NightPix Posted March 20 Share #1  Posted March 20 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) As I’ve gotten older my eyes aren’t what they used to be. Because of an old injury I  need to wear glasses with progressive lenses and a prism adjustment. This makes using an M-body no longer an option without a visoflex. I have a number of M-lenses I love. I sometimes use these with my SL2,but mostly in situations where I don’t need the SL2’s higher MP. I’m not a big fan of the Visoflex. Another possibility is for me to pick up an SL2-s (or SL3-s) specifically for use with the M-lenses. It’s not the rangefinder experience, but at least I could keep my M-lenses busy and save the SL2 for times that require more MP, like shooting wildlife (big lenses, cropping, etc). I’m wondering if the group has any thoughts on this possibility, and opinions on using the M-lenses on an SL2-s (which are priced pretty reasonably now). I’ve been happy with their performance on the SL2. FWIW - I do print a fair amount, but seldom very large. Thanks for your feedback! Edited March 20 by NightPix Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 20 Posted March 20 Hi NightPix, Take a look here M-lenses on SL2-S. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted March 20 Share #2  Posted March 20 If you are not a large printer or cropping fanatic the gain from a high resolution camera is highly questionable. There may be more detail but to my eye the quality of the visible detail is preferable on a lower resolution camera. IMO there are more drawbacks. 24 appears to be a sweet spot. In my experience the SL2S is an excellent body to use M lenses on. And it looks reasonably compact compared to the chunky 601. Despite being a similar size. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
insomnia Posted March 20 Share #3 Â Posted March 20 Unless you're super often on the edge ISO wise, I cannot think of a scenario which would justify buying an extra SL2-S for this. If you have the SL2, use it. It does not need "saving" for anything. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NightPix Posted March 21 Author Share #4  Posted March 21 (edited) 17 hours ago, insomnia said: Unless you're super often on the edge ISO wise, I cannot think of a scenario which would justify buying an extra SL2-S for this. If you have the SL2, use it. It does not need "saving" for anything. Thanks for the comment. I guess I didn't do a good job of explaining my question, so here's some more info. I do a lot of low light photography and astro, and the SL2 images are often just too noisy. I have been using a Sony a7iii which is pretty good in low light but the color science is not nearly as good as Leica's (IMHO). I've read that the SL2-s is significantly better than the SL2 in low light (maybe 1-2 stops). So my thinking was that I could use an SL2-s for my low light work (with my fast M's) and the SL2 when I need extra megapixels for daylight landscapes and images that might benefit from heavy cropping (mainly wildlife). I'm perfectly happy with 24 MP - most of the wildlife images I print are cropped smaller than that. I have tested my Q3 (60MP) and it's surprisingly good in low light, but I prefer a wider lens for nightscapes and astro. Edited March 21 by NightPix Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Mead Posted March 21 Share #5 Â Posted March 21 My SL2-s works really well with my M lenses, both 35 Summilux and 50 Summilux. I have an M10M which I love and as I get more used to the SL2-s I find myself liking it more and more. It is a really fine camera; just different from the M. I am finding as I use it more that setting ISO and shutter speed is easy and quick, just different. And focusing on the SL2-s is really nice with the magnification feature. And the ISO with the SL2-s really is outstanding. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
framemymind Posted March 22 Share #6  Posted March 22 In my experience, the SL2-s is around 2 stops better in low light than the SL2. That's why I own both. The SL2 for High-Resolution Landscapes, Portraits, scanning Film Negatives, etc., and the SL2-S is for Street and low-light photography. It surprised me how good the SL2-S is compared to my Fujifilm GFX cameras, even at ISO 25000. The files look great. The noise has a pleasant kind of  "organic" look to my eyes. It's a fantastic camera especially for the current market price! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomasis7 Posted March 23 Share #7 Â Posted March 23 Advertisement (gone after registration) i love sl601 and i dont want more megapixel. I use M lenses. Superb colors out from SL601. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
costa43 Posted March 23 Share #8  Posted March 23 (edited) I think it may be worth you holding out for a short period as the rumours of an M camera with a built in EVF being released imminently are getting stronger.  It will no doubt have a very different price tag to the SL2-S, which is an absolute bargain at the moment but may be something to consider. Edited March 23 by costa43 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now