06-30-2009, 01:09 PM
I just got back from a week in France (just a day and a half in Paris). Since the trip was primarily business, I wanted to see how "light" I could travel. I took 50mm and 85mm primes and a Panasonic LX3 (24-50mm equivalent) for wide angle shots.
I mostly used the LX3, which was relatively innocuous, so I could pull it out anywhere. The only time I missed taking my Canon was at a dinner at a Chateau. The grounds were absolutely spectacular and the 50mm would have been a perfect complement to the LX3.
Back in Paris, I almost exclusively used the 50mm in the Musée D'Orsay. Great non-flash shots especially when you want to capture true colors. For the massive portraits that wouldn't fit into the 50mm (80mm equivalent) frame, the LX3 did the trick.
I almost never used the 85mm (136mm equivalent). It's a great portrait lens but outdoors it is either too long or too short. I think a great complement to the 50mm would be a 135 or 150mm prime.
In the future when I want to travel light, I will take the LX3, the 50 and my 70-300mm zoom. The LX3 covers wide, the 50 provides low-light indoors and the zoom covers most other shots.
I mostly used the LX3, which was relatively innocuous, so I could pull it out anywhere. The only time I missed taking my Canon was at a dinner at a Chateau. The grounds were absolutely spectacular and the 50mm would have been a perfect complement to the LX3.
Back in Paris, I almost exclusively used the 50mm in the Musée D'Orsay. Great non-flash shots especially when you want to capture true colors. For the massive portraits that wouldn't fit into the 50mm (80mm equivalent) frame, the LX3 did the trick.
I almost never used the 85mm (136mm equivalent). It's a great portrait lens but outdoors it is either too long or too short. I think a great complement to the 50mm would be a 135 or 150mm prime.
In the future when I want to travel light, I will take the LX3, the 50 and my 70-300mm zoom. The LX3 covers wide, the 50 provides low-light indoors and the zoom covers most other shots.