Ever just take a 4/3rds system and leave the big DSLR guns at home?

Started Nov 10, 2011 | Discussions thread
OP robonrome Senior Member • Posts: 2,316
Re: The end result...

rrr_hhh wrote:

I own a 5d (mk1) too, but the 16-35mm is the last lens I'd bring on a trip like that. Why not the 24-105mm ?

I can understand why the need of your 5d2. The IQ is so wonderful that you want it for a memorable trip. But that 16-35 is way too big and heavy for what it will offers you. Plus if it is the 16-35 mk1 as mine, it isn't even very sharp. Secondly I don't think that you'll use it very often for mountain landscapes : all the mountains will look lower than they are in fact when used at the wider end. I had got it for my D60 in the early days of digital slrs when there were no full frames available and it was the only alternative to get a wa, but nowadays it sits in a cupboard most of the time. Even the 12mm Olympus lowers the mountains. The 24-105mm is all you need with your 5d : it will add you the middle range which you'll probably use more often in mountain environments than the very wide end. 105 gives you already a good range at the long end, but I can also understand the need of going longer. I don't know the 70-300, neither how big it is. I own the 70-200mm F4. Together with the 24-105 F4 they make a nice combo and relatively light for Canon gear. Both the 5d and the 24-105mm were thought for travel photographers and photojournalists. I won't take anything heavier on an impegnative trip in Nepal ! Adding the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 and the Olympus 45 f1.8, you are already covered for low light situation very well. And you'll have your Canon gear for outdoor spectacular landscapes.

The only problem being that one has to take the gear one has and may be that you don't have these F4 zooms.


I do have the 24-105 and it's tempting to take especially with the IS, but I thought it duplicated too much what focal length I have with the G3. The 16-35 I have is the mark 2 so sharper than the mark 1, but sharpness isn't it's strongest point. The 70-300L is a new lens - I had the 70-200 F4 IS L and replaced it with this. It's virtually as sharp (quite a feat). It weights about 1kg so more than the 70-200 f4 and less than 70-200 f2.8.

I may still take the 24-105. If I did leave the 70-300L and 16-35 behind and take the 45-200 for the G3 I'd certainly save a bit on weight.

 robonrome's gear list:robonrome's gear list
Sony a7R II Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 Olympus E-M1 II Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM Canon EF 135mm F2L USM +14 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow