First, let's give your productions a number.
1 $S \to AaAb$
2 $S \to BbBa$
3 $A \to \varepsilon$
4 $B \to \varepsilon$
Let's compute the first and follow sets first. For small examples such as these, using intuition about these sets is enough.
$$\mathsf{FIRST}(S) = \{a, b\}\\
\mathsf{FIRST}(A) = \{\}\\
\mathsf{FIRST}(B) = \{\}\\
\mathsf{FOLLOW}(A) = \{a, b\}\\
\mathsf{FOLLOW}(B) = \{a, b\}$$
Now let's compute the $LL(1)$ table. By definition, if we don't get conflicts, the grammar is $LL(1)$.
a | b |
-----------
S | 1 | 2 |
A | 3 | 3 |
B | 4 | 4 |
As there are no conflicts, the grammar is $LL(1)$.
Now for the $SLR(1)$ table. First, the $LR(0)$ automaton.
$$\mbox{state 0}\\
S \to \bullet AaAb\\
S \to \bullet BbBa\\
A \to \bullet\\
B \to \bullet\\
A \implies 1\\
B \implies 5\\
$$$$\mbox{state 1}\\
S \to A \bullet aAb\\
a \implies 2\\
$$$$\mbox{state 2}\\
S \to Aa \bullet Ab\\
A \to \bullet\\
A \implies 3\\
$$$$\mbox{state 3}\\
S \to AaA \bullet b\\
b \implies 4\\
$$$$\mbox{state 4}\\
S \to AaAb \bullet b\\
$$$$\mbox{state 5}\\
S \to B \bullet bBa\\
b \implies 6\\
$$$$\mbox{state 6}\\
S \to Bb \bullet Ba\\
B \to \bullet\\
B \implies 7\\
$$$$\mbox{state 7}\\
S \to BbB \bullet a \\
a \implies 8\\
$$$$\mbox{state 8}\\
S \to BbBa \bullet \\
$$
And then the $SLR(1)$ table (I assume $S$ can be followed by anything).
a | b | A | B |
---------------------------
0 | R3/R4 | R3/R4 | 1 | 5 |
1 | S2 | | | |
2 | R3 | R3 | 3 | |
3 | | S4 | | |
4 | R1 | R1 | | |
5 | | S4 | | |
6 | R4 | R4 | | 7 |
7 | S8 | | | |
8 | R2 | R2 | | |
There are conflicts in state 0, so the grammar is not $SLR(1)$. Note that if $LALR(1)$ was used instead, then both conflicts would be resolved correctly: in state 0 on lookahead $a$ $LALR(1)$ would take R3 and on lookahead $b$ it would take R4.
This gives rise to the interesting question whether there is a grammar that is $LL(1)$ but not $LALR(1)$, which is the case but not easy to find an example of.