Reading mode: Light Dark

Lens setup for a year of world travel?

Go to last post
P

Projectdb

Active member
Messages
97
Reaction score
155
I have a rather lengthy question, just hoping to get some varying opinions on a lens setup for an upcoming year + of travel.

I’ll be spending 1-3 months in a static location with a rented apartment, moving countries throughout the year. Because of this, lens weight in transit is not a huge concern as I’ll have a place to stash more less used lenses and won’t need to haul them around with me. That being said, I’ll likely never carry everything at once, but I will have some niche situations that I’d like to optimize for, if possible.

- I’m not concerned about video at all.

- 90% of my photography will be cityscape, street, general touristy photography, as I’ll still be working remotely during the week and limited to wandering around whatever city I’m in. While I’ll be shooting these most frequently, I’ll also have plenty of opportunity for these. I’ll be living in the city for at least a month and can re-visit locations.

- The other 10% will be a wide variety of situations when I’m traveling for weekend trips in the area. This will include mountaineering above 20,000 ft, rain forest treks, general landscape, and some potential for wildlife. While this is a smaller percentage of overall images, these are the ones I really want to be able to nail as they’re kind of a one shot opportunity. (Not 100% sure I care about spontaneous wildlife shooting to warrant a different lens. No planned safaris as of yet, if that becomes the case I'd probably shell out for a lens specifically for that)

- I have primes that I am happy with and will be going with and will be used for the usual suspects, low light, night, and times when I just want to grab something light and go for a walk. (Panaleica 15 1.7, 25 1.4, and Olympus 45 1.8)

- I prefer not to change lenses super frequently as the wife occasionally gets impatient. I solve this locally by taking two bodies, and will likely do the same pretty frequently.

- Cost isn’t a HUGE factor as I’ve recently moved from APS-C and liquidated that gear. I’m expecting to be traveling for a year minimum, likely 2-3 and I’m sold on M43 for this.

I’ll take 3 bodies, one of them will be a rangefinder (GX85 or EP-5), other two will basically be dependent on the lenses (EM1 II, EM1, EM5II, G85 are options).

I’ve been buying and selling lenses due to lockdown boredom for the last little while trying to get a feel for what I like within the M43 ecosystem.

I picked up an Olympus 12-40 2.8 and figured out that I really really like the pro lenses and the weight and price is worth the trade-off. I have, or have tried a good portion of the more consumer grade zooms and think I would like to go with the more premium options with weather sealing. So, tldr; what setup would you prefer?

Panasonic 8-18

Olympus 12-40 2.8

Olympus 40-150 2.8 w/1.4 TC

or

Panasonic 8-18

Olympus 12-100

Panasonic 100-300 II

Or maybe cut a little weight and size and swap out the 8-18 for the Laowa 7.5 or on the long end something like the Panasonic 45-175 ?(which I have and kind of like for the weight and size)

Just trying to find the balance between, size, weight, lens swapping and weather resistance. Initially I was just going to add the 8-18 and 40-150 to the 12-40 I already have. My reservation was the weight of 2 bodies and those 3 lenses in a shoulder bag while walking around town. That lead me to thinking maybe the 12-100 would be a better option than the 12-40 and 40-150. Less lens swapping and half the weight.

I know I’m overthinking this, but I have all summer to figure it out and am getting pretty bored being stuck at home. Any thoughts would be appreciated!
 
I just did about what you are planning to do and did it all with a G9, Pl 12-60 and 50-200 that fit in a tenba BYOB 10. Upcoming trip I'll add the 8-18.

Carrying lots of stuff sucks, carrying lots of expensive stuff is worse.
 
Projectdb said:
Panasonic 8-18

Olympus 12-100

Panasonic 100-300 II
Click to expand...
That's my basic setup, along with a few primes (Laowa 7.5mm, Oly 17mm f/1.8, Oly 45mm f/1.8)

The 12-100mm is such a great do-it-all lens if you can live with the weight. I was initially skeptical when it was first released, but it pretty much stays glued to one of my camera bodies all the time now. The 12-100mm accounts for almost 75% of my shots since I got it in 2018.

The Panasonic 8-18 and the Panasonic 100-300 are great to have around when you need them.
 
Projectdb said:
I have a rather lengthy question, just hoping to get some varying opinions on a lens setup for an upcoming year + of travel.

I’ll be spending 1-3 months in a static location with a rented apartment, moving countries throughout the year. Because of this, lens weight in transit is not a huge concern as I’ll have a place to stash more less used lenses and won’t need to haul them around with me. That being said, I’ll likely never carry everything at once, but I will have some niche situations that I’d like to optimize for, if possible.

- I’m not concerned about video at all.

- 90% of my photography will be cityscape, street, general touristy photography, as I’ll still be working remotely during the week and limited to wandering around whatever city I’m in. While I’ll be shooting these most frequently, I’ll also have plenty of opportunity for these. I’ll be living in the city for at least a month and can re-visit locations.

- The other 10% will be a wide variety of situations when I’m traveling for weekend trips in the area. This will include mountaineering above 20,000 ft, rain forest treks, general landscape, and some potential for wildlife. While this is a smaller percentage of overall images, these are the ones I really want to be able to nail as they’re kind of a one shot opportunity. (Not 100% sure I care about spontaneous wildlife shooting to warrant a different lens. No planned safaris as of yet, if that becomes the case I'd probably shell out for a lens specifically for that)

- I have primes that I am happy with and will be going with and will be used for the usual suspects, low light, night, and times when I just want to grab something light and go for a walk. (Panaleica 15 1.7, 25 1.4, and Olympus 45 1.8)

- I prefer not to change lenses super frequently as the wife occasionally gets impatient. I solve this locally by taking two bodies, and will likely do the same pretty frequently.

- Cost isn’t a HUGE factor as I’ve recently moved from APS-C and liquidated that gear. I’m expecting to be traveling for a year minimum, likely 2-3 and I’m sold on M43 for this.

I’ll take 3 bodies, one of them will be a rangefinder (GX85 or EP-5), other two will basically be dependent on the lenses (EM1 II, EM1, EM5II, G85 are options).

I’ve been buying and selling lenses due to lockdown boredom for the last little while trying to get a feel for what I like within the M43 ecosystem.

I picked up an Olympus 12-40 2.8 and figured out that I really really like the pro lenses and the weight and price is worth the trade-off. I have, or have tried a good portion of the more consumer grade zooms and think I would like to go with the more premium options with weather sealing. So, tldr; what setup would you prefer?

Panasonic 8-18

Olympus 12-40 2.8

Olympus 40-150 2.8 w/1.4 TC

or

Panasonic 8-18

Olympus 12-100

Panasonic 100-300 II

Or maybe cut a little weight and size and swap out the 8-18 for the Laowa 7.5 or on the long end something like the Panasonic 45-175 ?(which I have and kind of like for the weight and size)

Just trying to find the balance between, size, weight, lens swapping and weather resistance. Initially I was just going to add the 8-18 and 40-150 to the 12-40 I already have. My reservation was the weight of 2 bodies and those 3 lenses in a shoulder bag while walking around town. That lead me to thinking maybe the 12-100 would be a better option than the 12-40 and 40-150. Less lens swapping and half the weight.

I know I’m overthinking this, but I have all summer to figure it out and am getting pretty bored being stuck at home. Any thoughts would be appreciated!
Click to expand...
I would consider a lineup made of three essential zoom lenses:

Pl8-18; pl12-60; pl50-200.

The 12-60 covers a lot more than the 12-40 weighing basically the same.

The 50-200 is a better lens than the 40-150 pro. I have both and i like the optical performance if the panaleica better. It outperforms the 40-150 also in the portability department.

I only wish it was an internal zoom lens like the 40-150.

You can add pl 1.4x teleconverter and you'll have a great range covered with those zoom lenses.

If you don't need weather sealing the gx80/85 is as unobtrusive as a camera can get while offering neat features.

Since you already have pl primes i would encourage you to pick the g9 as your main body.

At current street price the g9!has really no competitor, bang for the buck.
 
Projectdb said:
I have a rather lengthy question, just hoping to get some varying opinions on a lens setup for an upcoming year + of travel.

I’ll be spending 1-3 months in a static location with a rented apartment, moving countries throughout the year. Because of this, lens weight in transit is not a huge concern as I’ll have a place to stash more less used lenses and won’t need to haul them around with me. That being said, I’ll likely never carry everything at once, but I will have some niche situations that I’d like to optimize for, if possible.

- I’m not concerned about video at all.

- 90% of my photography will be cityscape, street, general touristy photography, as I’ll still be working remotely during the week and limited to wandering around whatever city I’m in. While I’ll be shooting these most frequently, I’ll also have plenty of opportunity for these. I’ll be living in the city for at least a month and can re-visit locations.

- The other 10% will be a wide variety of situations when I’m traveling for weekend trips in the area. This will include mountaineering above 20,000 ft, rain forest treks, general landscape, and some potential for wildlife. While this is a smaller percentage of overall images, these are the ones I really want to be able to nail as they’re kind of a one shot opportunity. (Not 100% sure I care about spontaneous wildlife shooting to warrant a different lens. No planned safaris as of yet, if that becomes the case I'd probably shell out for a lens specifically for that)

- I have primes that I am happy with and will be going with and will be used for the usual suspects, low light, night, and times when I just want to grab something light and go for a walk. (Panaleica 15 1.7, 25 1.4, and Olympus 45 1.8)

- I prefer not to change lenses super frequently as the wife occasionally gets impatient. I solve this locally by taking two bodies, and will likely do the same pretty frequently.

- Cost isn’t a HUGE factor as I’ve recently moved from APS-C and liquidated that gear. I’m expecting to be traveling for a year minimum, likely 2-3 and I’m sold on M43 for this.

I’ll take 3 bodies, one of them will be a rangefinder (GX85 or EP-5), other two will basically be dependent on the lenses (EM1 II, EM1, EM5II, G85 are options).

I’ve been buying and selling lenses due to lockdown boredom for the last little while trying to get a feel for what I like within the M43 ecosystem.

I picked up an Olympus 12-40 2.8 and figured out that I really really like the pro lenses and the weight and price is worth the trade-off. I have, or have tried a good portion of the more consumer grade zooms and think I would like to go with the more premium options with weather sealing. So, tldr; what setup would you prefer?

Panasonic 8-18

Olympus 12-40 2.8

Olympus 40-150 2.8 w/1.4 TC
Click to expand...
If I were looking for a long telezoom (which I'm not), I'd lean toward Panasonic's 50-200/2.8-4.0 instead. It's smaller and lighter and offers greater reach. In my view, the 40-150/2.8 is more of a low-light/indoor lens.
Projectdb said:
or

Panasonic 8-18

Olympus 12-100

Panasonic 100-300 II

Or maybe cut a little weight and size and swap out the 8-18 for the Laowa 7.5 or on the long end something like the Panasonic 45-175 ?(which I have and kind of like for the weight and size)

Just trying to find the balance between, size, weight, lens swapping and weather resistance. Initially I was just going to add the 8-18 and 40-150 to the 12-40 I already have. My reservation was the weight of 2 bodies and those 3 lenses in a shoulder bag while walking around town. That lead me to thinking maybe the 12-100 would be a better option than the 12-40 and 40-150. Less lens swapping and half the weight.

I know I’m overthinking this, but I have all summer to figure it out and am getting pretty bored being stuck at home. Any thoughts would be appreciated!
Click to expand...
Background: About 8 years ago, I faced similar decisions. I had a big "pro" DSLR kit for my event work, but I was tired of lugging it around for scenics, and I planned to travel for a few years. Thus, I was looking for a compact kit that would give me IQ similar to my 16MP Canon EOS 1Ds MkII.

There are no bad options here, so rather than comment on those you've presented above, I'll just describe what's worked for me. Over the years, I've upgraded, refined and expanded my MFT kit. Here's what my travel kit looks like now:
  • GX8 and GX9 bodies
  • Panasonic 14-140
  • Panasonic 7-14/4
  • Panasonic 20/1.7
  • Olympus 45/1.8
  • Godox TT350 or Metz 28 CS-2 flash
This all fits in a small shoulder bag. FWIW, I have a much larger MFT kit that covers my corporate work as well (see my gear list). The above is what I select for lightweight travel.

My hiking kit is just the GX9 and 14-140. I own 12-35/2.8 and 35-100/2.8 zooms for my event work, but got the 14-140 to reduce lens swapping when wandering or hiking with just one body. Like your wife, my hiking companions don't like to wait for me every time I stop, so I have to shoot fast and then double-time to catch up. When wandering alone during the day, I expand the kit to two bodies and the two zooms. At the end of the day, I swap the two zooms for the two primes for more light gathering.

This has served me extremely well for the past 5 years, and I'm able to make 18"x24" prints that are a crisp and detailed as I could ask for.

FWIW, I've hiked in falling snow and light rain with non-sealed bodies (GX7 & GX9) without issue. With the 14-140 I don't need to swap lenses, and I can take the camera out of a chest-mounted TLZ pouch, fire off a few shots, and stash it again in under 30 seconds. I also carry a $4 rain sleeve just in case, but haven't needed it.

Finally, you're spending a lot on lenses. Doesn't make sense to cheap out on the rangefinder body. I recommend a GX9 over GX85. It's a better, more full-featured camera all 'round, and the 20MP sensor will make the most of the nice glass you're considering. I'd be looking at the beloved GX8 or a G9 as the weather-sealed other body. Also, you'll benefit from Dual IS if you pair Panasonic bodies with those Panasonic lenses. You might want to swap your Old 45/1.8 for Panasonic's 42.5/1.7 for this reason, and also for that lens' quasi-macro close-focus ability.

More info at the link below and in other articles on my blog.

Hiking with a Micro Four Thirds Camera

P.S.: On further reflection, if I were buying a do-it-all MFT kit today, had lots of money, and didn't plan to hike, I might go for a GX9, G9, and the PanLeica trio - 8-18, 12-60 & 50-200. The 12-60 might reduce lens swapping enough to offset the convenience of the 14-140 when carrying just one body. The only reason I carve out a caveat for hiking is that I've found focal lengths longer than 60mm really handy for picking out distant details in mountainous terrain, and I know I'd find swapping the 12-60 and 50-200 a chore. Plus, the 50-200 is fairly large and heavy. The 14-140 is extremely small and light for the reach it offers - almost exactly the same as the 12-35/2.8.

It really is a tough call, highly depended on several use factors (not least of which are intended print sizes and interest in low-light shooting), and with lots of good options to choose from.

--
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw
http://jacquescornell.photography
http://happening.photos
 
Last edited:
In your case with already possessing the Olympus 12-40 I would add the 8-18 mm and 50-200 mm from Panasonic. I had the 12-35mm f2.8 but I found the zoom range limiting and for lowlight I've some primes in that range (so do you I saw) and exchanged it for the PL 12-60mm.

The three PL zoomlenses are compact, high quality and will be all you need if you take your primes. If you don't shoot that much wide angle and you don't mind manual focusing then consider the Laowa 7.5 mm as stated before.
 
I would have done 17/1.2, 12-100, 56/1.4. All weather sealed for travel.

The 12-100 is wide enough for landscape.

But if you're doing wildlife you'll have to take one of those longer zooms so one of the primes goes into the bag while those 3 stay on the cameras.
 
The M.Zuiko 12-100 is an amazing lens and perfect if you don't want to change lenses often. It's also a great match with the new M.Zuiko 100-400 -- have you considered that one? Those two lenses combined with your primes would be a great setup.
 
My reply is more rooted in what I think you have stated - your preferences, your priorities.

One sidebar - if you value some of the computational options in the EM1 II or EM1 III, I would stick with Olympus lenses, so those options work as you desire. Same goes for lenses with IS that will work along with the camera, whereas when you mix brands, you can have not all the tech work cooperatively.

You stated a preference for a minimum of lenses and a preference for the Oly 12-40 Pro. Based on that I would lean toward completing the trio with the Oly 7-14 Pro, and the 40-150 Pro and the 1.4x TC. If you chose to bring two bodies, you could make one more advanced and one more compact, but still plenty capable. Those three lenses, with the TC for the long end will cover a multitude of situations. If you really wanted to add a prime or two for specific kinds of shots that are important to you. It's not that you couldn't add these as you go - I think - but if you know what you need ahead of time, then you could add that.

There is no substitute for good lenses. Cameras come and go, good lenses are an investment - and you have discovered that with the 12-40mm Pro lens.

Personally, I travelled for a couple of decades with FF gear. For me, I learned the value of great glass, so I have invested in exactly what I am suggesting for you, though the cameras I have are the EM1 III and the EM1X, but these serve my priorities. That said, the two smaller zooms are great for so many different situations and yet are so compact for the quality they are capable of delivering. The big one is bigger than most, but for the range it shoots and that it works so well with the 1.4x, I think it is a great asset for a trip like this, especially for the times when you may see wildlife or sometimes day or night shots of cool iconic parts of a city. Zooms are great for that kind of thing, especially with a camera that has IBIS and even better if they can work together - especially at the long end.

Should be a great adventure - we live on an amazing planet with so many great sights and experiences - and you get to do it with your best friend.
 
I did take a look, but the size kind of turned me off mostly. The long end is more of a bonus lens for certain circumstances that I don't forsee coming up often.

It's definitely something I'll be looking at if I end up in a safari scenario, or when I'm done with this trip to use back home (wherever that might be).

I did manage to make it to a local shop to check out the 12-100. It was pretty impressive in my limited use. I'm leaning heavily towards it currently.
 
Thank you for the thoughtful reply. This is the exact setup I envisioned after being blown away by the 12-40.

The only two sticking points I came up with were the lack filter options for the 7-14 (It would see plenty of use for landscape as I try and spend as much time in or on top of mountains as possible, sometimes in some very cold weather where a screw in filter would be more ideal) and trying to decide which lenses would remain on a 2 body setup.

This trio is more versatile than anything involving the 12-100 for certain, the only hesitancy I had was lens swapping. The majority of my photos will be taken in the process of daily life, with 1-2 days a week that will probably entail more specific adventures where I'll be more intent on capturing places and moments.

I wonder if maybe the best bet would be to rent a uwa lens and walk around my own city with a trio and see which focal lengths I use the most to determine just how often a lens swap would be necessary with 2 bodies and 3 lenses. I live in the downtown of a major metro that happens to be on the older side, so it would probably do a pretty good job mimicking the urban areas I'll be walking about in on the trip.
 
I actually hadn't looked at that as the price was higher than what I'd been seeing on the Only and I'd heard such good things about the Oly 40-150. I will definitely start pouring over reviews.
 
Wildalaskaken said:
Carrying lots of stuff sucks, carrying lots of expensive stuff is worse.
Click to expand...
Totally agree. This slow traveling concept is new to me, I'm used to 2 lenses and a camera for travel as I'm usually in transit frequently. This time I'll have a homebase to leave equipment I don't see myself using on any given adventure. That being said, I'm definitely still trying to limit myself to 3 zooms maximum (along with the primes I already have).

I'll have to peak at the 50-200. For whatever reason it really wasn't on my radar.
 
I've seen so many people with the same sentiment on the 12-100. It's such a versatile range and the IQ seems to be on par with the rest of the Only Pro's.

I do think I'd get a good amount of use with an uwa on a second body. The 100-300 would be very situational, but for the price it seems like it'd be nice to have when those situations arise.
 
I think the idea of renting a lens is a great idea. Paying attention to what we actually shoot is far more educational than thinking we need XYZ focal length.

Good luck, whatever tools you find work best for you!
 
Projectdb said:
The 100-300 would be very situational, but for the price it seems like it'd be nice to have when those situations arise.
Click to expand...
Never had any regrets about the 100-300mm. I don't use it regularly, but when you need it, you need it.
 
We spent 3 years traveling back in the late 80's. OM-1 with 28mm, 50mm and 135mm. Ektachrome back then. If I were doing your trip today, I'd take my Pen F with 12mm PRO and my 14-150mm f4-5.6. The latter isn't as sharp as some, but it's very light and compact.

I used this combination for 3 weeks in Kyoto back in 2019 and found it worked well.

Cheers,

Jeff
 
Mine would be...

Oly 8-25 (when it becomes available)

Olympus 12-100

Olympus 40-150 2.8 w/1.4x TC and 2x TC

Sigma 30mm F1.4
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A_SCY
  • Question Question
EM1ii Settings for Christenings Weddings - Events with Flash?
Replies
4
Views
5
A_SCY
A_SCY
M
Matched Lenses
2
Replies
28
Views
270
Danielvr
Danielvr
N
Video help…
Replies
3
Views
4
Photongraphy
P
U
Iceland in November. What kit to bring?
2
Replies
33
Views
452
bikerguy
B
Daneland
  • Photo Photo
Red London through GM5
Replies
9
Views
146
AGWoodard
AGWoodard

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top