SL2-S focus and ISO capability compared to SL2 and SL3

[Geoff C. Bassett]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

21 minutes ago, Avatar said:

I don't disagree. Autofocus was decent and should get much better with firmware.. For now, an SL2-S is on route and don't expect better autofocus than the SL3 but for the money and with everything everyone has shared about it, it might be perfect for this place I will be using it primarily.

Wow, my 24-70 Sigma is en route but I'd love an aperature ring on the lense and will look for this when it's available for sure!

I would see if you can return the order, unless it goes on backorder I expect the new one will be available soon. 

 

[Avatar]

19 minutes ago, Geoff C. Bassett said:

I would see if you can return the order, unless it goes on backorder I expect the new one will be available soon. 

 

I picked up a pre owned one for $700..Too late to cancel and at that price should be able to move it without losing too much and i will get to use it a bit before Version 2, which looks really interesting.

Searching around for specs, weight etc..

[Avatar]

1 hour ago, Geoff C. Bassett said:

I would see if you can return the order, unless it goes on backorder I expect the new one will be available soon. 

 

I emailed my dealer and he said he has heard nothing about it!

[Simone_DF]

5 hours ago, Avatar said:

I emailed my dealer and he said he has heard nothing about it!

According to rumors, it will be announced on May 16th.

[Camaro5]

I've had both the SL2-S and now an SL-2.  the -S is better in very low light but I didn't get the resolution I wanted.  Multishot mode works fine, but you can't always carry a tripod with you.  You do give up some low light capabilities with the SL2 but I've been able to get nice images handholding up to ISO 6400 in pretty dark conditions.  A little noise reduction in Lightroom or Topaz goes a long way, mostly for dark skies, but you also need that with the -S if you are shooting high ISO images.  

I do not shoot in pitch dark conditions and the SL2 has been fine, including the autofocus for stills, even in low light.  Just my opinion, but I think much of what's been said about the SL2 on the internet has been overblown.  My preference was for the detail and colors of the 47mp resolution.  Don't get me wrong, the -S I had was fine, but the SL2 is just better for my uses, especially for fine landscape prints, but everybody has their own shooting styles and preferences.  

[Avatar]

15 minutes ago, Camaro5 said:

I've had both the SL2-S and now an SL-2.  the -S is better in very low light but I didn't get the resolution I wanted.  Multishot mode works fine, but you can't always carry a tripod with you.  You do give up some low light capabilities with the SL2 but I've been able to get nice images handholding up to ISO 6400 in pretty dark conditions.  A little noise reduction in Lightroom or Topaz goes a long way, mostly for dark skies, but you also need that with the -S if you are shooting high ISO images.  

I do not shoot in pitch dark conditions and the SL2 has been fine, including the autofocus for stills, even in low light.  Just my opinion, but I think much of what's been said about the SL2 on the internet has been overblown.  My preference was for the detail and colors of the 47mp resolution.  Don't get me wrong, the -S I had was fine, but the SL2 is just better for my uses, especially for fine landscape prints, but everybody has their own shooting styles and preferences.  

I had zero complaints with the SL2, just for the job I am shooting the smaller files and hopefully improved ISO performance will make sense for the SL2-S. I use Topaz and Lightroom extensively and agree..SHould get the SL2-S today and I'll report back.

[Avatar]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Well, as expected i received a supposedly pre owned SL2-S. It has the original firmware and doesn't look like it's ever been out of the box.

Updated the firmware and took a few test images around my place..It's an encouraging start. I will go to the location I am shooting at later and give it the pressure cooker tests but I'm pretty confident that for my specific purpose and use the SL2-S makes more sense for me, not to mention more than $4K less.

I don't want to trash the SL3. That camera produced crazy great files in the short time I tested. Not to mention it's brand new and will only get better as new firmware comes out.

The lighting at the place I shoot (bar restaurant) is terrible. No one would shoot it professionally without lighting. But for the purposes of social media and so forth this set up will be all I need.

Can't yet speak on speed of auto focus between the SL2 and SL2S. From what i had read, the SL2-2 had substantially faster autofocus but those articles were written before most of the firmware updates which seemed to pull the SL2 closer and equal in a few areas. In my head the Sl2-S is a bit faster focusing but pragmatically, I think it's in my head.

The reason i went SL2, SL3 and SL2-S were not entirely about auto focus anyways.

Hoping the 24-70 Sigma 2.8 shows up soon, as it would be nice to test out at the same time.

 

 

[Avatar]

Just got back from shooting at the bar/restaurant with the SL2-S. I brought the 50mm Lumix 1.8 and took one picture on the street on the way there..the place is about 100 yards from my place as it is.

I was nervous about this as this is the 3rd SL I've bought in about two weeks..

It is so far better for this environment that  it can't be overstated. 12500 ISO out of camera is better than 6400 out of the SL2. I was concerned I'd lose color but I don't see any loss of quality.

It's a game changer.

Tomorrow the Sigma 24-70 2.8 should arrive and I will shoot again and hopefully be done thinking about gear for this forever.

I know I am going on and on about this but I really am shocked how much better it is than the SL2 and at under $3K for a pre owned but literally new SL2-S, I couldn't be happier.

I was so involved in the process that I can't really speak about if the SL2-S was focusing faster than the SL2. Felt like it was but as I posted before, likely that's in my head.

I'll post some sample images when i have a chance!

Thank you everyone for your posts and comments.

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 May 16, 2024 by Avatar

[Avatar]

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 May 16, 2024 by Avatar

[Avatar]

Not great examples of low light but just was impressed with the SL2-S and see great potential.

I'll post more when the 24-70 comes and really challenge the ISO but the SL2-S far exceeded expectations.

 

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!

[Tjazz]

Avatar, Your colors and dynamic range are amazing in these pictures. 
And your comments on camera choice are interesting to me—you sold SL3 and SL2 to buy an SL2-S. I have the SL2-S and have been in the queue for an SL3, pondering that option.  I shot around 400 images recently in New Zealand with the SL2-S and the SL24-90 and was very pleased with every aspect of my results, from beaches, seascapes, and mountains to people, birds, and Astro. Especially compelling in scenes shot during golden hours. I’m not a pro but a dedicated amateur. Maybe I don’t need the SL3 after all! I do have the Q3 for street and light travel. 

[Avatar]

1 hour ago, Tjazz said:

Avatar, Your colors and dynamic range are amazing in these pictures. 
And your comments on camera choice are interesting to me—you sold SL3 and SL2 to buy an SL2-S. I have the SL2-S and have been in the queue for an SL3, pondering that option.  I shot around 400 images recently in New Zealand with the SL2-S and the SL24-90 and was very pleased with every aspect of my results, from beaches, seascapes, and mountains to people, birds, and Astro. Especially compelling in scenes shot during golden hours. I’m not a pro but a dedicated amateur. Maybe I don’t need the SL3 after all! I do have the Q3 for street and light travel. 

As I have mentioned in this thread, I am primarily a street shooter and mostly B&W at that. I couldn't be happier than with the M11M and have an M11 which doesn't get much use but I do love it too. Then there's the Q3 and after years of trying with Q's, finally I have bonded with it and often wonder why keep the M11 as it's not often used.

I had an SL way back when but only for a short time and it didn't make sense for what I shoot.

With the project I am shooting the SL camera's came into my radar recently and in 3 weeks, got an SL2 then SL3 and sold them quickly days before the SL2-S arrived yesterday.

It's been a whirlwind and I'm thrilled with the SL2-S as I've written.

I am sure the SL3 is even better than I realized but it didn't make complete sense when I especially realized i likely will not carry it around as I do my M's and Q3.

As good as the SL3 is and it will get even better with firmware, the SL2-S gamble i took paid off as I am stunned with the results.

Maybe a small thing and i am particularly aware of how a camera feels in hand and the SL3 was ok but in that department I much prefer the feel of the SL2/S.

For me it was an easy decision and I got what looks like a brand new 'pre owned' SL2-S for $2900.. In my case it made no sense to spend $7K on the SL3.

What would you hope the SL3 does that the SL2-S doesn't?

Edited May 16, 2024 by Avatar

[Tjazz]

That’s the right question. I jumped in the queue for it in case I decided it would be a good replacement for the SL2-S.  For me my interest was about resolution since I mainly shoot nature and landscapes with the SL. But your comments caused me to reflect further on the matter and again my New Zealand images and prints are not lacking detail. So I’m realizing that I don’t really need the SL3’s 60mp to deliver excellent results. I’ll likely keep the cameras I have (also including my beloved Q2M) and simply enjoy them, exploring the infinite possibilities of my Leica lens kit (24-90, 35APO, 100-400). 

Edited May 16, 2024 by Tjazz

[Avatar]

17 minutes ago, Tjazz said:

That’s the right question. I jumped in the queue for it in case I decided it would be a good replacement for the SL2-S.  For me my interest was about resolution since I mainly shoot nature and landscapes with the SL. But your comments caused me to reflect further on the matter and again my New Zealand images and prints are not lacking detail. So I’m realizing that I don’t really need the SL3’s 60mp to deliver excellent results. I’ll likely keep the cameras I have (also including my beloved Q2M) and simply enjoy them, exploring the infinite possibilities of my Leica lens kit (24-90, 35APO, 100-400). 

When i started this journey, a close friend told me not to bother with the SL2 or SL3 but get the SL2-S. He was just raving about it and he is a serious pro with a very deep kit of video and still cameras.

I was convinced the more megapixels the better and told him so.

Again, I am in no way putting down the SL3, I know it's much better than I even think and I took some frames at 25,000 ISO and they were amazing.

You made to mention the Q monochrome! The madness never stops and will continue when invariably the Q3M gets released!

If you do massive crops and find the SL2-S images don't hold up as well as you like and using tools like Topaz and denoise aren't enough or convenient then for sure the larger resolution images from the SL3 would make sense.

I also do zero video and wish for a replacement to the discontinued CL, perhaps a smaller SL without video...ah..never know!

Edited May 16, 2024 by Avatar

[Tjazz]

Very helpful. And yes something special about the Q2 Monochrom. Certainly a luxury since conversions to black and white are so good now. This talk makes we want to go out and take pictures!! 😁

[JoshuaR]

This has been an interesting thread for me to follow. I’m an M shooter (M10-R, M10M, M6) who’s owned a Q2 in the past and am increasingly in the market for a “workhorse” camera that can go out in really bad weather, do video (I’m doing more and more video), and generally offer a different experience, especially at the wider and longer ends of the focal length range. I’d like to stay in the Leica universe and to leverage my investment in M lenses. I’m on the waitlist for a Q3, but I’ve been thinking a lot about an SL2-S. For half the price of the Q3, it seems to offer a lot of utility and value:

• I can put a Sigma 24 or 45 on it and have a relatively small AF camera.
• I can put a zoom on it or my M lenses and do stills and video.
• I can get more use out of my 21 SEM and 90 Elmarit.
• I can shoot low light color with great results.
• I can try out some super-fast lenses that would be challenging to focus on the M.
• I can have a backup camera for my M bodies.

I’ve been put off by the size and weight, but this isn’t a camera I’d use all the time, and with my M lenses or the small Sigma primes it doesn’t seem like it would actually be all that big. I tend to prefer OVFs over EVFs, but I’ve never owned a camera with an EVF the size of the SL2-S’s and think that the size and resolution might make it workable for me. And, best of all, I can actually afford to buy an SL2-S by selling off some of my less-used gear…. It’s seriously tempting.

