SL2 or SL2-S for soccer games

[Kim Dahl]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 1/3/2021 at 4:17 PM, Tp2000 said:

I'm not sure that I buy that any more. I shot sport for UK national papers in the 00s and there were a few folks then who, in specific conditions, did still use follow focus, but they were also some of the folks who had grown up shooting film at live sporting events and getting that transmitted back. The majority were all using autofocus with good success - and its fair to say having picked up a R5 this week and shot with it, the autofocus 10 years later is just stupidly good now. 

I am forever in awe of those folks who did shoot sport on the Canon F1/Nikon F3 cameras. I learnt sport (mountain bike photography) on a canon A1 and my father drumming into me how to pre-focus and latterly follow focus. But my goodness it is hard. And, I'll add, considerably easier on those cameras (or an M with the rangefinder patch) than with focus peaking on a SL(2) as the split screen/overlay makes it much easier to see the speed at which the subject is coming into focus.

 

 

I think this is true to a point, but the advantage of manual focus in those situations is that those photographers were entirely in control. They were not attempting to second guess what the camera was doing, which is the problem that I have with the SL2 AF. It either needs to be predictable (ie in x situation, it will do y) so that an experienced photographer can anticipate what the camera will do (as they aren't controlling it) or, it needs to just work. I'm ok with the idea that the occasional frame may not be tack sharp, but the wild variance that you get on the SL2 does irk me. 

 

For balance, I should add, the SL2 is the one camera I've used where I have repeatedly gasped when I look at some of the files that come out of it, so on balance I'm a fan, just for specific uses.

 

However to come back to the original question:

If you are shooting seriously, then see canon/nikon/sony

if you are just shooting your kid's game, then Id lean towards the SL2-S (smaller file size, faster buffer clearance, less susceptibility to motion blur from the higher mpx sensor, better low light and - from early reports - better AF performance)

 

 

 

I completely agree.  I have experience with press photography and sports photographer for + 35 years.  I have photographed handball with an M6 and 50 f2.  Pre focus right where the player "jumped" and shot on goal.  It was ok then ca 1992/95.  Today ALL my colleagues (and me) sit with Nikon, Canon or Sony for sports (all are good - most with dslr (Nikon) but there are more and more mirrorless (Sony) and if I had not followed I would not have worked as photojournalisme today.  So the question is extremely relevant.  To be completely honest, I will not choose Leica for sports - football / fast sports.   👍🏻 If one need to take a sports picture of children for football, then Leica works ok.  But if it's professional (and Leica SL is professional in terms of price) then there are far better choices.

Edited January 4, 2021 by Kim Dahl
Spel and komma

[stump4545]

If I am not shooting at high or very high burst rate with the SL2 then is the extra speed of the SL2-S a moot point?

I find myself shooting youth soccer at Medium Speed since I don't want a million photos to edit.  Hmmm shoot I be shooting at high or very high on SL2?

Lastly since I shoot with the Leica 90-280mm sometimes Id not have as much reach as I would like so I wind up cropping the image to get closer to the action.  

Being that I do crop sometimes and shoot at Medium Burst speed would the SL2 by the body to have for me over the SL2-S?

I am not shooting professional just for fun and I already have the SL2 but might make a trade for an SL2-S to try.

[Anakronox]

I think everyone here, when referring to speed means autofocus speed.  Which is not a strong point of any SL series camera.  I don’t shoot sports, so feel free to disregard my observations.  Even in general street photography situations, which are far less dynamic, AFC cannot keep up very well with moving subjects and tracking mode isn’t great either.  I prefer the single field AFS modes, which are very accurate, but slower - so the SL2 CNET’s used for portraits and landscapes mostly.   Maybe this will be improved in the future, but I wouldn’t choose to use either camera to lock on to running athletes.  The right tool for the right job and all that. 

[caissa]

14 hours ago, stump4545 said:

If I am not shooting at high or very high burst rate with the SL2 then is the extra speed of the SL2-S a moot point?

I find myself shooting youth soccer at Medium Speed since I don't want a million photos to edit.  Hmmm shoot I be shooting at high or very high on SL2?

Lastly since I shoot with the Leica 90-280mm sometimes Id not have as much reach as I would like so I wind up cropping the image to get closer to the action.  

Being that I do crop sometimes and shoot at Medium Burst speed would the SL2 by the body to have for me over the SL2-S?

I am not shooting professional just for fun and I already have the SL2 but might make a trade for an SL2-S to try.

You started this thread, but I actually think it was a very bad idea. Just think about it. The camera can be had since only a very short time. So most people here either do not have the camera or just got it and played around with it for a few hours. They had no time yet, to study the different settings in depth. So they are actually still beginners with this camera. They have probably not even read the manual completely, or just gave it a short glimpse. Most have not really studied the AF system, it is quite complex (more than just turning it on). In other cameras it is often easier, the cameras do the thinking for you as in the a9.

So most remarks are from people with in depth experience in other cameras (Sony Canon Nikon Fuji). And from that and their missing experience with the new camera infer that their old systems are far better at AF. They have found a setting (often the default) that gives them what they need. So they say now camera x is much easier and much faster. What did you expect ?

You need to talk with a person with a lot of experience with the Leica SL2 or SL2-S AFs or AFc. He can tell you what is important for successful shooting and where the limits are. Such photographers are rare to find. I know of only one or two.

I think the best thing for you to do is take the time to try your SL2, study the manual, look at some web videos about the AF in the SL2. (It needs some googling or searching in these LUT threads. When the SL2 came out the same questions were asked.) Look in the picture threads for examples of pictures of BIF, then maybe contact these photographers about their impressions and experiences. There are also threads where videos and info material for the SL2 have been compiled.

Robin Sinha made an introduction to AF with the SL2. (There are at least 2 videos, this is the short one.). It is quite nice, but cannot answer each and every question you have about AF. I would start there.

Notice that he is using the camera on a tripod. You probably did not ...   But it is no coincidence. If the camera is in a stable position, the AF results are typically better. This is probably the starting point anyway, try to avoid all unnecessary camera movements at all price. (Yes with some cameras you can jump around and do all crazy things and you still get some pictures in focus ...   Yes, maybe, but maybe it is also not the full truth - marketing).

About switching the camera (exchange for SL2-S). The SL2-S has the newer firmware, so is maybe currently a little bit better. (No serious tests actually, just rumors). But if you cannot cope with the SL2 then the SL2-S will make no big difference. (Sorry, but all this switching of cameras and gear generally is just a silly game. The skills of the photographer are more important. And they do not grow overnight.). 😷🤧🤔🤓

Edited January 5, 2021 by caissa

[sillbeers15]

I would like to breakdown the challenge of tracking fast moving subjects (including fast changing directions moving from far to near) into the 3 category below:

1.  Successfully lock focus on subject

2.  Manage to keep fast moving subject within frame

3.  Manage to keep subject continuously in locked focus frame after frame (ie focus tracking box turned ‘green’ after subject locked in focus and green focus box continues to be on subject frame after frame

Item 3 is what you guys have been discussing and throughout my user experience, the SL2 does it pretty well once you have selected and optimised the settings on the focus profile.

Instead I find item 1& 2 much more challenging. Item 1 calls for a good understanding of the camera’s limitations. When the subject is either too small or and under strong back light situation, the success rate to lock focus drops. Anyway I learn to avoid shooting in these situations as even I managed to get good focus in these situations, the IQ and composition just sucks. A waste of time shooting this way.

I found a way around item 2 challenge by attaching a dot sight device to my lens. Instead of getting lost of subject from camera EVF. I track subject by looking through the dot sight device and continue to track fast moving subject this way with much higher success rate.

 

[Simone_DF]

Wouldn't be better to wait for the big firmware update dropping in March/June to reassess AF perfomance? 

It should bring the SL in line with the Panasonics and offer a significant jump.

[sillbeers15]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 hours ago, Simone_DF said:

Wouldn't be better to wait for the big firmware update dropping in March/June to reassess AF perfomance? 

It should bring the SL in line with the Panasonics and offer a significant jump.

+1

[SrMi]

8 hours ago, Simone_DF said:

Wouldn't be better to wait for the big firmware update dropping in March/June to reassess AF perfomance? 

It should bring the SL in line with the Panasonics and offer a significant jump.

Do we know whether AF performance will come to SL2 as well or will it be only for SL2-S (BSI sensor, faster readouts)?

I have seen only this: The firmware scheduled for spring 2021 will add even more features to the SL2-S

[Simone_DF]

49 minutes ago, SrMi said:

Do we know whether AF performance will come to SL2 as well or will it be only for SL2-S (BSI sensor, faster readouts)?

I have seen only this: The firmware scheduled for spring 2021 will add even more features to the SL2-S

I believe @Steven and somebody else mentioned that the SL2 update will be released 2-3 months after the SL2-S update. 

I'm pretty sure it will have all the AF updates minus some video feature, since the only difference between the two cameras is the sensor. Same way the S1R and S1 got all the upgrades from the S5. Maybe it will be slightly slower on the SL2 due to the faster readouts of the SL2-S, but the difference should not be significant. Time will tell.

But if Leica doesn't upgrade the SL2, who's going to buy this camera at 6k when you can have the SL2-S at 4.5k?

Edited January 6, 2021 by Simone_DF

[SrMi]

32 minutes ago, Simone_DF said:

I believe @Steven and somebody else mentioned that the SL2 update will be released 2-3 months after the SL2-S update. 

I'm pretty sure it will have all the AF updates minus some video feature, since the only difference between the two cameras is the sensor. Same way the S1R and S1 got all the upgrades from the S5. Maybe it will be slightly slower on the SL2 due to the faster readouts of the SL2-S, but the difference should not be significant. Time will tell.

But if Leica doesn't upgrade the SL2, who's going to buy this camera at 6k when you can have the SL2-S at 4.5k?

I hope SL2 gets the upgrade. I could imagine that, in time, SL2 will get upgraded to the new BSI sensor.

[Simone_DF]

1 hour ago, SrMi said:

I hope SL2 gets the upgrade. I could imagine that, in time, SL2 will get upgraded to the new BSI sensor.

Without an AF upgrade, the SL2, the current flagship model, will become a 6k unsellable brick, unless for whatever reasons you REALLY need 47mp and cannot use Photoshop or Topaz to upscale your images, or you shoot static subjects.

Who sane of mind would buy it when you can have a better performing AF camera for 1500€ less and still be able to use 96mp in multishoot mode or upscale as desired with third party software? While SL2's S-AF is fine in certain situations, the current C-AF implementation is subpar compared to everything released in the last 5 years, if not more. I'm aware that it works for some people, plenty of good examples on this forum, but we are talking about a niche of happy users vs an abyss of differences compared to Sony/Canon/Nikon. At least for this generation. More powerful processors will probably close the gap with the big threes in the future.

[jaapv]

On 1/2/2021 at 4:03 PM, BernardC said:

Exactly. Any DSLR, especially Nikon's top-of-the-range APS-C DSLR, will be much better than a mirrorless camera for sports. AF will be better, of course (with an equivalent lens), but also you can't beat the speed of light when anticipating action.

It's a real art. A top player might reveal their intentions with a minute twitch, something that an experienced photographer can read. That's really really hard to do when looking at a video screen that is a frame or two behind. Your camera is pointing at where the ball used to be, because you haven't seen the clever side pass.

Exactly -which is exactly why a sports photographer once told me: "I never use bursts; the shutter opens maybe 1/1000th of a second. That means you are missing 99% of the action at 10 fps. The secret is anticipation and skill."  

Maybe hyperbole, but worth thinking about. Even more so in wildlife photography, if you don't have a good understanding of animal behaviour, you can only rely on luck and static shots.

[frame-it]

On 1/7/2021 at 3:15 AM, SrMi said:

I hope SL2 gets the upgrade. I could imagine that, in time, SL2 will get upgraded to the new BSI sensor.

but isn't that 3 years away?

Edited January 9, 2021 by frame-it

[stump4545]

when you say SL2-S has faster auto focus since only has 24mb sensor what does that mean exactly and how will that benefit shooting running soccer players?

I know shooting the SL2 so far sometimes it is hard to lock focus on a player then keep focus tracking on that one player.

Does the SL2-S offer better focus tracking at this point?

[Archiver]

As a general point of discussion, I have been shooting combat sports like boxing and kickboxing with some degree of success with a M9 and fast 35, and a 5D Mark II with 35L. Neither of these cameras can be considered optimal or even suitable for these sports. It is very difficult to prefocus for a certain distance with boxing as they can move quite unpredictably, so I just used single point focus/centre focus and snap off a few frames when experience tells me that something is about to happen. I have no experience with the SL2-S or Sony A9 II, although I'd very much like to try these to see how much they could improve my work. I also shoot with the Panasonic G9 and Olympus 17mm Pro lens, and the 11fps burst mode is very helpful, but the image quality/look isn't like what you get from even these old full frame sensors. The M9 gives me some idea of how they did it in the old days (with great difficulty and a bunch of experience and skill), but moving to a decent modern camera would undoubtedly make life much easier.

Edited March 2, 2021 by Archiver

[Michael Markey]

On 1/9/2021 at 10:43 AM, jaapv said:

Exactly -which is exactly why a sports photographer once told me: "I never use bursts; the shutter opens maybe 1/1000th of a second. That means you are missing 99% of the action at 10 fps. The secret is anticipation and skill."  

Maybe hyperbole, but worth thinking about. Even more so in wildlife photography, if you don't have a good understanding of animal behaviour, you can only rely on luck and static shots.

I used to do my equestrian stuff with film M`s for years .

Knowing your subject will get you 90%there without the need for burst .

However for some shots ,which I would classify as movement rather than action,  ie a horse galloping and capturing the point where three feet are in the air ,for example ,is too fast and a short burst is often useful.

Often though the results using burst are unpredictable and you can get a load of nothing . 

What it can do is ,as Archiver suggests, is make life easier but that`s not the same as guaranteeing a good outcome .

[stump4545]

So what accept of autofocus does the SL2-S do better or faster then SL2?

Does the SL2-S lock onto subject faster or focus track better then the SL2?

Locking unto moving subject and tracking subject are the arears I wish the SL2 did better and I am not sure if the SL2-S and its 24mb sensor improve these autofocus ascepts.

 

[LD_50]

I shot soccer a few times with my Nikon D4S and the 70-200 f/2.8 and 200 f/2. That camera tracks very well and has very quick AFs and AFc.

I found that a lot of my best shots were done with prefocus and bursts. The quick AFc also helped to lock on to subjects and stay with them and the OVF allowed me to follow easily. The actual tracking AF I didn’t find much use for. I have not shot soccer with the SL or SL2-S to determine if the same held true.