Some thoughts about the Leica SL2-S while they are fresh in my mind.

Image file from an SL2.

I took possession of a nice, mint copy of Leica's SL2-S camera a few days before a day and a half long photo project. Unlike my friend, Paul's architecture photo projects, which require a handful of frames for each meticulous set-up my recent project at the Seminary of the Southwest required kind of a traditional photojournalism approach intertwined with a couple dozen studio portraits. I came home with nearly 2,000 total images. Of course, many of them are near duplicates of the frames just before and just after but it's important to understand that when photographing a class with twenty or so people in it, none of them rehearsed or posed, getting a range of expressions and gestures without intruding too much is the name of the game. 

Many of the frames were from the studio set up where I made portraits of faculty and staff members. The numbers go up because, again, the people I was working with, while pros in their own fields, don't spend much time in front of a camera, surrounded by light stands, flashes and modifiers. They are not used to the portrait process and so shooting a lot of frames serves two purposes. First, people tend to lower their guards when they get used to a process; which requires shooting more frames. Second, small changes in expressions can make a big difference in the actual success of the session. And.....people blink. 

Those studio shots were done with a different camera. A Panasonic S5, which I still think is a wonderful photo and video tool. And right now probably a screaming bargain on the used markets...

All of the faster moving, unpredictable location portraits, classroom photos, chapel photos, interior architectural photos and even some swimming pool photos were done with one camera and one lens. The SL2-S and the Leica 24-90mm f2.8-4.0 lens.

The SL2-S required no learning curve for me. Zero. Nada. Why? Because the body, menus and general feel of the camera are almost identical to the Leica SL2 which I have been using for almost four years. The SL2-S is a just a bit heavier and feels even more solid than the SL2. Don't know why but it does. It's hefty. But I guess that photographers of my generation (now over 60....nearing 69) cut our teeth in the photo business on big, professional cameras, some festooned with motor drives which added a lot of bulk and weight and it was ingrained in us that bigger and heavier meant more precision and more reliability. And it's hard to shake early formed beliefs that have stood the test of time. Just ask any devout religious person... :-)

If I were using a camera only as a street shooting camera or "found object" documenting camera I would probably choose something different. Like an M series Leica, A  Leica Qx, or even a smaller and lighter camera from another brand. But in the commercial field the size and weight of the camera is a very small percentage of the gear we bring to light stuff and to support our bigger lenses. While the SL2-S, coupled with the big 24-90mm zoom is quite a ponderous package you don't need to always shoot with that configuration. When I do use the SL2 or SL2-S for unbridled fun (just for me) there are a lot of lens options that make the whole assemblage much more friendly. The 50mm f2.0 APO Voigtlander for the M series cameras is small and light by comparison to nearly all the non-M 50mm lenses, even with a lens adapter attached. And it's wickedly sharp. Even wide open. Maybe especially at wide open apertures. 

The weight of the camera and its density means that all things being equal it's a very stable and low vibration platform. Add in five stops of image stabilization and it becomes a very, very stable platform. The EVF is the best in the business. There are some others on the market that boast a higher resolution but the resolution and the refresh rate of those drops when you are actually photographing. When the higher resolution would come in handy. And the excellent glass optics for the Leica EVF make a big difference in the immersive quality of the finder. 

The reasons I opted to buy an SL2-S and add it to my commercial camera inventory are mostly about the sensor. I wanted a lower res (than the SL2) sensor exactly for jobs like the one I'm describing because I want to shoot in the raw format so I can fix anything I screw up in the field but I don't want the megapixel overhead. Many times the 47+ megapixels of the SL2 don't really add more to the quality of frames that are intended to be used in lower res applications and the big files fill up hard drives quickly. The big frames also slow down the camera's ability to write to the buffer. 24 megapixels, more and more, just keeps feeling like the sweet spot for camera files for general use. The buffer on the SL2-S is enormous. Another reason, and one I got good use from last Monday and Tuesday, is the new BSI image sensor in the SL2-S. I was able to shoot files at ISO 6400 and even 12,000 with little or no noise. A clear three to four stops better than my original SL cameras. And about two stops better noise performance compared to the SL2.

A real advantage of a camera with great ISO performance isn't always all about shooting in the dark. I was shooting many images in which a lecturer was standing in front of a window to the outdoors. I'd let the exposure on the person go a bit dark and at the same time try not totally dramatically over expose the landscape out the window. When I pulled the raw files into Lightroom I could usually pull up the shadow detail with the shadow slider, pull down highlights to get detail there too and then add a bit of midrange contrast with the clarity slider. The results were files that looked correctly exposed and had no discernible noise in what used to be the shadow areas. In really formidable cases I could use the subject selection tools in Lightroom to separate the backgrounds from the main subject or foreground and apply exposure corrections to each part individually. Miracle post processing! And all without the heavy noise I would get with earlier generation 24 megapixel cameras. 

The SL2-S is an L mount camera but it's very easy to use M mount lenses on it. There are menu profiles for nearly all of the Leica M and R series lenses which means automatic correction for geometric distortions and also automatic vignetting corrections. While I stuck with the big L mount zoom lens for this job I currently have a 35mm f1.4 Voigtlander lens (M) on the camera and it's easy as pie to shoot with. There are no corrections for third party lenses like the one I'm currently using but it's not hard to find Leica M lens profiles that match the basic parameters and are almost certainly sharing large scale lens design parameters with other similar lenses. The profiles for certain Leica 35mm Summilux lenses seem to work well. 

So. Better sensor, overall. Great performance with adapted M lenses. Good image stabilization. Perfect handling for those used to previous generations of the SL cameras. Great Leica color science. Low, low noise. Endless buffer. Heavy enough to assist with maintaining muscle mass in one's arms. And a superb EVF and back screen. Add to all of this a simple and easy to navigate menu and you have a camera that's not the latest tech but light years ahead on handling and heavy duty use. 

The downsides? Well, there is the weight. And for those of you who actually use continuous tracking AF in photo and video there seems to be a consensus on the web that it's not the among the fastest, or the stickiest C-AF. And, finally, the battery life with the supplied SCL-4 battery is not really great. Maybe 250-350 shots, depending on your dependence on chimping. I worked around the battery issue by stocking up on some of those new SCL-6 batteries that were made as a battery upgrade for the SL3 and Q3 cameras. They work really well and get me about 25% more frames than the earlier, stock battery.

The camera's battery is chargeable through the USB connection, has state of the art collaboration with my iPhone via the Leica app, and does everything I ever wanted in a  camera. 

Why keep the SL2 around? Hmm. We did a couple of big budget jobs over the last two years for an international medical technology company and they love the big files from that camera. If we shoot it at 100, 200 or 400 ISO and light everything well it's unbeatable for big trade show graphics. Think 6 by 10 feet. And unlike billboards which are generally seen from some long distance you can walk right up to the panels and pixel peep to your heart's content. If we have only one client who really "needs" the higher resolution I think it's just common sense to keep the camera around. It's already paid for. Already depreciated. Maybe when all the kinks are worked out of the new SL3 we'll upgrade but nobody (myself included) is demanding anything better right now than the SL2 for finnicky, controlled work....at higher resolutions.

There's really no need for anyone to rush out and buy an SL2-S. I'm pretty sure there's a new model in the works. And Nikon and Canon have caught up with most imaging performance metrics. I like working with the Leica cameras and they match the way I've historically worked so I am quite comfortable with them. I'm equally certain that I could pick up a Panasonic S5ii and get a very close level of  on sensor performance, especially when using the same L mount lenses. Still, it's comfortable to have similar, familiar menus between the SL2-S, the SL2 and the Q2 cameras. Makes it easy to pick up one and go. And it's nice that all the batteries from the SL to the SL3 and the Q2 and Q3 are interchangeable. The same battery type across six models is a wonderful thing. It's always sad when new camera comes out and you have to get all new batteries....

I loved working with the camera. The photographs out of it are just great. I love them. The client loves them. And that's what counts. Would I buy it again?

You bet.  I've already recouped my initial investment. Not a bad, quick return.

Taken with some Leica camera or another. But not the SL2-S.