Anyone using SL2 and M10R - sensor differences evident?

[pmendelson]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am using the SL2 and the M10M (with a mix of SL and M lenses), and was wondering if anyone is using the SL2 and M10R, and, if so, if they are finding any real world obvious differences in things like dynamic range and high ISO performance.  In other words, based on the sensor performance alone, are the SL2 and the M10R pretty much redundant, or are there clear advantages to the M10R?  Reviews of the M10R seem to indicate an improved sensor, but I'd love to hear people's personal experiences comparing the two.

Thanks,

Peter

[John Smith]

This video by Mathphotographer might be helpful.

[caissa]

The SL2 has a higher resolution, is much faster and has IBIS (the most important difference). And because of the sensor shift mechanism also a multishot or highres mode (187 MP) with higher dynamic range, lower noise and "true" colors (no more Bayer filtering with interpolation). So there are a lot of differences.

And there is also AF if you use the SL lenses. Which is also important for most users.

Edited September 30, 2020 by caissa

[pmendelson]

Thanks.  I saw that video but it looked like he exposed the photos from the cameras differently so the results were somewhat inconclusive.  IBIS and multishot are great on the SL2 although I usually shoot handheld so I am not really enjoying the benefits of multishot.  But those are two clear advantages to the SL2.

[SrMi]

Here are PhotonsToPhotos PDR measurements for SL2 and M10-R: link (note that there are some issues with ISO50 on SL2). 

The relevant difference between the two cameras is not the sensor but other components (IBIS, EVF vs. rangefinder, M-lenses vs. L-Lenses, size & weight, etc.). 

[Jeff S]

One can put technically higher performing SL primes (higher than even M 50 APO) on an SL body, not on an M; but M lenses can be mounted on the SL. It’s system performance, not just sensor performance.  The M system is also subject to RF/lens calibration issues, etc, while the SL focuses off-sensor with high grade EVF viewing and focusing, and software integration (and IBIS as noted). Real life performance often varies from optimal, on-paper performance.

Jeff

Edited September 30, 2020 by Jeff S

[agencal]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

We compared M10R with M 50mm apo cron to SL2 with SL 50mm lux at landscape distance. Aperture for both lenses were f5.6 and also f8.

What we realised is SL2 default sharpness at adobe camera raw is great but it is soft for M10r.You need at least 60 for sharpness to make them look smilar.(m10 was not like this)

At the center of the image SL2 was better but at corners M10r was better.But these are i think lens depended. If we had SL 50mm apo on SL2 probobily SL2 would be sharper at the edges as well.

So as a landscape photographer i sold my M10r and i will be buyüng SL2 tomorrow with 35mm and 90mm apo crons😊

[Alistairm]

Peter 

i use both. Anecdotally, having not run “tests”, I find the sensors functionally so similar in terms of resolution and DR that it doesn’t matter.

Without really realising it I’d stopped shooting my M10 and was only shooting my M glass on the the M10M and SL2. Much of that was due to the M10’s tendency to clip highlights, which made me miss the EVF and led to me using M glass on the SL a great deal of the time. 

I’m now using the M10R a fair bit and enjoying the exposure latitude it offers. For my shooting, I don’t think the output is any better than the SL2 (and obviously the SL2 has the Wonderful EVF and IBIS), but with the M10R the M body colour sensor has caught up to the SL2.

 

Edited September 30, 2020 by Alistairm

[Stuart Richardson]

I have the S3 (which uses a version of the M10R sensor) and the SL2, and I think the SL2 sensor is the better of the two. In my cameras at least, the SL2 looks better at high ISO both in terms of color retention and lack of banding. It also has better low ISO pushability and flexibility to the files. The S3 seems to do better with long exposure, such as in night photographs. Your experience may differ, but I would advise testing the cameras to see how they work for you. In my workflow at least, the differences were significant. 

[Tailwagger]

1 hour ago, Alistairm said:

i use both. Anecdotally, having not run “tests”, I find the sensors functionally so similar in terms of resolution and DR that it doesn’t matter.

As do I and I concur. From a sensor standpoint I see little reason to choose one over the other.  I shoot them both side by side now with zero regard for basic IQ. From a practical standpoint, I choose one over the other on the basis of available focal length or a need for AF or IBIS.  In my experience, the optics used have a far, far greater impact on the style of result than the sensor.  Shoot with a lens like the 35mm ZD, likely the 50 M APO (which I don't own) on the 10-R and you'd be hard press to discern any substantive difference when shooting with the SL Summicrons. Conversely, the WATE gives a significantly different look from my Pano zoom, ditto the 50 and 75mm 'luxes from the SL crons. Outside of the influence of the optics, so far  the only thing I have noticed is that out of the box, the M has a slightly more subdued notion of color when compared to the SL2, but either can be made to emulate the other fairly easily in post. 

