Micro 4/3rds kit for travel

[vaizki]

Sorry for the upcoming long rant, I'm kind of thinking aloud here

I've done several business trips in the last year where I've been lugging along quite a bit of DSLR kit "just in case" or if I know I'm going to have time off in nice places. Visited South Africa, Argentina, Mexico, Panama in the last 4 months, looking at Spain, Bahamas, more Mexico, Dubai etc before summer.

You're probably going to think I'm crazy but my normal walkaround gear on many of these trips has been:
- Canon 7D with 70-200/2.8L IS II + 1.4x II extender, mostly on the lens, sometimes in pocket. Yes it's heavy, yes it gives great images.
- 2x extender and EF-S 10-22 in a small backpack with raincoat, food, water etc as needed
- Canon S95 in other pocket for "general zoom" but I use it almost exclusively at the wide end where it's also f/2.
- For wet action I have a Panny FT3/TS3 which is "ok" but not great.
- no tripod or even monopod although I have a good CF monopod..

This kit basically fills most of my airplane carryon when combined with laptop and the bits & bobs needed (chargers, lens hoods, etc) and flight necessities. I got weighed last week in Mexico City.. 15.5kg carryon :bonk: And frankly, I want to travel lighter again. On some trips I've had just a 5D + 35/1.4L with me but I love getting out of the cities into nature so it's a bit restrictive.

Sorry Canon but I'm just not dragging your kit along for any more trips unless they're very photography oriented. Which means 90% of the time you're out.

I've had a GF1+20/1.7 for a long time, and I really like the compactness of the lens, image quality is good and the body is "ok" but I never got around to getting the viewfinder so I've used it much less since I got the S95. Been eyeing the G3 and it's "almost there" and kind of waiting for the GH3 to show up. X100 and X-Pro1 have tempted me lately but then Oly announced the E-M5 with the dual add-on grips and I think it might be the camera for me.

My concern is, does the m4/3 system really offer me a GOOD setup to replace that DSLR lug-along circus? So far my thinking is:

- OM-D E-M5 body with the "first" grip (I have BIG hands)
- Wide angle is giving me some pain, the 12/2 or 14/2.5 .. totally different kinds of lenses and different prices. 14/2.5 may be too cheap & compact to pass up anyway so I might just get that first.
- Samyang fisheye just for fun, maybe sell my Canon version of it. I have enjoyed the lens more than I though I would...
- Panasonic 20/1.7 is definitely staying as my normal & after-sunset lens, loving the 40mm view
- Do I need a standard zoom? Probably not.. I'd want the 45/1.8 instead of 14-42 zoom tbh if I had space for one of them. The X version might be worth it for a zoom (I have the 14-42 kit lens somewhere which is too big for what it can do).
- The big question really is telephoto as I've been completely spoiled by a f/2.8 canon white whale. Panasonic 100-300 is my thinking today but I'm afraid that I'm going to be completely stifled by the small max aperture and not 100% convinced by the IQ. But I really like getting to 400-600mm "equivalent" with the 7D + 70-200 + extenders and the m4/3 + 100-300 would let me keep that.

Do you think I'm looking at the wrong system and should stick to APS-C with NEX-7, wait out to see X-Pro flex its wings or something completely different?

 

[Deleted member 49549]

Jukka, i too have been looking at my dslr and wishing it were smaller.

Problem is there is no alternative that ticks all the boxes for me (yet).

• nex system, if it had more lenses, would be closest, but there really is a poor selection at the moment, and the roadmap doesnt inspire me either.
• the pentax k01 would have been a possible if it had a viewfinder.
• m43 - not are if i would be happy with a smaller sensor and its affect on depth of field and high iso abilities.

 

[vchaney]

The issue with the APS-C based mirrorless systems is the size of the lenses, and if you get to the large apertures it will be an issue for all of the systems.

I went trekking in Patagonia and left my big SLR kit at home and took an EP2, 20/1.7 Oly 9-18, Pana 14-45 and the 100-300. The whole kit including spare batteries etc was less than 2kg and remarkably compact.

The telephotos as they stand are not fantastic, but the weight saving was too good to pass up. The biggest issue was the focus speed on the EP2. That has now largely been sorted out with the EP3, EM5 and Third generation panasonic cameras.

There are some amazing lenses for the system. I'm now using the 45 1.8 and Panasonic 7-14 which are exceptional. My wife has the PL45 2.8 macro which is fantastic albeit more expensive.

I was happy to compromise on the quality of the telephoto for all of the other benefits. I don't believe you will find a compact telephoto set up, so it boils down to what it most important to you.

 

[vchaney]

Don't forget, if you can handle not having AF, you can put an adapter on and use your current lenses.

I think there is a PDAF adapter for the NEX too. Problem is, the lenses are still big.

 

[woof woof]

"m43 - not are if i would be happy with a smaller sensor and its affect on depth of field and high iso abilities."

DoF is down to aperture and camera to subject distance not sensor size as such. If you are willing to change the composition of your pictures or spend some cash on wide aperture lenses you can indeed get shallow DoF from MFT. Of course although you can get shallow DoF from MFT a 25mm shot on MFT is never going to look exactly like a 50mm shot on FF.

Higher ISO performance on some of the earlier models like my GF1 and G1 isn't up to 5D standards but it's probably not the night and day difference that some seem to think it is. If you take care with your settings and do some noise reduction ISO 1600 is perfectly useable and 3200 is at a pinch, especially if you only want a whole image or a light crop at reasonable print size.

Check out the many shots in the Panny G thread. There's plenty of shallow DoF and high ISO examples and if you can't find any I'll post you some

 

[ukaskew]

I was in much the same position last Summer, I sold all my Nikon gear and went for a Micro 4/3s system. I didn't regret it at all, in fact I even managed to shoe-horn the rest of the motorsport season out of it with the 100-300mm, and the sites I supply pics to didn't even notice I had changed systems (I even shot the Britcar 24hr with pretty good results, an event which required high ISO and good tracking AF, two things most people claim M43 can't do.)

The 14mm 2.5 is a decent enough lens, I got mine for £130 second hand and managed to take one of my favourite photos with it. It's the cheapest reasonably wide option by some margin, the 12mm and 7-14mm are apparently very good lens but the cost of both is eye watering. The Samyang Fisheye is a stunner, amazing build quality and fantastic to use. The 45mm is probably the best lens of the bunch, though, it really is special.

I was concerned about the telephoto aspect as well, the 100-300 is better than it has any right to be, quite frankly, but I really really missed not have a fast 70-200mm equivalent. The Panasonic 35-100mm 2.8 should solve that problem later this year and for me personally that would round the system off perfectly.

It went to New York with me at Christmas and I never once felt it held me back (a few pics here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/harry_s/sets/72157628541403913/), I used the 14mm 2.5, 45mm 1.8 and Samyang 7.5mm Fisheye and aside from wanting the forthcoming 35-100 2.8 occasionally it all worked very well and comfortably fit into a small bag that never once felt too heavy or awkward...unlike my old D90 set-up.

The biggest "problem" I had was batteries, they eat the things for fun. I ended up with 4 for my G3 and 2 for my E-PL2 to be on the safe side.

 

[vaizki]

Thanks for the input everyone, so far what I'm hearing isn't too bad to be honest. I'm not going to let go of all my Canon gear (yet!) so this is a secondary kit which can have a few shortcomings. As such the telephoto end is not the most important part of a travel setup for me to be honest. I love catching a shot of a faraway bird or animal but it's more the thrill of the chase than the final image as often the result is dime a dozen variety anyway. Maybe I'll learn to get closer

And ukaskew / Harry_S, your flickr feed is what convinced me earlier this week that the 100-300 has a chance to pass muster and finally led to this post Great shots indeed.

A small request, nobody hijack the thread with sensor size vs dof battle ok? OK?! Start a new one if you must... With full-frame and cropper DSLRs as well as the GF-1 and fast glass for all systems (20/1.7 and f/1.4 L-lenses) I have a good feel for the DoF control available in m4/3 and while it's not perfect it's not a deal breaker for me at all.

chaney, I'm not seeing EF lenses on m4/3 being viable for me.. The adapter with electronic aperture control from Red Rock is quite expensive and still pretty cumbersome. Not that I wouldn't mind one and using my 135/2 as a 270/2 -alike for a laugh. And thanks for the reminder on the lens size, it's an evident problem with the NEX series looking at those monster lenses :shake: I have a Canon FD 50/3.5 macro with adapter for the GF-1 and even that feels like I'm twisting the camera on the lens when focusing! The 55/1.2 SSC was a bit of fun though, 110/1.2 equivalent :nuts:

