SL2 vs. SL2-S in 2024 (Lightroom SR/NR)

[Almizilero]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Yes, I chose the (probable) year of the SL3 to make a dream come true and add an SL2 to my SL2-S. So far, the two have been a dream team for my diverse needs. The SL2-S for everything stage related and the SL2 as my new main body for portraits.

Today I had a little time on my hand and did the obvious, test the two against each other. But with a twist! The question was if the main difference (maximum low light performance versus maximum resolution) was still that relevant with all the AI capabilities of modern image software.

So I shot three pictures of the same scene from a tripod with both cameras at ISO 200, 6400 and 12800. From what I read, the SL2 should be unusual beyond ISO 3200 which is absolutely not what I found. Maybe these notions come from test with older firmware, but even the shot at ISO 12800 was quite decent. Not as good as from the SL2-S, of course, but with a little tweaking ...

The images ISO 6400 were uninteresting, so I concetrated on the other two extremes.

At ISO 200, both cameras give excellent results. As has been said by others, the SL2 has a little more punch to the colours and renders a wee bit warmer, but with some WB adjustments, that difference almost disappears. What remains is the better resolution the SL2 provides. There is so much detail in the image! So I used the Super Resolution feature in Lightroom to blow up the SL2-S file (and then I downsized it to the resolution of the SL2). The result is quite amazing. It looks almost as detailed on first glance. Only by pixelpeeping it becomes obvious that real resolution looks better than AI resolution. It also lost some more contrast, but that should be easily adjustable.
I didn't bother to try Noise Reduction on the SL2-file at ISO 200.

At ISO 12800, there was still a lot of detail in the SL2 file, but the one from the SL2-S looked considerably better. So this time, I got NR on the SL2 file. at a strenght of 25, the file cleaned up even to much. It got detailed and sharp, but looked a little to processed. I guess a little tweaking in the NR strength might help. On the other hand, the Super Resolution didn't look to great on the SL2-S file. It lost some of punch and colour in the process. Again, at closer insprection, the real resolution of the SL2 trumps the blown up version from the SL2-S. Much more so at the higher ISO. Even with the effect of the to strong NR, the SL2 file still looks better.

So, in the end, I think the gap between the two bodies has gotten much smaller. It's still a decission between resolution and noise, both cameras shine in there respective area. But the new AI tools can help a lot with both. I feel the NR work better for the SL2 than the SR does for the SL2-S, but in the end, you can just get the camera you feel fits your needs best and use the AI tools for the times you need better resolution/noise reduction. With the new tools at our disposal and the assumption that the SL3 will have a similar sensor to the M11, I even doubt there will ever be a SL3-S.

If you want to have a look at it yourself, heres a download of tiff files:
https://we.tl/t-t4CKDUckjV

They are coded as follows: SL2_ISO200_OR_6 which means: camera_ISO_ (OR=original file / SR=superresolution / NR=noisereduction)_(6=resolution of SL2S / 8=resolution of SL2)

Remember that this was in no way a scientific test. Also I feel that under the given circumstances the high ISO performance is usually better than in real life scenarios where you have to raise the ISO to achieve manageable shutter speeds. I hope to add some experience in that regard after the weekend.

For now, have a look if you like, I'll be happy to hear your thoughts! I for one, can hardly believe that I came to the conclusion that I'd actually keep the SL2 if I had to give up one. Tell that to myself from two years ago ...

Edited February 9, 2024 by Almizilero

[LocalHero1953]

Thanks, that's interesting.

Have you done a comparison between the two, both shot at, say, ISO 12800, and both with an appropriate amount of NR applied, then displayed at the same size on screen? Does the SL still look more detailed, and does the SL2-S look less noisy (and less 'artificial')?

Edited February 9, 2024 by LocalHero1953

[Almizilero]

At viewing distance (eg fullscreen in Lightroom), the files are pretty much indistinguishable, even without any processing (except for the colour differences). The finer details only come into play when zooming in. There is also a point to be made that one could apply just a little NR to the SL2S-files to even it out some more. But I just wanted to get a broad feel to what these AI functions can add to the game.

[dpitt]

14 hours ago, Almizilero said:

Yes, I chose the (probable) year of the SL3 to make a dream come true and add an SL2 to my SL2-S. So far, the two have been a dream team for my diverse needs. The SL2-S for everything stage related and the SL2 as my new main body for portraits.

Today I had a little time on my hand and did the obvious, test the two against each other. But with a twist! The question was if the main difference (maximum low light performance versus maximum resolution) was still that relevant with all the AI capabilities of modern image software.

So I shot three pictures of the same scene from a tripod with both cameras at ISO 200, 6400 and 12800. From what I read, the SL2 should be unusual beyond ISO 3200 which is absolutely not what I found. Maybe these notions come from test with older firmware, but even the shot at ISO 12800 was quite decent. Not as good as from the SL2-S, of course, but with a little tweaking ...

