1. Welcome to Mu-43.com—a friendly Micro 4/3 camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

12/20/45 or 14/25/45 for hiking in Scotland.

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by Fred49, May 8, 2012.

  1. Fred49

    Fred49 Mu-43 Regular

    Feb 24, 2010
    I am leaving tomorrow for the TGO challenge, a 14 days walking event in Scotland. ( Glen Affric / Monadhliath / Cairngorms ) :smile:

    My EM5 didnt arrived yet so ill use my EP2 but i am hesitating a ton about which lenses ill bring.

    Since i got the 25mm the 20mm didnt saw much use, but i have mostly done city photos.

    A few weeks ago i have been to Barcelona and i was perfectly happy with 12/25/45, using 25/45 outside and 12/25 inside buildings.
    But i am afraid 12 to 25mm is a bit wide as a gap.

    12/20/45 is leading atm but i have changed my mind 5-6 times in the past week !!!
  2. xdayv

    xdayv Color Blind

    Aug 26, 2011
    Tacloban City, Philippines
    for a very light setup, a 14 - 20 - 45 will be the one I will take for the 14-days event. I wouldn't mind replacing the 20 with the 25.
    • Like Like x 1
  3. krugorg

    krugorg Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jul 18, 2011
    Minnesota USA
    Sounds like a cool trek!

    I would vote for the Oly 12, just because I love that lens for landscapes. If you are taking the 45, I would choose the 20 as the normal lens, because of the size/weight savings.
    • Like Like x 1
  4. shizlefonizle

    shizlefonizle Mu-43 Veteran

    Apr 21, 2012
    why not 12, 25,45? seems like it would the holy trinity for m4/3 as of right now
    • Like Like x 1
  5. nickthetasmaniac

    nickthetasmaniac Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jan 11, 2011
    I've never been overly happy with the 14mm as a landscape lens, but other than that I wouldn't fret too much - I don't think you'll notice too much difference between the kits you mention...
    • Like Like x 1
  6. RSilva

    RSilva Mu-43 Regular

    Oct 24, 2011
    Neither am I very happy with the 2/12mm but you get what you pay. I guess a truly amazing wide/super wide should cost much more. (something like the Zeiss G or ZM 21mm f2.8 would be nice)
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Rover

    Rover Mu-43 Regular

    Apr 5, 2012
    14 days of walking, I would just screw the 20 on the front of my camera and leave everything else home.
    • Like Like x 2
  8. strang

    strang Mu-43 Veteran

    May 7, 2012

    Although I probably would take a tele or super zoom with me as well. But yeah 3 lenses is a bit of a hassle.
    • Like Like x 1
  9. Qwerty

    Qwerty Mu-43 Regular

    Jan 15, 2012
    I would cut it down to two lenses, either 12mm and 20mm or 12mm and 45mm depending on the kind of photography you do.
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Fred49

    Fred49 Mu-43 Regular

    Feb 24, 2010
    If i were hiking with my wife or any other person i wouldnt take 3 lenses.

    But my backpack weight is trimmed down to 5,2kg ( less if i wear more than a shirt + windshirt) including shelter, sleeping pad, sleeping bag etc...
    at most ill carry 4,5days = 3kg of food, 1l of water and a 100g gas canister that is a total weight of less than 9,5kg, an EP2 + 3 batteries + 3 lenses +pedco ultrapod + a cuben fiber chestpack weights less than 1kg.
    So i will be between 6,5 to 10,5 kg.

    As i hike solo i will have plenty of time to takes photos ( when it doesnt rain ) thats why i am willing to carry 200-300g more even if i dont use it often.

    the 14 shouldnt be much better than the kit lens ( even if i only own the mkI) but its 55g so less than the kit lens if the other focals are covered.
    And the 20/25/45 are so different from the kit lens i wont take the later.

    So if i have the 20 or 25 on my EP2 for 80-90% of the time as usual.
    The 45 for 10-15%
    They is perhaps 5% of the time ill want the 14 or 12 and the weight penalty is only 55gto 150g to cover that option.

    Unless i plan to stich, using my simili monopod /tripod :

    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

    thinking as i write, sorry if its gobbledygook
  11. Fred49

    Fred49 Mu-43 Regular

    Feb 24, 2010

    in fact i would be inclined to take 2 lenses : 20mm + 45mm and throw the 55g of the 14mm where i can find some room :p 

    But to be honest first time i wrote my gear list it was only EP2 + 20mm
  12. fredlong

    fredlong Just this guy...

    Apr 18, 2011
    Massachusetts USA
    I shot film for years with a 24, 35, 90 kit. The only thing I had an issue with was the 35mm was usually just a little wider than I wanted.

    I think I'd be happy with the 12, 20, 45 on a hiking trip like this. I wouldn't even consider the 75 gm. difference between the 14 and 12 or the 100 gm. difference between the 20 and 25. I know small amounts of weight add up when hiking, I strive for ultralight backpacking myself, but some things are more important than others.

    • Like Like x 1
  13. chasm

    chasm Mu-43 Veteran

    Mar 2, 2010
    I used to have a Canon SureShot that had switchable 38 and 70mm lenses - you just flicked a switch, it didn't zoom. I was as happy as Larry.

    I was in the Highlands last weekend. Wasn't hiking, so took the following:
    Samyang 7.5mm fisheye
    Panasonic 14mm f2.5
    Voigtlander 25mm f0.95
    Holga 25mm f8
    Zeiss Planar T* 50mm f1.7 + Contax adapter

    Based on your possible selections and my own experience, I'd either go 14mm + 45mm or 20mm + 45mm. Not 12 unless you're happy with three lenses. I prefer two if I'm walking as one can go in a pocket.

    The Pinwide I didn't use as my sensor needs a little clean :eek:  but the fisheye was much more versatile than I'd thought and it has a lovely intensity in its rendition - highly recommended.
    The Holga is also really useful - dreamy standard lens and weighs next to nothing.
    Voigtlander is a great all-round standard as well as being useful in moonlight :rolleyes:  and practically a macro lens as well.
    I like the Panasonic 14mm - I'm also considering getting the 11mm conversion lens they've just brought out, although currently it's more than I paid for the lens itself!
    I think it's essential to have a bit more reach available than a standard lens gives - I was tempted by the Olympus 45mm but fell for my teenage Zeiss dream instead, and so far am delighted with it.

    Enjoy the highlands - the weather was lovely when I left!
    • Like Like x 1
  14. Armanius

    Armanius Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 23, 2010
    Just take all four lenses! If you were thinking about taking the 25, the addition of the 20 is just a few grams heavier. That way, you'll have no regrets in the event you thought one (or the other) was better for a particular photo.
    • Like Like x 1
  15. phrenic

    phrenic Mu-43 All-Pro

    Sep 13, 2010
    I would rather sweat a little more and take more lenses rather than find myself short when there's a great opportunity. That's also an advantage of a lighter, smaller system right. ;) 
    • Like Like x 1
  16. jim_khoo

    jim_khoo Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 9, 2010
    Kuala Lumpur
    or you might want to consider wide zoom and a prime; 9-18 and 45mm.
    • Like Like x 2
  17. G1 User

    G1 User Mu-43 Veteran

    Jul 20, 2010
    Get the National Geographic Belt pack, and you can carry it without any bulk of a shoulder bag, Wear the camera + 1 lens on your neck across one shoulder, old school, but still a valid way to carry things when need both hands at times.
    • Like Like x 1
  18. applemint

    applemint Mu-43 Veteran

    Jan 24, 2012
    Sorry to hear your EM-5 did not arrive yet - I remember your original post saying you hoped that your pre-order would arrive in time for the TGO Challenge.

    I think the 12mm would get some good use - even if it's only 24mm equivalent vs the 28mm of the 14mm I find a 24mm makes a big difference compared to 28mm for those wide angle landscape shots. But I think that given how little each lens weighs (even though every gram counts when backpacking light) that the 12mm, 20mm (or 25mm) and 45mm would all be worth taking - I don't think I could narrow it down to just two lenses.

    Look forward to seeing your pictures and have fun - still quite a lot of snow in the Cairngorms (higher up) at the moment for May:

    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
    • Like Like x 1
  19. Fred49

    Fred49 Mu-43 Regular

    Feb 24, 2010
    so 12/20/45

    I am using this cuben fiber pack, strapped to the straps of my backpack like on the 3rd from top photos on the right :

    ZPacks.com Ultralight Backpacking Gear - Multi-Pack 3 in 1 Lid, Chest Pack, Belt Pack

    weight of pack + attachments straps = 47g

    with 10g i added a foam/duc tape back and a separation between camera and lenses

    and then its a perfect with for the EP2 + those 3 lenses.

    See you in 2 weeks and a half.


    nb i dont have the 9-18 and resisted buying one, will be harder to resist the 12-35 if its as sharp or better than the 7-14.
  20. landshark

    landshark Mu-43 Veteran

    Apr 27, 2010
    SO CAL
    I would take just the 12 and the 45, there is really not much need for anything in between
    • Like Like x 1
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.