Travel Lenses?

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by Jsanders, Apr 21, 2012.

  1. Jsanders

    Jsanders New to Mu-43

    8
    Apr 1, 2012
    Santa Barbara CA
    Im about to go on a WWOOFing adventure through Italy and France and Im looking to add a new lens and maybe some accessories, any recommendations?? I have a GF1 w/ 20mm f1.7 and the 45mm f2.8.
     
  2. kinlau

    kinlau Mu-43 Top Veteran

    836
    Feb 29, 2012
    Something wide, either the Panny 14/2.5 or Oly 12/2.
     
  3. okinana

    okinana Mu-43 Veteran

    305
    Sep 21, 2011
    Philadelphia, PA
    I am selling a Panasonic 14mm f2.5. PM me if interested. Also selling a Panasonic 14-45mm and a Oly 40-150mm.
     
  4. dhazeghi

    dhazeghi Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 6, 2010
    San Jose, CA
    Dara
    The Panasonic 14-45 is a good kit zoom. Fast focusing, silent, and reasonably sharp throughout the range. Where it's weak (low light, close-up focus), your other lenses will work admirably.

    I'd also suggest looking for an LVF-1. It's not a particularly great EVF, but if you're shooting in bright sunlight, it will be a huge help.

    DH
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. dixeyk

    dixeyk Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 9, 2010
    I traveled all over Spain and Portugal and my 4/3rds Olympus 14-54 on my Olympus E-520 was used 99% of the time despite taking two other lenses. It's a very useful focal length. The 14-54 mkII can be converted to use on m43 and it is a heck of a lens. That said, the Panasonic 14-45 is a VERY good kit lens and can be had for quite a bit less.

    If I were going today I'd take a 14-45 and a Panasonic 20 for low light stuff and be done with it. I'm a big fan of traveling light. I also bet I'd use the zoom most of the time. Zooms are great for traveling vacause you are moving around and not having to stop and change lenses is a it plus. Also, the 14-45 is no slouch as a lens and the IS on the lens is a nice little benefit.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  6. Jsanders

    Jsanders New to Mu-43

    8
    Apr 1, 2012
    Santa Barbara CA
    How different is the pany 14mm and the 20mm?
     
  7. dixeyk

    dixeyk Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 9, 2010
    The P20 is faster and a good deal sharper. Depends on your feeling about FOV but I find the 14 and 20 to be a nice combo. The 14 is also a a lot faster to focus and quiet (the 20 is neither). I notice that you have the 20 and 45...the 14 would give you a great set of focal lengths and the theree lenses combined are pretty compact and light. I suspect the 14 would get a lot of use traveling.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Mellow

    Mellow Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 27, 2010
    Florida or Idaho
    Tom
    I second this. When I'm traveling I usually take this lens, the 20mm, and the 9-18mm zoom. Usually most pictures end up from the 14-45mm.

    Also, it's got very good IS, which is easily switched on/off on the lens (no menus).
     
  9. Jsanders

    Jsanders New to Mu-43

    8
    Apr 1, 2012
    Santa Barbara CA
    What about a telephoto lens?
     
  10. dhazeghi

    dhazeghi Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 6, 2010
    San Jose, CA
    Dara
    The Olympus m.ZD 40-150 is pretty compact, and quite sharp, but it lacks stabilization. The Panasonic 45-200 is less compact and not quite as sharp, but it is stabilized. Depending on your feelings regarding size and stabilization, either could be a good choice.

    If you do go for the Olympus, make sure to get the micro 4/3 version, not the older 4/3 version (which needs an adapter).

    DH
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. dixeyk

    dixeyk Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 9, 2010
    I prefer the 45-200 over the 40-150. The extra reach is nice and the lens has IS. I think you said you're using a Panasonic body (right?) so I'd go with the 45-200 although it is a little bigger and heavier. That said, I used my telephoto exactly once on my last trip. The exception would be if you wee going on Safari (or something similar) then a telephoto would be the main lens and I'd suggest something like the Panasonic 100-300.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. ill_dawg

    ill_dawg Mu-43 Veteran

    201
    Aug 26, 2010
    Maybe not everybody's cup of tea, but I would also recommend the samyang 7.5mm fisheye. It's perfect for when you need to go super wide, can add interest to otherwise plain pics, takes really sharp pics, and can be had for not too much cash. On my last vacation, all I brought was the 7.5, the 20, and the 45. I leave the telephoto at home if I'm not planning on shooting animals.

    YMMV

    Sent from my HTC Vision using Tapatalk 2
     
  13. ~tc~

    ~tc~ Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Oct 22, 2010
    Houston, TX
    I disagree - a telephoto is just the thing for isolating interesting architectural details. You can always stitch to make up for a wide angle. Also, I always end up with a bunch of junk in the scene with a wide angle.

    I vote for the 45-200

    Where in Italy? Pix of my trips to northern Italy here:
    http://troyandmollyalloverthemap.shutterfly.com/
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. zettapixel

    zettapixel Mu-43 Veteran

    470
    Aug 12, 2010
    NY
    +1 here, plus if you like telephoto perspective it's useful, that's why for trips I bought 14-150 and 9-18. Nowadays I could've opted for 12/2, which wasn't available then... And, of course, 20/1.7 is with me too.
     
  15. oldracer

    oldracer Mu-43 All-Pro

    Oct 1, 2010
    USA
    We travel a lot, probably 25,000 miles last year. My current travel kit comprises the 9-18 on a GF-1 and the 14-140 on a G1, driven by two reasons:

    1) Changing lenses is problematical. When traveling, your subject and/or your companions may not be interested in waiting around while you change lenses. Outdoors especially there is also the risk of dust or dirt getting blown onto the sensor. So changing needs to be minimized.

    2) When traveling, you are often unable or limited in your ability to get significantly closer to or farther away from your subject. Sometimes it's because your companions don't want to wait around while you compose your picture but often it is because your mobility is restricted by guard rails, guards, being in a vehicle, etc. Ergo, zooms are required.

    Carrying two bodies is a bit of a luxury. When carrying only one body, the 14-140 is pretty much my "outdoors" lens and the 9-18 is used indoors. The overlapping ranges minimize lens changing.

    (IMHO, 24mm or shorter equivalent focal length is required if you want to communicate a sense of space when photographing indoors. 28mm is just not enough and 40mm is hopeless.)

    A 5- or 6-section monopod that collapses to 16" or so, with a cheap ball head having a quick release mount. Promaster has some monopods that suit, for example the SystemPro. For a ball head, get the smallest version of something like the Manfrotto 486RC2. They have several similar models; I'm not sure which is the smallest. The Velbon QHD-41Q works well too.

    (Run screaming away from the Manfrotto 234RC "monopod head." IMHO it was designed by idiots. It only works if the camera base is horizontal.)
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. MexicoMik

    MexicoMik Mu-43 Regular

    195
    Mar 19, 2012
    I travel a lot and although I just recently switched to 4/3, in all my traveling with Nikon DSLRs I had several lenses but the one that probably 80% of the shots were taken with was the 18-200 (28-300 in 35mm). The next most used lens was an 11-16 (approx 17-24) shot almost inevitably at 11. I doubt if any of my prime "fast" lenses were used more than a handful of times over the past several years.

    Yeah, you can pixel peep and see the difference between a zoom and a prime but unless pixel peeping is how you "do" photography, there just isn't any visible difference. So the zoom is a much more useful lens for travel than a bunch of primes.

    A week ago I did some EP3/tripod tests with the 14-42 kit lens, the 12, and the 45. I moved the camera to make all images the same size. At full screen on the computer I could not see any visible difference in sharpness/resolution. There WAS a difference at 100%. But I don't shoot pics and then crop them to 100% or more, so there was no visible difference when viewing them on screen.

    My point is, as others have made, you will get a lot more pics with the zoom simply because it's a lot easier to use and no hassle re changing lenses. Ultimate quality? Sure, a good prime is superior but I have found that in just about every case, the quality difference doesn't matter in normal viewing.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  17. Jsanders

    Jsanders New to Mu-43

    8
    Apr 1, 2012
    Santa Barbara CA
    Thanks for all the recs. I will be working on a vineyard in southern tuscany then go up to Piedmont and make my to Southern France, in Vaucluse and then stopping in Burgundy and Bordeaux.
     
  18. Pim

    Pim Mu-43 Regular

    I would definitely take something wide, my choice would be the Oly 9-18. It is one of my favorite lenses and definitely needed in some of the old cities in Europe, with its narrow streets. Having said that I also second most peoples thoughts about a tele zoom, you definitely will want to isolate architectural details etc.... add the 20mm that you already have for low light indoors and you should be good to go!

    Regardless of what you go for, have fun! That is more important than any lens choice..:)
     
  19. Jsanders

    Jsanders New to Mu-43

    8
    Apr 1, 2012
    Santa Barbara CA
    The 9-18mm looks like a great lens but I dont have the $$$ for that one unless someone has a used one for a good price?
     
  20. Ned

    Ned Mu-43 Legend

    Jul 18, 2010
    Alberta, Canada
    I would keep looking... I see those lenses pop up used here and there on a fairly regular basis. A lot of people have them. ;)
     
    • Like Like x 1