The SL2 is all the camera you need ...

[V23]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

17 hours ago, helged said:

Looking forward to the SL2-S vs S5II comparison!

Me too.

[Tailwagger]

7 hours ago, Sohail said:

For me, it's all about the lenses. That's where it's at. 

I totally agree with the above which leads me to a slightly different view from your initial post.  After nearly four years with the 2, I've run into any number of situations where I would have appreciated several of the improvements you list and a few others you don't. OTOH, my collection of L-glass has never been a source of any serious disappointment.  The M is my primary, simple, deliberate camera; the SL2 is the shotgun generalist and as such, has a very different brief which it has executed brilliantly in some circumstances, in others, less so. 

My commitment, both financially and emotionally, to the L system lies with the glass, not the body.  Whether the SL3 will provide improvements sufficient to justify the outlay for another body remains to be seen, but Leica has a way, particularly after a full four year+ development cycle, of surprising on the upside.  So I'll reserve judgement until I see just how much magic they can conjure this time around.  New SL3 or no, the SL2 will remain in the fold, if for no other reason than mine has been through the sort of wars that produce a patina not so highly prized on the secondary market.  

[Virob]

On 6/20/2023 at 8:27 AM, Sohail said:

 Topaz does a really terrible job but the latest version of Adobe Camera RAW bridges the gap very nicely. What matters instead and has always mattered are the lenses. 

What is it about Topaz that you don’t like?  I don’t take a lot of high iso images but find that topaz denoise Ai is working very well with 3200 and 6400 images. Yes it can start out heavy handed but with the 4 different mode and the ability to make adjustments in each mode to dial things down, it provides a lot of flexibility to optimize the settings. I have heard of issues with Topaz photo Ai.

I am also very content with the SL2 and not waiting for the SL3, but who knows, maybe I’ll be blown away by it and change my mind once it is available. However, there is at least one apo lens that has priority.

47 mpix is plenty. The only reason I would be interested in more all else being equal is in order to crop images more. This would reduce the number of lenses to carry around and I can really focus on a few specific focal lengths that I like, and rely on cropping when needed, knowing I will still get an excellent result.

[Sohail]

6 hours ago, LeicaR10 said:

Sohail,  Your comments and points in your OP Post #1 are spot on.  The SL2 delivers the photographs that I "see" in spades.  I have an SL2-S for use with M lenses and needing low light performance.  We share many of the same ideas of what is needed and not needed.  For me, more MPs, flip screen and other items are not necessary for my genre of photography.  I believe too many photographers are lead down a path of more MPs by clever marketing in general and at the end of the day, they realize the latest and "most MPs" do not improve their photographs.  IF, photographers spent more time on creating photographs with meaningful "content" that includes better composition, light, shadow, texture and feeling they would find far more joy with their photography.  Your superb photographs show these attributes and clearly separate what most create as mere photos to your visionary photography being true masterpiece photographs.  Others will have their opinions about needing/wanting new and better camera/lens XY and Z and that is what keeps camera manufacturers in business.  For me, I prefer to concentrate on creating photographs with the tools that work now rather than waiting and wishing for the next "better" or often as we say here in Australia are really in the "Never, never".  r/ Mark   

I agree some of my best was done a micro-four thirds sensor at 16 MP. BTW, thank you for the very kind words.

[Sohail]

2 hours ago, Tailwagger said:

I totally agree with the above which leads me to a slightly different view from your initial post.  After nearly four years with the 2, I've run into any number of situations where I would have appreciated several of the improvements you list and a few others you don't. OTOH, my collection of L-glass has never been a source of any serious disappointment.  The M is my primary, simple, deliberate camera; the SL2 is the shotgun generalist and as such, has a very different brief which it has executed brilliantly in some circumstances, in others, less so. 

My commitment, both financially and emotionally, to the L system lies with the glass, not the body.  Whether the SL3 will provide improvements sufficient to justify the outlay for another body remains to be seen, but Leica has a way, particularly after a full four year+ development cycle, of surprising on the upside.  So I'll reserve judgement until I see just how much magic they can conjure this time around.  New SL3 or no, the SL2 will remain in the fold, if for no other reason than mine has been through the sort of wars that produce a patina not so highly prized on the secondary market.  

