DPReview.com is closing April 10th - Find out more

So should I move to L-mount for landscapes?

Started 3 months ago | Discussions thread
dcassat Senior Member • Posts: 1,332
Re: I did

pdk42 wrote:

Thanks. Some really nice shots there. I think if I cull my m43 collection then I can probably get away without too much extra cost for the L-mount lenses I'd need (16-25 or 16-28 plus the 24-105). Maybe the 70-300 later to round out the long end. Or maybe I could forsake the wider end and just add the 70-200/4 to the 20-60.

Thanks!  I took a look at your photos also.  Many wonderful ones there.  I see how much you enjoy it, the care you take in your compositions really shows.

The advantage of those f/4 lenses is their weight, really matters if you're hauling them for any distance.  I have the Sigma 14-24 and 24-70 along with the Panasonic 70-300.  That's the combo I carry when doing the landscape thing, and it's about the most I would ever want to carry (a little too much, in fact)  While the quality of the 14-24 can't be denied, I don't use 14mm much.  I think if that 16-28 had been available I would have jumped for it instead unless I was planning a lot of astro, which isn't something I expect to do.  The 70-300 is nice for macros but I haven't bonded with it in the landscape yet.  But I think I haven't found the opportunity.  I've considered the new Sigma 20 also and just shoot prime wide.  I may wind up selling the 14-24 at any rate.

Enjoy the hunt for the best kit!

-- hide signature --


 dcassat's gear list:dcassat's gear list
Olympus E-M5 II Panasonic Lumix DC-S5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 Pro +1 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow