E-P1 versus LX3/S90 for travel?

Through Australia and New Zealand, I carried a PacSafe MetroSafe 200 with a Nordstrom tissue-weight cashmere shawl lining the bottom, my GF-1, my 20mm Panny lens, my 14-42 Oly, and my Canon FD 50mm + adapter, each in a neoprene bag. I kept the camera inside a warm hat (we were traveling in late winter). The external viewfinder was carried in its case inside the hat. I also carried an iPad, an iPhone, an iPod Nano (the last just as a long flight backup entertainment device), and my passport was in there, too. Also a torch, a small Rhodia pad, and 4 fountain pens in a case.

In one front outer pocket were my 46mm filters and in the other the 52mm filters, plus a couple of 7ml vials for ibuprofen and vitamins. Side pocket was sunglasses, other side pocket was the day's itinerary and other papers.

The entire getup weighed 3.7 kilos including the iPad.

So I think it's very doable, even though I probably could have managed with one fewer lens. Maybe. I don't think I ever got the 14-42 out.

 

Both? :smile: Seriously, even if you took both cameras with you (LX3 and E-P1), with one or two lenses for the Oly, it would still be a much lighter load than carrying a DSLR around. I like the LX3 for its wide angle, but if I had a 9-18mm or 7-14 lens, then the LX3 would become redundant, IMO. The Olympus is small enough.

 

To take with you most of the time and not feel that you have it, the S90 size is the one to go for

If you are quite happy being "slightly" inconvenienced

and you want a "zoom" take an LX or similar

If you are content with the 17mm or 20mm - take the EP-1 and OVF

If you want a built in viewfinder (and zoom and occasional video) and not too worried about a little more size - go for a Canon G11 - great value at £350

(I would probably take a G11 and put the EP1 20mm in my bag)

I would want a VF, even a slightly inaccurate one, in all that bright light

Just my opinion

 

I think an E-P1 and a 17/2.8 will be enough for you. The lens is 34mm equivalent, which make it very useful in most cases and is the smallest possible for M4/3 by now. I am sure you can manage without the external viewfinder.

 

I think it depends on the type of photography you do, what kind of subjects you like etc.

I have D70, LX2 and E-P2 . LX3 is much better than LX2 but not extremely different. At the time that I only had D70 and LX2, I regretted leaving D70 at home for few trips in Europe because while I was mostly interested in street photography, there were times were I wanted to do good landscapes, catch a few animal shots etc.

Recently, I left both D70 and LX2 at home for some trips and kept E-P2. I have mostly regretted leaving behind some of my Nikon lenses but otherwise it was a good choice.

I think if I was doing the trip you mention,I would bring all three or atleast D70 + LX2.

 

On my last big overseas holiday, I brought 3 cameras: Panasonic LX3, Olympus E-PL1, Samsung NX10 (yes, I'm a gear head)

Photo count at the end of the holiday:
E-PL1: ~4000
NX10: ~1000
LX3: 0.

 

On my last trip abroad I had a Pentax DSLR and a Pany LX2 (no E-P1 yet). Today, I'd go with both E-P1 (normal angles, zoom) & LX2 (wide shots, times when can't carry a 'big' camera). The LX has an optional leather pouch that can be carried from the waist, roomy enough for camera + extra battery + extra SD. It's a 'don't even have to think about it' case : the LX always make the trip, and I never part with it.

Then, for expected tourist visits, I take along the 'bigger' camera. The E-P1 wins for me as I'm more a rangefinder kind of person, and I feel like the more time passes by, the more awkward SLRs seems to be.

 

I love traveling, I travel a lot, and I like traveling light....and the way I think is "I don´t know when will I be back here or if I will ever be back here, so I want my photos/memories of this trip to be well documented". I´ve travelled to China with a Sigma DP1 and a Pana LX3 and I´ve got some amazing photos, but I have no doubt a micro 4/3 compact camera would have done a better job when it came to speed, dynamic range and iso performance.

 

Well, the answer isn't immediately obvious, actually. There are many advantages a camera like the LX5/S95 would have over an E-PEN, portability and flexibility being the biggest ones. You can't easily switch from wide angle to zoom on an E-PEN without taking extra lenses, which would defeat the purpose of your compact travel kit. You could certainly do OK with just one pancake lens like the 17 or 20 on the E-PEN, but invariably you'll find yourself wishing you had some extra zoom.

The answer also depends on what kind of photos you take, and what you want to do with them. If you're only looking to document your trip for personal reasons, perhaps publish some photos on the web, maybe print one or two on 8X10 photo paper at home, then the compact cameras are more than sufficient and you'll want the flexibility they offer. If you're looking to sell photos to magazines or in print, you'll want better IQ, in which case you'll be looking at least at an E-PEN with a number of different lenses (leave some at the hotel and only take what you need on your daily walks).

 

EP1

I own an LX3 and an EP2 , + 14-42 and 20mm1.7

The EP2 replaced my olympus E420 wich i used when it was the lightest DSLR .

I hike in remote places during my holidays, i carry up to 2 weeks of food , so everything else as to be as light as possible, i dont even carry a real tent ( just a floorless 900g shelter for 2 people with no inner usualy , ) and no change clothes except one underwear and one pair of socks


But if i go to someplace i will likely not visit again in my life ( like my hikes in Patagonia or Greenland ), i bringed my E420 , now EP2 + lens kit, i find the difference in quality over a good compact ( now my LX3) to be worth the extra 300-350g including batteries and extra bulk.
I print my best photos in A3 books and the difference shows enough.

When i hike in France i usualy bring my LX3 and i usualy print A4 books.

 

Nick
why not pick up the newer E-PL1
then you get the built in flash and the option of getting the electronic viewfinder later if you are that way inclined
only a small increase in price but given what you are wanting the camera for it may be a better option in the long term

Keith

 

Correction: 28-105 equivalent, of course... :smile:

 

Don't worry, Ray! I've got your back...

 

For travel, a 50mm (75mm effective) prime will be too restrictive, IMO. But, as long as you don't mind working around that, and potentially missing shots that you'll wish you got, later, it might be a good solution. I think (and this is MHO, of course) that a small kit zoom would be a better travel setup.