Leica M Typ 240 vs Olympus PEN E-P1: An In-Depth Camera Comparison for the Discerning Photographer

Selecting the right camera - especially when choosing across brands as distinct as Leica and Olympus - can often feel like navigating a jungle gym blindfolded. I've personally tested thousands of cameras over my 15+ years in the field, from beginner compacts to high-end professional systems, and today I’m diving into two rather different offerings: the Leica M Typ 240 and the Olympus PEN E-P1. These cameras mark very different eras and philosophies in mirrorless photography but remain highly regarded in their niches.

Together, we'll peel back their specs and real-world performance across various photography genres, all while keeping an eye on practical usability, image quality, and value. Along the way, I’ll share unique insights gleaned from hands-on testing - insights only an experienced reviewer can offer.

First Impressions: Size, Build, and Handling

Physically and ergonomically, both cameras aim to blend compactness with a classic rangefinder aesthetic, but their scale and feel couldn’t be more different.

The Leica M Typ 240 is sturdily built with a 139 x 80 x 42 mm body weighing 680 grams. It sports a full-frame sensor, which accounts for much of its heft, and its iconic all-metal rangefinder-style chassis exudes the brand’s hallmark craftsmanship. Handling is a tactile experience; its top-deck shutter dial and minimalistic controls encourage deliberate shooting.

Contrast that with the Olympus PEN E-P1’s noticeably smaller footprint - 121 x 70 x 36 mm and just 355 grams. This camera occupies the entry-level mirrorless segment with a more plastic-and-metal hybrid body that's still comfortable in hand, especially for street or travel photography. The Micro Four Thirds sensor shrinks the required internal housing, which helps keep weight low.

Looking down at their control layouts, we see Leica’s mature simplicity: dedicated dials for aperture, shutter speed (with no shutter priority mode on the M Typ 240), and ISO, catering mostly to photographers who prefer manual control and focusing via the optical rangefinder.

Olympus, on the other hand, offers a more typical compact mirrorless setup with exposure compensation, shutter priority, aperture priority, and manual exposure modes. The E-P1’s controls are more conventional and user-friendly to amateurs or those upgrading from compact cameras.

In everyday shooting, the Leica’s rangefinder approach is rewarding for those invested in manual focusing and crafting images thoughtfully - but it’s not for rushing action or autofocus-reliant users. The Olympus caters better to all-around utility and ease of use but requires more patience in low light autofocus situations.

Sensor and Image Quality: Full Frame vs Micro Four Thirds

When it comes to the heart of image creation - the sensor size and quality - these two cameras stand at opposite poles.

The Leica M Typ 240 sports a 24-megapixel full-frame CMOS sensor (36 x 24 mm), delivering 5952 x 3976 pixel resolution. Its sensor scores an impressive 84 DxOmark overall with excellent color depth (24 bits), dynamic range (13.3 EV), and low light ISO sensitivity, supporting native ISOs from 100 to 6400. This large sensor size enables shallower depth of field, more natural bokeh, and superior high ISO performance. The presence of an anti-aliasing filter slightly tempers its sharpness but avoids moiré patterns - a wise balance Leica chose.

By contrast, the Olympus E-P1 uses a smaller Four Thirds CMOS sensor measuring 17.3 x 13 mm with a 12-megapixel resolution (4032 x 3024 pixels). Its DxOmark score of 55 reflects its age and smaller size, with 21.4 bits color depth and 10.4 EV dynamic range, notably lagging behind the Leica. While its max native ISO extends to 6400 as well, effective low light usability drops sharply beyond ISO 800 in real-world conditions.

In practice, Leica’s sensor offers noticeably richer colors and cleaner shadows, crucial for portrait and landscape photographers seeking maximum image fidelity. Olympus’s sensor is still capable for web use and casual prints but can’t compete in dynamic range or noise control.

Viewing and Focusing: Rangefinder vs Contrast Detection

A major dividing feature is the Leica M240’s rangefinder optical viewfinder versus no viewfinder on the Olympus PEN E-P1 (live view only).

Leica’s optical rangefinder provides 1x magnification and 100% coverage, enabling a direct optical experience with manual focusing via coupled rangefinder patch - a tactile, analog feel that many photographers prize for precision focusing and composition. However, it lacks autofocus, face or eye detection, or any electronic aids. For manual focus devotees, nothing beats this direct mechanical feel, but it requires skill and patience.

Olympus forgoes any viewfinder, relying exclusively on a 3.0-inch fixed TFT LCD with 230K resolution for framing and focusing via live view. Its LCD incorporates anti-reflective coatings, helping outdoors visibility but lacks touchscreen or higher resolution advantages. Focusing happens through 11 contrast-detection points with face detection and basic continuous AF - but struggles in low light and fast-moving subjects.

So while Leica’s setup demands expertise and suits deliberate shooting styles like street, portraits, or landscapes, Olympus’s autofocus convenience aligns with casual users and event shooters who prefer not fussing with manual focus.

Autofocus and Shooting Performance

Regarding autofocus, the Leica M Typ 240 does not have any autofocus system - focus is manual via the legendary rangefinder mechanism. This may sound archaic in the age of lightning-fast AF systems, but for users accustomed to Leica’s rangefinder heritage, it’s an expected trade. For fast-paced genres like sports or wildlife, this is impractical. It does offer a slow continuous shooting rate of 3 frames per second.

Olympus’s E-P1 offers contrast-detection autofocus with 11 focus points, capable of single, continuous, selective, and multi-area AF modes. It includes face detection but lacks advanced tracking or eye detection. Continuous shooting also maxes out at 3 fps and shutter speeds from 60 to 1/4000s, with no electronic shutter. Not groundbreaking, but sufficient for candid street or casual action shots.

In practical terms, if autofocus speed and accuracy are critical (say wildlife or sports), neither camera excels by modern standards, but Olympus’s autofocus is at least functional. Leica’s manual focus approach requires skill and time, limiting spontaneous shooting.

Build and Weather Resistance: Longevity in the Field

The Leica M Typ 240 has modest environmental sealing to resist dust and moisture, giving professionals more confidence shooting outdoors in variable conditions. Its rugged metal chassis and mechanical controls are robustly built for long-term professional use. The lack of image stabilization means lens choice and shooting technique become critical for sharp images.

Olympus E-P1 lacks environmental sealing or ruggedness claims, appearing more consumer-grade in build. While it feels solid for its class, it doesn’t invite abuse or harsh environments. That makes it less suitable for outdoor adventurers but an excellent lightweight partner for day-to-day travel or street photography.

Lens Ecosystem and Compatibility

Leica’s M mount boasts 59 native lenses ranging from vintage manual classics to new high-performance optics. Its long, storied history in rangefinder lenses means users can invest in superior glass with excellent bokeh and sharpness, supporting portrait and landscape distinctions.

Olympus’s Micro Four Thirds mount has an enormous lens catalog (107 lenses), including a wide spectrum of focal lengths and price points, from ultra-compact primes to robust telephotos and macro lenses. Being a standardized mount across Panasonic and Olympus unlocks strong system versatility. Additionally, the system benefits from sensor-based image stabilization, easing handheld shooting.

Battery Life and Storage

Leica’s M Typ 240 manages approximately 500 shots per charge - a solid performance for its era and sensor size. It uses SD/SDHC/SDXC cards in a single slot with USB 2.0 for data transfer (slow by modern standards).

Olympus offers about 300 shots per charge, respectable for a small mirrorless, but less than Leica. Storage is similar with a single SD/SDHC slot and USB 2.0. Neither camera supports modern wireless, Bluetooth, or GPS without optional accessories.

Video Capabilities

Neither camera leads in video. Leica M Typ 240 records Full HD (1920x1080) at 24 or 25 fps in Motion JPEG format, with no microphone or headphone ports - limiting serious audio control. Olympus E-P1 maxes out at 720p HD video at 30 fps, also Motion JPEG.

Videographers will find both offerings behind current industry standards, but Leica’s higher resolution and full frame sensor grant slightly better overall video quality.

Real-World Performance Across Photography Genres

Here’s where the rubber meets the road - how do these cameras actually perform in distinct photography disciplines?

Portrait Photography

Leica’s M Typ 240 excels for portraits with its full-frame sensor, rich color depth, and ability to render shallow depth of field with smooth, natural bokeh. The optical rangefinder aids careful, deliberate framing, though lack of autofocus and eye detection means slower focusing workflow. Skin tones appear luscious and nuanced here.

The Olympus PEN E-P1’s smaller sensor and contrast-detect autofocus handle portraits adequately but generate less background separation and less creamy bokeh. Still, its autofocus and white balance bracketing assist casual photographers or beginners fine-tuning images.

Landscape Photography

The Leica again shines with 13.3 EV dynamic range, capturing expansive tonal gradations from highlights to shadows - a huge advantage for landscapes. Its build and weather sealing encourage shooting beyond fair weather. Manual focusing and optical viewfinder suit photographers who enjoy composing slowly and precisely.

The Olympus E-P1’s 10.4 EV dynamic range and smaller resolution limit its landscapes, with more clipped skies and less detail retention. No weather sealing reduces confidence for strenuous outdoor use. However, the large lens selection allows wide-angle and macro options.

Wildlife Photography

Neither camera was built for wildlife shooting. Leica’s lack of autofocus and slow frame rate severely hamper tracking fast animals. Olympus’s contrast-detect AF and 3 fps burst rate offer marginally better chances but remain behind modern hybrid phase detect systems. For telephoto work, Olympus’s lens selection is richer, but image quality at focal lengths tends to degrade because of sensor size.

Sports Photography

Both cameras falter here. The Leica’s rangefinder mandates manual focus, making fast sports action nearly impossible. Olympus’s limited autofocus and burst rates reduce keeper chances. Sports photographers should consider more specialized cameras.

Street Photography

The Leica M Typ 240’s quiet leaf shutter, compact-ish size, and manual focus make it a classic street shooter’s tool. Its discreet design and fast prime lenses enable subtle composition. The Olympus is more compact and lighter yet relies heavily on LCD framing, which is less discreet.

Macro Photography

Neither camera specializes in macro but Olympus’s Micro Four Thirds ecosystem offers numerous affordable macro lenses with autofocus and image stabilization. Leica users can access dedicated M-mount macro lenses but must focus manually. Still, Leica’s sensor quality yields excellent details in macro if technique compensates for no stabilization.

Night and Astro Photography

Leica’s low light ISO rating (1860) outpaces Olympus (536), and full-frame sensor excels at star and night shots with less noise. Manual focus and long exposure capabilities align well with astro needs, provided users have sturdy support tripods. Olympus users face much higher noise and limited dynamic range.

Video Work

As mentioned, video features are minimal on both; Leica offers Full HD at 24/25 fps, while Olympus maxes 720p at 30 fps. Neither has stabilization suited for video, and audio is limited. For serious video, other brands win outright.

Travel Photography

Olympus’s smaller size, lightweight body, and versatile lens lineup make it a more practical travel companion. The Leica system’s bulk and manual focusing limit agility, although image quality from Leica is unbeatable if one values quality over weight.

Professional Workflows

Leica’s support for lossless compressed RAW, robust build, and optional GPS bolster professional use. The camera’s file quality meets rigorous print or commercial needs. Olympus’s 12MP RAW files and lack of weather sealing position it more as a hobbyist or entry-level system.

Summary of Performance Scores and Genre Breakdown

Bringing all that into perspective:

Leica M Typ 240 scores high in image quality, reliability, and select genres like portrait and landscape. Olympus E-P1 scores lower globally, with strengths in portability and ecosystem breadth.

Conclusion: Which Camera Should You Buy?

Choosing between these two ultimately boils down to your photography goals, budget, and workflow preferences.

Buy the Leica M Typ 240 if you:

• Prioritize ultimate image quality with full-frame sensor benefits.
• Prefer manual focus, rangefinder heritage, and classic Leica craftsmanship.
• Shoot portraits, landscapes, or deliberate street photography.
• Need a durable body with weather sealing for professional or serious use.
• Can invest significantly upfront (price ~$5479 USD).

Buy the Olympus PEN E-P1 if you:

• Want a compact, lightweight, and affordable mirrorless system (~$181 USD).
• Value autofocus convenience and a versatile lens ecosystem.
• Shoot casual portraits, travel, or street photos on the go.
• Prefer a budget system with reasonable image quality but know it’s not for professional demands.
• Are content with Four Thirds sensor limitations.

Final Thoughts

While the Leica M Typ 240 stands as a modern classic, blending cutting-edge sensor tech with a timeless rangefinder form, the Olympus E-P1 offers entry-level mirrorless ease around a smaller sensor. Each camera has a clear personality: Leica invites craftsmanship and meticulous image making, Olympus aims for everyday portability and flexibility.

If your photography demands absolute image fidelity and you cherish manual control, Leica remains compelling. For lightweight versatility at a modest price, Olympus still holds charm.

Either way, this camera comparison showcases how sensor size, lens options, and user intentions frame not only images but entire photographic experiences.

Leica M Typ 240 screen back Olympus E P1 front Olympus E P1 screen back

Happy shooting - wherever your journey leads!

Images used in this article are for illustrative comparison of design, specs, and sample results from the Leica M Typ 240 and Olympus PEN E-P1.