SL2 or SL2-S

[Virob]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Between denoise, and upscaling Ai applications, arguments can be made for either a lower or higher MP cameras. There are, of course other reasons to pick one or the other, but the lines are blurring.

[LocalHero1953]

I am in the process of off-loading my Sigma fp, to allow for the possible purchase of a second (used) SL2-S. I had hoped the new Q3 would replace both the Sigma for tripod-mounted video (for performance recording) and my Q2 for, well, Q2 stuff. Sadly the Q3 retains the 30 minute recording limit. A second SL2-S will allow matched video recording at wide angle and close-up (with a long lens) simultaneously, and also video recording and stills (also with a long lens). With a SL3 on the horizon, but possibly a distant one, I will hold back on the second SL2-S until the need arises.

I didn't own the SL2 long enough (4 months) nor at the same time as the SL2-S, so I can't comment safely on your question, Chris. For rehearsals I usually set the AutoISO upper limit to 25,000; that produces more noise than your shot shows, but LR Denoise cures that effectively. I would be interested to shoot a distant face in low light with eyes and eyelashes with both cameras, to see how easy it would be to crop and recover details.

[Advertisement]

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

[Ken Abrahams]

As it turned out I first purchased the SL2 with 50 Summicron Asph kit combination and the deal was very good however I really wanted the SL2S. Going through my Camera store for purchases, Leica Wholesale just didnt have any stock. After a few weeks with the SL2 I purchased the SL2S (reporter) and they threw in a free 35 Sigma lens. All I can say is, I am very glad that I bought the two cameras. There is no point in "splitting the baby" so to speak when one can have the best of both worlds.

Ken 

This is what I wrote this morning over in the Forum's SL2S Image page  

"Acquiring two new cameras in the same month presents an unlikely challenge. I have mainly shot the SL2 however going back over the SL2S files it has taken a few months to realise the small but very appreciative differences to each camera. Perhaps I am a bit precious with the SL2S because its Reporter colour makes it look very special. The SL2S however has very beautiful files and works well at night or any time really.

The SL2 also has great files which allow for high resolution and the ability to crop a bit further than I would normally. It works a treat on the Apo SL 35 and VE 90-280 lenses. Taking time to get to know one camera to optimise settings for shooting styles may take a longer when alternating between two new cameras however I am just about at that point now. My SL 601 sits in the drawer now but I have that camera to thank for a good starting point for appreciating these two cameras. I have no regrets buying into the SL models and hardly ever think of the M10 or M 11 systems."   

[LocalHero1953]

4 hours ago, Ken Abrahams said:

it has taken a few months to realise the small but very appreciative differences to each camera.

How would you describe the differences in the images you get from each? Colour? Noise? (There are detail/resolution differences, of course).

Do you see any differences in responsiveness? (Early reviews said the SL2-S was faster to focus, but the SL2 has had a number of AF improvements since then).

Edited June 6, 2023 by LocalHero1953

[hansvons]

19 hours ago, jplomley said:

Of course, however the SL2 now becomes formidable at higher ISO's mitigating the requirement for an SL2s. Just depends how high an ISO one needs for their imaging under low light conditions.

It's not only the noise. It's the juice in the shadows. Many famous films are shot on cameras that don't resolve the delivery format 4K because cinematographers and directors tend to choose fidelity over resolution. Today's latest and greatest cinema camera, the Alexa 35mm from 2023, resolves 4K.

The less-resolving camera has larger pixels, and in the SL2S case, its backside illuminated sensor effectively uses an even larger portion of the available pixel size. That allows for less light saturating the sensor in less time. You cannot fix that in AI-powered apps, at least for now. 

I'd only choose resolution over fidelity if I used the higher resolution. Since I do only editorial and journalistic work, I only need up to 24MP. Still, the higher fidelity is very useful in lowlight and the "shoot low, print high" postproduction approach. If I were shooting landscapes (what I occasionally do) and printed super large, I'd considered a high-resolving sensor. But I don't print super large, maxing out at 70cmx50cm, which fits snugly with the SL2-S resolution. 

I believe the current resolution race is basically a horsepower race for cars that never(rarely) see the race track.

The perception that the SL2S is the SL2's little sister is based on the price. In reality, it's the more capable camera in many ways, and that's not only the sensor. Processing speed comes to my mind, quicker AF, video, etc. I think of it as an unusual Leica bargain. 

[Ken Abrahams]

5 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

How would you describe the differences in the images you get from each? Colour? Noise? (There are detail/resolution differences, of course).

Do you see any differences in responsiveness? (Early reviews said the SL2-S was faster to focus, but the SL2 has had a number of AF improvements since then).

Well others have offered very good descriptions of the differences in these two cameras including the reply above this by Hansvon. I haven’t noticed any difference in focusing speed. I tend to agree with much of what is been said on this forum about the SL2S compared to SL2 but wouldn’t go as far as saying the SL2S will be a classic. Maybe if I only had that camera and not the SL2, I might fancy the notion mine was more special than the other? 

The SL2S is less noisy and has smooth rendering especially in dusk or dawn, subdued lighting. When I first saw SL2 files using SL lenses some time ago,  I thought they looked clinical compared to M lenses. They were sharp but a different kind of sharp. I wasn’t convinced at all but since using these two cameras with SL lenses I have changed my mind. I like to add impressions to my images, I like a surreal edge whether it be color or hyper real or smooth or flat images, I like to create something unique. I can do this with the SL2 files. The resolution and detail is astounding. The SL2S is better in the shadows but has extraordinary smooth rendering with SL or M lenses. I love using the 21 SEM with either camera. 
 

There was a couple of times I did think the SL2S was a bit faster to focus. Some lenses are different it seems. 
best

Ken 

[LocalHero1953]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks, Ken. I have the SL2-S, and could use a second body sometimes - I was wondering what I'd notice if I went for the SL2 rather than the SL2-S. It will most likely be the SL2-S though.

[Stuart Richardson]

If you already have the SL2S, I think it makes a lot of sense to get the SL2, unless you need to use two SL2S cameras in very low light at the same time. Perhaps that is something you do in theater, but I don't think it is a typical requirement for much else. I know the SL2S is more popular with most people who are more focused on video or on low light, but I still think the SL2 is the better camera. For me at least. The resolution boost from 24mp to 47mp is not subtle...it is a significantly larger file and it makes for smoother tonality, less moire and a more medium format look, in addition to its higher resolution. You can crop the hell out of it, which is particularly useful with long telephotos. With modern noise reduction options, it is possible to get usable images out of it at very high ISOs, especially after downsampling to 24mp. It is not going to be better than the SL2S in that regard, but it is in my experience a lot better than the M10 was...it is not awful in that regard, at least compared to other high resolution sensors. It is pushing four years old, however, so it is of course not going to equal newer sensors. Still, I think the SL2 and SL2S are best seen as additive to each other, like Ken indicated. They both have areas where they are quite a bit superior to the other. Which of those is more important will be for each photographer to decide, but if you have the opportunity to have both, I think that is quite a luxury choice to be able to make. Since the interface and handling is identical, swapping between the cameras is not going to really slow you down at all either.

[Ken Abrahams]

Sold on the SL2S - This image taken at dusk pretty much sold me on the SL2S as have a special quality. The file has obviously been worked in photoshop but the file has all the info to start with.  800 iso and shot at 1/8 sec and f9.5 on 21 Super Elmar lens. I didnt mean to shoot at such a low speed however it really highlights the SL2 and SL2S image stabilisation. The lack of noise at 800 isnt something new because the SL 601 was pretty good at 1600 iso. The file allowed me to bring the image alive with contrast adjustments and masking layers. The only filter used was camera raw and there was a total of 10 adjustment layers in PS. The SL2 is also special and I use that camera with the VE 90-280 and other lenses when photographing trains and architecture in daylight hours. 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited June 7, 2023 by Ken Abrahams
sp

[Ken Abrahams]

SL2S with APO SL 35

I can remember being very surprised by this file. Its super clean, smooth and bright details including colour rendering really blew me away. 200 iso at F4 looks like a sweet spot I thought. The 35 APO lens is great wide open and I endeavour to shoot with that setting whenever possible. Anyway the SL2S appeared to give me exactly what I wanted when creating images with subtle and surreal impressions.    

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Ken Abrahams]

SL2 - with VE 90-80 is a great combination however so is the APO SL 35 lens. The SL2 is great for when cropping into files. Not that anyone sets out to crop and not use the whole image area however it certainly allows for that leeway. Sometimes I will do Street using SL2 and 21 SEM and the cropped files are excellent. The larger files are a dream to work with and allows plenty of scope for intensive post processing.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[LocalHero1953]

Thanks, @Stuart Richardson and @Ken Abrahams - really useful advice and comparisons. I don't have to make a decision yet, though I have now sold the Sigma fp, so I no longer have that flexibility of choice if the need arises.

[Olaf_ZG]

10 hours ago, Ken Abrahams said:

Sold on the SL2S - This image taken at dusk pretty much sold me on the SL2S as have a special quality. The file has obviously been worked in photoshop but the file has all the info to start with.  800 iso and shot at 1/8 sec and f9.5 on 21 Super Elmar lens. I didnt mean to shoot at such a low speed however it really highlights the SL2 and SL2S image stabilisation. The lack of noise at 800 isnt something new because the SL 601 was pretty good at 1600 iso. The file allowed me to bring the image alive with contrast adjustments and masking layers. The only filter used was camera raw and there was a total of 10 adjustment layers in PS. The SL2 is also special and I use that camera with the VE 90-280 and other lenses when photographing trains and architecture in daylight hours. 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

And now, if we would have a T/S lens, things would be even much better…

[Ken Abrahams]

7 hours ago, Olaf_ZG said:

And now, if we would have a T/S lens, things would be even much better…

Yes, I see what you mean Olaf. I corrected perspective in a small way but  preferred the tilted towers for effect and to keep more image area visible. I think I called this Gotham Melbourne😀 Never the less T/S Leica would be nice. 😀👍

[PeterGA]

If one crops a lot then more megapixels matter- I frame and shoot 16:9 and PP into Xpan a lot so the extra megapixels matter to me. This will be the only reason I upgrade to the next iteration into SL3. I used to shoot with a Fuji 100 until I got tired of the weight and lens sizes - for some forms of photography like crowded scenes- it is amazing what one can see in the file which one didn't even notice when shooting with high MP count cameras ...

[Ken Abrahams]

One of the ways I have stumbled on to a system to assess how a new camera (sensor) performs compared to other cameras is by using one particular lens over several cameras. One such lens I have used over the years with various cameras is the 21 Super Elmar M lens. There are other lenses but the SEM is one I have used constantly for either landscape or Street with all camera iterations. The SEM performs exceptional well with all of the cameras such as M Monochrom, SL 601, M10M and followed by the SL2 and SL2S. The system follows haphazardly the use of lens which acts as a "control" in my meta assessments. Recently to my great surprise, the 21 SEM and SL2S combination has shown extraordinary smooth, detailed files with apparent enhancement in colour rendering compared to any previous camera. Reds and greens especially are stand out colours which seem to "pop" out of the frame. The SL2S files also seem to hold detail when cropped substantially although the SL2 is better positions for extreme crops the SL2S with its better dynamic range seems to also cope well with such crops.

Instead of a scientific appraisal my sensing and visual memory of files over the years and different cameras noted how the SL2S SEM combination is on another level. Admittedly I am "late to the party" with my recent purchase of both SL2 and SL2S however there still seems to be questions whether to buy SL2 or SL2S. My background in counselling alerts me not to advise people making up their minds, to decide one or the other camera. Those decisions are best made by the individual. Leica have made not one but two very good cameras however they have presented a quandary in choosing one or the other. Many have purchased both SL2 and SL2S which solves the issue hands down and Leica benefit from such a market strategy. If I was to choose one, all over again with the knowledge I have now, it would definitely be the SL2S.