GH2 - the (current) best camera for travel, hiking, etc ... ??

[jeremyrh]

I am planning a Himalayan trek, and giving some thought to what is the best photographic solution. Ideally one would carry - or have carried - a large format camera, wooden tripod etc., but in the real world I wonder what a normal DSLR gains over the GH2, and whether it is worth the very considerable difference in terms of weight. I would be interested to hear the views of the many photographers here who have much more experience than I in this area.

[Ken Bennett]

It really depends on the purpose of the trip. I am lucky to have a variety of cameras at my disposal, from the G-1 and GF-1 through professional DSLRs and I still even have my 4x5 camera and the big tripod. For personal travel, the micro 4/3 cameras are a great choice -- my wife and I can share a nice kit with several lenses and two or three cameras, and it all fits in a small waist pack, or just gets thrown in a purse or shoulder bag for the day. A smallish travel tripod with a decent head is fine for these small cameras, too, saving the weight and size of a larger tripod. Image quality is excellent for personal prints up to whatever size I care to make on an Epson 3800.

If the trip is for work, of course, then it's a different story. There are definite image quality gains using a 1D Mark IV or a 5D Mark II, especially for low light work. But then it's a whole different trip.

[NikoJorj]

but in the real world I wonder what a normal DSLR gains over the GH2, and whether it is worth the very considerable difference in terms of weight.

The main advantage I'd see to the DSLR is the groud glass VF, but I don't how readable is the EVF of the GH2 in strong sun on the snow.

[Christopher Sanderson]

...but I don't how readable is the EVF of the GH2 in strong sun on the snow.

The rear screen is very bright and of course if ambient light overwhelms it, you just bring your eye to the eyepiece EVF. This automatically switches off the EVF screen and gives the brightest finest-detailed EVF I have seen. Very impressive and for those used to mushy eyepiece EVFs quite a revelation: you don't miss the optical TTL VF at all.

[Vivec]

For me, a real difference between the m43 and a DSLR is in the lenses. There are still no really fast high-quality lenses for m43. For example, an 85mm F1.4 portrait lens on a full-frame camera, would need something like a 40mm F1.0 lens to approach the DOF and view angle. Even a 40mm F1.4  (is 85mm F2.8 equivalent) would be quite welcome but currently no such lenses exist.

So, in the end it depends on what kind of photography you like; if it requires narrow DOF for subject isolation then m43 may not be your best choice -- but for landscapes with deep DOF, m43 could be excellent. Not sure what the widest lens available is though?

[Ken Bennett]

So, in the end it depends on what kind of photography you like; if it requires narrow DOF for subject isolation then m43 may not be your best choice -- but for landscapes with deep DOF, m43 could be excellent. Not sure what the widest lens available is though?

Agreed, though I think for general purpose travel photography, a set of small zoom lenses is fine.

As far as I can tell, the Panasonic 7-14mm zoom is the widest available lens for m43. It's equivalent to a 14mm field of view on a 35mm camera.

[John Camp]

For me, a real difference between the m43 and a DSLR is in the lenses. There are still no really fast high-quality lenses for m43. For example, an 85mm F1.4 portrait lens on a full-frame camera, would need something like a 40mm F1.0 lens to approach the DOF and view angle. Even a 40mm F1.4  (is 85mm F2.8 equivalent) would be quite welcome but currently no such lenses exist.

Well, there's a Noctor 50mm 0.95 in a 4/3 mount, if that's what you're looking for...

http://noktor.com/products.php

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2010/03/more-wild-n-wacky-micro-43-lens-fun.html

[leuallen]

I used medium format and 35mm with film for 30 years. I currently use a G1. It is the best camera I have used in terms of fun while still giving very good results. I have owned and used Leica as a point of reference. (Not saying the G1 is better than a Leica! )

The size/weight differential to other systems is significant, especially when you get older and it get harder to get to the locations you want to shoot. I use a belt pouch system and can comfortably carry three lenses (28 to 400mm plus macro) and accessories such as an extra battery, remote tripper, filters, etc. I can move through the thick woods and not notice the equipment I have on me.

I shoot lots of single row panos. I originally used a Manfrotto 055 tripod but that sucker is heavy with a geared head and leveling base. I now use a medium size Induro carbon fiber with a leveling base and small ball head. It works great. Very light and easy to carry. The lack of height is not such a drawback as I use the articulated LCD so I don't have to stoop to view. The panos are easy to shoot and come out great using CS5. Of course with the panos you get very high resolution. It is just the thing for landscapes.

I use the Panasonic lenses and find them to be very good. I have some very high quality adapted manual lenses to compare them with and they hold up well.

So I say give it a try. If you have time before the trip, try a GH2 and see if the results don't please you. If don't have the camera/lens with you or can't get to the location you want because of size/weight, then no picture.

Larry