[John Smith]

58 minutes ago, Stuart Richardson said:

I have the S3 (which uses a version of the M10R sensor) and the SL2, and I think the SL2 sensor is the better of the two. In my cameras at least, the SL2 looks better at high ISO both in terms of color retention and lack of banding. It also has better low ISO pushability and flexibility to the files. The S3 seems to do better with long exposure, such as in night photographs. Your experience may differ, but I would advise testing the cameras to see how they work for you. In my workflow at least, the differences were significant. 

Stuart, I appreciate you sharing your experience with the S3 and how it compares with the SL2. I'd been on the fence for months about the S3 and recently decided to let go of the S system and limit things to the SL2 and M. I was lucky that the S3 has revived the value of used S lenses a bit. 

In response to the OP's question, I think @Tailwagger  is right. No material difference in the sensors in and of themselves. The real differences lie in the lenses with the SL2 showing a bit more contrast or punch than the M10R. Makes for a great combination, actually.

[T25UFO]

Hugh Brownstone loves his SL2 but he’s always been an advocate of M cameras as well.  He has a new video on Three Blind Men An An Elephant where he shoots SL2 and M10R side by side.  As usual, his conclusions are most interesting, and shows that it’s not all about sensors and lenses.

Sorry I can’t post a link here but go to the 3BMEP website or search on YouTube.  Definitely worth a look.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

On 10/1/2020 at 5:00 AM, Alistairm said:

Peter 

i use both. Anecdotally, having not run “tests”, I find the sensors functionally so similar in terms of resolution and DR that it doesn’t matter.

Without really realising it I’d stopped shooting my M10 and was only shooting my M glass on the the M10M and SL2. Much of that was due to the M10’s tendency to clip highlights, which made me miss the EVF and led to me using M glass on the SL a great deal of the time. 

I’m now using the M10R a fair bit and enjoying the exposure latitude it offers. For my shooting, I don’t think the output is any better than the SL2 (and obviously the SL2 has the Wonderful EVF and IBIS), but with the M10R the M body colour sensor has caught up to the SL2.

 

This.....

When I go out, the camera I choose is now dependant on everything EXCEPT the sensor. Portability, usability, AF, IBIS, lens selections all come into play and the sensor doesn't.

Gordon

[SJH]

On 9/30/2020 at 11:59 PM, T25UFO said:

Hugh Brownstone loves his SL2 but he’s always been an advocate of M cameras as well.  He has a new video on Three Blind Men An An Elephant where he shoots SL2 and M10R side by side.  As usual, his conclusions are most interesting, and shows that it’s not all about sensors and lenses.

Sorry I can’t post a link here but go to the 3BMEP website or search on YouTube.  Definitely worth a look.

A very good post from Hugh on this, we had a bit of fun banter on social media but from my point of view having upgraded from an M10 to and M10R, with my SL2 for some heavy lifting, it’s pushed my Q2 out which I used to buy more Leica APO glass. I think that now the M10R has this sensor paired with an SL2 I couldn’t really see the justification in keeping the Q2. None are pocketable so I just found that if I wanted AF I’d take my SL2 with an SL APO lightweight lens and then my M10R was the right camera for an even more portable package with M lenses than the Q2. I did though buy a GR3 for sticking in a jeans pocket or coat for a ‘take anywhere’ and whilst not quite a Q2 in sensor IQ terms it gets pretty close and is just far more portable, backs up my Leica’s well when I need it.

[scroy]

Putting in a plug for Sean Reid - reidreviews.com (paywall),  he has been doing a very thorough set of reviews in comparing the M10R/M10M/SL2 using M-glass.

Its worth a read.

[isleofgough]

The SL2 sensor does tend to blow out highlights. I find I get best results by setting one full stop under exposure.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

12 hours ago, SJH said:

A very good post from Hugh on this, we had a bit of fun banter on social media but from my point of view having upgraded from an M10 to and M10R, with my SL2 for some heavy lifting, it’s pushed my Q2 out which I used to buy more Leica APO glass. I think that now the M10R has this sensor paired with an SL2 I couldn’t really see the justification in keeping the Q2. None are pocketable so I just found that if I wanted AF I’d take my SL2 with an SL APO lightweight lens and then my M10R was the right camera for an even more portable package with M lenses than the Q2. I did though buy a GR3 for sticking in a jeans pocket or coat for a ‘take anywhere’ and whilst not quite a Q2 in sensor IQ terms it gets pretty close and is just far more portable, backs up my Leica’s well when I need it.

My Q2 is my 28mm solution for the SL system. I don't really think of it as a separate camera. My normal walk around is a 28, 50 and 90. The Q2 and two SL Summicrons makes up that kit for the L mount.

Gordon

[T25UFO]

12 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

My Q2 is my 28mm solution for the SL system. I don't really think of it as a separate camera. My normal walk around is a 28, 50 and 90. The Q2 and two SL Summicrons makes up that kit for the L mount.

Gordon

Same here . . . well almost.  Mine is 28mm with the Q2 and 75mm on the SL2.  Added advantage of never having to change lenses.  Other focal lengths achieved by cropping or walking backwards!

[SJH]

These are very good points re the Q2, for me though I just use my M 28 1.4 on the SL2 or M10R. Both ways are really fantastic though and very much personal preference.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount