Jump to content

Used SL2 and SL2S prices


T25UFO

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Just did a quick search on MPB.  3 used SL2S at an average price of £3,170 plus 1 Reporter at £3,829.  15 SL2, highest price £2,729, lowest £2,399.  Interesting that the lower spec S commands a higher secondhand price and there are fewer available.  Leica Mayfair, always top end of the used market, has 1 Reporter at £4,400, which is pretty close to the new price.  Go figure . . .

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, CptSlevin said:

Because Leica SL2S is better than SL2 in every aspect.
Yeah it has lower MP count, but BSI sensor

Not every aspect. Resolution is such a key spec that just that alone is a deciding factor for a lot of people. There is also the faster electronic shutter and slightly faster fps in afc, which is nominal but if we are being pedantic…


 

Edited by costa43
Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, costa43 said:

Not every aspect. Resolution is such a key spec that just that alone is a deciding factor for a lot of people. There is also the faster electronic shutter and slightly faster fps in afc, which is nominal but if we are being pedantic…


 

The market have decided, SL2S retains price better than SL2.

Link to post
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, CptSlevin said:

The market have decided, SL2S retains price better than SL2.

The market where I am seems to be the other way around. The sl2 is slightly more than the sl2s. Barring of course the special edition reporter model. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is because as a SL2-S user, I see the SL3 sensor more like a downgrade. 
I like the body changes and the addition of PDAF, but that’s not enough to make me switch, and the SL3 has too many bad compromises for my use case, like the slow readout speed and more. 
I’m waiting for a SL3-S

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, Simone_DF said:

This is because as a SL2-S user, I see the SL3 sensor more like a downgrade. 
I like the body changes and the addition of PDAF, but that’s not enough to make me switch, and the SL3 has too many bad compromises for my use case, like the slow readout speed and more. 
I’m waiting for a SL3-S

If the 2S is better than the 2, primarily because of the BSI sensor, and the 3 already has a BSI sensor, what would be the benefit of a 3S?  Not questioning your logic, just curious.

Link to post
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, T25UFO said:

If the 2S is better than the 2, primarily because of the BSI sensor, and the 3 already has a BSI sensor, what would be the benefit of a 3S?  Not questioning your logic, just curious.

Like I wrote above, faster readout speed is a must. 
Better flash sync. The SL3 dropped to 1/200s. 
Better juice in the shadows, which are slightly worse on the SL3 compared to the SL2-S, imho. 
Also the SL3 is not ideal for video.
These are all areas where a SL3-S can shine

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see the SL3 as a downgrade at all and I have all 4 SL iterations. Admittedly I will be selling the SL2 and I am interested in the values being discussed here. The SL2S is a great camera and arguably, I'm not really ready to make comparisons yet but yes iI feel that it's "differently better" than the SL3 sensor. I should say that the SL3 sensor is different to the SL2S and it needs careful consideration from capture to post production before writing it off.  I have had the SL2 and SL2S Reporter for one year now. The SL2 has been my go to camera for the 90-280 lens and some other situations. The SL2S is for street and urban abstract - and long exposure night train images.

I am in the middle of applying my different styles of work with the SL3 or even potentially aligning images to the SL3's output potential. I don't know what that is yet but I am aware how different cameras can help develop ones photography style by revealing something new in its makeup. The SL2S and Monochrom cameras did that for me. It would be marvellous to think that a SL3S would magically repeat great things the SL2S produced. If Leica can do that then they are brilliant. 

       

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Simone_DF said:

Better juice in the shadows, which are slightly worse on the SL3 compared to the SL2-S, imho. 

Yes, the SL3 is an improvement over SL2-S and of course SL2, but only if you underexpose heavily and need to recover shadows, otherwise you will see no difference.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Exactly. It is also quite a bit older. Also the used market is more often frequented by price sensitive buyers, many of which are amateurs, and many of those do not have high resolution requirements. Also more likely to use high ISO than proper studio flash or location lighting etc. The SL2 is more of a niche buy at this juncture for that reason. I have both cameras but still prefer the SL2 about 80% of the time. 

Edited by Stuart Richardson
Link to post
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Stuart Richardson said:

Also the used market is more often frequented by price sensitive buyers, many of which are amateurs, and many of those do not have high resolution requirements.

You mean amateurs are not seduced by high pixel specs???

