SL2 or SL2-S are very "cheap" now..

[glini]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I followed the same reasoning and purchased my SL2 last year (middle of, same price as your Ex-demo, barely new).
I’m pleased with the choice and recently added a Lumix S5 II body, plus a Leica SL 70-200, which was good for me, not for my wallet 🤣🤣

Edited January 19 by glini

[Stuart Richardson]

The SL2 is still the highest resolution body Leica has ever made, since the SL3 doesn't offer multishot. Don't worry about the high ISO unless you are constantly over 1600 or 3200. It is manageable. If you do want very good high ISO, the SL2S is superb for that. Personally, I think most of the changes in the SL3 were either neutral or unappealing. I find the grip is less comfortable and the body feels more crowded because they shrank it down to cater to loud voices of people who were just trying to compare it to other mirrorless cameras. The SL2 era had superb ergonomics and great features. Leica had to change something to try to get people to switch, but what they did was give it a worse interface (whoever thought white text with no background is a good idea on an EVF camera has never shot in a place with snow I guess), a vestigial knob, a confusingly non-binary power switch instead of a simple on-off lever and an inelegant flippy screen. When compared to the current value of the SL2 and SL2S, getting the older camera is a no-brainer. 47mp vs 60mp is not very significant, especially if you don't like the ergonomic changes. if you do, then by all means go for the newer bodies if you can.

Edited January 19 by Stuart Richardson

[darylgo]

If the Q is the gateway drug into the M system then the cheap SLx-x is certainly the downfall of many Leica fanboys.  And it’s the savior for those beautiful R lenses with the best ibis.  Leica doesn’t get credit enough for its ability to attach practically any lens made and shoot at ridiculously slow shutter speeds.  Buy the silver SL2, it’s cheap also.  
 

If you hit that slippery slope and your mind starts wandering into the L mount lens realm have a look at the Panasonic lenses, lightweight and while not Leica Apo they are surprisingly good.  

[costa43]

The SL2 is an absolute steal used at the moment. Even MPB has them for just over €2k, they offer a 6 month warranty. Privately they are even cheaper. Has to be the best bang for your buck in Leica land if you want a high res camera. 

The SL2s is also the same cost give or take if you want the better iso performance at the cost of resolution. 

[Geoff C. Bassett]

SL2 is still the best SL camera in my opinion except for it's auto WB being off.

[Filip Baraka]

11 hours ago, Stuart Richardson said:

The SL2 is still the highest resolution body Leica has ever made, since the SL3 doesn't offer multishot. Don't worry about the high ISO unless you are constantly over 1600 or 3200. It is manageable. If you do want very good high ISO, the SL2S is superb for that. Personally, I think most of the changes in the SL3 were either neutral or unappealing. I find the grip is less comfortable and the body feels more crowded because they shrank it down to cater to loud voices of people who were just trying to compare it to other mirrorless cameras. The SL2 era had superb ergonomics and great features. Leica had to change something to try to get people to switch, but what they did was give it a worse interface (whoever thought white text with no background is a good idea on an EVF camera has never shot in a place with snow I guess), a vestigial knob, a confusingly non-binary power switch instead of a simple on-off lever and an inelegant flippy screen. When compared to the current value of the SL2 and SL2S, getting the older camera is a no-brainer. 47mp vs 60mp is not very significant, especially if you don't like the ergonomic changes. if you do, then by all means go for the newer bodies if you can.

Agree on most points, and difference in the price is always better invested in glass. 

It is really interesting that SL3 still does not have a multishot feature

[HuntingSand]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

S shooter here...I just got a good (actually, great) deal on a mint SL2 and couldn't say no. Feels like a toy compared to the S behemoth, but of course it's jam packed with features that an S doesn't have. I look forward to making good use of it over the coming months and years.

[PhotoCruiser]

I just bought in Zurich's Leica Store a almost unused, in absolutely perfect conditions  silver SL2 body for 3300$ over some black SL3 for 200-500$ less but with much longer use. I find the silver model looking old school good but not really better than the black one but the camera was in such perfect conditions that i preferred to pay the extra cost for her over the others.

I had also the SL3 in my hand and difference is noticeable but not huge and i found the size of the SL3 a bit more comfortable for my hand,
but i did not used hier not did i know the SL2 so i can't argument about ergonomics and differences between SL2 and SL3.
Should i find a SL3 for a reasonable cost to upgrade than i may consider to upgrade because the higher MP, but for now i will learn how to use the SL2 what should reveal if the SL2-S would be the better choice as sometimes i photograph in low light conditions.

Chris

 

[Snuff]

Bought a new SL2-S for $2500. Serial number 564ХХХХ, made in April 2024. Glad the camera is still in production. Saw posts that some people got new cameras 2-3 years old.