"The SL2 and S1R offer identical sensor resolution—the basics of the imaging chip are the same. But the SL2's sensor features two, rather than three, layers of glass. It omits a light filtration layer and uses microlenses to better capture light coming it at askew angles.
It's an advantage if you plan on using the camera with M-mount rangefinder lenses (via an adapter), as the sensor design will improve image quality at the corners and edges of your image. However, if you're using modern, autofocus L-mount glass, don't expect to see vastly different results versus the S1R."
Per Jono's review comments:
"The microlens design will help with vignetting and colour cast, but it is the coverglass stack which causes 'smearing' near the periphery.
The M10 actually only has 1 layer (IR Cut filter / protection)
the SL and SL2 have 2 (IR Cut filter and protection)
but the point and problem is to keep it thin enough to stop smearing."
Steve Spencer wrote:
I hope in addition to micro lenses, it also has thinner sensor cover glass. The micro lenses, thinner sensor cover glass, and built-in corrections could make this camera clearly the best non-rangefinder for Leica M glass and that would be important to a number of people. In addition, it would then be the camera that works the best with Leica M glass and also works with L mount glass like the new Leica SL summicron lenses. One could imagine a kit for this camera that included the Leica M 21 SEM (or the WATE if you wanted wider), the Leica SL 35 f/2 APO, the Leica SL 50 f/2 APO, and the Leica SL 90 f/2 APO. That is a ridiculously expensive, but pretty stellar kit and quite reasonable in size. If you needed a fast wide lens you could add the a Leica M summilux 21, 24, or 28. If you needed longer focal lengths you could add L glass. I can see this as a very versatile camera that can take a lot of different and interesting lenses some of which other cameras could not use or not use well.
Now if you need top drawer AF, then this camera probably won't be for you, but I think it will have a following and for those people it will bring some things that other cameras cannot. ...Show more →
The SL2 is exactly what I was expecting and I never know why people are surprised. The micro-lenses alone are enough to have Leica M users paying a premium.
I don't know if I'll buy the camera it depends on how much of a discount my dealer gives me. I'm happy with the FP though it's 24mp vs 47mp so owning both isn't a stretch. But I don't like the S1/S1R at all so I would gladly pay a premium for the SL2 if the through the viewfinder experience was better than the S1. And no the micro-lenses don't have me excited since I would much rather use an RF to manual focus than any other method of manual focusing.
Just watched the DPR video overview and a negative comment about the SL2 regarded the EVF: resolution decreased during focusing. There was also a comment about jittery AF focus behavior.
It will be interesting to see if challenging M lenses perform equally on the SL2 and M cameras. Wasn't that a claim about the SL too? Or was it 'close to' M performance? My brief testing of the SL quickly revealed it was not equal to M performance. Maybe it's indeed improved this time.
rscheffler wrote:
Just watched the DPR video overview and a negative comment about the SL2 regarded the EVF: resolution decreased during focusing. There was also a comment about jittery AF focus behavior.
It will be interesting to see if challenging M lenses perform equally on the SL2 and M cameras. Wasn't that a claim about the SL too? Or was it 'close to' M performance? My brief testing of the SL quickly revealed it was not equal to M performance. Maybe it's indeed improved this time.
I think SL never meant to be equal to M for M glasses, it might be better than all others though. I am also interested in EVF performance, maybe something with 120fps or 60fps or it related to AF, one of review mentioned during AF, EVF resolution drop, don't remember which review mention that. I think this is one of better Leica value this time given its on paper spec.
rscheffler wrote:
Just watched the DPR video overview and a negative comment about the SL2 regarded the EVF: resolution decreased during focusing. There was also a comment about jittery AF focus behavior.
It will be interesting to see if challenging M lenses perform equally on the SL2 and M cameras. Wasn't that a claim about the SL too? Or was it 'close to' M performance? My brief testing of the SL quickly revealed it was not equal to M performance. Maybe it's indeed improved this time.
