Two lens choice for trek? Apology in advance for asking such a question :-)

[jdlaing]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

MATE.

[Paul J]

It depends on the landscape.

 

I would suggest a wide and a long. I like 90 or 135 for landscape too.

 

But if that doesn't include a 1.4 lens for around the campfire and low light then take another as well and disguise it as something your wife will want to carry.

 

In this case I would take a 21 Super Elmar, a 35 Summilux and a 90mm Summicron.

Edited February 7, 2018 by Paul J

[SiggiGun]

Interesting discussion! I have no definitive personal answer,... except "less is better"! Also: It depends for me if it is the first trip in this area or not but in general I hesitate between 3 different solutions for the first trip:

1. MATE
2. 24ELMAR + 50AA
3. MATE + 90MACRO

For a second trip: I have 2 options:

1. 21SEM + 50APO
2. 35X + 75APO

[pgk]

Or do I just take the 35 Summilux and enjoy the walk?

 

The 35mm focal length is so versatile. Its probably my most used lens. I could, if I had to, use it as my 'only' lens but I can't see that happening fortunately. So given that I would certainly take a 35, the choice then become wider or longer? Wider - the 21SEM. Longer - more tricky but I'd probably go with the 75 Summicron. That said, I'm sure that you will get advocates for every focal length and lens from 21 to 90!

Edited February 7, 2018 by pgk

[Narsuitus]

If just travelling with two lenses, I usually just take a 28 Summicron ASPH and 50 Summilux ASPH which covers most eventualities. (Edit: I should add that I’m a big fan of 21& 24 mm for landscape work).

 

 

If I had your lenses, I would take the 50 and the 24.

 

If I could choose from my lenses, I would take the 35 and then depending on which I thought I would be more useful, I would take the 21 or the 90.

[a.noctilux]

Toying with MATE minutes ago on M10 .

Forgot that it's big and protrude a big chunk in the viewfinder 35/28 (but in landscape that is not relevant anyway).

 

As second deliberation (if allowed ), in this same MarkP's trek, I would just take Elmarit-M asph. 28mm so small/short, smart / light and this make a nice set/kit with M10 .

 

Life is not simple : just mount the new and my last Leica lens that I use for some months now, Summaron-M 5.6/28mm.

Last change, this the one I'll take for the sake of challenging a bit.

The rendering is so beautiful at f:5.6 for "everything", really magic lens.

Edited February 7, 2018 by a.noctilux

[NZDavid]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

How about 24 and 35? Or just a single lens. How much does each lens weigh? When you're hiking, every gram counts. 

[Peter H]

Mark, your 28 and 50 combined with your imagination and experience will serve you beautifully.

 

I also think you’ll be more relaxed and enjoy yourself more with them, because they’ll let you to photograph what your eyes find most naturally, rather than having to think hard about composition which I imagine is not the first priority of this excursion.

[newnew]

Mark,

I just looked how it is at Bay of Fires in Tasmania through Google images.  I would definitely take a 21 or 24 . Actually for that trip I would rather take the 24 which is wide but also allows people pictures. Than, I would take a compact 90 as there will be things you will not be able to reach from distance (fish, animals, waves on offshore rocks, sunset over the jungle etc..). Between these two extremes, you may live by cropping. These all could fit into the smallest bag possible, in my case a Billingham Headley Digital. With M10's ISO capability you do not need any fast lenses and bokeh may not be your first priority on this trip. Enjoy your time and post us nice pictures.

[Gregm61]

My two would definitely be the 21mm Super Elmar and 35mm f1.4 FLE.

[Ecar]

I'd go for the '35/1.4 and enjoy the walk' option.

Light, no need to set the monopod up, no lens changes, forces you to use what you have creatively (else, you'll inevitably spend time changing lenses and curse yourself for not taking another focal length that would have been "just perfect"...), good for those evening group picture, etc.

 

2nd best AFAIC would be the MATE: better versatility, a bit more stretched in low light. 

[jmahto]

I did an experiment recently that may help your decision. I shot with 90mm macro elmar M and 180APO3.4. Cropped 90mm to match 180mm view. The result was measly 6mp. Then I printed both (cropped 90mm and full 180mm) on A4 size paper.

 

There was almost no difference (slight diff was in high frequency areas and only detectable if you compared with non-cropped one).

 

Therefore now my rule is to crop to double the FL if you are not going to print bigger than A4.

 

As for my two lens choice on a hike, I usually carry 28cronASPH (useful in low light and around evening campfire) and 90macro elmar M.

[michaelwj]

Just the 28 or even just the 24. No changing lenses, no worries. I second KoFes thought, what are you going to use a 50 for?

If you must add a second lens go longer, a lightweight 90.

[platypus]

Mark, with your extensive collection of lenses you are spoilt for choice, and perhaps you will be none the wiser after all the good and sensible advice tendered here.

 

I hesitate to add my 2 cents worth but here it is....take the 21SEM, and have a wonderful walk.

[Kwesi]

Hi Mark,

Sounds like a great trip! My suggestions are:

1: Take only 2 batteries and a charger. You won't go thru 2 full batteries in a day. if weight and space is an issue 

2: Take the 21 SEM and OVF for the Views

3: Take the 35 FLE for the experience of just being present and just being open to meeting new people and whatever is around you.

[Mute-on]

I’ve been to the Bay of Fires and it is spectacular.

You will capture amazing images with any focal length. I would take the 28 Elmarit for size, weight, versatility and image quality.

If you are desperate to fill an extra space in your bag, 21 and 35. I wouldn’t, but YMMV.

 

Enjoy Tassie!

 

Cheers

 

J

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[wattsy]

28 Summicron and 90 Macro-Elmar.

[Abram]

I always had 28/50 as a fallback combination (on any platform) and I generally still agree with that mindset but of late I've been trying to re-center my vision around 35mm so that's changed my perspective a bit.

 

With the variations you mentioned I think my top two choices would be the 21 SEM and 50 Summilux or just the 35 FLE (and enjoy the walk!). 21/50 provides a particularly fun combination in my experience, however I also find it more ideally suited to a 2-body setup, I say this because I've tried to get away from persistent lens-swapping while out shooting. I don't mind a chance once-in-a-while but if I'm always swapping lenses to "get the shot" then I'm missing quite a bit of whatever experience I'm having and never really thinking / composing properly. 

 

So in the end I guess my vote goes to just pack light and take the 35 FLE! (That's my setup right now as well, M10 + 35 FLE and it works for almost all scenarios)

Edited February 8, 2018 by Abram

[rramesh]

I would go with 2 lenses.

1. An all purpose lens - Something you are most comfortable with and which will work in 80-90% of the situation. I would use a 28 or 35 here.
2. A special lens for those rare moments - Here it could be a long lens, like a 90 or an extra wide lens like a 21 or even a 15.

Edited February 8, 2018 by rramesh

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[coupdefoudre]

21 SEM or 28 Elmarit-M ASPH

 

with

 

75 APO or 90 (Macro-Elmar or Elmarit 2.8)

 

The first two, of course, are small. The Macro-Elmar is small so two of these 3 would be easy to carry.

 

For me it would be the 28 and the 90 Macro-Elmar (if I could only have two, and I almost never take a multi-day trip with only 2 as I prefer 3).

 

I am always finding something in the natural world that I can use the compression provided by a 75 or 90.

 

Oh, the third, if I was going, would be the 50 Lux for evening stuff.