Agreed. It will be curious to see what they come up with. But judging from the upgrade of the Q2 (a camera I own and am pleased with) to the Q3, there was nothing major there to get me seriously excited. SL1 to SL2 was significant. I guess one thing that could get me interested is improved ergonomics. Perhaps if the body was slightly smaller or if the edges weren't so hard but again the SL2/s body is well balanced with the APO lenses -- and these are small gripes.

[Sohail]

1 hour ago, Virob said:

What is it about Topaz that you don’t like?  I don’t take a lot of high iso images but find that topaz denoise Ai is working very well with 3200 and 6400 images. Yes it can start out heavy handed but with the 4 different mode and the ability to make adjustments in each mode to dial things down, it provides a lot of flexibility to optimize the settings. I have heard of issues with Topaz photo Ai.

I am also very content with the SL2 and not waiting for the SL3, but who knows, maybe I’ll be blown away by it and change my mind once it is available. However, there is at least one apo lens that has priority.

47 mpix is plenty. The only reason I would be interested in more all else being equal is in order to crop images more. This would reduce the number of lenses to carry around and I can really focus on a few specific focal lengths that I like, and rely on cropping when needed, knowing I will still get an excellent result.

I guess, in my experience, Topaz isn't very kind to skin tones and can ruin crucial texture. It's all of course very subjective but the resultant images look too plascticy for my liking. 

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 6/20/2023 at 8:01 PM, goodbokeh said:

I'm aware of reported shutter shock effects (real and imagined) and the benefit of EFCS, which the SL2 lacks. Many on this forum and also Fred Miranda believe it's de minimis with the SL2's refined mechanical shutter. I'll be testing my SL2 when it arrives for that. There is always the fall back of Electronic Shutter, with it's known shortcomings. Many use that mode with their M11's which also lacks EFCS.

As background, I did careful tests on my M10-R & M with various M lenses up to 135mm in Live View Mode. That mode triggers the double action first curtain mechanical shutter on my M10s, which the SL2 & M11 always use. I only found the smallest amount of mechanical shutter shock discernible @ 1/180 sec. (300% view) so that is a hopeful sign to me.  

Do note that shutter shock is related to focal length. The longer the lens the more intrusive. 

[Paul2660]

I agree that topaz can be heavy handed on human subjects. Topaz Denoise. However on traditional landscapes it usually does a good job. There are two other software tools to consider. ON1 has a noise software out and Adobe Denoise which is in the latest versions of Adobe raw conversion software. (Camera raw and LR)

 

Paul

[LBJ2]

On 6/20/2023 at 11:27 AM, Sohail said:

I've just been out shooting with my SL2, and it's easy to forget how amazing a camera it is. For now and the next few years, I can't see any reason to upgrade. The SL2 is all the camera I need and more. With all the hype about what the new SL3 is going to include, I can't see it being markedly better than what the SL2 already gives us. Its only real shortcoming is noise at higher ISOs. Topaz does a really terrible job but the latest version of Adobe Camera RAW bridges the gap very nicely. What matters instead and has always mattered are the lenses. 

The following reasons are not enough to persuade me to upgrade to an SL3:

1. More pixels? 47MP is ample for my purposes (street, reportage, travel)
2. Better low-light handling? It has to be significantly better. 2/3 stops more. The difference in noise handling from Q2 to Q3 is not enough to warrant an upgrade.
3. Tiltable screen? Not very practical. Flippable makes more sense but too fiddly for a big camera.
4. Faster AF? I'm a slow photographer. I'm OK.
5. Better battery handling? I'm not complaining about battery life on the SL2.

I'll skip and wait for the SL4!

Thoughts?

I really enjoy the SL2, my first Leica mirrorless camera, much more than I had anticipated when I bought it. I could spend a few more years with this camera too!

Just to join the discussion with my own responses to your listed points. Also, a real shame some will miss out on this system's experience and IQ potential because they read on the forum it's a large/heavy system. So glad I didn't allow those comments to influence my decision to try the SL2: 

More pixels? 47MP is ample for my purposes (street, reportage, travel)

I seem to get along well with the opportunity to choose more FF MPs/resolution. I don' know how much is too much. So far up to 60MPs FF has been very useful and appreciated.

Better low-light handling? It has to be significantly better. 2/3 stops more. The difference in noise handling from Q2 to Q3 is not enough to warrant an upgrade.

Optimal low-light specs for photography has always been a forum favorite. Real-world, low light photography makes up a tiny portion of my work, I suspect I'm not alone. 

Tiltable screen? Not very practical. Flippable makes more sense but too fiddly for a big camera.

I can't stop talking about how useful the new Sony A7rV tilt and flip screen design resonated with me. I didn't know what I didn't know. The Q3 tilt will be loved by many I think. 

Faster AF? I'm a slow photographer. I'm OK.

Took me some time and practice to learn SL2 DFD/CDAF autofocus. I don't avoid fast moving subjects with this camera. Rather, I enjoy the challenge and proof it can be done. 

Better battery handling? I'm not complaining about battery life on the SL2.

Would be very nice if I never saw or experienced the SL2's "Battery Power not sufficient for 4K recording and Continuous Shooting" warning again. But easy to plan for regardless. 

I think having the M11's sensor in the SL3 alone will be enough for me to be interested in upgrading from SL2 to SL3. My current ambition is to shoot my Leica SL APO primes on the M11's sensor 😉. I am sure the SL3 will be another stunning Leica camera with the new sensor being just one of the desirables Leica has in store for us. But I am in no hurry. 

Edited June 22, 2023 by LBJ2

[Virob]

8 hours ago, Sohail said:

I guess, in my experience, Topaz isn't very kind to skin tones and can ruin crucial texture. It's all of course very subjective but the resultant images look too plascticy for my liking.

 

55 minutes ago, Paul2660 said:

I agree that topaz can be heavy handed on human subjects. Topaz Denoise. However on traditional landscapes it usually does a good job. There are two other software tools to consider. ON1 has a noise software out and Adobe Denoise which is in the latest versions of Adobe raw conversion software. (Camera raw and LR)

 

Paul

Thanks guys. I have used Topaz for scenics and wildlife, can’t recall a time I’ve used it for people. Would explain the differing perception.

[Sohail]

57 minutes ago, LBJ2 said:

I really enjoy the SL2, my first Leica mirrorless camera, much more than I had anticipated when I bought it. I could spend a few more years with this camera too!

Just to join the discussion with my own responses to your listed points. Also, a real shame some will miss out on this system's experience and IQ potential because they read on the forum it's a large/heavy system. So glad I didn't allow those comments to influence my decision to try the SL2: 

More pixels? 47MP is ample for my purposes (street, reportage, travel)

I seem to get along well with the opportunity to choose more FF MPs/resolution. I don' know how much is too much. So far up to 60MPs FF has been very useful and appreciated.

Better low-light handling? It has to be significantly better. 2/3 stops more. The difference in noise handling from Q2 to Q3 is not enough to warrant an upgrade.

Optimal low-light specs for photography has always been a forum favorite. Real-world, low light photography makes up a tiny portion of my work, I suspect I'm not alone. 

Tiltable screen? Not very practical. Flippable makes more sense but too fiddly for a big camera.

I can't stop talking about how useful the new Sony A7rV tilt and flip screen design resonated with me. I didn't know what I didn't know. The Q3 tilt will be loved by many I think. 

Faster AF? I'm a slow photographer. I'm OK.

Took me some time and practice to learn SL2 DFD/CDAF autofocus. I don't avoid fast moving subjects with this camera. Rather, I enjoy the challenge and proof it can be done. 

Better battery handling? I'm not complaining about battery life on the SL2.

Would be very nice if I never saw or experienced the SL2's "Battery Power not sufficient for 4K recording and Continuous Shooting" warning again. But easy to plan for regardless. 

I think having the M11's sensor in the SL3 alone will be enough for me to be interested in upgrading from SL2 to SL3. My current ambition is to shoot my Leica SL APO primes on the M11's sensor 😉. I am sure the SL3 will be another stunning Leica camera with the new sensor being just one of the desirables Leica has in store for us. But I am in no hurry. 

Great points overall. Just on the high MP vs low MP point, there tend to be two arguments: one, more latitude for cropping; and two, the ability to make large prints.

None of them I find compelling -- at least for my purposes. The cropping argument is a recipe for laziness and generally weaker images. It also defeats the purpose of getting a FF sensor and buying specific primes at specific lengths. And as for large prints, you can get great print quality from 16 MP files, if your technique is good. I'm mostly talking about travel and human subjects.

Re low-light handling, the upgrade has to offer significant gains -- not marginal. Obviously, that's subjective for each of us.

[LBJ2]

2 hours ago, Sohail said:

Great points overall. Just on the high MP vs low MP point, there tend to be two arguments: one, more latitude for cropping; and two, the ability to make large prints.

