Let’s make one thing clear: I really loved my Leica M11. The feel, the rangefinder experience, the image quality – all of it was intoxicating. It was a pure, unadulterated, and liberating photographic experience. But after a year of lugging it around, battling its quirks, and missing shots due to its inherent limitations, plus my degrading eyesight, I found myself needing something different. Perhaps a camera that’s more versatile and even practical. So, I did the unthinkable, probably taboo, to most of my Leica friends. I traded my Leica M11 for an almost new Leica SL2 via our local community’s popular camera trader, Mark Canlas. A “downgrade” in the judging eyes of some, but for me, it’s been quite a revelation. This review isn’t just about comparing the two by features but rather about my journey from the rangefinder purity of the M11 to the more practical world of the SL2 and whether it was the right move.
When I got the unit, the first thing that shocked me was the Leica SL2’s weight and size. It’s a beast compared to the sophisticated elegance of the M11. Picking it up for the first time felt like holding a brick even though it was perfect for my hands since the M11 was quite small for me. To make it more visual, it’s like comparing a M4 Sherman to the iconic Triumph Bonneville. The weight, the build, and the sheer presence of the SL2 are undeniable with an almost 50% addition in weight. At the start, it felt a bit cumbersome to use, a clear difference compared to the M11 which easily slips into my Artisan Artist ACAM 7100. It was not discrete at all and I was worried that the weight would hamper my adventures. The SL2 demands a bigger and more dedicated camera bag, given that it’s not something you just casually bring around every day. On certain days, I found myself saying “It’s too big” and would just leave it in the dry box but then again, the convenience of the autofocus for my eyes can’t be discounted, so I continue to bring it around and shoot with it. I’d be lying if I didn’t say that I miss the M11’s compactness.
There’s so much to love on the Leica SL2’s viewfinder. Hands down it’s gorgeous. I can say it with confidence since I still own a Sony A7R3, a Leica Q3, and a Leica CL. While a battery drainer, the EVF offers a large, clear, and precise portrayal of the scene, in contrast to the optical viewfinder that the M11 has, and even with the Visioflex 2. Despite being equipped with a 3.7MP OLED panel the Visioflex 2 was sluggish and wasn’t helping my style of shooting. It is though an add-on accessory on the M11 compared to the SL2’s embedded EVF so it’s not a fair comparison. But between the Hasselblad H2D’s EVF that my friend John Villavicencio owns, I still find the SL2 sharper, faster, and much more vivid (John and his Hasselblad is another story that needs a different post altogether though).
The Leica SL2’s autofocus is decently fast and accurate however it’s not perfect. It latches onto subjects in seconds and with confidence, even under slightly less-than-ideal conditions. It’s not as fast as 2024’s more updated camera line-up with phase detection, but it’s not a laggard either. The SL2 uses a contrast-detect autofocus with Depth From Defocus (DFD) technology (from what I read, licensed from Panasonic), a bit dated by today’s standards but in most situations, especially with stationary or slowly moving subjects in good light, the SL2’s autofocus works well. It’s generally accurate and quiet, quickly acquiring focus on both stills and video. The SL2’s autofocus does fail in some difficult situations, though. Low-light performance, while better, can still be spotty. Fast-moving subjects can also be problematic, with the system sometimes hunting or losing focus. Continuous autofocus, while functional, isn’t always as dependable as some rivals, especially even compared to my old Sony A7R3, which can be a disappointment for action or sports photography.
On image quality, I asked myself whether it was worth the reversal from 60MP to 47MP. On Lightroom or Photoshop, the SL2 does not suffer from the M11 series’ slight magenta cast, which can be easily corrected by a white balance picker. Edge sharpness, color rendering, shadows, and highlights seem to be visually similar between the two cameras. I just lost 22% of pixel dimensions, but overall, still retain the Leica look and feel that both cameras provide. The M11’s got this fantastic 60MP sensor that’s famous for its amazing dynamic range and detail. The SL2’s got a 47MP sensor, which isn’t quite as high-resolution but still produces some really stunning image quality. The files are clean and detailed and have amazing dynamic range. Honestly, when I’ve edited them, I haven’t really noticed a gigantic difference in image quality between the two cameras. Both of them produce pictures that are more than good enough for even the most particular photographers. And the SL2’s slightly lower resolution actually has some advantages. The files are smaller and much more manageable with my older Macbook M1 Pro.
On battery life, my already traded-in M11 used to provide around 600 shots on its BP-SCL7 battery, while this SL2 manages only around 300 shots on a single charge using its BP-SCL4. Not really a good reason to shift to the SL2, but I do get to use my Q3’s 2 batteries with it so saves me around $350. The good news is that like the M11, the SL2 is chargeable through USB and even via a power bank, which is extremely convenient when I am on the move.
Regrets? So far, none. I realized I use the M when I want to slow down and process my style of photography, wherein I don’t need autofocus. The M11 perfectly fits when the shooting experience is more important than the result. On the flip side, I now use the SL when I want AF convenience without sacrificing image quality; I don’t mind carrying more weight, given my current predicament with my eyes. Which camera do I think tells my stories better? Does the Leica SL2 support my workflow and visual perspective? The M11’s size and the loss of rangefinder touch operation are undoubtedly felt, but the SL2’s features have opened up uncharted creative possibilities. I’m testing it now with my M lenses, namely a Leica 50mm 1.4 Summilux and a Voigtlander 35mm 1.4 VM II (multi-coated), checking if any changes will be seen in my workflow. From the short time that I’ve had it, I shoot faster, not because of the autofocus capabilities but for being able to clearly see the frame. The autofocus does help, especially with my Sigma 24 f2 DG DN Contemporary, I wonder if I should get the Sigma 35 or the 50 as part of my new L line-up.
