Leica X2 Compact Camera

Already own this?

This item is in your gearlist!

Key Features

  • 16.2 MP APS-C CMOS sensor
  • 36mm F2.8 equivalent lens
  • Up to 5 FPS
  • ISO 100-12500
  • Fixed 2.7" LCD with 230,000 dots
  • Optional electronic viewfinder
  • Built-in pop-up flash or optional hot shoe flash
  • SD/SDHC card slot

Product Description

The Leica X2 is a 16MP APS-C compact camera with a fixed 36mm equivalent F2.8 lens. The camera is an updated version of its X1, with the biggest changes being the use of a 16.2MP CMOS sensor and the addition of an accessory socket for adding an optional 1.44M dot 'Viso-Flex' electronic viewfinder. An add-on handgrip is also available. Leica says it has improved the autofocus system (one of our biggest criticisms of the X1), but has retained the rather low-resolution 230,000 dot rear LCD. The optional Viso-Flex is visually near-identical to the Olympus VF-2 viewfinder, which uses a full 1.44m dot Epson LCD panel, rather than the Panasonic LVF2, which uses a field-sequential display (updating one color after another), to offer the equivalent of 1.44m dots.


Body type
Body type Large sensor compact
Max resolution 4928 x 3264
Other resolutions 4944 x 3272, 4288 x 2856, 3264 x 2160, 2144 x1424, 1632 x 1080
Image ratio w:h 3:2, 16:9
Effective pixels 16.2 megapixels
Sensor photo detectors 16.5 megapixels
Sensor size APS-C (23.6 x 15.8 mm)
Sensor type CMOS
ISO Auto, 100, 200, 400, 800, 1600, 3200, 6400, 12500
White balance presets 5
Custom white balance Yes (2)
Image stabilization No
Uncompressed format RAW
JPEG quality levels Fine, Standard
Optics & Focus
Focal length (equiv.) 36 mm
Optical zoom 1×
  • Contrast Detect (sensor)
  • Single
  • Face Detection
  • Live View
Digital zoom No
Manual focus Yes
Normal focus range 30 cm (11.81)
Macro focus range 30 cm (11.81)
Number of focus points 11
Lens mount Unknown
Screen / viewfinder
Articulated LCD Fixed
Screen size 2.7
Screen dots 230,000
Touch screen No
Live view No
Viewfinder type Electronic (optional)
Photography features
Maximum aperture F2.8
Minimum shutter speed 30 sec
Maximum shutter speed 1/2000 sec
Aperture priority Yes
Shutter priority Yes
Manual exposure mode Yes
Subject / scene modes No
Built-in flash Yes (Pop-up)
External flash Yes (with Leica SF 24D, Leica SF 58 flash units)
Flash modes Auto, On, Off, Red-Eye, Front Curtain, Rear Curtain, Slow sync, Studio
Continuous drive Yes (3 or 5 fps)
Self-timer Yes (2 or 12 sec)
Metering modes
  • Multi
  • Center-weighted
  • Spot
Exposure compensation ±3 (at 1/3 EV steps)
Videography features
Microphone None
Speaker None
Storage types SD/SDHC card
Storage included 110 MB
USB USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/sec)
Remote control No
Environmentally sealed No
Battery Battery Pack
Battery description Lithium-Ion rechargeable battery & charger
Battery Life (CIPA) 450
Weight (inc. batteries) 345 g (0.76 lb / 12.17 oz)
Dimensions 124 x 69 x 52 mm (4.88 x 2.72 x 2.05)
Other features
Orientation sensor Yes
GPS None


User Reviews

  • canadaone, Feb 23, 2013 GMT:
    well worth the price.

    The near flawless design reflects its german ancestry. Simple, solid well executed body with quick access to the important (read serious) features.The easily accessible controls with the exception of the thumb wheel are a joy to use. Fitted with the optional matching finder and hand grip the X2 makes for a fine dedicated urban camera. The improved focusing speed is more than adequate in most circumstances and the provision for manual focus makes up under special circumstances. Optical ...

    Continue Reading

  • utku67, Feb 15, 2013 GMT:
    One of a kind artistic design but not exactly very responsive and not very consistent performance

    This is truly one of a kind artistic design and apart from using it even only looking at it is a pleasure to the eye. But when it comes to functionality I will not be able to say the same. But the menus are very intelligently designed in a very minimalist but in a very efficient way. I think this menu design should set an example to other manufacturers as well. The image quality, loyalty of colors to the original (real) situation and sharpness is examplary. The in-camera "Black and white" ...

    Continue Reading

  • SergeyMS, Nov 6, 2012 GMT:
    Must have

    I am very impressed by quality of pictures and by convenience of use, as well as by quality of finishing and design. Absolutely perfect, to my opinion and experience. It is true example of high art of camera design. Quality of image on ISO 1600 is very good. Very easy to set up any mode - minimum menus and settings required. Problems: Only con - auto ISO setting does not work properly.

