Am I crazy? Full frame to Micro 4/3rds??? (travel, casual, etc.)

I upgraded from my 20D to the 5d2 when it was released because I wanted full-frame coverage, delicious bokeh and, well, I mean, the 5d2 and it's predecessor both have an excellent reputuation, but after all this time, because of a vacation I'm about to embark on, I'm seriously considering ditching my 5d2 and going 4/3rds (micro 4/3rds? which is it?) Hear me out and tell me what you think...

First off, I'm traveling to Cambodia and Thailand and my initial thought was to invest in a water resistant, shock resistant, freezeproof camera, but I wanted an integrated GPS and a quality image and eventually, after a lot of research, determined that they don't make that camera yet.

Meanwhile, friends on my side of the fence were telling me: "Dude, take the DSLR, I want to see the awesome pictures you'll take..." And I too still go back and forth. The quality of the 5d2 rivals film, right? And you want to take good pictures of Angkor Wat, right?

However, there are a couple of problems with this. First, the only travel insurance I've found (world nomads) that I can get on the spur of the moment without a ton of paperwork only insures luxury goods (cameras, diamonds, etc.) up to $500 which doesn't even cover the LENS on the 5D2, much less the camera itself. And, if my camera is lost or stolen, because I'm currently living and working abroad, I have no homeowner's insurance or equivalent to cover the camera, meaning I'd be out a paycheck and a half if it got pinched from my bag while I was in Cambodia. Add the fact that I'm not sure I can find my original recipt for the 5d2 and/or the lens to the equation and I'm basically not going to be able to get ANY coverage at all on my camera equipment, which is a second reason I'm considering ditching the 5d2 for something smaller and lighter...

And finally, I'm traveling light. A single, very rugged waterproof sealed-backback and little else-- possibly a camelbak for day expeditions. As it stands, the 5d2 24-105 fits but the combo is heavy, in my bag and around my neck and while it all handles well enough, I wouldn't call it intuitive or anything-- video mode is, especially, a pain in the ass.

Which brings me here to the Micro 4/3rds board. Should I ditch all this and just grab a GH1 for the trip? Will it and the kit lens be a lot lighter/easier to manage than my big ol' DSLR full-frame job? I'd be able to insure it for about 1/2 of it's value with the recipt and I'd be less stressed, as its not even a 3rd of the value of my big rig. Meanwhile, I feel it would be a great change to try out, and hell, everything I've read about the GH1 seems to be roses and rainbows. Is there anything I'm overlooking here? Am I crazy to want to downgrade like this? And no, this isn't the only thing I'm planning on doing with the GH1-- in addition to it being my travel go-to camera, I'm thinking of letting it handle my casual photography needs and sort of pushing the 5d2 into the background until uh, I guess I need it again. Until I start printing in magazines, or something I guess.

The best walk around lenses from Olympus are the 12-60 and 14-54.
Instead of an m4/3 body, consider the E-620.
E-620/14-54 II combo sounds like what you need.

Jeff.

If video is important to you then the GH1 is a good choice. With the kit lens it isn't that tiny or fast. So, you will want to supplement with one small fast prime lens. Perhaps the 20 f1.7 that is due to be announced in the next 24 hours (not sure when you leave on the trip).

If you are traveling that light what are you doing for image processing or image storage?
--
terry
http://tbanet.zenfolio.com/

I can't advise you as to what's going to work for you, but I can see myself heading out on the next trip with the G1, my Cosmicar 12.5/1.4, the Panasonic 20/1.7, the Oly Pen F 40/1.4 and 70/2. Whole kit will fit in a tiny bag and weigh less than 4 lbs.
--
Godfrey
http://godfreydigiorgi.posterous.com

I have a Nikon D70. While it's not in the same league as a 5D, it's a good camera. And I have a Canon HV30 video camera. Dragging this stuff around is a hassle for me. Taking both on vacation? MAJOR headache!

That's why I'm looking at the GH1. If video is important to you, a GH1 is the probably the best travel camera out there.

If video is not important to you, then an EP-1 or G1 might be better options that will save you some bucks.

Like any other tool, any of these cameras will have their ideosyncracies. All cameras have their downsides, it's just a matter of 1) deciding if a particular camera meets your needs and 2) getting used to it to find the workarounds that meet your needs. And do this well in advance of going on vacation.

Regards,

Dan.

Future Blues wrote:

However, there are a couple of problems with this. First, the only travel insurance I've found (world nomads) that I can get on the spur of the moment without a ton of paperwork only insures luxury goods (cameras, diamonds, etc.) up to $500 which doesn't even cover the LENS on the 5D2, much less the camera itself. And, if my camera is lost or stolen, because I'm currently living and working abroad, I have no homeowner's insurance or equivalent to cover the camera, meaning I'd be out a paycheck and a half if it got pinched from my bag while I was in Cambodia. Add the fact that I'm not sure I can find my original recipt for the 5d2 and/or the lens to the equation and I'm basically not going to be able to get ANY coverage at all on my camera equipment, which is a second reason I'm considering ditching the 5d2 for something smaller and lighter...

And finally, I'm traveling light. A single, very rugged waterproof sealed-backback and little else-- possibly a camelbak for day expeditions. As it stands, the 5d2 24-105 fits but the combo is heavy, in my bag and around my neck and while it all handles well enough, I wouldn't call it intuitive or anything-- video mode is, especially, a pain in the ass.