The few comments I seen so far implies that it is not as good as the M10 but I know Sean Reid will post an article about M lenses on the SL2 so that will be interesting to read, he will also compare the camera to the S1R but I am not sure if that comparison will include M lenses.
Overall this looks like a really competent camera from Leica that has a lot going for it, like the EVF, IBIS, design etc.
rscheffler wrote:
Just watched the DPR video overview and a negative comment about the SL2 regarded the EVF: resolution decreased during focusing. There was also a comment about jittery AF focus behavior.
It will be interesting to see if challenging M lenses perform equally on the SL2 and M cameras. Wasn't that a claim about the SL too? Or was it 'close to' M performance? My brief testing of the SL quickly revealed it was not equal to M performance. Maybe it's indeed improved this time.
Someone on FM brought this up about the S1R if I remember correctly. They returned it due to that happening, could be a sensor limitation since I don't think Panasonic fixed it? Anyone wanna chime in?
Also the jittery AF is a S1/S1R issue too. I think the FP is slightly slower and thus not as noticeably jittery (also maybe no DFD?)
Canon EOSR doesn't do this and I don't remember Nikon or Sony doing this either (but it's been a while now since I've used them).
rscheffler wrote:
Just watched the DPR video overview and a negative comment about the SL2 regarded the EVF: resolution decreased during focusing. There was also a comment about jittery AF focus behavior.
It will be interesting to see if challenging M lenses perform equally on the SL2 and M cameras. Wasn't that a claim about the SL too? Or was it 'close to' M performance? My brief testing of the SL quickly revealed it was not equal to M performance. Maybe it's indeed improved this time.
What I've heard is that it's not reduced resolution, but the way the contrast-only autofocus operates in continuous mode. It needs to oscillate around the current focusing distance, thus introducing out of focus images of the focus point. Some electronics that only processes the most contrasty input from the lens may be able to fix this, but that may be too computationally expensive for the processor. At this time, you may just need to let the autofocus work in AF-C, without visual confirmation, or switch to AF-S, i.e. single focus.
Steve Spencer wrote:
I hope in addition to micro lenses, it also has thinner sensor cover glass. The micro lenses, thinner sensor cover glass, and built-in corrections could make this camera clearly the best non-rangefinder for Leica M glass and that would be important to a number of people. In addition, it would then be the camera that works the best with Leica M glass and also works with L mount glass like the new Leica SL summicron lenses. One could imagine a kit for this camera that included the Leica M 21 SEM (or the WATE if you wanted wider), the Leica SL 35 f/2 APO, the Leica SL 50 f/2 APO, and the Leica SL 90 f/2 APO. That is a ridiculously expensive, but pretty stellar kit and quite reasonable in size. If you needed a fast wide lens you could add the a Leica M summilux 21, 24, or 28. If you needed longer focal lengths you could add L glass. I can see this as a very versatile camera that can take a lot of different and interesting lenses some of which other cameras could not use or not use well.
Now if you need top drawer AF, then this camera probably won't be for you, but I think it will have a following and for those people it will bring some things that other cameras cannot. ...Show more →
There is some mention of a thinner cover glass in one of the SL2 reviews ( have to find that one again) . Something about 2 layers of glass instead of 3.
rscheffler wrote:
Just watched the DPR video overview and a negative comment about the SL2 regarded the EVF: resolution decreased during focusing. There was also a comment about jittery AF focus behavior.
It will be interesting to see if challenging M lenses perform equally on the SL2 and M cameras. Wasn't that a claim about the SL too? Or was it 'close to' M performance? My brief testing of the SL quickly revealed it was not equal to M performance. Maybe it's indeed improved this time.
Some differences of opinions regarding AF performance in the different reviews. Maybe something about increasing the depth sensitivity. See below from http://www.slack.co.uk/leica-sl2.html Jonathan Slack
"In more general terms I’ve found that the AF is very fast, and more importantly is very accurate, "
"Focusing
I have to admit to being easily confused by AF options on digital cameras, but I’ve found the new AF options in the SL2 to be easy to understand and quite logical. I think that the new options for Depth Sensitivity, Field Movement and Shift in direction, together with the AF profiles are a really good idea.
For example, I was finding that shifting from a snap of the dog on a walk, to shooting a plant close up, sometimes the camera was reluctant to go so close. Increasing the depth sensitivity sorted out this problem.
Choosing Wildlife Mode and then Tracking has proved to be a good solution to shooting birds in flight. Sadly I’ve not had any sports events to shoot, so I haven’t been able to try out the sports mode.
In more general terms I’ve found that the AF is very fast, and more importantly is very accurate, whichever mode you choose. It also works very well with the Panasonic and Sigma lenses I’ve tested with the SL2."
Changing from mid-distance (or infinity) to close-up will probably always be difficult to a contrast-only autofocus system, because it only sees a composition of blurry blobs at this point, and oscillating around the focusing distance only induces minor changes in the blurriness of the blobs - so the contrast-only AF has very little information on how to adjust the focus distance.
LBJ2 wrote:
Some differences of opinions regarding AF performance in the different reviews. Maybe something about increasing the depth sensitivity. See below from http://www.slack.co.uk/leica-sl2.html Jonathan Slack
"In more general terms I’ve found that the AF is very fast, and more importantly is very accurate, "
"Focusing
I have to admit to being easily confused by AF options on digital cameras, but I’ve found the new AF options in the SL2 to be easy to understand and quite logical. I think that the new options for Depth Sensitivity, Field Movement and Shift in direction, together with the AF profiles are a really good idea.
For example, I was finding that shifting from a snap of the dog on a walk, to shooting a plant close up, sometimes the camera was reluctant to go so close. Increasing the depth sensitivity sorted out this problem.
Choosing Wildlife Mode and then Tracking has proved to be a good solution to shooting birds in flight. Sadly I’ve not had any sports events to shoot, so I haven’t been able to try out the sports mode.
In more general terms I’ve found that the AF is very fast, and more importantly is very accurate, whichever mode you choose. It also works very well with the Panasonic and Sigma lenses I’ve tested with the SL2."...Show more →
AcuteShadows wrote:
Changing from mid-distance (or infinity) to close-up will probably always be difficult to a contrast-only autofocus system, because it only sees a composition of blurry blobs at this point, and oscillating around the focusing distance only induces minor changes in the blurriness of the blobs - so the contrast-only AF has very little information on how to adjust the focus distance.
I agree with this and find that the S1 gets confused a lot. If the lens has the ability to produce sharply defined bokeh balls the S1 will sometimes think the bokeh balls are a point of sharp focus and lock on the bokeh and like a dog with a bone it's difficult to get the S1 to switch over (one point focus is usually the safe bet when using the S1). Whereas with the EOSR/A9 etc I haven't had this issue.
I doubt something that Panasonic has been working on for many years Leica magically perfected in a few short months.. Jono is old friends with Andres and will always favour Leica so I tend to take his reviews more as guides for what to expect or what to test when the product is in my own hands..
Jono admits in his reviews that he will not 'focus' on bad points... but I agree his reviews remain a worthwhile read.
Regarding jittery AF behaviour from other brands: IIRC, when I tried the a7RII 2-3 years ago for an extended trial, I experienced jittery AF, particularly with the 85/1.4. It was a bit disconcerting while shooting because one had to trust the system was working properly. For more static subjects it did seem to work most of the time, but once things started moving, it was not consistently reliable. I don't recall if the a7RII was contrast detect only or also PDAF...
adamdewilde wrote:
I agree with this and find that the S1 gets confused a lot. If the lens has the ability to produce sharply defined bokeh balls the S1 will sometimes think the bokeh balls are a point of sharp focus and lock on the bokeh and like a dog with a bone it's difficult to get the S1 to switch over (one point focus is usually the safe bet when using the S1). Whereas with the EOSR/A9 etc I haven't had this issue.
I doubt something that Panasonic has been working on for many years Leica magically perfected in a few short months.. Jono is old friends with Andres and will always favour Leica so I tend to take his reviews more as guides for what to expect or what to test when the product is in my own hands.. ...Show more →
adamdewilde wrote:
The SL2 is exactly what I was expecting and I never know why people are surprised. The micro-lenses alone are enough to have Leica M users paying a premium.
I don't know if I'll buy the camera it depends on how much of a discount my dealer gives me. I'm happy with the FP though it's 24mp vs 47mp so owning both isn't a stretch. But I don't like the S1/S1R at all so I would gladly pay a premium for the SL2 if the through the viewfinder experience was better than the S1. And no the micro-lenses don't have me excited since I would much rather use an RF to manual focus than any other method of manual focusing. ...Show more →
I had no interest in the SL, I do have significant interest in the SL2 and would at a minimum like to try it to include seeing how my M glass 24-90 FLs perform on the SL2 for myself.
Of course $6k is a price for serious consideration, but when I think about all the money I've spent on upgrading my Sony cameras over the last six years e.g.,A7r, A7rII, A7rIII, A9 and currently the A7rIV somehow $6K doesn't look as bad 😳
LBJ2 wrote:
I had no interest in the SL, I do have significant interest in the SL2 and would at a minimum like to try it to include seeing how my M glass 24-90 FLs perform on the SL2 for myself.
Of course $6k is a price for serious consideration, but when I think about all the money I've spent on upgrading my Sony cameras over the last six years e.g.,A7r, A7rII, A7rIII, A9 and currently the A7rIV somehow $6K doesn't look as bad 😳
Panasonic S1 do AF jittery in AFC even with their native 70-200f4. (and sometimes refuse to adjust focus unless you changed frame/composition and stuck at close or long distance) However, the images seems sharp most of time if subject has reasonable distance. This is because focus refresh speed is more than EVF feed can handle. PDAF don;t have this issue because it is open loop that not require continue adjust based on trial and error.
I can safely say that this camera is not for anyone heavily rely AFC performance. The same as Panasonic S1. I don't mind it at all personally, though I would say Nikon Z's AF performance especially eye face tracking implementation is miles better than S1 and I think that would have been the standard I am happily accept even it is not as good as latest Sony.
However, I do pick up S1 more than Z and enjoy shooting it more general speaking, well, but that could be personal...
Nov 07, 2019 at 12:07 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
rscheffler wrote:
Jono admits in his reviews that he will not 'focus' on bad points... but I agree his reviews remain a worthwhile read.
Regarding jittery AF behaviour from other brands: IIRC, when I tried the a7RII 2-3 years ago for an extended trial, I experienced jittery AF, particularly with the 85/1.4. It was a bit disconcerting while shooting because one had to trust the system was working properly. For more static subjects it did seem to work most of the time, but once things started moving, it was not consistently reliable. I don't recall if the a7RII was contrast detect only or also PDAF... ...Show more →
The A7r II does have PDAF as we all as contrast detect AF.
zhangyue wrote:
Panasonic S1 do AF jittery in AFC even with their native 70-200f4. (and sometimes refuse to adjust focus unless you changed frame/composition and stuck at close or long distance) However, the images seems sharp most of time if subject has reasonable distance. This is because focus refresh speed is more than EVF feed can handle. PDAF don;t have this issue because it is open loop that not require continue adjust based on trial and error.
I can safely say that this camera is not for anyone heavily rely AFC performance. The same as Panasonic S1. I don't mind it at all personally, though I would say Nikon Z's AF performance especially eye face tracking implementation is miles better than S1 and I think that would have been the standard I am happily accept even it is not as good as latest Sony.
However, I do pick up S1 more than Z and enjoy shooting it more general speaking, well, but that could be personal......Show more →
Hahaha the S-008/S3 (missing from the market so long I've lost track of it's name) will have worse AF than all the mentioned cameras but I'm sure you'd use it a lot more than most if someone dropped it on your lap
I get what you say about the Nikon though I really did love it's through the viewfinder implementation. It's one of the things I didn't love about the SL and hate about the S1.
