I was recently on a trip to Northern European capitals mostly and this is the kit I took with me: GX1 plus Panasonic 14-42x 25mm/1.4 Rokinon 8.5mm fisheye Panasonic 45-175mm Panasonic 14mm/2.5 I also took Fuji X100 as back-up and a general 35mm lens replacement. This was part of the reason I did not take the excellent 20mm/1.7 lens (similar focal length). I took mostly the usual touristy pics, architecture and such. Here's the breakdown of lens usage: Total photos = 6000 GX1 - 3200 Fuji X100 - 2800 That is not the breakdown I would have expected in the beginning of the trip but X100 turned out to be a pretty easy trip mate to have around the neck, with a pretty versatile focal length and saw almost exclusive use for insides of buildings/museums/night photos. Jaw dropping Auto-WB for the super dim photos of yellow tinted restaurant food. Also got the sky blue all the time, where GX1's will have to be worked on to get rid of the purple coloration. m43 lens usage breakdown: 14-42 - 1800 Rokinon 8.5mm fisheye - 300 45-175 - 300 Panasonic 14mm/2.5 - 500 Panasonic 25/1.4 - 150 Again, a bit of a shocker, but reflects how convenient the 14-42mm range is . I think I mostly used the wider end of the range. I rarely felt constrained by the 14mm but I did seriously consider getting the 12-35mm lens for this trip. Ended up getting the Fuji X100 instead :smile: Really bummed about not having used the Pana 25mm more, but it really was a bit tight for the type of sightseeing shooting I was doing. Some of the photos I took with it do show pretty incredible level of detail and that makes me feel that I should've made more use of it. Oh well... Fisheye was pretty handy as an ultrawide, though I also tried the in camera panorama mode of the X100 which was pretty nifty. I wish Panasonic also had it. For night walks, I think I had 14mm on the GX1 and X100 at the ready as well. 45-175mm didn't see that much use, but was nice to have for some "from the boat" shooting. Some photos. Will post more later :smile: 14-42mm {} 45-175mm {} Rokinon fisheye {} 14mm/2.5 {} X100 {}
It seems like from your analyzes that the 12-35 can save you allot of space. This picture was taken with the 14-45 at 37mm, I think they have moved the statue. <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/ehudlavon/8527072043/" title="The Louvre - Cupid and Psyche by Ehud Lavon, on Flickr"> {} "1024" height="768" alt="The Louvre - Cupid and Psyche"></a>
Steven... nice work! I especially like the first two images. I agree with elavon, the 12-35 is probably your next travel lens! And perhaps the 9-18, as well. When traveling, I find the wider focal lengths serve my imaging needs better than long lenses. And shuffling primes on and off and on again gets really old, really quickly. With the 12-35, you won't suffer any loss of IQ vs. using primes, and you will gain a moderately wide end as well as a modestly long end... with great IQ and good speed. For travel, I would be fairly content if limited to the 9-18, 12-35, and 35-100 zooms. Of course, I'd just have to toss in one of the: 17/1.8, 20/1.7, or 25/1.4, just for the heck of it!
Pretty much what I think, except 12 is plenty wide enough and the 100 is too limiting ... Need a 2X teleconverter, and then I could reduce kit size/weight considerably. Currently, I carry 8/3.5FE, 12-35/2.8, 20/1.7, and 45-200
