SL2: A great addition to any Canon kit

SL1 has silent shutter actually.

Also, it has good image performance, if, you digest the RAWs in DPP4 as DIGIC6/7 are improving the low light NR, but with DPP4 + RAW can accomplish the same results as DIGIC7's noise reduction.

The live view in the SL1 is actually better than the one in the M2; it uses Hybrid CMOS AF II like the EOS M2, but it would appear the DIGIC5 in the SL1 has a bit more juice then the M2 (even though they're both DIGIC5, either the firmware is better on the SL1 or it's a higher powered DIGIC5) as live view on the SL1 is more responsive then my former M2; it's actually pretty close to the M3 in terms of performance.

So really, the SL1, if you use RAW and digest them properly, performs very well, as does the live view.

The EOS M on the other hand, we all know was very, very slow. The SL1, is the only other camera other then the EOS M2 to use the Hybrid CMOS AF II vs the Hybrid CMOS AF I that the EOS M, T4i, and T5i used.

The other arguments here are the "traditional" Canon colors of DIGIC5 and former, which DIGIC6 and later leans more towards a Sony-like bias; SL1 is one of the last cameras to use DIGIC5 and thus one of the "best" Canon's you can own if you prefer the traditional colors.

And of course Magic Lantern is DIGIC5 friendly; you can bump bitrates, use zebras, I believe focus peaking (not 100% sure on that one as I never used ML for it, but I've heard).

IMO, after reading about the eye sensor hiccups, and, the grip being actually worse, meh.

Also nobody has confirmed the stated spec of 6 frame raw max of the SL2, if true, that it matches actual use limits, the SL2 is not a clear cut winner across the board, especially competing against a cheaper, smaller, lighter, also 9-point AF counterpart. Between all the above, it actually reinforces the notion perhaps the SL1 is still a good move and frankly better in some cases then the SL2.

Now this is no means the same story as the 6D vs 6D2, but it's ringing a familiar tune; the 6D/SL1 was much cheaper, and potentially better in terms of IQ, that's an ouch for the 6D, not so much the SL2, but, the point being Canon is now taking 1 step back for every 2 steps forward with doing things like neutering the sensor in ways that hamper DR (6D) to differentiate from probably same sensor 5DIV, not implementing an eye sensor in lower class DSLRs, not going to more than 9-point AF (SL2) or 4k (both), going more Sony-like in their colors (both).

Newer models should be superior across the board, not having to choose between more AF and stinkier DR (6DII) or better IQ but no eye sensor (SL2) and both should be market competitive (4k).

Don't hear what I'm not saying, SL2 is still a strong product, but I shouldn't have to ask myself if the SL2 is better then the SL1, it should be, not might be...

...It wasn't that long ago that Canon released products superior to their predecessor, but I've noted the shift in trends with marketing obviously becoming even more involved, then they should be and things are becoming a mixed bag.

I'll keep my M5 for now, but I'll be keeping a sharp eye out for the Nikon upcoming products as it's not blowing smoke up my tailpipe the moves Canon's been doing lately.