None of them I find compelling -- at least for my purposes. The cropping argument is a recipe for laziness and generally weaker images. It also defeats the purpose of getting a FF sensor and buying specific primes at specific lengths. And as for large prints, you can get great print quality from 16 MP files, if your technique is good. I'm mostly talking about travel and human subjects.

Re low-light handling, the upgrade has to offer significant gains -- not marginal. Obviously, that's subjective for each of us.

Personally, I think Leica offered up a very practical solution to the forum MP debate with the triple-resolution feature on the M11, Q3 and sure to come to the SL3 too. I have similar feature on my Sony camera as well. This feature has become a priority feature for any future camera I buy for photography.

To me it's all about how much good data I have to work with as needed/wanted or not, for multiple applications. I usually avoid the MP crop/print forum debate. I'll take as much as I can get haha. 24 MP or less is typically more than fine, so is 40 or 47MP. But I don't think I'll ever buy another camera again that doesn't include something like the triple resolution feature but that does require a generous helping of MPs to be effective IMO. 

I do agree, the 47MP SL2 sensor while not a low light champion, has more than impressed regardless of the charted data I've seen on this sensor. So much so I wonder if some of those charts/ data are somehow flawed.

But again, the SL2 for me has really been a joy to own and use for many reasons.  # 1, It really is a high quality system worthy of the red dot in every way. 

[goodbokeh]

6 hours ago, jaapv said:

Do note that shutter shock is related to focal length. The longer the lens the more intrusive. 

Thanks for that advice jaapv. I'll make a point of also testing my wife's Sigma 150-600 for mechanical shutter shock when my Silver SL2 arrives (still on backorder at B&H). I'll also test it in electronic shutter mode. I expect the electronic shutter will be superior for details, it is compared to EFCS on my Fuji 100S. The two things about electronic shutter that concern me are distortion of fast moving subjects and indoor lighting can in some special (unpredictable) circumstances cause banding.

[jaapv]

It has been tested extensively by a number of members here. Believe me. Mechanical shutter will produce soft images on that lens at any shutter speed   Shutter shock is on a higher frequency which does not register with OIS 

[goodbokeh]

13 minutes ago, jaapv said:

It has been tested extensively by a number of members here. Believe me. Mechanical shutter will produce soft images on that lens at any shutter speed   Shutter shock is on a higher frequency which does not register with OIS 

Thanks jaapv, are you saying there is a 150-600 OIS firmware incompatibility with the SL2? BTW, I don't test for shutter shock handheld there are just too many variables. I test on a tripod and make sure to have image stabilization turned off because of possible stable-body interference. I'm an old hand at testing for mechanical shutter shock, I've been doing it since the M4/3rds world received a Jim Kasson red alert on the Olympus EM-1 way back in the early teens. Soon thereafter EFCS was introduced by Olympus in a firmware update. 🙂 

[jaapv]

It has been tested extensively by a number of members here. Believe me. Mechanical shutter will produce soft images on that lens at any shutter speed   Shutter shock is on a higher frequency which does not register with OIS 

1 hour ago, goodbokeh said:

Thanks jaapv, are you saying there is a 150-600 OIS firmware incompatibility with the SL2? BTW, I don't test for shutter shock handheld there are just too many variables. I test on a tripod and make sure to have image stabilization turned off because of possible stable-body interference. I'm an old hand at testing for mechanical shutter shock, I've been doing it since the M4/3rds world received a Jim Kasson red alert on the Olympus EM-1 way back in the early teens. Soon thereafter EFCS was introduced by Olympus in a firmware update. 🙂 

No there is no firmware incompatibility. It is a known problem for users. I’ll be interested in your results, although testing on a tripod does not mirror real life use. 

[Sohail]

On 6/20/2023 at 9:28 PM, goodbokeh said:

The Silver SL2 is a beautiful presentation that reminds me of my youth and the film cameras I used with all the golden memories, slides (K-64) and prints from back in the 70's & 80's. Frankly, I want something more graceful in appearance and image production for my mirrorless inventory and the 47 MP FSI CDAF Silver Leica SL2 will be that.

Like you, I succumbed to the silver SL2. I had no intention of getting it. The pictures of it online weren't doing it for me. But when you see it up close, it's a thing of beauty. 

 

[LBJ2]

On 6/22/2023 at 8:19 AM, LBJ2 said:

I really enjoy the SL2, my first Leica mirrorless camera, much more than I had anticipated when I bought it. I could spend a few more years with this camera too!

