Canon 2000D vs Leica TL2
The Canon EOS 2000D (called Canon T7 in some regions) and the Leica TL2 are two digital cameras that were announced, respectively, in February 2018 and July 2017. The 2000D is a DSLR, while the TL2 is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera. Both cameras are equipped with an APS-C sensor. The Canon has a resolution of 24 megapixels, whereas the Leica provides 24.1 MP. Read on to find out how these two cameras compare with respect to their body size, their sensors, their features, their input-output connections, and their reception by expert reviewers.
|Canon 2000D||Leica TL2|
|Digital single lens reflex||Mirrorless system camera|
|Canon EF mount lenses||Leica T mount lenses|
|24 MP, APS-C Sensor||24.1 MP, APS-C Sensor|
|1080/30p Video||4K/30p Video|
|ISO 100-6400 (100-12800)||ISO 100-50000|
|Optical viewfinder||Viewfinder optional|
|3.0" LCD, 920k dots||3.7" LCD, 1230k dots|
|Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)||Fixed touchscreen|
|3 shutter flaps per second||7 shutter flaps per second|
|500 shots per battery charge||250 shots per battery charge|
|129 x 101 x 78 mm, 475 g||134 x 69 x 33 mm, 399 g|
Body comparison: Canon 2000D vs Leica TL2
An illustration of the physical size and weight of the Canon 2000D and the Leica TL2 is provided in the side-by-side display below. The two cameras are presented according to their relative size. Three consecutive perspectives from the front, the top, and the back are available. All size dimensions are rounded to the nearest millimeter. If you prefer, you can also use the toggle button to switch to a comparison in percentage terms (in this case, the camera on the left side – the 2000D – represents the basis for the calculations across all the size and weight measures).
If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Leica TL2 is notably smaller (29 percent) than the Canon 2000D. Moreover, the TL2 is markedly lighter (16 percent) than the 2000D. In this context, it is worth noting that neither the 2000D nor the TL2 are weather-sealed.
The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete since they do not consider the interchangeable lenses that both of these cameras require. Hence, you might want to study and compare the specifications of available lenses in order to get the full picture of the size and weight of the two camera systems.
The adjacent table lists the principal physical characteristics of the two cameras alongside a wider set of alternatives. If you would like to visualize and compare a different camera combination, just use the right or left arrows in the table to switch to the respective camera. Alternatively, you can also navigate to the CAM-parator app and make your selection from the full list of cameras there.
|Canon 2000D»||5.1 in||4.0 in||3.1 in||16.8 oz||500||n||Feb 2018||449||Canon 2000D|
|Leica TL2«||5.3 in||2.7 in||1.3 in||14.1 oz||250||n||Jul 2017||1,950||Leica TL2|
|Canon 4000D« »||5.1 in||4.0 in||3.0 in||15.4 oz||500||n||Feb 2018||399||Canon 4000D|
|Canon 77D« »||5.2 in||3.9 in||3.0 in||19.0 oz||600||n||Feb 2017||899||Canon 77D|
|Canon 200D« »||4.8 in||3.7 in||2.8 in||16.0 oz||650||n||Jun 2017||549||Canon 200D|
|Canon 800D« »||5.2 in||3.9 in||3.0 in||18.8 oz||600||n||Feb 2017||749||Canon 800D|
|Canon G9 X Mark II« »||3.9 in||2.3 in||1.2 in||7.3 oz||235||n||Jan 2017||529||Canon G9 X Mark II|
|Canon M100« »||4.3 in||2.6 in||1.4 in||10.7 oz||295||n||Aug 2017||499||Canon M100|
|Canon 1300D« »||5.1 in||4.0 in||3.1 in||17.1 oz||500||n||Mar 2016||449||-||Canon 1300D|
|Canon 750D« »||5.2 in||4.0 in||3.1 in||19.6 oz||440||n||Feb 2015||749||-||Canon 750D|
|Canon 760D« »||5.2 in||4.0 in||3.1 in||19.9 oz||440||n||Feb 2015||849||-||Canon 760D|
|Canon 1200D« »||5.1 in||3.9 in||3.1 in||16.9 oz||500||n||Feb 2014||449||-||Canon 1200D|
|Fujifilm X-T20« »||4.6 in||3.3 in||1.6 in||13.5 oz||350||n||Jan 2017||899||Fujifilm X-T20|
|Fujifilm X-A3« »||4.6 in||2.6 in||1.6 in||12.0 oz||410||n||Aug 2016||399||-||Fujifilm X-A3|
|Leica CL« »||5.2 in||3.1 in||1.8 in||14.2 oz||220||n||Nov 2017||2,795||Leica CL|
|Leica TL« »||5.3 in||2.7 in||1.3 in||13.5 oz||400||n||Nov 2016||1,695||-||Leica TL|
|Nikon D3400« »||4.9 in||3.9 in||3.0 in||15.7 oz||1200||n||Aug 2016||499||-||Nikon D3400|
Any camera decision will naturally be influenced heavily by the price. The manufacturer’s suggested retail prices give an idea on the placement of the camera in the maker’s lineup and the broader market. The 2000D was launched at a markedly lower price (by 77 percent) than the TL2, which puts it into a different market segment. Usually, retail prices stay at first close to the launch price, but after several months, discounts become available. Later in the product cycle and, in particular, when the replacement model is about to appear, further discounting and stock clearance sales often push the camera price considerably down. Then, after the new model is out, very good deals can frequently be found on the pre-owned market.
Sensor comparison: Canon 2000D vs Leica TL2
The size of the imaging sensor is a crucial determinant of image quality. All other things equal, a large sensor will have larger individual pixel-units that offer better low-light sensitivity, wider dynamic range, and richer color-depth than smaller pixels in a sensor of the same technological generation. Moreover, a large sensor camera will give the photographer more control over depth-of-field in the image and, thus, the ability to better isolate a subject from the background. On the downside, larger sensors tend to be associated with larger, more expensive camera bodies and lenses.
Both cameras under consideration feature an APS-C sensor, but their sensors differ slightly in size. The sensor area in the TL2 is 12 percent bigger. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have format factors, respectively, of 1.6 (2000D) and 1.5. Both cameras have a native aspect ratio (sensor width to sensor height) of 3:2.
With 24.1MP, the TL2 offers a higher resolution than the 2000D (24MP), but the TL2 nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 3.92μm versus 3.72μm for the 2000D) due to its larger sensor. However, the 2000D is a somewhat more recent model (by 7 months) than the TL2, and its sensor might have benefitted from technological advances during this time that enhance the light gathering capacity of its pixel-units. Coming back to sensor resolution, it should be mentioned that the TL2 has no anti-alias filter installed, so that it can capture all the detail its sensor resolves.
The Canon EOS 2000D has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 6400, which can be extended to ISO 100-12800. The corresponding ISO settings for the Leica TL2 are ISO 100 to ISO 50000 (no boost).
Since 2007, DXO Mark has published sensor performance measurements that have been derived using a consistent methodology. This service is based on lab testing and assigns an overall score to each camera sensor, as well as ratings for dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), color depth ("DXO Portrait"), and low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports"). The following table provides an overview of the physical sensor characteristics, as well as the sensor quality measurements for a selection of comparators.
|Canon 2000D»||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/30p||22.6||11.9||1009||71||Canon 2000D|
|Leica TL2«||APS-C||24.1||6014||4014||4K/30p||-||-||-||-||Leica TL2|
|Canon 4000D« »||APS-C||17.9||5184||3456||1080/30p||21.9||11.4||695||63||Canon 4000D|
|Canon 77D« »||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||23.6||13.3||971||78||Canon 77D|
|Canon 200D« »||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||23.6||13.4||1041||79||Canon 200D|
|Canon 800D« »||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||-||-||-||-||Canon 800D|
|Canon G9 X Mark II« »||1-inch||20.0||5472||3648||1080/60p||21.9||12.5||522||65||Canon G9 X Mark II|
|Canon M100« »||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||23.5||12.9||1272||78||Canon M100|
|Canon 1300D« »||APS-C||17.9||5184||3456||1080/30p||-||-||-||-||Canon 1300D|
|Canon 750D« »||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||22.7||12.0||919||71||Canon 750D|
|Canon 760D« »||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/30p||22.6||12.0||915||70||Canon 760D|
|Canon 1200D« »||APS-C||17.9||5184||3456||1080/30p||21.9||11.3||724||63||Canon 1200D|
|Fujifilm X-T20« »||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||4K/30p||-||-||-||-||Fujifilm X-T20|
|Fujifilm X-A3« »||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||-||-||-||-||Fujifilm X-A3|
|Leica CL« »||APS-C||24.1||6014||4014||4K/30p||-||-||-||-||Leica CL|
|Leica TL« »||APS-C||16.1||4928||3264||1080/30p||-||-||-||-||Leica TL|
|Nikon D3400« »||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||24.8||13.9||1192||86||Nikon D3400|
Many modern cameras are not only capable of taking still images, but also of capturing video footage. The two cameras under consideration both have sensors whose read-out speed is fast enough to capture moving pictures, but the TL2 provides a better video resolution than the 2000D. It can shoot movie footage at 4K/30p, while the Canon is limited to 1080/30p.
Feature comparison: Canon 2000D vs Leica TL2
Beyond body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. For example, the 2000D has an optical viewfinder, which can be very useful when shooting in bright sunlight. In contrast, the TL2 relies on live view and the rear LCD for framing. That said, the TL2 can be equipped with an optional viewfinder – the Visoflex (Typ 020). The table below summarizes some of the other core capabilities of the Canon 2000D and Leica TL2 in connection with corresponding information for a sample of similar cameras.
|Canon 2000D»||optical||n||3.0||920||fixed||n||4000||3.0||Y||n||Canon 2000D|
|Leica TL2«||-||n||3.7||1230||fixed||Y||4000||7.0||n||n||Leica TL2|
|Canon 4000D« »||optical||n||2.7||230||fixed||n||4000||3.0||Y||n||Canon 4000D|
|Canon 77D« »||optical||Y||3.0||1040||swivel||Y||4000||6.0||Y||n||Canon 77D|
|Canon 200D« »||optical||n||3.0||1040||swivel||Y||4000||5.0||Y||n||Canon 200D|
|Canon 800D« »||optical||n||3.0||1040||swivel||Y||4000||6.0||Y||n||Canon 800D|
|Canon G9 X Mark II« »||-||n||3.0||1040||fixed||Y||2000||8.2||Y||Y||Canon G9 X Mark II|
|Canon M100« »||-||n||3.0||1040||tilting||Y||4000||6.1||Y||n||Canon M100|
|Canon 1300D« »||optical||n||3.0||920||fixed||n||4000||3.0||Y||n||Canon 1300D|
|Canon 750D« »||optical||n||3.0||1040||swivel||Y||4000||5.0||Y||n||Canon 750D|
|Canon 760D« »||optical||Y||3.0||1040||swivel||Y||4000||5.0||Y||n||Canon 760D|
|Canon 1200D« »||optical||n||3.0||460||fixed||n||4000||3.0||Y||n||Canon 1200D|
|Fujifilm X-T20« »||2360||n||3.0||1040||tilting||Y||4000||8.0||Y||n||Fujifilm X-T20|
|Fujifilm X-A3« »||-||n||3.0||1040||tilting||Y||4000||6.0||Y||n||Fujifilm X-A3|
|Leica CL« »||2360||Y||3.0||1040||fixed||Y||8000||10.0||n||n||Leica CL|
|Leica TL« »||-||n||3.7||1230||fixed||Y||4000||5.0||Y||n||Leica TL|
|Nikon D3400« »||optical||n||3.0||921||fixed||n||4000||5.0||Y||n||Nikon D3400|
One difference between the cameras concerns the presence of an on-board flash. The 2000D has one, while the TL2 does not. While the built-in flash of the 2000D is not very powerful, it can at times be useful as a fill-in light.
Concerning the storage of imaging data, both the 2000D and the TL2 write their files to SDXC cards.
Connectivity comparison: Canon 2000D vs Leica TL2
For some imaging applications, the extent to which a camera can communicate with its environment can be an important aspect in the camera decision process. The table below provides an overview of the connectivity of the Canon EOS 2000D and Leica TL2 and, in particular, the interfaces the cameras (and selected comparators) provide for accessory control and data transfer.
|Canon 2000D»||Y||mono||mono||-||-||mini||2.0||Y||Y||-||Canon 2000D|
|Leica TL2«||Y||stereo||mono||-||-||micro||3.0||Y||-||-||Leica TL2|
|Canon 4000D« »||Y||mono||mono||-||-||mini||2.0||Y||Y||-||Canon 4000D|
|Canon 77D« »||Y||stereo||mono||Y||-||mini||2.0||Y||Y||Y||Canon 77D|
|Canon 200D« »||Y||stereo||mono||Y||-||mini||2.0||Y||Y||Y||Canon 200D|
|Canon 800D« »||Y||stereo||mono||Y||-||mini||2.0||Y||Y||Y||Canon 800D|
|Canon G9 X Mark II« »||-||stereo||mono||-||-||micro||2.0||Y||Y||Y||Canon G9 X Mark II|
|Canon M100« »||-||stereo||mono||-||-||mini||2.0||Y||Y||Y||Canon M100|
|Canon 1300D« »||Y||mono||mono||-||-||mini||2.0||Y||Y||-||Canon 1300D|
|Canon 750D« »||Y||stereo||mono||Y||-||mini||2.0||Y||Y||-||Canon 750D|
|Canon 760D« »||Y||stereo||mono||Y||-||mini||2.0||Y||Y||-||Canon 760D|
|Canon 1200D« »||Y||mono||mono||-||-||mini||2.0||-||-||-||Canon 1200D|
|Fujifilm X-T20« »||Y||stereo||mono||Y||-||micro||2.0||Y||-||-||Fujifilm X-T20|
|Fujifilm X-A3« »||Y||stereo||mono||-||-||micro||2.0||Y||-||-||Fujifilm X-A3|
|Leica CL« »||Y||stereo||mono||-||-||-||-||Y||-||-||Leica CL|
|Leica TL« »||Y||stereo||mono||-||-||micro||2.0||Y||-||-||Leica TL|
|Nikon D3400« »||Y||mono||mono||-||-||mini||2.0||Y||-||Y||Nikon D3400|
Both the 2000D and the TL2 are recent models that feature in their makers' current product line-up. The TL2 replaced the earlier Leica TL, while the 2000D followed on from the Canon 1300D.
Review summary: Canon 2000D vs Leica TL2
So what conclusions can be drawn? Which of the two cameras – the Canon 2000D or the Leica TL2 – has the upper hand? The listing below highlights the relative strengths of the two models.
Reasons to prefer the Canon EOS 2000D:
- Better moiré control: Has an anti-alias filter to avoid artificial patterns to appear in images.
- Easier framing: Has an optical viewfinder for image framing and settings control.
- Longer lasting: Can take more shots (500 versus 250) on a single battery charge.
- Easier fill-in: Is equipped with a small onboard flash to brighten deep shadow areas.
- Easier device pairing: Supports NFC for fast wireless image transfer over short distances.
- More affordable: Was introduced into a lower priced category (77 percent cheaper at launch).
- More modern: Is somewhat more recent (announced 7 months after the TL2).
Advantages of the Leica TL2:
- Maximized detail: Lacks an anti-alias filter to exploit the sensor's full resolution potential.
- Better video: Provides higher definition movie capture (4K/30p vs 1080/30p).
- Larger screen: Has a bigger rear LCD (3.7" vs 3.0") for image review and settings control.
- More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1230k vs 920k dots).
- Fewer buttons to press: Has a touchscreen to facilitate handling and shooting adjustments.
- Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (7 vs 3 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
- More compact: Is smaller (134x69mm vs 129x101mm) and will fit more readily into a bag.
- Less heavy: Has a lower weight (by 76g or 16 percent) and is thus easier to take along.
- More legacy lens friendly: Can use many non-native lenses via adapters.
- Faster data transfer: Supports a more advanced USB protocol (3.0 vs 2.0).
- More prestigious: Has the Leica luxury appeal, which ensures a high resale value.
- More heavily discounted: Has been on the market for longer (launched in July 2017).
If the count of individual advantages (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the TL2 is the clear winner of the contest (12 : 7 points). However, the relevance of individual strengths will vary across photographers, so that you might want to apply your own weighing scheme to the summary points when reflecting and deciding on a new camera.
In any case, while the comparison of the spec-sheets of cameras can offer a general idea of their imaging potential, it remains partial and cannot reveal, for example, the handling experience and imaging performance when actually working with the 2000D or the TL2. User reviews that are available, for instance, at amazon can sometimes shed light on these issues, but such feedback is all too often partial, inconsistent, and inaccurate.
Expert reviews: Canon 2000D vs Leica TL2
This is where reviews by experts come in. The following table reports the overall rankings of the cameras as published by some of the major camera review sites (cameralabs, dpreview, ephotozine, imaging-resource, photographyblog). The detailed reviews can be accessed by clicking on the site logo in the table header.
