Would you take just an fp L and 20-60mm?

I was reading in this thread:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/65669891

I have been traveling by car (SUV actually), and I keep thinking about how I could reduce the weight and bulk of my kit, which currently doesn't even fit in my big backpack. Next year I hope to fly to a few places, like the U.K. and Vietnam. I just can't take all my cameras and lenses, so I've been thinking I might get a versatile camera, one zoom, and a nice prime, but I figured I would get a Sony A7r IV. The problem with that idea is I just can't get what I'd consider a great all-around lens for it.

I like how wide the Panasonic 20-60 can go. I've been thinking I might get that lens and a Sigma fp L.

I do still plan to get a Sony A7r IV and Zeiss 40mm f2 Batis first, and I will use my Sigma Art lenses on that with my MC-11 adapter. (14-24mm f2.8 Art and 24-70mm f2.8 OS Art, plus my 50mm f1.4 Art). That is really not a particularly carryable set-up though. I was thinking about getting a couple of small primes to go with the Sony camera that I'll have with the 40mm lens, such as the new Sigma 24mm f2 I (16mm shorter focal length) and the new Sigma 65mm f2 I (25mm longer focal length). Three lenses just seems like a lot though, and not only would it be bigger and heavier than the fp L with a Panasonic 20-60mm f3.5-5.6, but it would cost more to replace, if it gets stolen too.

I wonder if I'm crazy to even think it might make sense to take just one lens and camera though. Would you take just an fp L and a 20-60mm lens on a photo trip?

Maybe I should consider "enhancing" that kit with Sigma's new 90mm f2.8, which Marco has recently used, and posted photos from. Still, I wonder if I will miss my 100-400, which I used extensively on my SD1 Merrill to photograph some wildlife on my trip so far (shooting a coyote, some bison, prairie dogs, prong horn antelope, and long horn sheep). I even shot some distant mountains with that long lens, though most of the time I just used my Nikon with the 24-135mm lens at the long end, rather than swapping lenses on my SD1 Merrill. I remember using my long lens several times down in Chile, shooting wild animals again (flamingos and vicunyas), so maybe it would make sense to at least take the 100-400 along, "just in case."

Scottelly wrote:

I was reading in this thread:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/65669891

I have been traveling by car (SUV actually), and I keep thinking about how I could reduce the weight and bulk of my kit, which currently doesn't even fit in my big backpack. Next year I hope to fly to a few places, like the U.K. and Vietnam. I just can't take all my cameras and lenses, so I've been thinking I might get a versatile camera, one zoom, and a nice prime, but I figured I would get a Sony A7r IV. The problem with that idea is I just can't get what I'd consider a great all-around lens for it.

I like how wide the Panasonic 20-60 can go. I've been thinking I might get that lens and a Sigma fp L.

I do still plan to get a Sony A7r IV and Zeiss 40mm f2 Batis first, and I will use my Sigma Art lenses on that with my MC-11 adapter. (14-24mm f2.8 Art and 24-70mm f2.8 OS Art, plus my 50mm f1.4 Art). That is really not a particularly carryable set-up though. I was thinking about getting a couple of small primes to go with the Sony camera that I'll have with the 40mm lens, such as the new Sigma 24mm f2 I (16mm shorter focal length) and the new Sigma 65mm f2 I (25mm longer focal length). Three lenses just seems like a lot though, and not only would it be bigger and heavier than the fp L with a Panasonic 20-60mm f3.5-5.6, but it would cost more to replace, if it gets stolen too.

I wonder if I'm crazy to even think it might make sense to take just one lens and camera though. Would you take just an fp L and a 20-60mm lens on a photo trip?

Maybe I should consider "enhancing" that kit with Sigma's new 90mm f2.8, which Marco has recently used, and posted photos from. Still, I wonder if I will miss my 100-400, which I used extensively on my SD1 Merrill to photograph some wildlife on my trip so far (shooting a coyote, some bison, prairie dogs, prong horn antelope, and long horn sheep). I even shot some distant mountains with that long lens, though most of the time I just used my Nikon with the 24-135mm lens at the long end, rather than swapping lenses on my SD1 Merrill. I remember using my long lens several times down in Chile, shooting wild animals again (flamingos and vicunyas), so maybe it would make sense to at least take the 100-400 along, "just in case."

Thinking of the Sony+24-70mm versus fp L+20-60mm, taken from the plethora of alternatives mentioned above:

At the long end, the Sony+70mm gets you 7008 pixels wide and a horizontal angle of about 29deg. For those same 7008 pixels, i.e. cropping the 9520pixel width, the fp L+60mm will give you a horizontal angle of about 25deg ... where less is more "reach" for the same resolution.

At the wide end, the Sony+24mm gives you a horizontal angle of about 74deg. The fp L+20mm will give you a horizontal angle of about 84deg at a higher spatial resolution.

Looks like the fp L+20-60mm wins: 25-84deg versus 29-74deg ...

I also have the fp L and 20-60mm. For traveling, and in good light, it's a great setup. Even cropping in 1.53-2x for 90-120mm works for me in a pinch.

For some the Sigma 28-70mm might work better, but I like the extra width and smaller/lighter footprint.

I bring a single prime, the 35mm f2, if I'm worried about lower light, but can do mostly all I need with the 20-60mm.

Mike2019 wrote:

I have had an fp L with the 20-60 for more than 6 months now, and am thrilled with the results that I get when travelling!

I have been using it in the 21:9 ratio only, and have gotten amazing pictures!

fp L is a very exciting camera, which is just amazing with the 20-60!

Interesting. Thanks for your comment Mike!

amweber21 wrote:

I also have the fp L and 20-60mm. For traveling, and in good light, it's a great setup. Even cropping in 1.53-2x for 90-120mm works for me in a pinch.

For some the Sigma 28-70mm might work better, but I like the extra width and smaller/lighter footprint.

I bring a single prime, the 35mm f2, if I'm worried about lower light, but can do mostly all I need with the 20-60mm.

Your comment and Mike's make me think maybe I'm not crazy. Thank you.

xpatUSA wrote:

Scottelly wrote:

I was reading in this thread:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/65669891

I have been traveling by car (SUV actually), and I keep thinking about how I could reduce the weight and bulk of my kit, which currently doesn't even fit in my big backpack. Next year I hope to fly to a few places, like the U.K. and Vietnam. I just can't take all my cameras and lenses, so I've been thinking I might get a versatile camera, one zoom, and a nice prime, but I figured I would get a Sony A7r IV. The problem with that idea is I just can't get what I'd consider a great all-around lens for it.

I like how wide the Panasonic 20-60 can go. I've been thinking I might get that lens and a Sigma fp L.

I do still plan to get a Sony A7r IV and Zeiss 40mm f2 Batis first, and I will use my Sigma Art lenses on that with my MC-11 adapter. (14-24mm f2.8 Art and 24-70mm f2.8 OS Art, plus my 50mm f1.4 Art). That is really not a particularly carryable set-up though. I was thinking about getting a couple of small primes to go with the Sony camera that I'll have with the 40mm lens, such as the new Sigma 24mm f2 I (16mm shorter focal length) and the new Sigma 65mm f2 I (25mm longer focal length). Three lenses just seems like a lot though, and not only would it be bigger and heavier than the fp L with a Panasonic 20-60mm f3.5-5.6, but it would cost more to replace, if it gets stolen too.

I wonder if I'm crazy to even think it might make sense to take just one lens and camera though. Would you take just an fp L and a 20-60mm lens on a photo trip?

Maybe I should consider "enhancing" that kit with Sigma's new 90mm f2.8, which Marco has recently used, and posted photos from. Still, I wonder if I will miss my 100-400, which I used extensively on my SD1 Merrill to photograph some wildlife on my trip so far (shooting a coyote, some bison, prairie dogs, prong horn antelope, and long horn sheep). I even shot some distant mountains with that long lens, though most of the time I just used my Nikon with the 24-135mm lens at the long end, rather than swapping lenses on my SD1 Merrill. I remember using my long lens several times down in Chile, shooting wild animals again (flamingos and vicunyas), so maybe it would make sense to at least take the 100-400 along, "just in case."

Thinking of the Sony+24-70mm versus fp L+20-60mm, taken from the plethora of alternatives mentioned above:

At the long end, the Sony+70mm gets you 7008 pixels wide and a horizontal angle of about 29deg. For those same 7008 pixels, i.e. cropping the 9520pixel width, the fp L+60mm will give you a horizontal angle of about 25deg ... where less is more "reach" for the same resolution.

At the wide end, the Sony+24mm gives you a horizontal angle of about 74deg. The fp L+20mm will give you a horizontal angle of about 84deg at a higher spatial resolution.

Looks like the fp L+20-60mm wins: 25-84deg versus 29-74deg ...

Yes, and I think it would be much lighter than my 24-70mm f2.8 OS Art on the Sony A7r IV. It almost seems like I ought to get the fp L and that 20-60 just to try it, if nothing else. I guess I could use the Sony A7r IV with my Art lenses and my 100-400 normally, but take the fp L with that lens as a backup camera and what I can take ou when I'm going on a long hike or something like that, and if I get an MC-21 to use my Art lenses on the fp L the fp L can be an all-around backup camera too. It might even make sense to get an 85mm f1.4 Art in SA mount too.

