Jonathan Slack'sLeica SL 2 review
I love my Leica film cameras, but have always , perhaps out of ignorance, viewed Leica digital offerings as bling, but technologically behind more mainstream cameras, but Jono Slack presents a different perspective with the introduction of the SL-2. First, it is expensive, but not beyond reach. Secondly, the video records to SD 4:2:2 video and up to 400 mb/sec. It has eye autofocus, speed and accuracy to do big and maybe even sports. Given that it solely relys on contrast autofocus which maxes out at 6fps..the camera can do 10fps mechanical shutter and 20fps electronic shutter, I hope that some Leica/Sony folks can post a few comparison as this camera comes to market. The video specs sound impressive, but the image bragging rights look impressive for a Leica, but I wonder how they will compare to the A7Riii and IV.
Beside the poor autofocusing performance, the battery life of the SL2 also sucks according to DPreview. I agree the video feature seems to be the only outstanding feature of the camera. Anyway, I would always take any Leica review by a Leica user with a big pinch of salt. We just have to wait and read the reviews once the camera is available and in the hands of more users.
Charlie N wrote:
I believe it’s the first mirrorless camera to do FF 4K60, so basically A7s3....
The AF sounds horrible based off of DP review YT.
IP54 rating is good, glad they are serious about weather sealing, using magnets for scroll wheel seems awesome to keep things sealed.
Interesting camera.
The SL2 shares the internals with the Panasonic S1R, which can also do 60fps 4K (cropped). The S1R is half the price of the SL2, at least when it was recently on sale for $3k.
I had the original SL and then moved to the A7r iii and now the iv.
I also had the Q2 for a bit. The Q2 was an amazing little camera, but the one thing I couldn't get past was the noise from the sensor in low light and the dynamic range. The SL2 has the same sensor. I like shooting in low light and the ability to pull from shadows with Sony's sensors and the fact that noise doesn't begin to become an issue until higher ISOs keeps me in the Sony camp.
Also, the focus of the Q2 wasn't as good as my a7r iii/iv.
Don't get me wrong, I have some images from my Q2 that I love (and from my original SL), but I'm not migrating back to Leica.
saxguy wrote:
I had the original SL and then moved to the A7r iii and now the iv.
I also had the Q2 for a bit. The Q2 was an amazing little camera, but the one thing I couldn't get past was the noise from the sensor in low light and the dynamic range. The SL2 has the same sensor. I like shooting in low light and the ability to pull from shadows with Sony's sensors and the fact that noise doesn't begin to become an issue until higher ISOs keeps me in the Sony camp.
Also, the focus of the Q2 wasn't as good as my a7r iii/iv.
Don't get me wrong, I have some images from my Q2 that I love (and from my original SL), but I'm not migrating back to Leica....Show more →
The SL2 likely has the S1R's sensor rather than the Q2's. Both may have the same antecedent (or event be the same sensor) but the S1R sensor outperforms. If the difference is in the sensor complex (surrounding electronics) then hopefully the SL2 shares that with the S1R rather than with the Q2.
The SL 2 is an important camera for Zeiss. Zeiss can now promote the ZX1 as a compact camera. The Leica looks like a huge camera. BTW The ZX1 is now on the B&H website.
Nov 07, 2019 at 09:37 AM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
Zorro2016 wrote:
Beside the poor autofocusing performance, the battery life of the SL2 also sucks according to DPreview. I agree the video feature seems to be the only outstanding feature of the camera. Anyway, I would always take any Leica review by a Leica user with a big pinch of salt. We just have to wait and read the reviews once the camera is available and in the hands of more users.
I would say at least one other outstanding feature is the weather sealing. They went to extra mile to meet an external standard that so far no one else has done. That wouldn't matter much to me, but to some it will be important. It also not surprisingly will work better with Leica M lenses than any other off the shelf camera and that will matter to some as well. By the way there is also a review at PC Mag here: https://www.pcmag.com/review/371694/leica-sl2 that is by a non-Leica user (I think it is by one of the Camera story guys from Calgary and I generally like their reviews). The non-Leica review pretty much matches Jono Slack's review. If you want tracking AF, then the camera is a bit behind but otherwise it is pretty competitive in features and even ahead in a couple: use of M lenses as would be expected and weather sealing which I would not have expected. It also comes with a Leica premium price, which is of course expected as well.
Nov 07, 2019 at 09:38 AM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
snapsy wrote:
The SL2 likely has the S1R's sensor rather than the Q2's. Both may have the same antecedent (or event be the same sensor) but the S1R sensor outperforms. If the difference is in the sensor complex (surrounding electronics) then hopefully the SL2 shares that with the S1R rather than with the Q2.
Well I would actually prefer that the SL2 (or any camera) avoid the funny business with noise reduction and scaling that the S1R does at low ISOs to inflate DR, so I hope the SL2 has the surrounding electronics but not the cooking of the RAW files that we see in the S1R.
Steve Spencer wrote:
I would say at least one other outstanding feature is the weather sealing. They went to extra mile to meet an external standard that so far no one else has done. That wouldn't matter much to me, but to some it will be important. It also not surprisingly will work better with Leica M lenses than any other off the shelf camera and that will matter to some as well. By the way there is also a review at PC Mag here: https://www.pcmag.com/review/371694/leica-sl2 that is by a non-Leica user (I think it is by one of the Camera story guys from Calgary and I generally like their reviews). The non-Leica review pretty much matches Jono Slack's review. If you want tracking AF, then the camera is a bit behind but otherwise it is pretty competitive in features and even ahead in a couple: use of M lenses as would be expected and weather sealing which I would not have expected. It also comes with a Leica premium price, which is of course expected as well....Show more →
I agree it's cool they received an IP54 rating but I'm guessing its S1R sibling would meet or exceed that rating if Panasonic went through the effort and expense to get rated. As an aside, IP54 means "Protected from limited dust ingress, protected from water spray from any direction"
Nov 07, 2019 at 09:46 AM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
snapsy wrote:
I agree it's cool they received an IP54 rating but I'm guessing its S1R sibling would meet or exceed that rating if Panasonic went through the effort and expense to get rated. As an aside, IP54 means "Protected from limited dust ingress, protected from water spray from any direction"
I not so sure the S1R would get the rating. Some of what I read is that the SL2 had to redesign the top dials to work by use of a magnet to get the rating, and obviously the S1R does not have that protection from water entry. Nevertheless, the similarity in the cameras and the lack of similarity in price is obvious. The appeal of the SL2 is that for Leica shooters it will work well with almost all of their Leica lenses and it will have the Leica interface, which I personally really like, but I am not willing to pay the price it would take to get it. If I still had my M10 and the Leica M lenses, I had with it, however, this camera would be mighty tempting.
Steve Spencer wrote:
I not so sure the S1R would get the rating. Some of what I read is that the SL2 had to redesign the top dials to work by use of a magnet to get the rating, and obviously the S1R does not have that protection from water entry. Nevertheless, the similarity in the cameras and the lack of similarity in price is obvious. The appeal of the SL2 is that for Leica shooters it will work well with almost all of their Leica lenses and it will have the Leica interface, which I personally really like, but I am not willing to pay the price it would take to get it. If I still had my M10 and the Leica M lenses, I had with it, however, this camera would be mighty tempting....Show more →
I read about the magnetic-activated dials too. Sounds innovative but not sure it would be necessary to prevent ingress, although perhaps it's necessary to IP rating if that's based on construction details rather than just testing. For example the K1:
bwcolor wrote:
I love my Leica film cameras, but have always viewed Leica digital offerings as bling, but technologically behind more mainstream cameras...
bwcolor wrote: Jonathan Slack'sLeica SL 2 review
I love my Leica film cameras, but have always , perhaps out of ignorance, viewed Leica digital offerings as bling, but technologically behind more mainstream cameras, but Jono Slack presents a different perspective with the introduction of the SL-2. First, it is expensive, but not beyond reach. Secondly, the video records to SD 4:2:2 video and up to 400 mb/sec. It has eye autofocus, speed and accuracy to do big and maybe even sports. Given that it solely relys on contrast autofocus which maxes out at 6fps..the camera can do 10fps mechanical shutter and 20fps electronic shutter, I hope that some Leica/Sony folks can post a few comparison as this camera comes to market. The video specs sound impressive, but the image bragging rights look impressive for a Leica, but I wonder how they will compare to the A7Riii and IV....Show more →
Yes. The bling/jewelry reputation is infamous among the forums. From a business perspective I admire Leica's brand ability to generate heaps of cash quickly, repeatedly for years now. Apparently there is a long time market segment that buys up these Uber-priced special edition bling Leica kits on a regular basis. For the rest of us, I am told much of my Leica M gear may even increase in value if and when I decide to sell.
I enjoy almost every minute with the humble but not inexpensive M10 Rangefinder and some beautiful tiny M glass. And while I had no interest in the SL, the SL2 specs have now captured my attention even knowing the SL2 is CDAF only. I am also eager to try my M glass on the SL2 too as read M glass might understandably perform better on the SL2 sensor with some adjustments applied reportedly, one less layer of cover glass and micro-lens adjustments.
The DPR video is now being referenced everywhere. Negative news travels fast. But there are other respectable reviewers describing the SL2 as quick and accurate AF e.g. Jono Slack. I guess results is somewhere in-between depending on available light and lens choice probably contributing to some degree. I think I shot CDAF only with the original A7r. Didn't really bother me until I read in the forums that CDAF only was a weakness.
There are many of us long time Leica R shooters, including telyt (Doug Herr) and myself, that shot Leica cameras and lenses for 35 or so years, only to have Leica discontinue the R system in 2009. We now have little interest in going back to Leica for their Digital cameras but still continue to use many of our R lenses. In my case, I have added quite a number of M-mount lenses including those by Leica, Zeiss, and M-Rokkor. Rather than getting a digital Leica, I and others are still using and/or adding Sony cameras to our equipment that are or were modded by Kolari for better performance particularly with our M-mount WA lenses. I already had Kolari perform a V3 mod of my A7r in 2016. Just recently I purchased an A7rII on the FM boards in mint condition. I will use the camera as is for now, but intend to send the camera to Kolari for an UT modification for usage with and better performance of my M-mount and quite possibly some of my R mount lenses in January. For many of us, this may well be a much better option.
Zorro2016 wrote:
Beside the poor autofocusing performance, the battery life of the SL2 also sucks according to DPreview. I agree the video feature seems to be the only outstanding feature of the camera. Anyway, I would always take any Leica review by a Leica user with a big pinch of salt. We just have to wait and read the reviews once the camera is available and in the hands of more users.
"I like to be able to shoot immediately, and so the first thing I do normally is to turn off “Auto Power Off” and to turn “Auto Display Off” to the longest period, and that’s what I did with the SL2 when I first got a body.
Initially I was horrified with the battery life, and on a long walk (about 4 hours) I only managed to take 176 shots before the battery needed replacing. I complained about this to Leica, and it was pointed out that the faster processor and bigger files together with the stunningly fast write times made this inevitable.
Then I got to thinking harder about this, and reset the power saving settings. I then spent a few hours taking pictures in batches (as you might do at a wedding or event). In this perfect situation I managed to get 1085 images from a single charge. Which of course is fine.
My current feeling is to leave the defaults for power saving (see above), set ‘pre-focus’ to off; and under such circumstances I would expect to get about 350 images on a hike or country walk, and perhaps 650 images when shooting an event or a Wedding, and more if shooting a sports event (not that I often do that!).
It’s also worth mentioning that the ability to plug in a power pack (which will power the camera when on and charge the battery when off) can be a serious help when shooting for extended periods."
The CIPA rating for the SL2 is 370 shots, so complaints about the battery life are definitely legit, especially since this is a very competitive 1860mAh pack, comparable to Nikon's EN-EL15b in the Z6/Z7, but still notably smaller than the FZ100 battery in the A7RIII/IV (CIPA for the RIV is 670 from about 25% more battery capacity). It's worth noting that the A7R II got 290 shot CIPA from the tiny FW50 battery (1080mAh)
At least it does have proper USB power/charge support, unlike the Z7.
After a few years using Sony a7-series cameras the SL2's UI is very appealing however the selection of native L-mount lenses doesn't meet my needs at this time, and the SL's considerable mass isn't appealing at all. In theory I can adapt my remaining R lenses to either E-mount or L-mount cameras but in practical use the R lenses haven't seen much daylight in the last two years, using the 100-400 GM instead.
naturephoto1 wrote:
There are many of us long time Leica R shooters, including telyt (Doug Herr) and myself, that shot Leica cameras and lenses for 35 or so years, only to have Leica discontinue the R system in 2009. We now have little interest in going back to Leica for their Digital cameras but still continue to use many of our R lenses. In my case, I have added quite a number of M-mount lenses including those by Leica, Zeiss, and M-Rokkor. Rather than getting a digital Leica, I and others are still using and/or adding Sony cameras to our equipment that are or were modded by Kolari for better performance particularly with our M-mount WA lenses. I already had Kolari perform a V3 mod of my A7r in 2016. Just recently I purchased an A7rII on the FM boards in mint condition. I will use the camera as is for now, but intend to send the camera to Kolari for an UT modification for usage with and better performance of my M-mount and quite possibly some of my R mount lenses in January. For many of us, this may well be a much better option.
+1. I second this in general. The only thing I am missing a bit when using M-lenses on my A7R is the rangefinder. But putting $$$$ down just for this....nops. I am personally not convinced that the very often mentioned microlenses in Leica cameras make such huge difference in performance - I believe it is more so the sensor cover glass thickness. And as you said, this can be replaced and exchanged in other cameras. For good reason this market has become a profitable niche for companies.
saxguy wrote:
I had the original SL and then moved to the A7r iii and now the iv.
I also had the Q2 for a bit. The Q2 was an amazing little camera, but the one thing I couldn't get past was the noise from the sensor in low light and the dynamic range. The SL2 has the same sensor. I like shooting in low light and the ability to pull from shadows with Sony's sensors and the fact that noise doesn't begin to become an issue until higher ISOs keeps me in the Sony camp.
Also, the focus of the Q2 wasn't as good as my a7r iii/iv.
Don't get me wrong, I have some images from my Q2 that I love (and from my original SL), but I'm not migrating back to Leica....Show more →
Dpreview just posted a sample gallery from the SL2 including low-light base ISO raws. I processed one with +5EV in PS and the DR looks excellent. Here's a link if you'd like to process one yourself:
