Better for travel photography SL2 or SL2s?

[2M6TTLs]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think (as an experienced travel photographer) you should first decide what camera you want to use to get the results you want and then configure it accordingly. Don't choose the camera according to the weight. So if you really want to use an SL body, do it. Use M lenses or Sigma options to keep your weight manageable.The M series balance better on an SL body and that is a plus point.As some pointed out the M series cameras are almost as heavy.

Reading the comments here.... I'm impressed by the intrepid cyclist and hikers who said they carried lots of camera gear with no issues. I also have done extensive hiking at altitude and cycle touring around the world ,I'm also pretty fit and I can honestly tell you..in hot and humid conditions you will NOT want to carry any more weight than is necessary. believe me. In cooler, drier climates, you can do it. Also don't leave anything valuable in hotel rooms. Just don't. hotel rooms are never safe.You just think they are.And to the contributer who said use a phone.. No, no and no.

 I saw an amazing sunset as I was cycling home from work last week and i only had my phone avasilable.

The exposure was either too dark or too light no matter what I focused on and the phone would not pick up the reds I was seeing, plus it was awkward to hold. Fix in post? Nope, i tried it. Nothing like what I saw. Use a camera not a phone with a camera 'function'.   

CL.   perfect for travel, super compact.

SL series. good for travel with advantages...full frame, incredible viewfinder, lens versatility etc.   

Can't go wrong with either. SL2 ( more pixels ) or SL2s ( better low light performance) should be an easy choice, which do you care about?

The weakness of every digital camera on the market remains battery dependance, and the only solution is to carry spares.

Good luck! Happy adventures.

 

Edited July 22, 2021 by 2M6TTLs

[tom0511]

I agree with those saying SL2/SLS2-s is doable even for longer hikes.

I also own a CL Kit but for my planed vacation in the mountains this summer I plan to probably bring the SL2+24-70+M28/1.4. Also a 70-300, which however will stay in the room often.

Last time a had a SL2+Pana24-105 and it worked well. I find the 24-90Leica a bit on the heavy side for hikes.

I like the handling of the larger camera and bigger EVF and also feel the files are a bit more solid.

In regards of SL2-s vs SL2 - I would choose depending how often you shoot in low light, inside the churches etc, or if you take advantage of the higher resolution for cropping and bigger prints. 

 

[FlashGordonPhotography]

22 hours ago, 2M6TTLs said:

I think (as an experienced travel photographer) you should first decide what camera you want to use to get the results you want and then configure it accordingly. Don't choose the camera according to the weight. So if you really want to use an SL body, do it. Use M lenses or Sigma options to keep your weight manageable.The M series balance better on an SL body and that is a plus point.As some pointed out the M series cameras are almost as heavy.

Reading the comments here.... I'm impressed by the intrepid cyclist and hikers who said they carried lots of camera gear with no issues. I also have done extensive hiking at altitude and cycle touring around the world ,I'm also pretty fit and I can honestly tell you..in hot and humid conditions you will NOT want to carry any more weight than is necessary. believe me. In cooler, drier climates, you can do it. Also don't leave anything valuable in hotel rooms. Just don't. hotel rooms are never safe.You just think they are.And to the contributer who said use a phone.. No, no and no.

 I saw an amazing sunset as I was cycling home from work last week and i only had my phone avasilable.

The exposure was either too dark or too light no matter what I focused on and the phone would not pick up the reds I was seeing, plus it was awkward to hold. Fix in post? Nope, i tried it. Nothing like what I saw. Use a camera not a phone with a camera 'function'.   

CL.   perfect for travel, super compact.

SL series. good for travel with advantages...full frame, incredible viewfinder, lens versatility etc.   

Can't go wrong with either. SL2 ( more pixels ) or SL2s ( better low light performance) should be an easy choice, which do you care about?

The weakness of every digital camera on the market remains battery dependance, and the only solution is to carry spares.

Good luck! Happy adventures.

 

For me, I start with the purpose of the trip and work backwards. For Namibia, for example, I knew there would be some wildlife but mostly people and places. So I took a long zoom and gear that was suited to dynamic moving subjects. If it had been really wildlife focused I would have found a way to carry a supper tele. In Cuba my longest lens was 150mm (120mm equivalent), I prioritised primes over zooms and took a flash. I took a much smaller tripod to Cuba than Namibia because Cuba involved much more walking.

Then I consider how important photography is on the trip. For most of my travel, photography is the priority. I can get away with less clothes, shoes etc if I need to. I rarely get on a plane with more than 20kg including carry on and Cameras and tripods could be half of that with accessories, spares and backups. I did do a photography trip where one of the participants had 7kg of gear in total, including cameras and lenses. He didn't check gear at all. I tend to use cameras that charge by USBC so batteries are no longer an issue. A big portable battery pack can charge the camera battery many times, and I can charge in cars planes and trains along the way. If I'm out and photography isn't a priority then I might just take an M10, 28, 50 and 90. If I'm on my mountain bike, I just have a Sony RX1RII stuffed in my bum bag.

If I'm travelling in my own vehicle I'll often take two complete systems, because I can.

You're spot on about environment and temperature. You've got to know what you can carry in different conditions. If I were hiking overnight I'd carry an M and smaller lenses for sure because I'm also carrying shelter, clothes and food. For wandering around Havanna I can carry 6kg plus bag. That's my limit. Any more and I don't enjoy.

A travel kit, to me, is a fluid and flexible term that I adapt to the trip and the potential subjects. That explains why I need a new bag for every trip.