Given your limitation of travel insurance (or lack thereof) and baggage load, it would make more sense for you to get a weathersealed Oly DSLR, and perhaps the 12-60. It would be a lot lighter than the 5DII, but without the benefit of video.

On the other hand, I recently got back from a three month road trip on which I carried the 5DII, G10 and Sigma DP1 in a shoulder bag. My primary lens was the 24-105L. It did get heavy, but the images were well worth it. Of course, I had insurance, and made myself very familiar with the video mode.

None of the m43 cameras are weather sealed at this time. Oly is supposed to be coming out with a 'pro' grade m43 camera with weathersealing, but this is only so much vaporware before it arrives. The upcoming Panasonic GF1 or present GH1 look like a good m43 solution if you are willing to give up weathersealing.
--
Archiver - Recording the sights and sounds of life
http://www.flickr.com/photos/archiver/

Well if you're carrying a FF DSLR, you're carrying rig worth more than the average Cambodian earns in a year or two. Carrying a humbler set might make you feel more safe and it could be easier to aproach locals too when taking photos.

If you are going on a professional (moneymaking) trip to a difficult zone take a weathersealed bulletproof brick. If you don't make a living off this trip, travel light and inconspicuous. I'd go with E-P1 + 14-42, 45-200 and one fast prime plus an LX-3 as a backup.

Well, it depends... If you think that with m43 you will get the same pictures as you would with 5D2, you are dreaming. The pictures from the 5D2 will be noticeably better than the m43 (I own both the original 5D and the EP1, and enjoy using both).

If you really care about bringing back good pictures, I would take the 5D because of two things: The extra dynamic range that you will get from the larger full-frame sensor and the faster AF, which is VERY useful for quick grab shots. A third factor is that high ISO is also better on 5D2.

m43 makes a great tiny travel camera, but you do get a bit noisier picture and a much slower AF (even with a Panny cameras). Bu the large elephant in the room is m43 lenses. To get an equivalent quality zoom lens for m43 you need to go to the f2 Olympus 4/3 zooms which are rumored to be at least as good or not better than the L glass, but they are not much smaller and cost about the same. So if you go for the really good glass, you loose most of the m43 advantage. If and when someone like Leica or Cosina come out with a couple of small top-quality dedicated primes for m43, the equation could change, but for now, you are going to loose in lens quality by going to m43. I love the pictures I get from my EP1, but I know that I always can use my 5D and L zooms when I really need that extra bit of IQ.

I don't quite understand people recommending the 620: it is another SLR, it is not that much smaller and you will be getting into a whole new system. And frankly, 620 cannot hold a candle to the 5D, unless you put on the aforementioned Oly zoom, which will make it quite large (and still the 5D2 will have better DR and HD video). The OP already has one of the two best semi-pro SLRs available, why would he change?

My recommendation is to leave your tripod at home and just take a good sturdy mini-tripod (Bogen makes the one I like). You can always put it up on something and get the shot. Not having to lug a tripod makes a huge difference. Also if that helps, my travel solution is to put the DSLR in a neoprene form-fitting case (Zing or its clones) and throw it in the daypack. Padded cases are too large and too cumbersome.

Best of luck on our trip.

Alex

P.S. Angkor Wat is somewhat overrated; the most interesting site (both culturally and photographically) in that region is Bagan in Myanmar (Burma).

If you are carrying any decent camera, you are carrying more than an average Cambodian makes in a year, so it does not make much difference. Just keep your camera strap around your arm at all times and obviously use your best judgment.

Future Blues wrote:

I upgraded from my 20D to the 5d2 when it was released because I wanted full-frame coverage, delicious bokeh and, well, I mean, the 5d2 and it's predecessor both have an excellent reputuation, but after all this time, because of a vacation I'm about to embark on, I'm seriously considering ditching my 5d2 and going 4/3rds (micro 4/3rds? which is it?) Hear me out and tell me what you think...

You have clearly identified the problems with your Canon equipment on such a journey (weight, size, uninsurability), but I think you may have selected the wrong solution in the GH1 unless you are desperate for some quality video on your expedition. May I suggest that a suitable alternative to consider may be the Panasonic DMC-LX3 or the Canon Powershot G10/11?

These would give you the benefits of small size, light weight and a purchase price that could be covered in your insurance policy, as well as not drawing attention to yourself as the well-heeled tourist. Personally speaking I carried my LX3 with me throughout my holiday/vacation this year in Southern Italy, and not once did I long for my G1 and its 45-200mm zoom telephoto lens. The naysayers, of whom there will be plenty , will tell you that the LX3 is limited to a maximum telephoto focal length of 60mm (equivalent), although you can increase this to over 100mm by using extended zoom or digital image cropping in post processing. What they ignore is the incredible f2.0 24mm (equivalent) wide angle on the Leica lens, which will be a godsend at a site like the Angkor Wat. Wide angle lenses are far more important in most travels than telephotos in my experience.

So yes, the GH1 and a small number of lenses will be cheaper, lighter and smaller than your Canon dSLR rig, but please consider that it may not be the optimal solution in a world where nothing will be perfect.

Oh and the LX3 will give you the faclity to shoot 720p HD video whereas the Canon G11 is limited to VGA only video resolution, although it does give you greater telephoto zoom and a lower wide angle view.

If size really is critical you could also consider the Olympus EP1 or the yet to be formally announced Panasonic GF1 if you can find one in stock anywhere.