Moving towards the big sister?

[PDP]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Good evening community,

this are my first ideas on the question if it is worth to invest into the big sister the SL2 or better not. I know that here are some discussions on that, ok, this is mine. My question is not to get rid of the camera I loved the most (my CL), it is more if it is worth to make use of the same system and buy the SL2. I have bought one, no I check it, finally I decide. There is nothing to say about quality, EVF, intelligent handling and all those things of the SL2 (they are all great, full stop) and its weight compared to CL (2.5 times or so), my question is based on results, on comparison of the pictures leaving the SL2 compared to CL.

Simple things first:

Answer 1: handling with the two major wheels is equal, but the SL2 offers more FN-buttons.

Answer 2: you can use all TL lenses on SL2, quite good in handling and you still end up with reasonable MPs, the 11-23 might even be a great deal.

Answer 3: I do not like the original SL lenses because of their seize and weight, but the SL2 works well on M-lenses. In fact it works better on M-lenses than the M due to its fantastic EVF and focus peaking. EVF of SL2 beats the one of CL. On SL2 you can use M-lenses within their character, it is so great!

Answer 4: the SL2 offers some special items and modi, I've read about but do not used so far. There is for example a multi-shot-mode, but Leica Academy Australia said it works in big prints only. These aspects I do not need do not count, I am an old-fashioned photographer. BUT BUT BUT, SL2 offers build in IS, and oh my god it works so well with M-lenses (it is about 2 stops I guess, or more).

Answer 5: It has 2.5 times the weight, but it works well, now after 2 days with both I feel the CL too light, ohoh, not fully true, the CL is still the beauty, the modern Barnack.

And now the crucial master question, does the SL2 makes better pictures? Yes it makes, clearly it makes, but what counts is what lenses I have and what I want:

Answer 6: CL is APS-C, SL2 is FF and SL2 has twice the pixels on twice the sensor, in other words (oh shit) they are almost equal in terms of MPs per cm2. Now everything depends on the lenses you have (or willing to use)

• you have TL-Lenses, the use on SL2 does not make sense at it internally crops to APS-C, so you carry 2.5 times for almost same result
  BUT I can use TL-lenses on both
• you are willing to invest in SL-lenses; they seem to be the best in the world, the largest, most expensive, good luck, not my world; so this is not my point, full stop
• you have M-lenses (I have a lot, each chosen carefully): The CL works well with them, really well, OK crop, but it works well;
  and now the SL2: it keeps me speechless, the handling with magnified EVF plus focus peaking, they work so well, so precise (in fact with CL preciseness is lower)! AND the M-lenses are used as designed by Leica

Summary:

I love my CL and I will keep it, for its size and weight and image quality and versatility with TL-, L-mount and M-lenses.
It will be my camera for family, for street and travelling.

But I probably/may keep the SL2 for my fine art landscape and those moments I want to us a M-lens perfectly

Reasonable, any comments welcomed

 

 

 

 

 

[Advertisement]

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

[Daedalus2000]

For me it makes sense, as you have a common lens mount so you can see the two cameras as complimenting each other and as also having a back up. The SL2 is for cases where you need extra quality or megapixels (with full frame lenses), the CL can be for all the cases where you need something light. The sigma/panasonic full frame lenses are very good so you do not have to have only Leica lenses.

 

[cpclee]

Everyone is different.  For me, the CL covers my needs 95% of the time and has more than enough pixels.  When I reach for an SL camera, it's not for more pixels but for the use of the big zooms.  The combination of speed, range and image quality in these zooms is unique and they just get the work done .  A secondary reason for using an SL camera is to mount a big flash and get high speed sync.  

[Driften]

I added an SL2-S to go with my CL. In my case most of my lens are Sigma full frame versions that I bought for the CL but work great on the SL2-S.  The IBIS and low light performance of the SL2-S makes it my go to for longer lens, and the CL is my goto for more standard lens where I don't need IBIS and light weight is needed. 

[papimuzo]

Thanks a lot  for your precise and sensible analysis.
I am not in the mood to wear a heavyer package (I am 82...) but I see very well what I miss. I will stay with my CL's.

[tom0511]

I own both systems and I am even thinking to sell the CL System (or part of it).

Why?

