Username9172
New member
- Messages
- 5
- Reaction score
- 1
Google sent me here when looking for a travel camera. I see its sponsored content though. So I'll ask actual users, do you use the S5 as a travel camera?
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
S5 as a travel camera?
- Thread starter Username9172
- Start date
jalywol
Forum Pro
Depends.
What (and where) are you going to be shooting, and is weight and size a concern?
Mostly, though, for travel, I prefer to go light, so I use M43. You can get very small bodies and very small, but very good, glass for that system, so if size and weight are important, that's the way to go.
On the other hand, if you are going to be shooting in lots of night and low light situations, and size is not paramount, then the S5 is perfect.
I have both the M43 and S5 systems. For ultimate IQ, the S5 is great. For long tele and travel, the M43 is the way to go. If you do decide on the S5, then the 20-60mm is a terrific, small, wide to normal zoom. I've gotten some really great urban shots with it, in my own locale, so it would be a great travel option, too.
-J
Last edited:
memo90061
Senior Member
I agree with this!
I can't have two cameras because I feel like it's just money lying around there, but if I didn't feel like that I would have both m43 and the S5. I sold all my m43 gear to get into the Panasonic S5.
I do miss the size of m43 and Olympus allowed me to keep ISO low for better quality. The S5 files are just cleaner. I love it and I feel like it has similar features as the Olympus. I only wish the lenses were smaller. Currently have the S5 with the 24mm F3.5.
I travel with the S5 to Guanajuato, Mexico City, Guadalajara, and Las Vegas.
Here are some pics: https://www.flickr.com/photos/memo90061/
rashid7
Veteran Member
absatively posilutely !
As others have mentioned.. The S5 is a great Full Frame camera for photography and video and if the size of carrying a full frame camera and lens(es) is not a problem then it's recommended.
However, if lugging around a camera with lenses weighing around 1-2 kilograms is too heavy then perhaps other options are better suited.
A good guide can be found below which may help with your decision. Good luck with your decision.
However, if lugging around a camera with lenses weighing around 1-2 kilograms is too heavy then perhaps other options are better suited.
A good guide can be found below which may help with your decision. Good luck with your decision.
Yes, an excellent camera for travel, especailly if using the wider lenses; teh 20-60 is perfect combined with the S5.
I posted on the September picture thread about how good this combination was on a hiking trip.
I have some different thoughts on this discussion. Disclosure: I recently purchased an S5, I like it a lot but I'm just getting to know it. I'm going to start with lenses because that then affects camera choice.
The whole issue of travel lenses can be easy if you want a simple solution and aren't too picky, but can have more difficult tradeoffs if you want to have flexibility for a wider range of situations.
What will your travels take you into? Typical travel scenes are easy (sunlit, relatively still outdoor scenes), but depending on where you go you may get into narrow alleyways and indoor spaces where you're much better off with an ultrawide lens and/or wide apertures. Flash may not be allowed (museums, historic buildings, cathedrals) or appropriate. You may be photographing at dusk or at night. You may want to bring in things that are far away which is why some people use a 200mm superzoom lens for travel (or the Olympus 12-100mm in Micro Four Thirds, which is equivalent in reach). You also may find yourself photographing action - not just freezing action, but also following it which is more demanding on an autofocus system.
Trying to prepare photographically for a variety of travel situations can easily lead you into taking too much gear (weight, bulk) or having to change lenses too often (been there with prime lenses in Europe decades ago). Sticking with a simple superzoom (say, 24-200 in full frame) means you can't go ultrawide and lose out in low light. But you could add in an ultrawide and/or a fast prime to cover those occasional situations.
The L system doesn't have a superzoom but it does have the 20-60 and 24-105 lenses. The 20-60 gets nice and wide but is likely to be frustrating when you want reach. Meanwhile, with the S5 and the 24-105 you're up to 1.4 kg or 3 lbs. There are slightly lighter choices out there in full frame format, such as the Nikon Z6II with 24-200mm at 1.2 kg or 2.6 lbs. The Canon and Sony choices in particular have better autofocus than Panasonic for following action.
You could also check out the APS-C systems or Micro Four Thirds for much smaller, lighter options, but the smaller format means that those apertures are equivalent to slower apertures in full frame. For example, an f/2.8 zoom in MFT is equivalent to f/5.6 in full frame format, thanks to the much smaller pixels in MFT. Still, that tradeoff may be worth it to get your camera kit down to a reasonable size and weight for your needs.
