Lens Suggestions for Riverboat Tour (Budapest, Vienna, Prague)

Swandy

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Dec 15, 2009
Messages
362
My wife and I are taking a riverboat tour along the Blue Danube from Budapest (through Vienna) and on to Prague. While we have travelled a bit in Europe and have taken a riverboat before, we have never visited this area.

Most of my "travel" shots tend to be in the wide to normal range. The times I have taken a longer zoom lens (generally the Olympus 50-200 years ago and currently the 40-150), I use it perhaps 10% of the time or less. I had originally thought about taking my Olympus Stylus 1 (with it's great zoom range) instead of my EM10, but just feel that the overall IQ of the EM10 is just better.

So I will be taking the EM10 and one of the 14-42 lenses (probably the EZ Pancake just because of it's size convenience over the IIR version), the BCL Fisheye (because it is too small and too much fun to leave home) and possibly the Olympus 17mm/1.8 (for indoors and at night, though to be honest on our last trip, I rarely changed from the EZ to the 17mm, even indoors in museums, when I had both along). I have the 40-150 - which while I will admit is relatively small and light for it's zoom range - still would require a larger camera bag than I really wish to take along.

So I am asking people who have been/traveled to these cities (not much wildlife to be concerned with), did you feel the need for a long lens?

Thanks, Steve
 

gryphon1911

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Mar 13, 2014
Messages
3,758
Location
Central Ohio, USA
Real Name
Andrew
Back when all I had was a DSLR, I would travel with the Nikon D50 and a Tamron 28-300. While convenient, I needed something with better IQ and better low light performance.
Upgraded to Tamron17-50/2.8 and a Nikon 55-200/4-5.6.

Then, as my lenses grew, I went with a 24/2.8, 50/1.8 and the 55-200mm.

Now, along with a bunch of Nikon DSLRs, I also have an m43 kit. In the same size kit and better IQ than that original kit, I can have the Olympus PMD EM5, 17 and 45/1.8 primes and a 40-150/4-5.6. Covers pretty much the same range.

I shoot mostly with the 17 and 45....but it is nice to have the 40-150 for that occasional use and it is honestly not that much weight. Unless you know you will need a focal rage longer than the 14-42 will provide, I'd take it, the BCL and the 17/1.8 - for low light a stuff.

Above all - remember to enjoy the trip and don't let getting an image get in the way of enjoying the locations you will be visiting.
 

Swandy

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Dec 15, 2009
Messages
362
Unless you know you will need a focal rage longer than the 14-42 will provide, I'd take it, the BCL and the 17/1.8 - for low light a stuff.

Above all - remember to enjoy the trip and don't let getting an image get in the way of enjoying the locations you will be visiting.
I assume by the above comment (about the focal range) you were referring to the 14-42 not the 40-150. So thanks for the thoughts, Steve
 

mistermark

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Oct 16, 2012
Messages
118
I think there's a case for taking a superzoom, because when shooting from the boat you may sometimes want a wide angle and the next moment a long telephoto. The Panasonic 14-140 mk2 is reported to be surprisingly good.

In cities, ie when on excursions, I'd want the same lens supported by a couple of primes for those shots that you might want to blow up really large or in low light. In my case that'd be the Zuiko 12mm and 60mm, but I can see that the 45mm might be better for low light.
 

Swandy

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Dec 15, 2009
Messages
362
I think there's a case for taking a superzoom, because when shooting from the boat you may sometimes want a wide angle and the next moment a long telephoto. The Panasonic 14-140 mk2 is reported to be surprisingly good.

In cities, ie when on excursions, I'd want the same lens supported by a couple of primes for those shots that you might want to blow up really large or in low light. In my case that'd be the Zuiko 12mm and 60mm, but I can see that the 45mm might be better for low light.
Had two "super zooms" - the Olympus 18-180 when I shot 4/3 and the Oly 14-150 which I was not really impressed with for the price. Ended up selling it and getting the 40-150 again for those times I needed the reach. And while I do like the convenience of these lenses, I just don't feel that their overall IQ is as good as even shorter zoom lenses (like the various 14-42/45 or the Panasonic 12-32 pancake). If I wanted just convenience, I would just take the Stylus 1 (which I love and has a great zoom range) and be done with it. Actually still considering that, but I keep coming back to my personal opinion that the EM10 (even with one of the 14-42 zooms) - aside from the zoom range - does better is just about all situations.
 

peteygas

Mu-43 Rookie
Joined
Nov 21, 2011
Messages
22
Location
sedona arizona
I did the same trip last summer ( loved it). .never used the 100-300, the 14-140 did 90% of the work , 7-14 the rest of the time. The Vienna concert ( very touristy)was okay , but terrible acoustics. save your money
 

BigTam

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Mar 19, 2012
Messages
860
Location
Dortmund, Germany
Real Name
Ron
Quite a few castles and monasteries higher up over the river: might find the 40-150 useful for them. Leave it in the cabin for the cities.
 

Swandy

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Dec 15, 2009
Messages
362
Quite a few castles and monasteries higher up over the river: might find the 40-150 useful for them. Leave it in the cabin for the cities.
I have had this suggestion a few times (other forums) and I think that I will either do this or as I was planning on taking the Stylus 1 (28-300 eq zoom range) as a backup, might just use that when on the boat.
 

jerrykur

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Aug 23, 2012
Messages
81
Location
Northern CA
I took my Canon 70-300 to Prague and used it quite a bit. But, I tend to like architectural detail. For example, bolt patterns on the Eiffel tower. I also like the compression effect that a long zoom has. That came in handy when shooting around the Karluv Most (Charles Bridge) area.
 

dcg

Mu-43 Rookie
Joined
Apr 8, 2014
Messages
13
I visited Budapest, Bratislava and Vienna back in March, and took the boat from Bratislava to Vienna. Here are a couple of pics from the boat using the 45/1.8. This is right about the focal length that differentiates your two lenses, so hopefully it'll help you decide whether you'd want wider or longer. My recommendation would be longer.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
P4240731.jpg by davecg, on Flickr

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
P4240741.jpg by davecg, on Flickr

Here are a few additional shots from Vienna - I had the 7-14 and the 45 with me: https://www.mu-43.com/showthread.php?t=65186
 

Swandy

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Dec 15, 2009
Messages
362
I visited Budapest, Bratislava and Vienna back in March, and took the boat from Bratislava to Vienna. Here are a couple of pics from the boat using the 45/1.8. This is right about the focal length that differentiates your two lenses, so hopefully it'll help you decide whether you'd want wider or longer. My recommendation would be longer.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
P4240731.jpg by davecg, on Flickr

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
P4240741.jpg by davecg, on Flickr

Here are a few additional shots from Vienna - I had the 7-14 and the 45 with me: https://www.mu-43.com/showthread.php?t=65186
Thanks for the examples - and I looked at the link to the previous thread and you have some beautiful shots there.
My thinking right now is to take either the 40-150 for shots from the boat - or since I plan on taking my Stylus 1 (28-300mm eq) along as a backup, just to use that for the boat shots - and leave either of them on the boat when we get off.
 

Chrisnmn

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Apr 26, 2012
Messages
1,215
Location
Auckland, New Zealand
Real Name
Chris
So I am asking people who have been/traveled to these cities (not much wildlife to be concerned with), did you feel the need for a long lens?

Thanks, Steve
No, you dont need a longer lens. Personally I think you are more than fine with just the Pancake and/or O17. free your bag space for more souvenirs instead. enjoy that trip! :wink:
 

dcg

Mu-43 Rookie
Joined
Apr 8, 2014
Messages
13
Thanks for the examples - and I looked at the link to the previous thread and you have some beautiful shots there.
My thinking right now is to take either the 40-150 for shots from the boat - or since I plan on taking my Stylus 1 (28-300mm eq) along as a backup, just to use that for the boat shots - and leave either of them on the boat when we get off.
You're welcome, and thank you.

I was pretty happy just having the 7-14 and the 45 with me. Only times I really would have liked longer were on the boat, and at Schonbrunn zoo. I had an XZ-2 as a backup; if I had it to do again (which I will - I'm heading to Prague this Spring), I'd have brought a separate m4/3 body so I could have spent less times switching lenses. I had the lenses along anyway, so the extra body wouldn't have taken up much more space in my bag than the XZ-2, which I hardly used at all. Of course, the Stylus 1 gives you much more range than the XZ-2 gave me.
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom