1080/25p).
• Better live-view autofocus: Features on-sensor phase-detection for more confident autofocus.
• Better sound: Can connect to an external microphone for higher quality sound recording.
• Better sound control: Has a headphone port that enables audio monitoring while recording.
• More framing info: Has an electronic viewfinder that displays shooting data.
• Larger viewfinder image: Features a viewfinder with a higher magnification (0.71x vs 0.68x).
• More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1230k vs 920k dots).
• More flexible LCD: Has a tilting screen for odd-angle shots in landscape orientation.
• Faster shutter: Has higher mechanical shutter speed (1/8000s vs 1/4000s) to freeze action.
• Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (5 vs 3 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
• Less heavy: Is lighter (by 81g or 12 percent) and hence easier to carry around.
• Easier travel charging: Can be conveniently charged via its USB port.
• 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.
• Easier device pairing: Supports NFC for fast wireless image transfer over short distances.
• More affordable: Was introduced into a lower priced category (71 percent cheaper at launch).
• More modern: Reflects 2 years and 2 months of technical progress since the M Typ 240 launch.

Advantages of the Leica M (Typ 240):

• Brighter framing: Features an optical viewfinder for clear, lag-free composition.
• Longer lasting: Gets more shots (500 versus 350) out of a single battery charge.
• More prestigious: Has the Leica luxury appeal, which ensures a high resale value.
• More heavily discounted: Has been around for much longer (launched in September 2012).

If the number of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the A7 II is the clear winner of the match-up (19 : 4 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.

In any case, while the comparison of technical specifications can provide a useful overview of the capabilities of different cameras, it remains partial and cannot reveal, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance when actually working with the A7 II or the M Typ 240. 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 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.		Sony A7 II	5/5	+	4/5	82/100	4.5/5	5/5	Nov 2014	1,999	ebay.com
2.		Leica M Typ 240	4/5	..	..	..	4/5	..	Sep 2012	6,950	ebay.com
3.		Leica M Typ 262	..	..	..	..	..	..	Nov 2015	5,195	ebay.com
4.		Leica M9	..	..	..	..	4.5/5	..	Sep 2009	7,999	ebay.com
5.		Leica M10	4.5/5	..	..	..	4/5	4.5/5	Jan 2017	6,595	ebay.com
6.		Leica M10-P	..	..	3/5	..	..	4/5	Aug 2018	7,995	ebay.com
7.		Leica SL	4/5	..	4/5	84/100	4.5/5	4/5	Oct 2015	7,450	ebay.com
8.		Sony A7	5/5	+ +	..	80/100	5/5	5/5	Oct 2013	1,699	ebay.com
9.		Sony A7 III	..	+ +	4.5/5	89/100	5/5	5/5	Feb 2018	1,999	amazon.com
10.		Sony A7C	3.5/5	..	3.5/5	86/100	4/5	4/5	Sep 2020	1,799	amazon.com
11.		Sony A7R	5/5	+ +	..	82/100	4.5/5	5/5	Oct 2013	2,299	ebay.com
12.		Sony A7R II	5/5	+ +	5/5	90/100	5/5	5/5	Jun 2015	3,199	ebay.com
13.		Sony A7R III	..	+ +	4/5	90/100	4.5/5	5/5	Oct 2017	3,199	ebay.com
14.		Sony A7S II	5/5	+	..	..	4.5/5	5/5	Sep 2015	2,999	ebay.com
15.		Sony A9	5/5	+ +	4.8/5	89/100	5/5	5/5	Apr 2017	4,499	ebay.com
16.		Sony A9 II	..	..	5/5	90/100	5/5	5/5	Oct 2019	4,499	amazon.com
17.		Sony A77	5/5	91/100	..	81/100	..	5/5	Aug 2011	1,399	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. Hence, a score should always be seen in the context of the camera's market launch date and its price, 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.

Check A7 II offers at
ebay.com
Check M Typ 240 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 use the search menu below. Alternatively, you can follow any of the listed hyperlinks for comparisons that others found interesting.

~

Check A7 II offers at
ebay.com
Check M Typ 240 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.