    Continue Reading

  • tboylee, Jun 16, 2012 GMT:
    x1 but better

    this camera is basically an x1 but better, i loved the image quality on the x1...on the x2, leica fixed all major problems with the x1

    Continue Reading

Questions & Answers


New Sony Vaio/Windows8 has color issues...problem for editing

I just ordered and received a brand new Sony Vaio E series, 14 inch laptop, windows 8.  I customized this laptop with everything I could need in order to edit with lightroom.  So it has a 1TB hard drive, 16GB (8gb x2) DDR3-1600MHz RAM, AMD Raedeon HD 7670M (2GB) hybrid graphics, and 3rd gen Intel Core i7-3632QM quad-core processor. When I pulled up some photos that I had just recently edited, I compared them side by side between my ipad and the new laptop.  The colors on the laptop appeared washed out.  The colors weren't vibrant and there was hardly any contrast and the blacks that were enhanced in my photo were gone. It also appears to have a color tint other than what I edited for. so I'm at a loss as to what to do to get the colors to appear 'normal' as they would have on my old laptop with windows vista/7.  Any help is greatly appreciated....and soon! So I'll know if I need to send this thing back or not.

kjbug40 asked
1 year ago


A couple of questions for you.  What color space (sRGB, AdobeRGB, etc.) are your images in?  What application are you using to view the images in Win8?  You didn't mention if you've calibrated the display on the laptop (I assume that you haven't), but that will likely correct the color balance issue (after calibration). Continue Reading

Bob Collette answered
1 year ago

Hopefully the screen is good enough for calibrating in a way that is sufficient for image editing. I have two Sony Vaio's. The older one does have the better screen and colours. Continue Reading

Leon Obers answered
1 year ago


What Big Sensor Compacts Are M43 Users Using?

I suspect some of you will find this one a bit odd, but here goes..... I'm thinking of adding a large sensor compact to the mix, and thought I'd ask here of all places. Simple questions for those of you who have a large sensor compact in the mix of gear you use? What do you think of it? What limitations do you encounter (beyond the blindingly obvious). Obviously, I'm mulling over something to accompany my Micro Four Thirds kit. Having shot nothing but larger sensor cameras for the past few years, I suspect I might find a premium point a premium point and shoot annoying. What I've mulled over so far: (1) The Merrils (good grief, have youn seen a big print from one of these? Looks a tad specialised, perhaps?) (2) Nikon Coolpix A (good all rounder in my estimation) (3) Ricoh GR (ditto) (4) Canon G1X (cheapest of the bunch, ...

tinternaut asked
1 year ago


None. I bought my last compact digicam a LONG time ago. If I need to go smaller than normal, I just use the 17mm f1.8 and do not carry any other lenses. Continue Reading

Gregm61 answered
1 year ago

Sony RX100, fits in a shirt pocket and takes excellent photos and videos (the 50p/28Mbps mode is particularly good). Easy to forget you have it with you (I usually carry it in a jacket pocket). Continue Reading

Dr_Jon answered
1 year ago

"Am I wrong to dis the likes of the Panasonic LX7 and Canon G16?" Yes!  I had a G11 for a while as a compliment to my m4/3 gear (and before that my DSLR), and no have the Oly XZ-2.  Both yield very good images.  The Oly especially shines due to the much faster lens though the current G series and LX series are now as fast or faster. And the Oly will also take your VF-2. RaymondR Continue Reading

RaymondR answered
1 year ago


What is the best CPU to run Olympus Viewer?

I've a old dual core AMD Athlon 64 X2 2.2GHz based system with Win7 at the moment. It processes RAW files from my E-3 at an acceptable speed (I'm quite a patient person). I recently upgraded to an OM-D E-M1 and now desperately need something faster! It takes the poor old thing 45 seconds to process each file :-( My laptop running an Intel Pentium B950 at 2.1GHz takes 30 seconds to process the same RAW file. Looking on a cpu benchmark site the figures for these 1285 & 1718 are pretty much proportionate to the results. Quad core? Dual core? Eight core? AMD? Intel? If I splash out on an i7 4790 based system which benchmarks at 11000+ will my RAWs process in a few seconds? It would be really helpful if people could post some times to process an M1, M10 or M5 file. Applying a simple gradation change from normal to auto for example. Thanks Paul

megashorts asked
1 month ago


Because the initial poster asked for a system for running Olympus Viewer, I did just that on my new system with Resource Manager enabled and generated a reply a couple of days ago analyzing the results with suggestions. Olympus Viewer Performance Test Results Please read it. Olympus Viewer is CPU bound during Export, uses threads, uses less than 4 GB RAM, is a 32 bit program, does not use GPU, and shows no performance difference with either a HDD or SSD for source, destination or both for the import source drive/ export destination drive. My system is close to a consensus of what the upgrade advisers suggested, and ran the 45 second (or 30 second) job in 8 seconds. Certainly time for an upgrade, but the devil is in the details. Continue Reading

MJohns answered
1 month ago

It's that simple. Go for a high-end i5 (4590 or 4690) or the i7-4790. 16GB of decent DDR3. 512MB or 1TB SSD. Samsung is recommended (I use the 1TB Evo 840). Video card doesn't matter. The CPU is almost all there is to know here from a raw-processing performance standpoint. I don't know about OV, but Lightroom does not respond nearly so well to memory and disk upgrades as you would think.  But as it looks like you tend to keep a system for a long time I'd go straight to 16GB and a big SSD so it's not an eternity in a penalty-box. Continue Reading

Steve_ answered
1 month ago

Looking at your CPU, you are probably due for an upgrade. Any computer you can buy today will be significantly faster. But nevertheless, it would be less expensive to use competent RAW processing software such as, for example, Lightroom than it would be to buy a new computer to run Viewer. Viewer is and always has been a terrible hack job. Lightroom renders in real time without needing to update the whole thing for every little change. Continue Reading

Klarno answered
1 month ago
  • Please enable JavaScript. GearShop is designed to work with JavaScript enabled. You may not be able to use our site properly if it's disabled in your browser's settings.