Which SL for my use case

[Big John]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Been waiting for the SL3 and now need to choose the best SL body for me and my needs.  I have the original SL and the 24-90 but much prefer shooting with M lenses (I use Zeiss, 28, 35, 50).  My photography is mainly street, family, travel. 
 

Reasons to upgrade (in no particular order): IBIS (key driver for me), improved grip, rounder design, better user interface (and quick menu), improved EVF. 
  

I normally default to buying the latest and greatest (SL3) but I don’t need better AF and virtually never use video.  Am undecided about sensor size (24MP has been fine so far, not crying out for 60) and would like improved ISO. So guess that is pointing me towards the SL2 or 2-S.  

 

Anyone else in similar situation? Guess used 2 and 2-S prices will drop soon. Likely to be any U.K. deals on new copies?  Thanks. 

[Advertisement]

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

[Olaf_ZG]

For what you describe, the 2-series will do. If you photograph a lot inside (family or travel) I would choose the 2s.

[Smogg]

I wouldn't consider the SL2 because of the ugly noise. The SL2-S is best suited for your purposes, but if you crop frequently, then the SL3

[Smogg]

On the other hand: you now have an excellent camera (SL) in your hands. Is IBIS important to you? Maybe it makes sense to look at your library to estimate how many times it was needed? Do you often shoot at night with long exposures?

[JeTexas]

I had an SL, and the downsides were the lack of sensor stabilization, crop video sensor and limited recording time, specialty plugs for peripherals, and no external power option for extended video shoots or timelapses. 

I jumped from there to the Panasonic S1R because at the time I couldn't afford an SL2. It was an improvement in image stabilization, and I could run USB-C power for timelapse photos, but the super-size file sizes got old really fast. Despite claims it had unlimited recording ability, that was only true for 1080, at 4K, it was still limited to 15 minutes. I had inputs for a mic and headphones, but instead of 2 SD card slots, they put that stupid Xpress slot on there, which meant purchasing different types of media if I wanted to run both slots. The controls were also way overly complicated compared to Leica. 

I just traded both the SL and the S1R in on two SL2-S bodies, and they are finally the camera I want. Simple, foolproof controls, IBIS, fast autofocus, unlimited video recording, standard HDMI, mic, headphones, USB-C power/recharging, and dual SD slots. The photos look great. The video looks great. There's no way I'd go back to a 50+mp sensor like the SL3 unless I was shooting wildlife and needed to be able to crop way in. 

[hansvons]

54 minutes ago, Big John said:

I have the original SL and the 24-90 but much prefer shooting with M lenses (I use Zeiss, 28, 35, 50).  My photography is mainly street, family, travel. 

What @JeTexas says.

The SL2-S is my digital workhorse, which either sees 35mm M lenses, a Sigma AF macro for negative scanning, or a set of R lenses for occasional video shoots. It's everything one can wish for if looking for a high-performance full-frame camera that is mostly focused manually. The colour and texture are outstanding; the IBIS is fantastic.

I see no reason to side-grade to the SL3 or upgrade to a future SL3-S anytime soon.

The only meaningful alternative for you could be an M-10. You won't get the sensor's fidelity of the SL2-S and IBIS but gain a smaller form factor and the experience of the RF, which I really like. 

[Big John]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

45 minutes ago, JeTexas said:

I had an SL, and the downsides were the lack of sensor stabilization, crop video sensor and limited recording time, specialty plugs for peripherals, and no external power option for extended video shoots or timelapses. 

I jumped from there to the Panasonic S1R because at the time I couldn't afford an SL2. It was an improvement in image stabilization, and I could run USB-C power for timelapse photos, but the super-size file sizes got old really fast. Despite claims it had unlimited recording ability, that was only true for 1080, at 4K, it was still limited to 15 minutes. I had inputs for a mic and headphones, but instead of 2 SD card slots, they put that stupid Xpress slot on there, which meant purchasing different types of media if I wanted to run both slots. The controls were also way overly complicated compared to Leica. 

I just traded both the SL and the S1R in on two SL2-S bodies, and they are finally the camera I want. Simple, foolproof controls, IBIS, fast autofocus, unlimited video recording, standard HDMI, mic, headphones, USB-C power/recharging, and dual SD slots. The photos look great. The video looks great. There's no way I'd go back to a 50+mp sensor like the SL3 unless I was shooting wildlife and needed to be able to crop way in. 

V helpful comments, thanks. I haven’t look v closely into the SL2 recently and you highlight some points that resonate with me (file sizes, cards).  

23 minutes ago, hansvons said:

What @JeTexas says.

The SL2-S is my digital workhorse, which either sees 35mm M lenses, a Sigma AF macro for negative scanning, or a set of R lenses for occasional video shoots. It's everything one can wish for if looking for a high-performance full-frame camera that is mostly focused manually. The colour and texture are outstanding; the IBIS is fantastic.

I see no reason to side-grade to the SL3 or upgrade to a future SL3-S anytime soon.

The only meaningful alternative for you could be an M-10. You won't get the sensor's fidelity of the SL2-S and IBIS but gain a smaller form factor and the experience of the RF, which I really like. 

Thanks - also resonating with me as have been on the fence about an M for about…….er 10 years!  In fact am thinking of getting a film M to use alongside digital (which is also another reason for not splashing cash on the SL3). 
 

Will take a good look at the 2-S. it does seem that user response to the S model has been v positive.