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

You mean amateurs are not seduced by high pixel specs???

Some certainly are, but I see a lot of people here who profess not to print past small sizes or even at all, and not to want to have such big files. I think there is a fairly large contingent of people who want the Leica experience in cameras and lenses, but for whom resolution is not so important. I am certainly not in that group, but it seems large. I do a lot of exhibition prints and large work, which is why the SL2 is the more useful of the two cameras to me, but if you never print big or even print at all, the SL2S is a better option.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Stuart Richardson said:

Some certainly are, but I see a lot of people here who profess not to print past small sizes or even at all, and not to want to have such big files. I think there is a fairly large contingent of people who want the Leica experience in cameras and lenses, but for whom resolution is not so important. I am certainly not in that group, but it seems large. I do a lot of exhibition prints and large work, which is why the SL2 is the more useful of the two cameras to me, but if you never print big or even print at all, the SL2S is a better option.

Stuart . . . just curious, what would you class as a big' print.  A2?  I only print to A3 at home (Canon printer limitation) so for anything larger I would probably upload a tiff file for professional printing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know it is an anathema to some, but I use the high-resolution bodies to give me extra cropping ability.  I'm not in the "crop until you find a picture" camp, but instead use the crop to give the field of view of a longer focal length lens.  Also, as an event photographer I have to work very quickly and sometime the image I "see" is not one I can compose at the moment.  I'm doing a renewal of wedding vows shoot tomorrow with my SL2.  The 24-90 will give me most of the reach I need, but instead of bringing my 90-280 I'll can make a 90mm shot have the field of view of 135mm with a crop to APS-C format.

I still keep my SL (Typ 601) because I agree that most of the time 24 mpx is plenty.  Wouldn't mind getting an SL2-S to shoot alongside the SL2, but they seem to be holding their value.  I agree that is likely due to it still being a current model.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, T25UFO said:

Stuart . . . just curious, what would you class as a big' print.  A2?  I only print to A3 at home (Canon printer limitation) so for anything larger I would probably upload a tiff file for professional printing.

I would say 60x90cm or larger, in most cases. As Luke mentioned, however, cropping is also a consideration.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

You can print A1 with 20mpix no problem. Even from 35mm film but it's starting to be pushing (40x60 is about max). It all depends on lens and overall quality of the picture. Sample from my workplace wall, 60x90 taken with 20mpix a month ago. I have a large format printer and I print for clients all the time. You need good RIP program (like Mirage) that can upscale, good printer, paper, ICC, inks and some knowhow.

50+ mpix is great if you have to change orientation from landscape to portrait and loose a lot of pixels. 

My opinion, go and buy SL2s, it is going to be a classic.

 

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 by Mikko Kankainen
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
21 hours ago, Stuart Richardson said:

Some certainly are, but I see a lot of people here who profess not to print past small sizes or even at all, and not to want to have such big files. I think there is a fairly large contingent of people who want the Leica experience in cameras and lenses, but for whom resolution is not so important. I am certainly not in that group, but it seems large. I do a lot of exhibition prints and large work, which is why the SL2 is the more useful of the two cameras to me, but if you never print big or even print at all, the SL2S is a better option.

In some ways you are correct, but in others... at least in my case... you are wrong. 

I'm predominantly a Nikon shooter who uses a Z9 and Z8 for nature photography. I value the 47MP files I get from these cameras when I photograph landscapes and wildlife. I, however, owned Nikon Z6, Z6II, and Zf bodies since their introduction. I have used/abused the latter and loved them for the highly flexible 24MP sensor. In fact, I find the capacity to pull shadows from the BSI 24MP sensor to be ideal, and have printed many of these pictures 20+ inches. It is with this background that led me to buy a Leica SL. 

I've now owned 2 SL's... the most recent of which is within the return period. After thinking about my decision to spend $1600 US on a 2015 camera, I decided that if I were willing to double the "investment," I could have a newer Leica body. After looking at used prices in the US, I saw that $3200 could get me an SL2 or SL2-S in 8 to 9 condition. I am looking at Leica Stores as the source because I want a minimum of a 6 month warranty on the body. In the end, I've decided to buy an SL2-S for $2900 in "8+" condition. I chose this because of the 24MP file because I know how flexible these files can be.

cheers,

bruce

Edited by BLeventhal
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...