Edited May 17, 2024 by JoshuaRothman

[LeicaR10]

JoshuaRothman,  The SL2-S is a great camera and hits all the points in your post #38.  The EVF is one of the best out there.  I can make 4 ft X 6 ft prints with no issues with the SL2-S.  It works great in low-light.  If you want a bad weather camera, you can use SL lenses and to a degree M lenses with no issue.  I use my SL2-S cameras with M lenses in the rainforests of northern Queensland, again no issues.  If you were in Iceland, depending on how extreme the weather, the SL lenses would be better suited for heavy downpours. There is a lot to like about the SL2-S.  The good news, you have choices.  r/ Mark

[Avatar]

3 hours ago, JoshuaRothman said:

This has been an interesting thread for me to follow. I’m an M shooter (M10-R, M10M, M6) who’s owned a Q2 in the past and am increasingly in the market for a “workhorse” camera that can go out in really bad weather, do video (I’m doing more and more video), and generally offer a different experience, especially at the wider and longer ends of the focal length range. I’d like to stay in the Leica universe and to leverage my investment in M lenses. I’m on the waitlist for a Q3, but I’ve been thinking a lot about an SL2-S. For half the price of the Q3, it seems to offer a lot of utility and value:

• I can put a Sigma 24 or 45 on it and have a relatively small AF camera.
• I can put a zoom on it or my M lenses and do stills and video.
• I can get more use out of my 21 SEM and 90 Elmarit.
• I can shoot low light color with great results.
• I can try out some super-fast lenses that would be challenging to focus on the M.
• I can have a backup camera for my M bodies.

I’ve been put off by the size and weight, but this isn’t a camera I’d use all the time, and with my M lenses or the small Sigma primes it doesn’t seem like it would actually be all that big. I tend to prefer OVFs over EVFs, but I’ve never owned a camera with an EVF the size of the SL2-S’s and think that the size and resolution might make it workable for me. And, best of all, I can actually afford to buy an SL2-S by selling off some of my less-used gear…. It’s seriously tempting.

If you are ok with the size and use lighter lenses, i think you will be overjoyed spending less with better results and can easily sell and get all or most of your investment back.

I finally sat down and did extensive test comparisons between some cameras and lens.

I worked with a friend and took and compared the same shots with the SL2-S, the Q3 and a Nikon Z8. We also compared a Lumix 50mm 1.8 lens, Sigma 28-70 2.8 lens and a Leica 28mm Summilux.

While I 'knew' the pictures taken with the SL2-S would be better in ISO noise than the Q3, I was surprised by how much less noise there was. We then 'binned' down the file size of the Q3 to 'small' 18 megapixels and looked again, still the SL2-S was obviously and very much clearly better. The Q3 and the Nikon Z8 were just no match, at least in ISO and noise.

The L lenses held up well in the tests but still and with no surprise the Summilux had a bit deeper blacks and maybe a little better colors. I am no expert and mostly shoot b&w but my friend does this for a living and pointed out the details and so forth. I am so impressed with the L lenses and bought the Sigma 28-70 2.8 today. I'm going to get a 24mm 1.4 tomorrow.

All in all, i first got into all of these cameras not to be shooting my regular work but for a specific project but, I just am loving this camera so much, I'm getting creative ideas about shooting at night with it..Very exciting..and for so much less than the SL3 or even an M11, which probably will be sold, leaving me with the M11M, Q3 and SL2-S...and M7 too.

 

 

 

Edited May 17, 2024 by Avatar

[Avatar]

On 5/13/2024 at 9:25 PM, Geoff C. Bassett said:

I would see if you can return the order, unless it goes on backorder I expect the new one will be available soon. 

 

Well the 24-70 arrived today and is sold already with some  other gear I am dropping off tomorrow..I picked up a sigma 28-70 2.8 instead as the focal ranges work ok for me and it's small and light..for 24mm..I'm picking up a Sigma 24mm F2..I can't wait to try it and miss having an aperature ring for sure!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Tjazz]

A very interesting journey and instructional for me in how to prioritize what matters most. I appreciate my SL2-S just a little more now and wonder if the megapixel race is starting to produce diminishing returns. For example some of my best work was done with a Q2 in the streets of Amsterdam nearly five years ago. And yet I traded it in and jumped on the Q3 train. A fine camera with its resolution and features, but it doesn’t negate the beauty of what I got from the Q2.