Maybe m4/3 is the sweet spot for a second system. I don't see myself getting a Nikon 1 and on the APS-C side I have everything but a mirrorless body from Canon (17-55/2.8, 10-22 and loads of FF glass). Knowing that Canon is notbgoing to put out in-body IS anytime soon on an EF-S mount camera so not going to wait for one

Anyone have the 12/2? I've read conflicting reviews, some saying not worth the outlay and other praising it as the dogs dangly bits.

 

[Craikeybaby]

If you aren't that fussed about the long end why take the 70-200 and extenders?

 

[vrapan]

Thanks for the input everyone, so far what I'm hearing isn't too bad to be honest. I'm not going to let go of all my Canon gear (yet!) so this is a secondary kit which can have a few shortcomings. As such the telephoto end is not the most important part of a travel setup for me to be honest. I love catching a shot of a faraway bird or animal but it's more the thrill of the chase than the final image as often the result is dime a dozen variety anyway. Maybe I'll learn to get closer

And ukaskew / Harry_S, your flickr feed is what convinced me earlier this week that the 100-300 has a chance to pass muster and finally led to this post Great shots indeed.

A small request, nobody hijack the thread with sensor size vs dof battle ok? OK?! Start a new one if you must... With full-frame and cropper DSLRs as well as the GF-1 and fast glass for all systems (20/1.7 and f/1.4 L-lenses) I have a good feel for the DoF control available in m4/3 and while it's not perfect it's not a deal breaker for me at all.

chaney, I'm not seeing EF lenses on m4/3 being viable for me.. The adapter with electronic aperture control from Red Rock is quite expensive and still pretty cumbersome. Not that I wouldn't mind one and using my 135/2 as a 270/2 -alike for a laugh. And thanks for the reminder on the lens size, it's an evident problem with the NEX series looking at those monster lenses :shake: I have a Canon FD 50/3.5 macro with adapter for the GF-1 and even that feels like I'm twisting the camera on the lens when focusing! The 55/1.2 SSC was a bit of fun though, 110/1.2 equivalent :nuts:

Maybe m4/3 is the sweet spot for a second system. I don't see myself getting a Nikon 1 and on the APS-C side I have everything but a mirrorless body from Canon (17-55/2.8, 10-22 and loads of FF glass). Knowing that Canon is notbgoing to put out in-body IS anytime soon on an EF-S mount camera so not going to wait for one

Anyone have the 12/2? I've read conflicting reviews, some saying not worth the outlay and other praising it as the dogs dangly bits.

Despite its brilliant performance it is the price/performance ratio that lets it down. When you have the option of the sub £200 14mm 2.5 it really matters not how great is the 12mm when it costs 4 times as much.

 

[vaizki]

If you aren't that fussed about the long end why take the 70-200 and extenders?

It's the only Tele zoom I have... Yes I know a 70-300L for example would be more compact but looking to shrink the whole kit down really instead of buying more Canon zooms.

And by the long end I really mean 300mm+ equivalent.

 

[vaizki]

Despite its brilliant performance it is the price/performance ratio that lets it down. When you have the option of the sub £200 14mm 2.5 it really matters not how great is the 12mm when it costs 4 times as much.

Ok.. If it was f/1.4 I guess it would be justified. Then again my 35/1.4L is worth it to me over the 35/2...

 

[vaizki]

Well here we go.. I've sold some DSLR stuff and
- Today picked up an Oly 45/1.8 lens.. pretty nifty I have to say. So tiny! Not a close focuser but IQ seems to be promising from what snaps I took.
- Panny 14/2.5 on order from the 'bay (white box from a kit)
- Samyang 7.5mm fisheye waiting for pickup at a local store (sold my Canon version)

Off to Barcelona on Sunday for a tradeshow, let's see how I manage with the GF1 and this new kit (although the 14/2.5 won't get here before that sadly). Of course I'm taking the 20/1.7 and 14-42 kit lens too for wide shots.

So now I'm still missing the tele and a body (c'mon E-M5!) with a viewfinder and I'm all set.

No turning back now