So, after planing a vacation to Japan with my wife for the past 2 years or so, we finally have all of our hotels and plane tickets booked. Only problem, we aren't leaving for another 6 months or so, which gives me way, way too much time to fuss about lens selection. Before I get the obligatory "just take a superzoom and enjoy the vacation you idiot!" post, I will mention this trip for me is as much a photographic opportunity as it is a vacation, and my wife is a bit of a photographer herself/very supportive as well (and I in turn am very supportive of her obsession with tea ceremonies and gardens, which will make excellent subjects, so it should be a nice balance). Ok, so the premise of the thread: I do not intend to do any sort of scientific testing, reviews, etc. From my perspective, every lens I own is great to fantastic optically, and test metrics are of little concern at this point. With that out of the way, I would like to share a bit of my thought process, as it may be interesting to other people, and it would be good to hear alternative perspectives as well. My goal is to get the best kit, pound for pound that will cover all of my uses, as possible. Weight is primarily a concern for general transportation, getting to Japan, and then getting from city to city, day to day I will carry a small messenger bag with generally about 3 lenses, suited to the particular activity. We will be staying in Tokyo (shibuya/harajuku area), then off to Mount Koya (koyasan), Nara, and finally Kyoto. The sort of photography I am likely to do includes cityscapes, landscapes, architecture/temples, nature/wildlife (mostly the deer in Nara but probably birds and other random creatures that we find), portraits, food, street, basically a bit of everything. Here is the current list that I am definitely bringing with: EM1 - main camera EM5 - backup/wife's camera 25/1.4 - standard prime lens, mainly for low light and narrow DOF shooting 42.5/1.2 - portrait lens, I know this isn't the best choice for size and weight, but it is my favorite lens and a focal length/aperture combo that I will often put to good use 7-14/4 - ultrawide zoom, one of my most used lenses 12-32 - wife's main lens, weighs little more than a lens cap (70g!!) 12-40/2.8 - standard zoom, can't really live without it 35-100/2.8 - while I just received this lens today, it seems perfect for my needs (will outline further) 100-300/4-5.6 - wildlife/nature zoom lens, not a lens I use a lot, but the sort of lens that when you need it, no other lens will do the job Mefoto Backpacker tripod Here are a few I am considering: 7.5/3.5 - fisheye prime, fun lens, not sure how often I will use it, probably redundant with the 7-14/4 (unless I plan to take 360 hdr panos), though small enough that it doesn't make a big dent weight wise 12/2 - I will almost certainly bring this, as it makes a great 3 lens low-light kit (12/25/42.5), only reservation is the 12-40/2.8 is basically just as good and only a stop slower, though again this lens is light enough (130g) that it doesn't factor heavily into the weight equation And here are the ones I have already ruled out: 17/1.8 - decent lens which I barely ever use, I always reach for the 12/2 or 25/1.4 instead, this was an easy call 45/1.8 - redundant now that I have the nocti 75/1.8 - this was tough, the 75 is a fantastic lens, but... (will outline below) So, to the topic of the thread, here are some previous LENS FIGHTS, (keep in mind these are simply my reasons for choosing X over Y, not an argument for one lens being better than another, and certain factors like cost have little bearing, as I already own all of these or can afford to buy the ones I am considering) 45 v 42.5 45/1.8 - lovely little lens, can't really say anything bad about it. 42.5 - better in every regard except size/weight, this is one of my favorite focal lengths to shoot with, and having a lens this fast at this FL knocks off one of the big limitations for me personally with the M43 system, control over DOF. I would have loved it if this lens was 100g less and built to 25/1.4 specs, but for what it does, I will begrudgingly live with the size/weight (its also significantly smaller/lighter than my old Sigma 85/1.4). 75 v 42.5 75 - I should have known better than to buy this lens as a stop gap to the 42.5(which was unavailable when I bought the 75), I wanted more DOF control but I've never been a fan of this focal length. Like the Minolta Maxxum 135mm 2.8 (which is surprisingly similar in size, weight, and AF speed, IQ is quite good too), I simply reach for this sort of lens too infrequently. 42.5 - Again, this lens is simply fantastic, similar DOF control as the 75/1.8, but at a working distance that I much prefer 75 v 35-100 75 - The 75 on the chopping block yet again, it is truly the best lens that I never use. 35-100 - I just got it but wow am I impressed. The combination of size, weight, constant 2.8 aperture, image quality and focus speed, all on a package that doesn't extend while zooming? I'm sold, boy does this make my old A900 + Sigma 70-200/2.8 seem ridiculously large and heavy (I understand 2.8 = 5.6 for DOF on m43 vs ff, even still!). I can comfortably carry the EM1+this lens with two fingers, just crazy. Anyway, the combination of size and convenience of a zoom really makes a lot more sense for me in this range, as again a 150mm equivalent lens never seems quite right for me. Future lens fights: 75-300 v 100-300 - Just purchased the 75-300 from a fellow MU43 member, will report back, am hoping the 75-300 will offer the same performance but save me a bit on size/weight. 9-18 v 7-14??? - I looked at the lightroom analytics for the 7-14 and I use the 7mm end about 90% of the time, so I'm not sure I could live with 9mm, but I do like the sound of half the weight and the ability to use filters (I have already modded mine with the gel filter and have installed a filter to cut the purple glare). The concept of doing long exposures with NDs and an ultrawide is very interesting though. 12-35 v 12-40??? - I would lose the close focus ability of the 12-40, which means I might have to take a macro lens as well, so that would probably be a net gain in size/weight. I hope if this was not informative, that it was at least amusing for some of you. Any other suggestions for future battles?