-- hide signature --

Just interested in the technology.

Mike2019 wrote:

Scottelly wrote:

Mike2019 wrote:

I have had an fp L with the 20-60 for more than 6 months now, and am thrilled with the results that I get when travelling!

I have been using it in the 21:9 ratio only, and have gotten amazing pictures!

fp L is a very exciting camera, which is just amazing with the 20-60!

Interesting. Thanks for your comment Mike!

I also have a Sony A7Riv, but almost do not use it since I bought the fp L with the 20-60.

The fp L is really a very exciting camera to work with.

Try it, and you will see!

Wow! That's even more interesting Mike! What lenses do you have for your Sony?

frankonian wrote:

Thank you for the food for thought in the direction of Panasonic.
I will get this lens for the fp L and test whether it is okay for me.
The compactness of the combination appeals to me a lot, even if I believe that the quality of my Sigma Art lenses cannot be matched.

On my cross-country trip I've found that when I go walking/hiking I normally take my SD1 Merrill with an 8-16mm lens, giving me 12-24mm equivalent, and my Nikon D810 with a 24-135mm on my tripod. Sometimes though I take just one camera with a zoom lens on it. That is sometimes my SD1 Merrill with my 24-70mm f2.8 OS Art, but usually it is my Nikon with the 24-135mm lens. That leads me to believe a single lens solution is probably what I should seek. I don't know if 20mm will be wide enough or if 60mm will be long enough, but I plan to get the Sony with a 10mm lens, and I will have that for super-wide shots, and I guess I could take that with me. I could see myself taking that with a 90mm f2.8 I along with an fp L and the 20-60. I think the 90mm lens will fit in my pocket, and of course I can take a small backpack with a longer lens too, like my 100-400 OS C, with my MC-11 and MC-21 adapters, so I can use it on either camera. I guess if I'm taking a small backpack though, I could take my 14-24mm f2.8 Art and 24-70mm f2.8 OS Art along too. Then I would have the most versatile kit, without taking all my gear.

Scottelly wrote:

I like how wide the Panasonic 20-60 can go. I've been thinking I might get that lens and a Sigma fp L.

I wonder if I'm crazy to even think it might make sense to take just one lens and camera though. Would you take just an fp L and a 20-60mm lens on a photo trip?

Yes, I would take a fp L and the Panny 20-60 lens.  Was strongly attracted to the lens when I bought my fp L, but instead I went with the Sigma 45mm F2.8 DG DN, another great all around lens.  The Sigma 45 is plenty sharp enough to crop, but that Panny 20-60 is nice!

Mike2019 wrote:

Scottelly wrote:

Mike2019 wrote:

Scottelly wrote:

Mike2019 wrote:

I have had an fp L with the 20-60 for more than 6 months now, and am thrilled with the results that I get when travelling!

I have been using it in the 21:9 ratio only, and have gotten amazing pictures!

fp L is a very exciting camera, which is just amazing with the 20-60!

Interesting. Thanks for your comment Mike!

I also have a Sony A7Riv, but almost do not use it since I bought the fp L with the 20-60.

The fp L is really a very exciting camera to work with.

Try it, and you will see!

Wow! That's even more interesting Mike! What lenses do you have for your Sony?

I have 3 Batis lenses, as well as Sony Zeiss 24-70, Sony Zeiss 16-35, the 24-105, and 70-200 f4, Sony Zeiss 50mm 1.4, and Sony Zeiss 35mm 1.4

Whoa! Nice set of lenses! How does the Sony with the 24-70 compare with the fp L and the 20-60? From your list I would guess that's the closest match.

I wonder if you have the same issue as me . . . lens overkill. At least I guess that's the name for it. I still find myself wanting even more lenses too!

:]

Tom Schum wrote:

Scottelly wrote:

I like how wide the Panasonic 20-60 can go. I've been thinking I might get that lens and a Sigma fp L.

I wonder if I'm crazy to even think it might make sense to take just one lens and camera though. Would you take just an fp L and a 20-60mm lens on a photo trip?

Yes, I would take a fp L and the Panny 20-60 lens. Was strongly attracted to the lens when I bought my fp L, but instead I went with the Sigma 45mm F2.8 DG DN, another great all around lens. The Sigma 45 is plenty sharp enough to crop, but that Panny 20-60 is nice!

Thanks for your comment Tom. I'm seriously wondering if I shouldn't just sell all my gear and just get that combo and the new 90mm f2.8 I. I think that might just be a little bit too crazy though.

-- hide signature --

Tom Schum
"Beware of taking advice from anonymous wise men." Quote from Anon.

Scottelly wrote:

Tom Schum wrote:

Scottelly wrote:

I wonder if I'm crazy to even think it might make sense to take just one lens and camera though. Would you take just an fp L and a 20-60mm lens on a photo trip?

Yes, I would take a fp L and the Panny 20-60 lens.

Thanks for your comment Tom. I'm seriously wondering if I shouldn't just sell all my gear and just get that combo and the new 90mm f2.8 I. I think that might just be a little bit too crazy though.

For what's worth, Scott, I don't think it's too crazy.

Think of el famoso Henri Cartier-Bresson. I've read that he shot with one camera and just a 50mm prime ...

I myself am down to just (!) four cameras - each having a specific purpose.

a point-and-shoot that fits in the pocket

a top-of-the-line u4/3 with all the options needed for my shaky hands, lack of limber and poor eyesight. (IBIS w/dual I; fully-articulating LCD; magnified manual focus with peaking).

an older u4/3 modified for full-spectrum shots

an original Sigma/Foveon which makes me work for a good shot

Scottelly wrote:

Tom Schum wrote:

Scottelly wrote:

I like how wide the Panasonic 20-60 can go. I've been thinking I might get that lens and a Sigma fp L.

I wonder if I'm crazy to even think it might make sense to take just one lens and camera though. Would you take just an fp L and a 20-60mm lens on a photo trip?

Yes, I would take a fp L and the Panny 20-60 lens. Was strongly attracted to the lens when I bought my fp L, but instead I went with the Sigma 45mm F2.8 DG DN, another great all around lens. The Sigma 45 is plenty sharp enough to crop, but that Panny 20-60 is nice!

Thanks for your comment Tom. I'm seriously wondering if I shouldn't just sell all my gear and just get that combo and the new 90mm f2.8 I. I think that might just be a little bit too crazy though.

You have to consider what subject matter you shoot, and so on.  Lack of a mechanical shutter might be a show stopper.

Scottelly wrote:

I was reading in this thread:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/65669891

I have been traveling by car (SUV actually), and I keep thinking about how I could reduce the weight and bulk of my kit, which currently doesn't even fit in my big backpack. Next year I hope to fly to a few places, like the U.K. and Vietnam. I just can't take all my cameras and lenses, so I've been thinking I might get a versatile camera, one zoom, and a nice prime, but I figured I would get a Sony A7r IV. The problem with that idea is I just can't get what I'd consider a great all-around lens for it.

I like how wide the Panasonic 20-60 can go. I've been thinking I might get that lens and a Sigma fp L.

I do still plan to get a Sony A7r IV and Zeiss 40mm f2 Batis first, and I will use my Sigma Art lenses on that with my MC-11 adapter. (14-24mm f2.8 Art and 24-70mm f2.8 OS Art, plus my 50mm f1.4 Art). That is really not a particularly carryable set-up though. I was thinking about getting a couple of small primes to go with the Sony camera that I'll have with the 40mm lens, such as the new Sigma 24mm f2 I (16mm shorter focal length) and the new Sigma 65mm f2 I (25mm longer focal length). Three lenses just seems like a lot though, and not only would it be bigger and heavier than the fp L with a Panasonic 20-60mm f3.5-5.6, but it would cost more to replace, if it gets stolen too.

I wonder if I'm crazy to even think it might make sense to take just one lens and camera though. Would you take just an fp L and a 20-60mm lens on a photo trip?

Maybe I should consider "enhancing" that kit with Sigma's new 90mm f2.8, which Marco has recently used, and posted photos from. Still, I wonder if I will miss my 100-400, which I used extensively on my SD1 Merrill to photograph some wildlife on my trip so far (shooting a coyote, some bison, prairie dogs, prong horn antelope, and long horn sheep). I even shot some distant mountains with that long lens, though most of the time I just used my Nikon with the 24-135mm lens at the long end, rather than swapping lenses on my SD1 Merrill. I remember using my long lens several times down in Chile, shooting wild animals again (flamingos and vicunyas), so maybe it would make sense to at least take the 100-400 along, "just in case."

Hi Scott,

My suggestion: Sony A7r IV, Tamron 28-200, Sigma MC-11 adapter for your wide lenses. The Tamron 28-200's image quality is very favorably reviewed.

For my next trip to Vietnam, I will take my Sony A7c, Tamron 28-200, and the Sigma DP1. Attached is a picture of the Sony A7c with the Tamron 28-200.

Ha

Indian Wells Tennis Tournament 2021