Anyone go traveling with just the 20mm lens????

[swandy]

We are going to Florida for a long weekend - mostly seeing family and friends, perhaps some sightseeing thrown in if time. Originally planned on taking the EP2, 20mm and the 14-45 lens. (Would probably leave the longer 40-150 home because this is not really a "sightseeing trip".) But I LOVE the idea of the size of just taking the EP2 with the 20mm attached in a small OpTech case. (Especially after all those vacations schlepping multiple stuff.)
Thoughts?
Thanks, Steve

 

[Terry]

Yes, I've gone for a couple of long weekends with just GF1 and 20mm. I've also gone with 20 + 45. If you just go with the 20 you will still find plenty of opportunities to craft good shots. Think of all the photographers that only ever went with a single lens on a rangefinder etc. The 20mm focal length is very versatile.

 

[photoSmart42]

Went to Vegas and took the 20 and the 14-140 along with the GH1. The 14-140 stayed in the bag. Only used the 20. That's not to say the 14-140 wouldn't have come in handy had we focused on more picture-taking, but for general purpose point-n-shoot type photos, the 20 worked out well. It's light, portable, and works nicely in a wide range of lighting conditions (i.e. food photos in dark restaurants).

 

[Rawfa]

I find the 20mm too restrictive for my type of shooting. I'm really struggling to like this lens for the fact that it's really awesome for low light, but it's just not wide enough. The more time I spend with it the harder I find to justify keeping it. I would totally travel with just the 17mm f2.8 though. It's not as wide as I would like but it's just wide and compact enough.

 

[ustein]

I was in October in Vegas with just the 17mm and the GH1. Was hard for me but I learned to get new types of shots using just one lens.

 

[ggibson]

I took the GF1+20mm to Hawaii with me and found it wonderful. I could have used a longer lens on some sunsets, but I didn't really miss it.

 

[pellicle]

Hi

as you can see from the above it really depends how you see things, but myself I'd say yes (if I had one). I like the "normal" range and like the way it makes me work for things. I've found that with 'stitching' I can make things as wide as I want more often than not. This weekend at a family gathering there best people shots in a small house interior were taken with my FD 28mm f2.8 ... I found myself wanting less DoF and higher shutter speed in the natural light.

So I think that the 20mm would be a good choice ... I'd also take a legacy 50mm f.18 as a mid telephoto ... perhaps this reflects my preference in shooting now more than anything else ...

 

[Jonas]

We are going to Florida for a long weekend (...) I LOVE the idea of the size of just taking the EP2 with the 20mm attached in a small OpTech case.

Why not?

For many years I couldn't afford even a second lens. I used an old SLR with a standard 50/1.4 and that was it. I spent the money I had on film girls and beer and got a very 50mm view of the world... I missed some images, I developed an addiction for fast normals and I learned how to use that lens. Some would call that "limiting oneself" and that would be right, partly.

Later I have traveled with a 1.5 crop DSLR, a 35mm and a Zenitar 16mm FE only. It worked just fine also if a three lens setup has became sort of "standard" for me now.

I think you should give it a try. If possible report back here. It could be another interesting discussion.

/Jonas

 

[Streetshooter]

Jonas,
Great post!
There's a guy on another forum doing the same thing, travelling to Fl.
I would say just take the 20. 1 lens will make you think more. If your thinking, you'll get better images.

 

[Paratom]

I have a bag where I can carry my M9 with the 35 Summarit and which is very small.
However a bag where one could carry 2 lenses isnt really that much bigger.
In the end I carry 90% the slightly bigger bag.
What I want to say: You cant fit a EP1+20mm in a shirt or jacket pocket, you have to carry a bag anyways. Thats why I personally would rather bring the 20 and 14-54 if I were you. I wouldnt miss the longer focal length but eventually the wider one.
One of the reasons why I enjoy the g11 more than I enjoyed the dp2 as a small camera.

 

[Vivek]

Steve, I would say money is better spent on glass (tools) than film, girls or beer- none of them would let you think.

 

[kweide]

Well did similar with E-P1 and only 17 mm. Travelled thru Tuscany, Floence, Arezzo, San Gimignano, Pistaoia etc.
No problem, the lack of telephoto lens was compensated by footwork

 

[swandy]

I want to thank everyone for their insightfull ("film, girls & beer") comments. I have always liked the idea of one lens (did Italy years ago that way, but it was the 14-54 zoom, but I really enjoyed not bothering to switch lenses). I also "grew up" into photography with just a 50mm lens on a film SLR - zooms back then either sucked or were just too expensive for anything decent. Also, most of my shots tend to be on the wide end of things - going to Belgium/Netherlands last year for almost 2 weeks I took over 1300 pictures and less than 100 were with the 40-150 lens.
If this was more of a sightseeing vacation, I would definitely take atleast the 14-42 also -would miss the wider end.
Thanks for all the experiences.
Steve

 

[mark1958]

I am at a meeting in Keystone. I have the 14-140 and 20mm as my two lenses. When i am on the ski slopes, I only bring the 20mm so i can have camera packed in ski jacket.

 

[arashm]

I have to agree with Rawfa
I love the lens for it's quality and being able to shoot at F2.0
but I seem to always seem to want it to be wider.
am

 

[m3photo]

Re: Standard 50/1.4

For many years I couldn't afford even a second lens. I used an old SLR with a standard 50/1.4 and that was it. I spent the money I had on film girls and beer and got a very 50mm view of the world...

Many of us of a certain age (ahem), would have been in the same situation I'm sure.
Film was all we had, beer tasted the same at any focal length and girls' noses were slightly more interesting at 50mm anyway
I still venture out with a D700 and my trusty old Nikkor 50 f/1.4 attached to it.
The advantage of FF digital is the convenience of stitching two 50mm shots if you want wide and cropping 50% if you're lacking that 100mm anyway.

HERESY you say - ON THIS FORUM Not to worry, I still use the G1+Kit zoom many a time, many a time :clap:

 

[jerryk]

I only have the one lens, so that is all I take. I actually find it very freeing to only have one lens. You are forced to concentrate harder on composition, your position to subject, etc.

 

[Lili]

Agreed, 100%

Jonas,
Great post!
There's a guy on another forum doing the same thing, travelling to Fl.
I would say just take the 20. 1 lens will make you think more. If your thinking, you'll get better images.

Thats why I love my Hexar AF
now I am carrying one DLSR with a prime
k100D Super 50mm f1.4
e410 25mm pancake
or
e510 with 35mm f3.5 macro

 

[andrewteee]

Not just traveling, but on my E-P2 about the only lens I ever use is the Panasonic 20mm. I love it.

 

[swandy]

Not just traveling, but on my E-P2 about the only lens I ever use is the Panasonic 20mm. I love it.

Andy - while I agree that I also love the 20mm, I do like to play with the different types of lenses and see what I can do with them. But - while traveling I generally try to keep it simple. That's why I want to try just taking the one lens along this time. I have done this a lot just walking around NYC, but never when traveling before. Though I will admit that my current travel kit (small Lowepro bag, EP2, 14-42, 20mm, 40-150 w/adapter, assorted filters) is still MUCH lighter and smaller than when we traveled to Europe last year and I took the E30 along.
Steve