The images ISO 6400 were uninteresting, so I concetrated on the other two extremes.

At ISO 200, both cameras give excellent results. As has been said by others, the SL2 has a little more punch to the colours and renders a wee bit warmer, but with some WB adjustments, that difference almost disappears. What remains is the better resolution the SL2 provides. There is so much detail in the image! So I used the Super Resolution feature in Lightroom to blow up the SL2-S file (and then I downsized it to the resolution of the SL2). The result is quite amazing. It looks almost as detailed on first glance. Only by pixelpeeping it becomes obvious that real resolution looks better than AI resolution. It also lost some more contrast, but that should be easily adjustable.
I didn't bother to try Noise Reduction on the SL2-file at ISO 200.

At ISO 12800, there was still a lot of detail in the SL2 file, but the one from the SL2-S looked considerably better. So this time, I got NR on the SL2 file. at a strenght of 25, the file cleaned up even to much. It got detailed and sharp, but looked a little to processed. I guess a little tweaking in the NR strength might help. On the other hand, the Super Resolution didn't look to great on the SL2-S file. It lost some of punch and colour in the process. Again, at closer insprection, the real resolution of the SL2 trumps the blown up version from the SL2-S. Much more so at the higher ISO. Even with the effect of the to strong NR, the SL2 file still looks better.

So, in the end, I think the gap between the two bodies has gotten much smaller. It's still a decission between resolution and noise, both cameras shine in there respective area. But the new AI tools can help a lot with both. I feel the NR work better for the SL2 than the SR does for the SL2-S, but in the end, you can just get the camera you feel fits your needs best and use the AI tools for the times you need better resolution/noise reduction. With the new tools at our disposal and the assumption that the SL3 will have a similar sensor to the M11, I even doubt there will ever be a SL3-S.

If you want to have a look at it yourself, heres a download of tiff files:
https://we.tl/t-t4CKDUckjV

They are coded as follows: SL2_ISO200_OR_6 which means: camera_ISO_ (OR=original file / SR=superresolution / NR=noisereduction)_(6=resolution of SL2S / 8=resolution of SL2)

Remember that this was in no way a scientific test. Also I feel that under the given circumstances the high ISO performance is usually better than in real life scenarios where you have to raise the ISO to achieve manageable shutter speeds. I hope to add some experience in that regard after the weekend.

For now, have a look if you like, I'll be happy to hear your thoughts! I for one, can hardly believe that I came to the conclusion that I'd actually keep the SL2 if I had to give up one. Tell that to myself from two years ago ...

Thanks, that looks very interesting.
What surprised me is that your ISO 200 is shot at F8 and 1/250... Not exactly a low light situation. (or maybe the EXIF is wrong?)
Just a week ago, I was struggling at ISO 3200 and F1.4 at 1/60.
IMO that kind of low light could give very dfferent results.

Edit:
I found your shots at ISO 12500 where at F8 and 1/20
So that is much lower light,  but still at least 5 stops more than I had last week

Edited February 10, 2024 by dpitt

[Almizilero]

vor 7 Stunden schrieb dpitt:

What surprised me is that your ISO 200 is shot at F8 and 1/250... Not exactly a low light situation. (or maybe the EXIF is wrong?)

EXIF are correct, I used a flash for those shots. The higher ISO shot were taken with light from the light bulb and the exposure as long as needed. As I said, this approach usually gives better lowlight performance than the setup you described. 

[trickness]

I find the noise in the SL2 gets really obnoxious at anything above 800 ISO (I shoot available light only) so I only go above that when absolutely necessary. 

So a primary use case scenario for me for an SL2-S is anything above 800. I've use Topaz AI NR on my high ISO SL2 files and found that its quite useful, but does tend to make the images look a bit over processed if you're not really careful.

I don't own an SL2-S, BUT: from what I've seen, handheld, at low/available light & higher ISO's, when a friend with an SL2-S was shooting alongside me, there is no contest. SL2-S files are way cleaner. It's always better to start with less noise and not have to rely on fixing it in post I think.

[Almizilero]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 44 Minuten schrieb trickness:

It's always better to start with less noise and not have to rely on fixing it in post I think.

Absolutely correct. But that was not my point. I basically wanted to see what the software can do and my conclusion was that for my taste NR works better on SL2 files than SR works on SL2-S files. I wouldn't recommend the SL2 over the SL2-S to anyone who does a lot of lowlight photography. It's just an option.

