SL2 vs CANON EOS R5

[The206]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hey There,

Thinking about getting an EOS R5 to go along with my SL2, wondering if anyone has both and can give a comparison. I need a second body but the SL2 is almost $3000 more. On paper the R5 seems better, just wondering if anyone is able to see any difference in sharpness because of the AA filter on the R5

[Sandokan]

Panasonic S5 as it has same lens mount. 

However, having exactly the same 2nd camera makes life so much easier, or have a fully manual M which muscle memory alone means you wont be fiddling for menus and buttons. 

[Gavin Cato]

I use 2 x SL2's for weddings and whilst I appreciate it's a big expense, over the lifetime of the cameras it may be worth it. 

It's very nice just putting my hand into the camera bag and grabbing either and know they are the exact same buttons / layout etc. and using the same batteries / lenses etc.

I'd hate to add a Canon into the mix.

[Joakim]

11 hours ago, The206 said:

Hey There,

Thinking about getting an EOS R5 to go along with my SL2, wondering if anyone has both and can give a comparison. I need a second body but the SL2 is almost $3000 more. On paper the R5 seems better, just wondering if anyone is able to see any difference in sharpness because of the AA filter on the R5

Hmm, here in Sweden the price difference is about half of that and if you add a couple of lenses as well then the difference is completely gone. Or maybe you didn't mean the R5?

[wjdrijfhout]

Difficult to advice without knowing the use-case for the second body. If it's for backup, a second SL2 would be the better option for reasons mentioned above. If cost is the issue, an SL is still a great camera also today, and roughly half the price of an SL2. If video, image stabilisation etc. is important to you, but still looking for something cheaper, a Panasonic S5 is a great option.

If there are specific use-cases for which you want to go into the Canon-R ecosystem (sports, birds in flight, etc), or you need specific lenses (>300mm, macro,  tilt-shift), Canon is probably the better bet. But bear in mind that within the L-mount alliance the lens-choices are rapidly increasing. 

If it's only a matter of cost, it is hard to see the R5 + extra lenses to be cheaper than an L-mount solution using the same lenses. 

[Slender]

As much as I respect Canon for everything they did, and do, I am so happy to have the SL2 system that, if I were to take a second body to back up the SL2, it would be an L mount one. Do you want the fancy/borderline useless 8k raw? you will more than make up for the price difference with extra lenses, memory card, hard drives, back up and new computer...etc pretty quickly.... and resell value of Canon lenses is tricky because its a crowded market.

As a "wingman" body with similar specs, I would definitively take something with same ergonomics and lens compatibility to avoid confiusions and mistakes in the field: SL (first one, very cheap now)... even second hand SL2 start to show up at good prices.

As a body with alternative capabilities - lets say video for cheaper entry prices, accessories...etc - Panasonic S5, S1H... incredible rebates on these b/c low sales sadly. or Sigma Fp.

For an emergency backup during travels, only to "have something" if your main is dead: Leica CL or TL2 +18mm (and compatible with you main SL lenses)... the later you can charge via USB-C like the SL2, so you dont even need to bring a spare batteries. Or a Q2.

If you really want a "wild card" to do crazy fast action or careful studio work, take something completly different then 🤪 Canon 1DxMkIII or Hasselblad 1DXII... or go second hand with the previous versions of these for amazing value.

Edited October 27, 2020 by Slender

[laowai_]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 10/26/2020 at 3:50 PM, The206 said:

Hey There,

Thinking about getting an EOS R5 to go along with my SL2, wondering if anyone has both and can give a comparison. I need a second body but the SL2 is almost $3000 more. On paper the R5 seems better, just wondering if anyone is able to see any difference in sharpness because of the AA filter on the R5

When I did this for money we always had three sets of exactly the same (camera, lens, flash). Set one to shoot, set two for the assistant to change film, set three as backup. There were very few events where I did not have to use the backup (camera, FM2’s jammed, lens diaphragm stuck, batterie died, flash stopped working, assistant screwed up....) In a high pressure environment you can’t mess with different type of equipment. 

As an amateur, if equipment dies, I enjoy whatever I am doing maybe even more if I don’t have a camera.

I’d say just get the gear you want and don’t worry about justifying to yourself why you need what you want.

[The206]

Thanks for all the advice. One of my main issues right now is needing a camera in the same megapixel count as a backup, also it has been frustrating using capture one with my SL2, while you can set a hot folder in capture one, it is just a greater strain on my digitech to not have the ability to auto apply settings from the previous shot. So a lot of the things I am looking for are for more professional uses. So easy tethering into capture one which the SL2 doesn't do, access to internal 4k 60fps with log versus having to go out to an external recorder, more universal lenses so that if I want to rent in a different city it will be easier to get EF/RF glass versus the zero access to rent L mount lenses. The battery issues with Sigma lenses is a massive problem for the SL2, I have been burned on back to back shoots now with the battery warning when the battery is 75% full but it won't let me even shoot 4k 24fps internal. Even with the overheat issues of the R5, you always have access to 4k 24fps. So it is more of a backup for more involved client shoots where we really need to tether fast or if I am out in the field and can't charge batteries and I need constant access to 4k 24fps. The in ability to use the SL2 as a webcam is also a pain when doing remote shooting, I have a remote casting to shoot and I cannot use the SL2 as a webcam which would make the casting look so much better. I just think Leica has been really slow to add simple fixes that would make this camera just a little more useable in a professional sense. Fuji was able to work out a deal with capture one to enable tethering. It would be beneficial for Leica to make some small updates to push this camera into a more versatile category. The auto focus has also been an issue for me and the r5 really blows the SL2 out of the water in this regard. So my logic here is they are both great cameras capable of creating great photos. If I am to have a backup it would be worth it to me to have a little more bells and whistles for my buck versus a duplicate camera, make sense?

 

[FlashGordonPhotography]

2 hours ago, The206 said:

Thanks for all the advice. One of my main issues right now is needing a camera in the same megapixel count as a backup, also it has been frustrating using capture one with my SL2, while you can set a hot folder in capture one, it is just a greater strain on my digitech to not have the ability to auto apply settings from the previous shot. So a lot of the things I am looking for are for more professional uses. So easy tethering into capture one which the SL2 doesn't do, access to internal 4k 60fps with log versus having to go out to an external recorder, more universal lenses so that if I want to rent in a different city it will be easier to get EF/RF glass versus the zero access to rent L mount lenses. The battery issues with Sigma lenses is a massive problem for the SL2, I have been burned on back to back shoots now with the battery warning when the battery is 75% full but it won't let me even shoot 4k 24fps internal. Even with the overheat issues of the R5, you always have access to 4k 24fps. So it is more of a backup for more involved client shoots where we really need to tether fast or if I am out in the field and can't charge batteries and I need constant access to 4k 24fps. The in ability to use the SL2 as a webcam is also a pain when doing remote shooting, I have a remote casting to shoot and I cannot use the SL2 as a webcam which would make the casting look so much better. I just think Leica has been really slow to add simple fixes that would make this camera just a little more useable in a professional sense. Fuji was able to work out a deal with capture one to enable tethering. It would be beneficial for Leica to make some small updates to push this camera into a more versatile category. The auto focus has also been an issue for me and the r5 really blows the SL2 out of the water in this regard. So my logic here is they are both great cameras capable of creating great photos. If I am to have a backup it would be worth it to me to have a little more bells and whistles for my buck versus a duplicate camera, make sense?

 

You bought into the wrong camera system. Sell the SL2 and buy 2 Canon's.

And no, I'm not just being a smart arse.

Gordon

[hamey]

2 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

You bought into the wrong camera system. Sell the SL2 and buy 2 Canon's.

And no, I'm not just being a smart arse.

Gordon

I also echo Gordon's view.

Ken.

 

[wjdrijfhout]

Agreed with Gordon, sounds like the SL2 was the mistake, not the R5. 
If you want a tethered solution with C1 with same pixel-count, perhaps consider GFX50R. Probably cheaper to get than R5, with better medium format image quality. 
As for webcam use, a simple $125 elgato cam link 4K will turn your SL2 into the best webcam you can imagine. 

[Jared]

On 10/27/2020 at 5:43 PM, The206 said:

Thanks for all the advice. One of my main issues right now is needing a camera in the same megapixel count as a backup, also it has been frustrating using capture one with my SL2, while you can set a hot folder in capture one, it is just a greater strain on my digitech to not have the ability to auto apply settings from the previous shot. So a lot of the things I am looking for are for more professional uses. So easy tethering into capture one which the SL2 doesn't do, access to internal 4k 60fps with log versus having to go out to an external recorder, more universal lenses so that if I want to rent in a different city it will be easier to get EF/RF glass versus the zero access to rent L mount lenses. The battery issues with Sigma lenses is a massive problem for the SL2, I have been burned on back to back shoots now with the battery warning when the battery is 75% full but it won't let me even shoot 4k 24fps internal. Even with the overheat issues of the R5, you always have access to 4k 24fps. So it is more of a backup for more involved client shoots where we really need to tether fast or if I am out in the field and can't charge batteries and I need constant access to 4k 24fps. The in ability to use the SL2 as a webcam is also a pain when doing remote shooting, I have a remote casting to shoot and I cannot use the SL2 as a webcam which would make the casting look so much better. I just think Leica has been really slow to add simple fixes that would make this camera just a little more useable in a professional sense. Fuji was able to work out a deal with capture one to enable tethering. It would be beneficial for Leica to make some small updates to push this camera into a more versatile category. The auto focus has also been an issue for me and the r5 really blows the SL2 out of the water in this regard. So my logic here is they are both great cameras capable of creating great photos. If I am to have a backup it would be worth it to me to have a little more bells and whistles for my buck versus a duplicate camera, make sense?

 

Given these requirements? I’d say the SL2 is simply the wrong choice. Wide selection of lenses with easy availability? Easy tethering to Capture One? Multiple (identical) bodies within your price range? Prompt service (a basic requirement for professional use)? Class leading AF? This just isn’t Leica’s forte. I know it’s not trivial to recommend you make a change, but better that than continuing down a path that will just lead to frustration. Time for Canon, Fuji, Nikon, or Sony. Right this moment (and given your already disclosed interest) I’d recommend Canon. Obviously, try renting one first to make sure you wouldn’t be swapping one set of problems for a new set, but I just don’t think Leica is aimed at your particular requirements.

Edited October 29, 2020 by Jared

[RagingCANE]

On 10/27/2020 at 5:43 PM, The206 said:

Thanks for all the advice. One of my main issues right now is needing a camera in the same megapixel count as a backup, also it has been frustrating using capture one with my SL2, while you can set a hot folder in capture one, it is just a greater strain on my digitech to not have the ability to auto apply settings from the previous shot. So a lot of the things I am looking for are for more professional uses. So easy tethering into capture one which the SL2 doesn't do, access to internal 4k 60fps with log versus having to go out to an external recorder, more universal lenses so that if I want to rent in a different city it will be easier to get EF/RF glass versus the zero access to rent L mount lenses. The battery issues with Sigma lenses is a massive problem for the SL2, I have been burned on back to back shoots now with the battery warning when the battery is 75% full but it won't let me even shoot 4k 24fps internal. Even with the overheat issues of the R5, you always have access to 4k 24fps. So it is more of a backup for more involved client shoots where we really need to tether fast or if I am out in the field and can't charge batteries and I need constant access to 4k 24fps. The in ability to use the SL2 as a webcam is also a pain when doing remote shooting, I have a remote casting to shoot and I cannot use the SL2 as a webcam which would make the casting look so much better. I just think Leica has been really slow to add simple fixes that would make this camera just a little more useable in a professional sense. Fuji was able to work out a deal with capture one to enable tethering. It would be beneficial for Leica to make some small updates to push this camera into a more versatile category. The auto focus has also been an issue for me and the r5 really blows the SL2 out of the water in this regard. So my logic here is they are both great cameras capable of creating great photos. If I am to have a backup it would be worth it to me to have a little more bells and whistles for my buck versus a duplicate camera, make sense?

 

I LOVE the SL2, lenses, menu system, build quality and color rendition but I just went through a similar dilemma. I really wanted to go for it with the SL2 for my architecture work so I bought the SL2, 16-35, 50mm APO Summicron L and 24-90. Then I needed to find some workarounds. I tried the Sigma MC-21 to adapt my Canon TSE lenses and they worked fine (I thought). I could no longer use the Cam Ranger with an iPad on location so I needed to always tether to a MacBook Pro but CaptureOne isn't natively supported. Then after comparing the adapted Canon lenses with my 5D MkIV images I realized they weren't as sharp in some areas. Now this needs to be thoroughly tested before I can confirm but the reality is there will likely never be Leica glass with Tilt Shift capability and I don't want to have to adapt lenses to a Leica. But more importantly, I don't have time to try and force this camera system into my professional workflow. I returned the SL2, 50, 24-90, and I have the 16-35 on eBay. Canon supports the work I do now and are set to release R mount Tilt Shift lenses in the future so I don't have much of a choice.

As much as I LOVE the SL2 system, It isn't the camera for my Architecture workflow so I had to move on. I ordered the recently discounted 5DS R and reorderd the R5. As far as the original question goes, If you are using the SL2 professionally you really need at least 2 of them. Trying to go back and forth between an SL2 and R5 would be a nightmare for me and the color is different which creates an extra step to match the files in post.

[wjdrijfhout]

18 hours ago, RagingCANE said:

Then after comparing the adapted Canon lenses with my 5D MkIV images I realized they weren't as sharp in some areas.

This is interesting. Do you know why this is the case? I have always found Canon glass adapted on SL(2) to be sharper than on traditional Canon DSLR’s and always blamed the AA filter on the Canon’s for it and/or the image quality of the Leica. What I did always notice was the superiority of the Leica glass over Canon L-glass. That’s why I sold all my Canon glass, with the exception of the 180mm macro.  

[RagingCANE]

4 hours ago, wjdrijfhout said:

This is interesting. Do you know why this is the case? I have always found Canon glass adapted on SL(2) to be sharper than on traditional Canon DSLR’s and always blamed the AA filter on the Canon’s for it and/or the image quality of the Leica. What I did always notice was the superiority of the Leica glass over Canon L-glass. That’s why I sold all my Canon glass, with the exception of the 180mm macro.  

No, I have no idea as I stated so I can't confirm. If this was the only reason to not use the SL2 then I would look further into it. It could be the conditions, it could be focus variations or it could be the adapter. This needs to be tested further but I'm not interested in doing that. And of course the older Canon TS lenses can't compete with Leica SL glass but my reason for the switch was based mostly on compatibility and efficiency in a professional environment. The cost and compromise of using the SL system doesn't make sense for me right now. If I were a landscape shooter and didn't need to tether I would stick with the SL2 and buy another body. The 16-35 is amazing and the new wide angle Summicrons they are working on will be great as well.

[The206]

I picked up the R5. I haven't had a chance to really test it out. Will report back, but seriously tho in terms of comfort the r5 might as well be a cardboard box under a bridge

[_Michael]

On 10/27/2020 at 7:52 PM, FlashGordonPhotography said:

You bought into the wrong camera system. Sell the SL2 and buy 2 Canon's.

And no, I'm not just being a smart arse.

Gordon

Completely agree. I was ready to add an opinion,  but it seems you have made up your mind. Leica is not the right system for you based on your needs and experience. 

[Michael Markey]

Going through the same decision making process .

I`ve shot Leica and Canon side by side for twenty years but am so enamoured by my CL that I was considering an SL2.

Sold my Canon gear but already regretting it and buying some lenses back again..

I use the Canon gear for occasional wild birding and cross country equestrian shots and try as I might (and boy have I been trying) I can`t seem to make the SL fit into that senario. 

Jury is still out because I can use my Canon lenses on a Sony body but at the moment the Canon is ahead and I`ll be just happy to use my CL and three film M bodies for what they can do best .

[FlashGordonPhotography]

5 hours ago, Michael Markey said:

Going through the same decision making process .

I`ve shot Leica and Canon side by side for twenty years but am so enamoured by my CL that I was considering an SL2.

Sold my Canon gear but already regretting it and buying some lenses back again..

I use the Canon gear for occasional wild birding and cross country equestrian shots and try as I might (and boy have I been trying) I can`t seem to make the SL fit into that senario. 

Jury is still out because I can use my Canon lenses on a Sony body but at the moment the Canon is ahead and I`ll be just happy to use my CL and three film M bodies for what they can do best .

If you need the latest incutting edge technology and usability doesn't matter then Sony.

If handling, menus or usability matter at all then Canon.

If you don't need cutting edge tracking, eye detect or video AF then the SL.

Gordon

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Michael Markey]

1 hour ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

If you need the latest incutting edge technology and usability doesn't matter then Sony.

If handling, menus or usability matter at all then Canon.

If you don't need cutting edge tracking, eye detect or video AF then the SL.

Gordon

Yes .... that`s it in a nutshell .

Michael