Gordon

Edited July 22, 2021 by FlashGordonPhotography

[2M6TTLs]

If you were on a pushbike the bike was carrying the weight of the camera gear (and your body,) not you yourself. That's one of the advantages of cycling over backpacking. If you are concerned about weight you need a CL kit. SL series is better for the photography because of the focusing screen alone but you'll feel that weight. M's are not lightweight either,

[FlashGordonPhotography]

On 8/8/2021 at 2:17 PM, 2M6TTLs said:

If you were on a pushbike the bike was carrying the weight of the camera gear (and your body,) not you yourself. That's one of the advantages of cycling over backpacking. If you are concerned about weight you need a CL kit. SL series is better for the photography because of the focusing screen alone but you'll feel that weight. M's are not lightweight either,

Try telling your legs that when you're climbing the Virunga mountains going from Uganda to Congo.  It just depends what your priorities are.

Gordon

[augustwest100]

The SL2S with the Sigma 45 2.8 is pretty light, and can be a good travel kit for people who find the 28mm focal length of the Q or Q2 to be too wide. I’ve traveled with that lens and a Sigma 100 macro. You can throw in a Voigtlander 21mm for wide shots. That lens fits in a pocket. 

[cheekz4dayz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'll add my 2 cents as I don't think I've seen this mentioned yet. I've never shot with an M so I can't speak on that. I've personally enjoyed the Sl2 for hiking especially because of the weather sealing. I was hiking in Kauai a couple months ago and the weather went from torrential downpour to sunny multiple times during a 3 hour hike. The Sl2 was solid the whole time and I used it with the 35/75 primes. I typically just have one lens attached and the Q2 in my sling bag in case I need something wider. 

 

Anyway back to the op: yes you can use the Sl2 for travel but I'd be mindful of how much gear I'm bringing. As the weight can add up quickly. On the trip I mentioned I had the sl2, 75 & 35 SL, 90-280, and a Q2. It was a bucket list trip so I brought everything lol but I only used the 90-280 when we were driving around the island with our car. Also, lugging all this in the airport got old quick 😂. I have no regrets cos I captured a lot of pictures I'm proud of but I'll always think twice before grabbing "the bazooka" aka 90-280

[LBJ2]

Having spent several hours/days learning the SL2 and SL 35/50 APOs, my muscle memory has adapted and I can say with confidence, I would bring this kit on travel with me just about anywhere. The SL2 no longer feels as heavy as my first impressions out of the box and the two APOs are not large relative to many other mirrorless primes. Additionally, my SL kit fits just fine in any of my current camera bags. 

I'll also give credit to the SL2 OEM camera strap which I find to be the ultimate in comfort with the neoprene neck pad and barely there light weight. And also very importantly, absolutely no metal bits to scratch and mark up my camera kit when stowing in the bag and plenty long to wear shoulder strap style. Not a beautiful strap, but the beautiful SL2 camera makes up for that. 

[jrp]

17 hours ago, augustwest100 said:

The SL2S with the Sigma 45 2.8 is pretty light, and can be a good travel kit for people who find the 28mm focal length of the Q or Q2 to be too wide. I’ve traveled with that lens and a Sigma 100 macro. You can throw in a Voigtlander 21mm for wide shots. That lens fits in a pocket. 

If compactness is your main criterion then, in full frame, there are smaller bodies in the Sony lineup and they too have small f2.5/f2.8 lenses (native or Sigma). I find them less satisfying to shoot with and so might you, especially if you have large hands or want to use bigger lenses.

[augustwest100]

8 minutes ago, jrp said:

If compactness is your main criterion then, in full frame, there are smaller bodies in the Sony lineup and they too have small f2.5/f2.8 lenses (native or Sigma). I find them less satisfying to shoot with and so might you, especially if you have large hands or want to use bigger lenses.

This was my experience exactly. I previously used A7 and A9 bodies, and they were definitely smaller and lighter, but I find the SL2S to be more solid with a more comfortable grip. Using it with the Sigma 45mm or with an M lens, it feels like a completely different camera compared with when I use a native SL lens, like the 24-70, at which point it feels like a DSLR. It's like having two cameras in one!

[beewee]

7 hours ago, cheekz4dayz said:

I'll add my 2 cents as I don't think I've seen this mentioned yet. I've never shot with an M so I can't speak on that. I've personally enjoyed the Sl2 for hiking especially because of the weather sealing. I was hiking in Kauai a couple months ago and the weather went from torrential downpour to sunny multiple times during a 3 hour hike. The Sl2 was solid the whole time and I used it with the 35/75 primes. I typically just have one lens attached and the Q2 in my sling bag in case I need something wider. 

 

Anyway back to the op: yes you can use the Sl2 for travel but I'd be mindful of how much gear I'm bringing. As the weight can add up quickly. On the trip I mentioned I had the sl2, 75 & 35 SL, 90-280, and a Q2. It was a bucket list trip so I brought everything lol but I only used the 90-280 when we were driving around the island with our car. Also, lugging all this in the airport got old quick 😂. I have no regrets cos I captured a lot of pictures I'm proud of but I'll always think twice before grabbing "the bazooka" aka 90-280

Travel photography can mean many things to different people. For hiking, the SL2-S + 28mm APO SL prime is on the top end of what I would want to carry as far as weight is concerned for a big hike (20+km and 1500m of elevation gain in a single day). An M10 + SEM wide angle prime would be a lighter and more compact setup but is also a different shooting experience. I’m starting to think maybe a CL (or future CL2) + 11-23 TL would be a more ideal setup for this kind of use case.

For road trips, I wouldn’t have much problem taking along more gear if photographic spots are near the car. I’ve taken 300/2.8 super teles with tripods and extenders for road trips and it’s not that big of a deal. For air travel, having a carryon rolling camera bag makes airport transits a breeze with heavy gear. I normally just keep the roller bag in the hotel and have a smaller bag for days where I want a lighter setup and I can slim down my kit for the day without needing to lug everything along.