200d compared to 100d - exposure and responsiveness

So did you notice much difference?

Iso 3200 was my max with the sl1

I read there's about a 2/3 stop improvement?

Is the AF more responsive due to the new processor at all? I only use centre point and one shot single servo

Any other differences you noticed?

Just about to buy but thought I'd get some feedback first as im tempted to get a grade A+ used sl1 replacement instead if there is not much difference

I dont do video or use flippy screens so...

Ah well I'll soon find out as i sold my sl1 and will have a new sl2 by the end of the week.

I'll welcome the extra battery life and rumoured partial improvements to dr and high iso

Actually dr was fine with the sl1 so what i mean is hopefully improved dr at higher iso and possibly better 3200 whichbeas my limit with the sl1 and dare i wishbfor useable 6400....?

We'll see.... tbh just better 3200 would make me happy

The sl1 was my favourite camera of all time of any format or manufacturer

I strongly hope the white balance response and rendering is the same and the colour output not too different as those are areas where my sl1 made me so happy

Looks like i just wasted about 180 quid then lol as the sl1 low iso - especially with highlight tone priority- was just great

Ah well maybe the better live view might help for stealthy shooting .

shenlonco wrote:

I also owned the sl1 and the sl2 to me is much better. And the live view works awesome on it also!

Good news!

Thanks guys and gals

Well ive got my new sl2.

The live view is excellent.  The viewfinder is great.

The guide modes are horrid so turned them all off.

Battery life improvements nice.

Overall feels lighter which is nice.

Shutter not quite as loud as sl1

Feels cheaper is my only minor negative observation.  Sl1 eas more solid.  This sl2 has an empty sorta feel and makes echo noises.

But on the whole the battery life, live view and lightness are nice

Literally live view as good as a mirrorless camera!  Amazing.  Yeah I'm happy i upgraded..

Okay done first low light shots.

Ah man the SL2 generation sensor is much much cleaner as high ISO. 3200 on the SL1 was noisy but I'd use it, but man 6400 is as usable on the SL2 as it was with my Nikon D5300, cleans up with NR better than SL1 files too

Generally sharper brighter and much less noise even at 6400.

Like all newer sensors a slight tendency to bright highlights even with Highlight tone priority engaged, but there's tons of info there and they pull down nicely.

I'd describe the leap in image quality as how it was going from a Nikon d3100 to a d3200 / 5100 to 5300....

Really is a nice sensor, much better WB under warm lighting, much cleaner whites.

But still the fabulous Canon colour and white balance.

VF is great, larger than a 77d / 800d etc.

And the live view is as easy and fast as a mirrorless camera now!!!!!

yeah this generation of sensor really is in my experience - doing the same test shots in my home as I do with every camera I own even the ones I buy and sell - a stop better, I know the measurebators say 2 thirds a stop or whatever but nah man it's more like a stop and just overall cleaner, and clearer and brighter and WAY less and finer noise in low light.

Not that i couldn't get by with just an sl1 for street, but meh the LV will come in useful from time to time, battery life is always good to have more, I do a lot of shooting in galleries etc and can now have clean 3200 and 6400

The SL2 is 47 grams heavier but due to the grip, feels lighter and better balanced.

So my conclusion is for daytime non live view shooting, honestly, keep an SL1 and no need to upgrade.  Yeah battery life, but an SL1 Duracell or x-pro version is like £25 on amazon, so no issue really

If you use Liveview often though and shoot indoors and in low light - yes it's worth upgrading