Need advice for which camera to but as secondary body to my S3 - SL2 or SL2-S

[Nachapon Dumrongthumavoot]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello everyone, i need your opinion on which camera to use as a secondary body for S lenses. 

I currently have leica S3 along with few S lens ( 45 70 100 120 180 ) and want to buy leica SL2 or SL2-s to use with my S lenses. Beside the S3, i only use MP6 as my film camera along wiht m9 and some M lens. 

I already got the leica S to L adapter and tried 100 with sl2-s with excellence result. My goal is to use S lenses on SL for a more casual trip or when IBIS from SL2 can help me get more tack sharp image in terrible light condition. 

What's your opinion between SL2 and SL2-s? On one hand SL2 higher resolution should work well with S lens resolving capability but i also hear good things about SL2-s low light capability as well as the lower file size should be more process friendly for just a normal everyday photo where if i want resolution at its finest, i can use the S3 instead.

Thank your for your input and sorry for my English as it's not my native language. 

 

[helged]

2 hours ago, Nachapon Dumrongthumavoot said:

Hello everyone, i need your opinion on which camera to use as a secondary body for S lenses. 

I currently have leica S3 along with few S lens ( 45 70 100 120 180 ) and want to buy leica SL2 or SL2-s to use with my S lenses. Beside the S3, i only use MP6 as my film camera along wiht m9 and some M lens. 

I already got the leica S to L adapter and tried 100 with sl2-s with excellence result. My goal is to use S lenses on SL for a more casual trip or when IBIS from SL2 can help me get more tack sharp image in terrible light condition. 

What's your opinion between SL2 and SL2-s? On one hand SL2 higher resolution should work well with S lens resolving capability but i also hear good things about SL2-s low light capability as well as the lower file size should be more process friendly for just a normal everyday photo where if i want resolution at its finest, i can use the S3 instead.

Thank your for your input and sorry for my English as it's not my native language. 

 

I recently sold the SL2 and is about to get the SL2-S to accompany the S3 (and S006). For my shooting, the S3 delivers on resolution and adjustable raw-files in post, but lacks, in particularly, stabilisation, electronic shutter, fast(ish) (single) auto focus, and long lenses. The SL2 is a fine body, but the sensor could be better at low light. Here the SL2-S has an advantage. As said, resolution is covered by S3. I foresee the SL2-S to be mostly paired with the SL 24-90 (a great, versatile lens), plus Canon 400mm f4 DO v2 for long reach  (sometimes with the 1.4x or 2.0x extenders, with Sigma MC-21 adapter), and Sigma 14 mm f1.8 for astrophotography. Plus S-lenses in between...

[GiorgioNuvolari]

Even though I am new to S system, I thought I would share that my experience and advice fully mirrors that of Helge above. I had an SL2, but having acquired an S3, I replaced it for SL2-S, in particular to expand the usability range - SL2-S low light performance complements and adds to that of S3. 

With an M9-P, I feel all the points of Leica experience are covered for me. 

All the best, GN

[Stuart Richardson]

I have the SL2 and S3 and I find that both compete for the same niche -- very high resolution, high image quality. In the end, the SL2 is the better camera for me, but I think if you are happy with the S3, the SL2-S will probably add more value for you, as it will increase the gap in terms of low-light performance. I found the SL2 a bit better at high ISO than the S3, in that it does not show any banding and better preserves color depth, but the S3 is better for very long exposures, like night landscapes. I imagine the SL2S will further increase the difference in ISO performance and take it well ahead of the S3, especially with the advantage of stabilization, no mirror, and the ability to use faster lenses. It is also less expensive, so makes more sense as a backup camera.

[tom0511]

I own a S007 and a SL2.

If you are used to the resolution of the S, would you get along with the 24MP of the sl2-s?

Is high high ISO very important for you? With both, sl2 and sl2-s you gain IBIS and you gain some DOF over the S.

So it depends what you want the sl2/sl2s for? (and: do you really want an SL body as a backup?). S lens on SL2(s) is still a big combo, sl2(s)-body is a little smaller but than you have to add the adapter. And the AF with S lens on SL2(s) is slower than S lens on S body.

I own the adapter as well, but mostly use S lenses on the S and SL lenses (or M) if I use the SL2. I also sometimes put a small CL-lens (for example 23/2.0) on my SL2 and then still have over 20MP and a quite compact combo.

But if low low light is what you want the camera for, the SL2-s maybe adds more benefit.

 

Edited May 25, 2021 by tom0511

[glenerrolrd]

I have all three cameras S3 ,Sl_2 and SL_2 S .   Two situations could be important .  

                 (1) If your primary interest is to have a lower cost backup body for your S glass ..  I would definitely prefer the Sl2 .  

                  BackUp is the key attribute and to back up a S3 I would want either an S 007 or an SL2 .  

                 When I think of my S3 and S lenses its about getting the very best image quality ....not push the envelop on high ISO .  Once you get above ISO 800 on any of these bodies you start to lose meaningful image quality .  Even if you can get a stop or even two more with an SL2S ..you lose most of that to having less pixels to work with.

                  (2) If you are looking for an alternative for different shooting opportunities .  The Sl2_S could be a better choice ....but I would go for SL lenses or adapted M lenses.  

                  Most notable would be the 90-280 SL lens which extends the reach of your system considerably .  

                  Or a 50/1.4 summilux  M  which is a great walk around lens for night shooting .  

With gear this expensive I try not to compromise my kit against its primary intention .  S3 to me means best possible image quality in a durable travel friendly package .  

 

[LeicaS2]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Is it a backup or an alternative?

if backup, get an 007.

if alternative, get a SL2S.

[davidmknoble]

Granted I have the S007 and have not gravitated yet to the S3, but having owned the original SL, I find the larger sensor size of the SL2 to be fun to compare to the S007.  I put S glass, SL glass, M glass and R glass on the SL2 so it is not a backup, but rather augments the S for me.  Even more fun has been the 185mp option which surpasses the S007 and S3.  I think the issue with the SL system is that the dynamic range is less than the S system and that means I prefer the images from the S007 regardless.  However, the SL2 is incredible when it comes to flexibility of various lenses.  Effectively 50+ years of various Leica lenses all available for digital processing.  The S, because of the medium format, does not allow that.

So my conclusion thus far has been augment, but not backup.  Not sure if that makes sense, but that is where I’ve landed.

[setuporg]

It’s probably not augment or an alternative, but agonize whether you should keep an S given the SL2/S!:)

[davidmknoble]

1 hour ago, setuporg said:

It’s probably not augment or an alternative, but agonize whether you should keep an S given the SL2/S!:)

Agonize is another good ‘A’ word.  I love the flexibility of the SL2, but I still love the S007 images more.  If the S007 had a step down adapter for M and R lenses?  Well, then it might be less agonizing….

LOL!