Just to join the discussion with my own responses to your listed points. Also, a real shame some will miss out on this system's experience and IQ potential because they read on the forum it's a large/heavy system. So glad I didn't allow those comments to influence my decision to try the SL2: 

More pixels? 47MP is ample for my purposes (street, reportage, travel)

I seem to get along well with the opportunity to choose more FF MPs/resolution. I don' know how much is too much. So far up to 60MPs FF has been very useful and appreciated.

Better low-light handling? It has to be significantly better. 2/3 stops more. The difference in noise handling from Q2 to Q3 is not enough to warrant an upgrade.

Optimal low-light specs for photography has always been a forum favorite. Real-world, low light photography makes up a tiny portion of my work, I suspect I'm not alone. 

Tiltable screen? Not very practical. Flippable makes more sense but too fiddly for a big camera.

I can't stop talking about how useful the new Sony A7rV tilt and flip screen design resonated with me. I didn't know what I didn't know. The Q3 tilt will be loved by many I think. 

Faster AF? I'm a slow photographer. I'm OK.

Took me some time and practice to learn SL2 DFD/CDAF autofocus. I don't avoid fast moving subjects with this camera. Rather, I enjoy the challenge and proof it can be done. 

Better battery handling? I'm not complaining about battery life on the SL2.

Would be very nice if I never saw or experienced the SL2's "Battery Power not sufficient for 4K recording and Continuous Shooting" warning again. But easy to plan for regardless. 

I think having the M11's sensor in the SL3 alone will be enough for me to be interested in upgrading from SL2 to SL3. My current ambition is to shoot my Leica SL APO primes on the M11's sensor 😉. I am sure the SL3 will be another stunning Leica camera with the new sensor being just one of the desirables Leica has in store for us. But I am in no hurry. 

"I think having the M11's sensor in the SL3 alone will be enough for me to be interested in upgrading from SL2 to SL3."

Based upon Q3 sensor information I've seen recently, I might have to back track or adjust my thoughts on this statement. TBD and I am sure the SL3 sensor will be another very good sensor/camera system but if perceived history repeats itself, there is a potential the SL3 will come with the same sensor as the Q3 also with PDAF ( speculation of course). 

While the Q3 sensor and the M11 sensor might share the same foundation or not, the Q3 measurements while still very good and capable, don't seem to be at the nit-pick level of the M11 output. Not that many will care about this one way or the other. And who knows maybe adding PDAF tech to the M11 sensor does result in part in some of these sensor level differences between M11 and Q3, I don't know but am interested to learn more. 

[Sohail]

20 minutes ago, LBJ2 said:

"I think having the M11's sensor in the SL3 alone will be enough for me to be interested in upgrading from SL2 to SL3."

Based upon Q3 sensor information I've seen recently, I might have to back track or adjust my thoughts on this statement. TBD and I am sure the SL3 sensor will be another very good sensor/camera system but if perceived history repeats itself, there is a potential the SL3 will come with the same sensor as the Q3 also with PDAF ( speculation of course). 

While the Q3 sensor and the M11 sensor might share the same foundation or not, the Q3 measurements while still very good and capable, don't seem to be at the nit-pick level of the M11 output. Not that many will care about this one way or the other. And who knows maybe adding PDAF tech to the M11 sensor does result in part in some of these sensor level differences between M11 and Q3, I don't know but am interested to learn more. 

I agree. If the SL3 follows the Q3 trajectory, it doesn't bode well. I think the Q3 is a design failure. If they go with the tiltable screen too, I think the SL2 will remain a classic. I'm happy to be proved wrong. Interesting to see how this pans out.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Mr.Prime]

On 6/20/2023 at 12:04 PM, Ko.Fe. said:

Staying strictly within 

I have to say - I can't agree. Way too heavy as the only camera for me. But SL2-S  is best replacement of FF DSLR I could wish for.

 

It is all individual. We have thread here where Hasselblad rig is called as light and compact.  

I've not handled one so I was curious and looked up the weight of the camera. Holy cow, it's heavy. My limit is an M3 and that's coming up in search results at 580g. The SL2 comes up in the same search results at 920g (with battery). The best Leica digital camera I owned (no longer) was the CL at 365g which was an easy carry. The SL2 is simply a non-starter for me at that weight, it'd never go on travel with me. Sony can do better, the a7rv is 730g (incl. battery) but the M11 is even better, close to the M3.