Travelling Light

[Mike Farley]

I have recently returned from a short break in Amsterdam, travelling there and back by Eurostar. That meant I was not constrained by any weight or luggage size restrictions which could be imposed when flying, so I was free to take whatever camera equipment I chose. In the past, that choice would automatically have been a DSLR and a bunch of lenses, but during my photo a day project last year more often than not I went out with lighter m4/3 gear. Back ache from lugging the heavier equipment around just did not appeal. The question was could I do the same for an entire holiday? The answer was yes and at no point did I miss having the sturdier camera. In the main, the shots which I took could have been done with either system, with just one exception. I recently acquired a basic m4/3 fisheye lens and do not own anything equivalent for my DSLR. There are not many occasions when the distortion from a fisheye really works well, but the lens is so small and light that carrying it around is no hardship. I only used it once, but it did provide a different view of a familiar scene.

The lens I used most was a standard kit zoom with a 35mm equivalent focal length range of 28 - 90. Being a kit lens, maximum aperture is restricted, at the long end especially, although it does compensate by being compact and light. Lack of speed was not an issue during the trip and the lens performs better than its price tag suggests. The m4/3 system does have a couple of altenative options which have a constant f/2.8 maximum aperture across the zoom range, albeit at the cost of increased size and weight. Either lens is quite expensive and for a lot less money I could have something like the Sony RX 100, which has a fast lens (f/1.8 at the wide end) and covers my most commonly used focal lengths. The principle downside is the lack of a viewfinder as standard, although a pricy EVF is an option. The same objection also applies to many of the alternatives to the Sony, but travelling very light with just a compact camera could be an intriguing possibility.

[Mike Farley]

This is the scene described above for which I used my fisheye lens. It is the "I amsterdam" sign which is in Museumplein in front of the Rijksmuseum and it features many times if you do a search on Google images for Amsterdam. I went past it a number of times at different times of the day and there are always people standing either on it or in front of it. I suspect that the only way to shoot it without anyone around is to go first thing in the morning, but this is the way that people use it which is why I thought it would be better to include them. The sign is actually straight, but I think that the curve imparted by the fisheye works well here and makes the shot just a bit different.

[Rose]

A friend of mine has just decided to replace his entire Canon DSLR system in favour of the Fuji XT1 and is loving the freedom. He's also getting really impressive results with the Fuji.

[Mike Farley]

A friend of mine has just decided to replace his entire Canon DSLR system in favour of the Fuji XT1 and is loving the freedom. He's also getting really impressive results with the Fuji.

I recently looked into selling off my Canon gear, in this instance to switch to a m4/3 system based on the Olympus OM-D E-1, but concluded that the range of lenses currently available, mainly at the telephoto end, is lacking. I would also need to check the efficiency of the Olympus continuous AF before committing to a change. It is probably just a matter of time, though.

I have written about the Fuji X series before, so will not repeat it here, but will link to it instead.

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=796&p=4359&hilit=fuji#p4358