SL2-S Test Drive

[rob_w]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 

As a CL user I was tempted to try out the new SL2-S and 24-70 zoom 'kit' zoom to see how much things have changed since I first looked at the SL. When Leica offered a test drive for the cost of shipping and insurance both ways I decided to take it up.

 

I took the test drive last weekend as we had a big family gathering and I wanted to try the combo in a familiar photographic scenario.

My aim was not to do rigorous comparative tests or pixel peeping, but just to shoot naturally with the test rig and see how I felt about it afterwards.  As a consequence, I did not test a wider range of features in a more deliberate way.  On the other hand, just using the combo as I would normally do, gave rise to more reflections than I expected.  I thought it might be interesting to share my experiences with the forum and solicit some opinions.  So here are the main points for me:

 

The SL2-S camera body:

• Autofocus is fast and reliable.  Not that the CL misses shots, but it can be critically slow when timing is important.  I am no AF expert, coming from 40 years of manual focus, so I don't know how that compares to phase-detect systems. The SL2-S was a noticeable improvement for me
• The sensor provides excellent highlight and shadow detail recovery.  On a bright day with strong shadows, I had no trouble recovering the full dynamic range in post. This is clearly a generation newer than the sensor in the CL
• The viewfinder is big, bright and fast. With the CL I have always noticed a slight lag compared to the OVF of the M camera which, of course, is instant because it is just a window on what is happening and has no blackout period.   With the EVF I would just miss the 'decisive moment' on some shots as a result of the tiny lag. Pleased to say I did not notice that problem with the SL2-S
• The size is perfect for my large hands and the buttons all fall in place nicely.  I think the Canon R camera feels the best to hold; Leica have sacrificed some form-fitting curves to achieve an elegant, clean visual design. That said, the size, placement, reach and operational simplicity are all very pleasing. In contrast, I have always found the CL a bit too small. I bought the grip to make it larger, but it is only just large enough
• The weight - oh dear, the weight.  Even with a small lens attached the body feels heavy.  I guess a block of lead or a gold ingot would be heavier, but not by much.  Given Leica's original DNA of making the most fantastic small cameras for nearly 100 years, it is so disappointing they don't seem to care about size and portability anymore

 

The 24-70 lens

• I compared the 24-70 lens to the Summilux-TL 35/1.4 on both the SL2-S and the CL bodies
• In some shots it appeared to resolve more detail than the TL35 while in other shots the result was reversed
• For portraits, the 24-70 was ever so slightly softer, perhaps just a lower contrast transition at the boundaries, than the TL35. Usually, I liked the 24-70 look more. That said, either look could be achieved with either lens with a bit of adjustment in post. The TL35 was also a bit colder in the shade, which surprised me as I expected Leica lenses to be consistent in their colour signature
• The 24-70 lens, although smaller than the 24-90, still felt heavy on the already heavy SL2-S, and unbalanced, with the centre of gravity too far forward.  I read reviews that it was better than the 24-90 in this respect, so I hoped for a better experience overall
• The 24-70 lens works fine on the CL but of course is rather large and front-heavy.  I did not compare it to the TL18-56 for image quality as I had chosen to use the TL35 for all comparisons on this occasion
• The TL35 also worked fine on the SL2-S. The 10.3 megapixel results were excellent and even zooming in on Lightroom it was not visually evident that the file was less than half the size of the 24 Mp norm. I guess that shows that megapixels are over-rated as a criterion for an excellent photographic system

 

Comparing the SL2-S and the CL as systems

• In the lighting conditions available, both systems produced excellent photos
• In general I felt the sensor was better in the SL2-S - better high ISO, better latitude for post processing, better dynamic range.  With more challenging conditions I suspect the difference would become more apparent
• the faster, brighter, larger viewfinder made for a better photographic experience
• I thought IBIS would make a noticeable difference but again, due to the bright conditions, shutter speeds were high enough for IBIS not to matter.  In other conditions and with longer lenses, I imagine it could come into play

 

Take-ways

 

I just do not think I can live with the weight of the SL2, even in SL2-S guise. Probably I could use one as a second camera alongside the CL, but I suspect there would be few occasions when it was taken out in preference. And that's before the complicated question of which lens(es) to purchase.

 

If Oskar Barnack were alive today one imagines he would be designing a small sensor camera with stunning lenses that can be taken everywhere and give outstanding results. That is, after all, what he did to unseat the front-runners making large, unwieldy cameras in his own era. If so, the CL would be the standard bearer for the Leica way of doing things today, and reviewers would be amazed by its performance. The people at today's version of Leica GMBH seem to have abandoned that objective to the point where it is apparently irrelevant to their aspirations.

 

If I were to put my money down for another Leica after the CL it would be more like a 'CL2' than an SL2. Possibly even a slightly larger, slightly heavier version of the CL. Not fussed if it has APS-C or FF sensor - I'll leave that to the technical wizards at Wetzlar. A later generation of either sensor is going to close the gap on what I experienced during the test. Add better EVF, better AF, snappier performance, what's not to like?

 

But of course there is no 'CL2' today. Some of us thought that mirrorless cameras would enable smaller, lighter bodies and lenses. In general, that has not happened with any manufacturer. Today's incarnations are heavier and bigger than any of the R and M cameras I have owned since 1979.

 

One other thing I discovered. The L Mount Alliance is beginning to create real variety.  In doing my research it became apparent that there are other options which could be considered, both for bodies and lenses.  Panasonic and Sigma have introduced lighter FF bodies, and both have a range of lenses to fit different budgets, size/weight and IQ needs.  For a full frame sensor the Panasonic S5 has to be investigated before making a decision -- to choose but one example. In some ways Leica has lost control of the L mount market, making it less clear that choosing a Leica is always going to be the best decision. I cannot think of a time in the last 40 years when I would have written that last sentence.

 

 

[mike3996]

Well written observations, thank you.

But I have one comment to make.

You lament about the size and weight and how Oscar must be turning over in his grave but the fact is that Leica has CL, TL2, Q, M, X in its current product line and only the S and SL series are large or heavy. I don't like heavy mirrorless autofocus cameras like SL but I think it's wise of them to expand their portfolio towards this segment. I don't think Leica will go exclusively towards SL any time soon, and I think they'll keep honoring and developing these smaller cameras and systems well into the future.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[wda]

13 minutes ago, rob_w said:

 

....

If I were to put my money down for another Leica after the CL it would be more like a 'CL2' than an SL2. Possibly even a slightly larger, slightly heavier version of the CL. Not fussed if it has APS-C or FF sensor - I'll leave that to the technical wizards at Wetzlar. A later generation of either sensor is going to close the gap on what I experienced during the test. Add better EVF, better AF, snappier performance, what's not to like?

 

But of course there is no 'CL2' today. Some of us thought that mirrorless cameras would enable smaller, lighter bodies and lenses. In general, that has not happened with any manufacturer. Today's incarnations are heavier and bigger than any of the R and M cameras I have owned since 1979.

 

One other thing I discovered. The L Mount Alliance is beginning to create real variety.  In doing my research it became apparent that there are other options which could be considered, both for bodies and lenses.  Panasonic and Sigma have introduced lighter FF bodies, and both have a range of lenses to fit different budgets, size/weight and IQ needs.  For a full frame sensor the Panasonic S5 has to be investigated before making a decision -- to choose but one example. In some ways Leica has lost control of the L mount market, making it less clear that choosing a Leica is always going to be the best decision. I cannot think of a time in the last 40 years when I would have written that last sentence.

 

 

Robert, thank you for your honest report of the findings following your test-drive experience. Very interesting. The SL system was launched about the time of my trying the already successful Leica Q. The visiting Leica rep encouraged me to try the SL, lying on a coffee table,  shared by a couple of customers. The SL had the original standard zoom lens fitted. I very nearly dropped it, so surprised was I when the camera was passed to me. I had reached the stage in my life when I no longer enjoyed carrying a heavy bag full of camera and lenses. I left the shop with my pe-ordered Q. Not long after, the CL was launched which was better suited to my needs than going the SL route.

I accept that the SL2-S has a superior sensor and performance. Hopefully Leica will realize that an upgraded CL would be widely welcomed by photographers who cherish the Barnack principles of a powerful camera in a compact package. I am sure your personal conclusions will resonate with many Leica photographers. Thank you.

[jaapv]

3 minutes ago, mike3996 said:

Well written observations, thank you.

But I have one comment to make.

You lament about the size and weight and how Oscar must be turning over in his grave but the fact is that Leica has CL, TL2, Q, M, X in its current product line and only the S and SL series are large or heavy. I don't like heavy mirrorless autofocus cameras like SL but I think it's wise of them to expand their portfolio towards this segment. I don't think Leica will go exclusively towards SL any time soon, and I think they'll keep honoring and developing these smaller cameras and systems well into the future.

Agree. The original SL/R series was no dwarf camera either (although the 4/5/6 followed the smaller trend of the time)- Leica has been offering different systems for different use for many decades.

[LocalHero1953]

Thank you for your observations; as a CL and SL2-S owner I fully agree with them.

I reach a different conclusion from these observations: the SL series is not a take anywhere camera, and many of those looking at it for that purpose are likely to be disappointed. The SL series is a great camera for specific tasks: events, controlled shooting, purposeful photography. It's not for street, travel, casual and social.

IMO of course.

[PDP]

That is a great report, a well written personal view and well balanced.

My experience was even shorter, I had the SL2 in my hand, was impressed by the EVF, but had the feeling that I do not want to spend my time with some x.5 kg in my hand or around my neck. Decision within 15 minutes:  I remain with the CL and M-lenses.

Correct comment: it does not matter if Oskar would run for CL (I guess he would), Leica is doing well offering different systems for different needs. And for me this little flexibel L-mount CL is matching best.

Thanks for your honest and well elaborated post!

Philipp

[rob_w]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

14 hours ago, PDP said:

it does not matter if Oskar would run for CL (I guess he would

Of course, as I read the history, Oskar was a rebel within E. Leitz at the time.  From the first Ur-Leica (1913?) to the decision to market a product based on the same technology (1925?) was a 12 year gap.  Even then I think it was viewed as highly risky and not fully supported.

PS that does ignore the minor matter of WW1, the Spanish Flu, rampant inflation, etc. all intervening ...

[hansvons]

On 6/7/2021 at 3:36 PM, rob_w said:

I just do not think I can live with the weight of the SL2, even in SL2-S guise. Probably I could use one as a second camera alongside the CL, but I suspect there would be few occasions when it was taken out in preference. And that's before the complicated question of which lens(es) to purchase.

Good summary. Clearly, the SL2-S isn't made for you. But it's always great to try new options. Perhaps you could have missed something important to you.

I bought the SL2-S and the 24-90 for commercial hybrid shoots, video and stills. And in both domains, it does what I expected it to do. The SL2-S is a sturdy workhorse and not a light travel companion. It delivers outstanding pictures and satisfies even the most demanding filmmaker when it comes to video quality. But it's heavy and indeed isn't made for the quick snap at family gatherings or travels. I find it well-balanced for video and stills, even/especially with the 24-90. But, again, it all depends on what you are used to and your line of work. 

I'm monitoring this forum because I'm contemplating getting a CL for personal use (I own a Fuji XE-3, but I like Leica colours much more). But I'll wait for the next generation. I want IBIS for the night shots; the IBIS in the SL2-S is outworldy, I don't want to sacrifice on this. For the lens, I'm thinking of getting a used Summicron M35mm because I'm a fifty guy, and that's what the 35mm essentially is in APSC. (I have solved the lens question already ;))

Thanks again for your thoughts.

 

[2M6TTLs]

I wonder how much longer Leica is going to make me wait for the next generation CL? I think I've been waiting a year and a half already.

Love the styling and build of the SL series ( because reminds me of the old R3 MOT ) but I know for a fact I can't deal with that much weight in my camera bag. I've learned that any camera over 600g is going to pretty heavy to carry around all day when you take into account a couple of lenses. Yes an M body is more than that and becomes a brick as the day goes on but it is manageable  somehow. On a hot day with walking to do that SL2s isn't going anywhere. CL and 18-56 plus one other M lens  and adaptor is perfect. 

Waiting for that CL2 or CLs.

[wda]

4 hours ago, 2M6TTLs said:

I wonder how much longer Leica is going to make me wait for the next generation CL? I think I've been waiting a year and a half already.

Love the styling and build of the SL series ( because reminds me of the old R3 MOT ) but I know for a fact I can't deal with that much weight in my camera bag. I've learned that any camera over 600g is going to pretty heavy to carry around all day when you take into account a couple of lenses. Yes an M body is more than that and becomes a brick as the day goes on but it is manageable  somehow. On a hot day with walking to do that SL2s isn't going anywhere. CL and 18-56 plus one other M lens  and adaptor is perfect. 

Waiting for that CL2 or CLs.

Quite a few people are eagerly awaiting the next generation of CL cameras. A similar story could be written about the Leica X series and T cameras, too. Many of those people have learned to live with the fact that Leica is very unpredictable,  particularly when they see niche items, like their new Leica smart phone, launched exclusively  in Japan.

I have learned to live with this situation. Fortunately,  I am still very happy with my CL and selection of lenses I possess. A new model will do little to inflate my happiness and contentment.

As an aside, writing a new article (yet to be published) for my website, I used some 17 years old images taken with my venerable 5 MP Leica Digilux 2 camera. Reprocessed with my improved level of Lightroom skills, one picture had an undeniable 'wow!' factor which gave huge pleasure to family viewers. So, my recipe for quelling frustration invoked by Leica's seeming tardiness, is to continue enjoying the equipment you already have.

Edited August 8, 2021 by wda

[Kim Dahl]

5 hours ago, 2M6TTLs said:

I wonder how much longer Leica is going to make me wait for the next generation CL? I think I've been waiting a year and a half already.

Love the styling and build of the SL series ( because reminds me of the old R3 MOT ) but I know for a fact I can't deal with that much weight in my camera bag. I've learned that any camera over 600g is going to pretty heavy to carry around all day when you take into account a couple of lenses. Yes an M body is more than that and becomes a brick as the day goes on but it is manageable  somehow. On a hot day with walking to do that SL2s isn't going anywhere. CL and 18-56 plus one other M lens  and adaptor is perfect. 

Waiting for that CL2 or CLs.

+ same her