1) Because I prefer the larger camera body of the SL2, I prefer the viewfinder, I prefer the wheels. It feels just right in my hands.

The CL I allways use with grip and it feels good, but the SL2 feels better

2) I do believe to see a difference in IQ, not just pixels, also "depth" of color, tonality and 3d look

3) I find the 18-56 kind of boring lens. (I find the 11-23 and some other lenses great though)

4) The Cl is compact, but as soon as you put a 35/1.4 on it its not really a "compact" anymore. The bag is smaller than the SL bag, but you need a bag. If I want small I often rather use a Canon g1xIII which fits the pocket of my jacket

Where the CL shines IMO is with the 11-23 as a compact UWA camera, and with the 23mm because its that small

However I do rather use native L-mount lenses for the SL2 to take advantage of precise AF. If Leica seem to expensive there are good options from Panasonic and also from Sigma available.

 

[Le Chef]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Big is the operative word. You could probably get most of the way there using Topaz Denoise without having lug around the big sister…

[huwm]

what about the step sis, the Lumix S5?

[jaapv]

As far as I’m concerned , a fantastic camera. It has pushed the CL into a light-use role. 

[ramarren]

I'm happy with the CL for the kind of photography that I do with it. When I want more pixel resolution, more tonality, etc, I go to medium format digital instead with a larger sensor than FF. 

G

[cpclee]

14 hours ago, ramarren said:

I'm happy with the CL for the kind of photography that I do with it. When I want more pixel resolution, more tonality, etc, I go to medium format digital instead with a larger sensor than FF. 

G

Can I ask which medium format digital system you use?

[ramarren]

20 minutes ago, cpclee said:

Can I ask which medium format digital system you use?

Hasselblad 907x/CFVII 50c Special Edition. It's a great addition to my V system bodies and lenses. 

G

Edited December 16, 2021 by ramarren

[Kim Dahl]

I have been in the same situation.  I have decided 90% 😆 - SL 2 is a completely different camera.  It weighs 2.5 times more.  CL covers what I need.  I will never get to use an SL2 as much as my CL and Leica MD.  So my decision now is:

I keep my TL2 and my TL optics for a while.  It makes amazing pictures.  Then I use my Leica MD with M optics (also TL2 with M) then I will see what the Leica M11 offers otherwise I will look for an M10 (R) that way I get two different systems.  
CL and M.

I also have Canon RF and if not Leica either comes with a new CL (2) or a “FF CL2” then I will phase out SL / TL completely and ny Leica will be completely Leica M and maybe Leica Q. I will not invest  more in TL / SL lenses for now.  Then Canon RF will be my new AF system along with Leica M and Q. This is how I feel right now…. Leica SL is Way too Big 

Ps.  I just want to justify why I think SL is too big: For Canon RF is just as big :-).  I use my Canon professionally and must have equipment for sports etc.  So SL is not an option either due to AF or objective selection.  We prefer not in that discussion, but if you are a photojournalist with a lot of sports, Canon-Nikon and Sony are the options you have.  So Leica for me is the little discreet camera I use once in a while and the one I use privately.

Edited December 16, 2021 by Kim Dahl
inserted a ps:

[Michael Markey]

Still using both CL and SL2s .

Still only one (apart from my M lenses) full frame lens for the SL2s.

Rest of the time I use the TL lenses.

Don`t find the SL2S all that heavy tbh

I find both cameras to be very good .

Very tempted to get the 24-90 but I`m hanging back .... I still have a bit of a question mark about these two product lines being developed further .

Used prices on SL lenses seem to be attractive at the moment .

 

 

[Camaro5]

M10 is my main camera but I still like my CL and use it when I want to use a zoom or telephoto lens and autofocus.  For my purposes the CL is a good backup to the M10 and each has their own particular uses.  I like the IQ of the M10 better, but that's not to say the CL is inferior by any means.

My CL has less than 2000 shots on it and my three TL lenses are all pretty new, so it's not going anywhere.  

You can spend yourself into oblivion chasing the next latest & greatest, but I'm trying to put a cork in that habit, hard as it is sometimes.  I did enough wheeling and dealing this year and now have two nice newer kits that I'm happy with and hope to leave it this way, at least for a while.