|Canon 2000D»||rev||-||3.5/5||-||3.5/5||Feb 2018||449||Canon 2000D|
|Leica TL2«||-||-||4/5||-||4/5||Jul 2017||1,950||Leica TL2|
|Canon 4000D« »||rev||-||3.5/5||-||3.5/5||Feb 2018||399||Canon 4000D|
|Canon 77D« »||-||82/100||4.5/5||4.5/5||4/5||Feb 2017||899||Canon 77D|
|Canon 200D« »||HiRec||78/100||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||Jun 2017||549||Canon 200D|
|Canon 800D« »||-||80/100||4.5/5||4/5||4/5||Feb 2017||749||Canon 800D|
|Canon G9 X Mark II« »||-||75/100||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||Jan 2017||529||Canon G9 X Mark II|
|Canon M100« »||Rec||-||4/5||-||3.5/5||Aug 2017||499||Canon M100|
|Canon 1300D« »||rev||73/100||4/5||3.5/5||4/5||Mar 2016||449||-||Canon 1300D|
|Canon 750D« »||-||75/100||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||Feb 2015||749||-||Canon 750D|
|Canon 760D« »||Rec||77/100||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||Feb 2015||849||-||Canon 760D|
|Canon 1200D« »||Rec||-||4/5||4/5||4.5/5||Feb 2014||449||-||Canon 1200D|
|Fujifilm X-T20« »||HiRec||82/100||5/5||-||4.5/5||Jan 2017||899||Fujifilm X-T20|
|Fujifilm X-A3« »||-||74/100||4.5/5||-||4/5||Aug 2016||399||-||Fujifilm X-A3|
|Leica CL« »||-||-||-||-||4/5||Nov 2017||2,795||Leica CL|
|Leica TL« »||-||-||-||-||4/5||Nov 2016||1,695||-||Leica TL|
|Nikon D3400« »||Rec||76/100||4/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||Aug 2016||499||-||Nikon D3400|
Care should be taken when interpreting the review scores above, though. The ratings are only valid when referring to cameras in the same category and of the same age. Hence, a score should always be seen in the context of the camera's market launch date and its price, and rating-comparisons among cameras that span long time periods or concern very differently equipped models make little sense. Also, please note that some of the review sites have changed their methodology and reporting over time.
Other camera comparisons
Did this review help to inform your camera decision process? If you would like to see a different side-by-side camera review, just make a corresponding selection in the search boxes below. An an alternative, you can also directly jump to any one of the listed comparisons that were previously generated by the CAM-parator tool.
- Canon 550D vs Nikon D800
- Canon 5D Mark IV vs Canon T6s
- Canon 5D vs Fujifilm GFX 50S
- Canon 77D vs Canon 6D Mark II
- Canon G1 X Mark III vs Sony RX1R II
- Canon M10 vs Panasonic GM5
- Canon SL1 vs Leica S Typ 007
- Canon SX740 vs Leica TL
- Leica M Typ 262 vs Leica Q Typ 116
- Leica Q Typ 116 vs Pentax K-3 II
- Nikon D5200 vs Nikon D5300
- Sony RX10 IV vs Panasonic G80
Specifications: Canon 2000D vs Leica TL2
|Camera Model||Canon 2000D||Leica TL2|
|Camera Type||Digital single lens reflex||Mirrorless system camera|
|Camera Lens||Canon EF mount lenses||Leica T mount lenses|
|Launch Date||February 2018||July 2017|
|Launch Price||USD 449||USD 1950|
|Sensor Format||APS-C Sensor||APS-C Sensor|
|Sensor Size||22.3 x 14.9 mm||23.6 x 14.9 mm|
|Sensor Area||332.27 mm2||370.52 mm2|
|Sensor Diagonal||26.8 mm||28.3 mm|
|Sensor Resolution||24 Megapixels||24.1 Megapixels|
|Image Resolution||6000 x 4000 pixels||6014 x 4014 pixels|
|Pixel Pitch||3.72 μm||3.92 μm|
|Pixel Density||7.22 MP/cm2||6.52 MP/cm2|
|Movie Capability||1080/30p Video||4K/30p Video|
|ISO Setting||100-6400 ISO||100-50000 ISO|
|ISO Boost||100-12800 ISO||no Enhancement|
|Viewfinder Type||Optical viewfinder||Viewfinder optional|
|Rear LCD Size||3.0 inch||3.7 inch|
|LCD Resolution||920k dots||1230k dots|
|LCD Attachment||Fixed screen||Fixed screen|
|Touch Input||no Touchscreen||Touchscreen|
|Maximum Shutter Speed||1/4000s||1/4000s|
|Continuous Shooting||3 shutter flaps/s||7 shutter flaps/s|
|Fill Flash||Build-in Flash||no On-Board Flash|
|Storage Medium||SDXC cards||SDXC cards|
|USB Connector||USB 2.0||USB 3.0|
|HDMI Port||mini HDMI||micro HDMI|
|Wifi Support||Wifi built-in||Wifi built-in|
|Near-Field Communication||NFC built-in||no NFC|
|Battery Type||LP-E10 power pack||BP-DC13 power pack|
|Battery Life||500 shots per charge||250 shots per charge|
129 x 101 x 78 mm
(5.1 x 4.0 x 3.1 in)
134 x 69 x 33 mm
(5.3 x 2.7 x 1.3 in)
|Camera Weight||475 g (16.8 oz)||399 g (14.1 oz)|
Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.