I did my first real life stage shoot yesterday and found files from the SL2 usable up to ISO 4000 and salvagable even at ISO 8000. Downsized to 24MP they look even better and at the size they will be used later on (web-presentation at around FullHD-size) there is hardly any difference to be seen between SL2 and SL2-S files. But I raise the ISO to get fast shutter speeds (1/250). Long exposure and high ISO might be a worse combination. And I'll also say that under similar circumstances, I have no trouble raising the ISO of the SL2-S to 25000. Which will remain my main body for anything stage related, since the files need way less processing. The SL2 will be my goto body for portraits in the future and they will also be backups for each other.

 

[trickness]

I'm really wondering how the high ISO performance and dynamic range will be on the upcoming SL3, not sure if it will be better or worse given the presumably higher resolution. But I really don't think the color on the M11 cameras is good, and if the SL3 uses a variation of that sensor, we'll have to see if the color is as excellent as it is on the SL2. I LOVE the color rendition on my SL2.

[Almizilero]

I haven't really looked into the M11 yet. But the ability to get DNG files at different resolutions seems to make a later SL3-S somewhat unlikely. Also, on sensor phase detection is said to be impacting colours. Since I don't feel the need for a better AF or even more resolution, I'm not holding my breath and think I'll be happy with my SL system as it is for quite some time.

I wonder if there will be much sellers remorse when the SL3 finally appears. Prices for the SL2/2S are crazy low at the moment.

Edited February 11, 2024 by Almizilero

[Photoworks]

I would welcome the DR and colors of the M11 in a SL3. The sensor is better than all the SL sensors.

The SL2 files need to be exposed correctly at high iso, otherwise, you add lots of noise if you underexpose and push in post.

I found the best initial NR is done in DxO PureRAW, looks natural, outputs DNG and it does not change color like the others.

[trickness]

21 minutes ago, Photoworks said:

I would welcome the DR and colors of the M11 in a SL3. The sensor is better than all the SL sensors.

The SL2 files need to be exposed correctly at high iso, otherwise, you add lots of noise if you underexpose and push in post.

I found the best initial NR is done in DxO PureRAW, looks natural, outputs DNG and it does not change color like the others.

I’ve read enough complaints about different color casts and weird color output on the M 11 cameras to say the jury is still out for me.

And I have found what you said about exposing correctly at ISO to be correct with not only my SL2, but also the Q2M. That said, I still consider the SL2 to be noisy at lower ISO values. 

[Photoworks]

3 hours ago, trickness said:

I’ve read enough complaints about different color casts and weird color output on the M 11 cameras to say the jury is still out for me.

I have seen does too, but most of the issues are in Lightroom and people that don't have WB set correctly, for AUTO WB is good

[hansvons]

18 hours ago, trickness said:

It's always better to start with less noise and not have to rely on fixing it in post I think.

Yes. I never understood why people try to fix stuff later that could be avoided in the first place. For shots in dim light, the SL2-S shines. When high resolution is on the table, use the SL2. I'd never try to convince people that I can up-res SL2-S footage to SL2 standards by asking software to do that. It won't pan out equally. Horses for courses, as they say.

[Simone_DF]

21 hours ago, Almizilero said:

But the ability to get DNG files at different resolutions seems to make a later SL3-S somewhat unlikely.

Let's not forget that the SL2 and SL2-S were both pushed and advertised for their video capabilities, especially the -S variant, and the 60mp sensor is barely ok at that because of the horrible readout speed, so there may still be hope for a SL3-S as a more hybrid variant

[BernardC]

43 minutes ago, Simone_DF said:

there may still be hope

Are you saying we should wait until we know what's in the SL3? 🙂

[lemonsz]

Hey OP, the image link has already expired , would you mind to upload it again. I’m really keen on looking at the differences, thanks. 

[Almizilero]

Am 23.6.2024 um 20:36 schrieb lemonsz:

Hey OP, the image link has already expired , would you mind to upload it again. I’m really keen on looking at the differences, thanks. 

Sorry, I didn't know the link would expire and didn't see your post back then. Someone asked me via PN, so here's a permanent link:

https://cloud.roland-kersting.de/index.php/s/SoAFR8XTNWEQWaa

 

[Paul K]

I'm curious... did you do any tests with pixel-shift shots? I'm curious whether pixel-shift on the SL2-S outdoes the SL2's standard shots.

[Almizilero]

Sorry no. That feature is not really on my map, as it doesn't apply to the things I shoot.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Shepherdphotographer]

Hi everyone, I just read this old thread today; I downloaded and opened the SL2 and SL2-S files (thank you so much to the author for making them available!): I looked at them and I noticed that the SL2-S files are actually cleaner, but I can't figure out if this is due to a lower resolution of the SL2-S (if you compare the original files of both at full resolution, i.e. the SL2 at 47 Mpx vs SL2-s at 24 Mpx), or to a higher noise of the SL2 (if you compare the original files of the SL2 at reduced 24 Mpx and those of the SL2-S at 24 Mpx): can you express your opinion, please? Thanks in advance!