The whole issue of travel lenses can be easy if you want a simple solution and aren't too picky, but can have more difficult tradeoffs if you want to have flexibility for a wider range of situations.
What will your travels take you into? Typical travel scenes are easy (sunlit, relatively still outdoor scenes), but depending on where you go you may get into narrow alleyways and indoor spaces where you're much better off with an ultrawide lens and/or wide apertures. Flash may not be allowed (museums, historic buildings, cathedrals) or appropriate. You may be photographing at dusk or at night. You may want to bring in things that are far away which is why some people use a 200mm superzoom lens for travel (or the Olympus 12-100mm in Micro Four Thirds, which is equivalent in reach). You also may find yourself photographing action - not just freezing action, but also following it which is more demanding on an autofocus system.
Trying to prepare photographically for a variety of travel situations can easily lead you into taking too much gear (weight, bulk) or having to change lenses too often (been there with prime lenses in Europe decades ago). Sticking with a simple superzoom (say, 24-200 in full frame) means you can't go ultrawide and lose out in low light. But you could add in an ultrawide and/or a fast prime to cover those occasional situations.
The L system doesn't have a superzoom but it does have the 20-60 and 24-105 lenses. The 20-60 gets nice and wide but is likely to be frustrating when you want reach. Meanwhile, with the S5 and the 24-105 you're up to 1.4 kg or 3 lbs. There are slightly lighter choices out there in full frame format, such as the Nikon Z6II with 24-200mm at 1.2 kg or 2.6 lbs. The Canon and Sony choices in particular have better autofocus than Panasonic for following action.
You could also check out the APS-C systems or Micro Four Thirds for much smaller, lighter options, but the smaller format means that those apertures are equivalent to slower apertures in full frame. For example, an f/2.8 zoom in MFT is equivalent to f/5.6 in full frame format, thanks to the much smaller pixels in MFT. Still, that tradeoff may be worth it to get your camera kit down to a reasonable size and weight for your needs.
georgehudetz
Veteran Member
One thing you forgot to bring up - good stabilization.
This is super helpful for interior shots and night cityscape shots. The S5 has excellent internal stabilization, and when it is paired with the 24-105, has even better dual-stabilziation.
Of course, many other cameras have good stabilization - particularly m43 - but it's an important part of a travel kit IMO. And, the S5 has that "dual-whammy" of great stabilization and low-noise images, which makes fast primes less essential.
--
http://georgehudetzphotography.smugmug.com/
My Flikr stream: http://flic.kr/ps/Ay8ka
This is super helpful for interior shots and night cityscape shots. The S5 has excellent internal stabilization, and when it is paired with the 24-105, has even better dual-stabilziation.
Of course, many other cameras have good stabilization - particularly m43 - but it's an important part of a travel kit IMO. And, the S5 has that "dual-whammy" of great stabilization and low-noise images, which makes fast primes less essential.
--
http://georgehudetzphotography.smugmug.com/
My Flikr stream: http://flic.kr/ps/Ay8ka
Last edited:
Off The Mark
Veteran Member
With the 20-60 lens it could be a great travel camera.
Although, I would prefer to travel with my Olympus m43 cameras or my Sony aps-c cameras.
Off The Mark
Veteran Member
A comparison between the 20-60 kit lens and the 24-105 f/4 kit lens:
Username9172
New member
- Messages
- 5
- Reaction score
- 1
Wow, I never thought of that combo. I'll look into it.
Username9172
New member
- Messages
- 5
- Reaction score
- 1
I do prefer the M43 size. I could get a pocket full of the Panasonic F1.7 lenses with one.
R
rick in vegas
Guest
M4/3 better . GX-9 is great with 12-60 or even smaller 12-32. Better yet Nikon Z with 24-50.
Pity that the no longer made GM5 has become so hard to find and expensive.
jalywol
Forum Pro
Yeah, I can fit a small handful of tiny lenses and that camera body into a TEENY bag....It's really great when you want to truly travel light and be inconspicuous.
-J
-J
The S5 might be a great FF travel camera bit it is still an Aircraft Carrier versus the GM5 PT Boat.
Tom, which lenses do you take with a GM5 for travel?
Username9172
New member
- Messages
- 5
- Reaction score
- 1
If only Panasonic would upgrade the GM5.
rashid7
Veteran Member
you can't build a navy w/ only PT-boats, ha ha
- all sizes of vessels needed
[& i still regret not buying the GM5]
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum