What's new
L-MOUNT Forum

Register a free account now!

If you are registered, you get access to the members only section, can participate in the buy & sell second hand forum and last but not least you can reserve your preferred username before someone else takes it.

Compact lens for landscapes

andy3009

andy3009

Member
Hi all, we have a trip coming up and I'm considering lenses for handheld landscapes. I was watching Lumix 14 - 28 thread with interest as I'd identified it as the solution but on reflection had to remind myself I sold a 10 - 20 APS-C as it was little used due to its size. The Lumix 20 - 60 on my Sigma fp L would be great, I think 20mm is wide enough and I like the images at 20mm...but the lens is too big. I'm looking for a form factor not far off the fp L with the Sigma 45mm as I like to carry the fp L and my Leica CL. So options are limited...considering the 18 - 40 as the only zoom option - I looked at the image thread https://l-mount-forum.com/community/threads/lumix-s-18-40mm-f-4-5-6-3.751/, but I'd regret if it doesn't match the 20 - 60 IQ, which seems to be the case. Can anyone comment further on the 18 - 40, or recommend a prime that might fit the bill and double as every day carry? Or I just leave the Leica CL at home and pack the 20 - 60 for walks. Thanks
 
When I bought my fp L I chose the Sigma 24mm f/3.5 to go with it, and it remains my favourite (along with the 35mm f/2) two years on. It has the same sort of pleasant character as the 45/2.8 although it's sharper wide open at close distances and has a 0.5x maximum magnification.

Some posts with photos from when I first got the camera and lens: May 2023 1, May 2023 2, May 2023 3, July 2023
 
For a light-weight carry, the LUMIX 18-40mm is hard to beat.

Richard Wong reviewed the LUMIX 18-40mm lens.
 
Thanks @Pete_W the video is useful especially the comparison with the 45mm at the end, quite convincing for my scenario. @xaviergut I've been considering that lens, IQ looks good, just wondered if it might be too wide to double as an every day carry.
 
andy3009 said:
Thanks @Pete_W the video is useful especially the comparison with the 45mm at the end, quite convincing for my scenario. @xaviergut I've been considering that lens, IQ looks good, just wondered if it might be too wide to double as an every day carry.
Click to expand...
Yes, I see your point, I don't know if the Sigma FP L has an apsc mode (I guess so). In that case it would become a 25,5mm focal lenght, right? And still some megapixels to crop again...

I own the Sigma 24mm f3.5 and is aswell tiny and a good performer. If I need to shoot wider with it I take two or three pictures and then I merge them in Lightroom.
 
Yes, the Sigma 24mm f3.5 is a great lens and I feel would be a more versatile focal length if you were to only take a prime lens. I love the 45mm but for the type of photos I take, a wider focal length is more convenient.
 
andy3009 said:
@xaviergut I've been considering that lens, IQ looks good, just wondered if it might be too wide to double as an every day carry.
Click to expand...

I have the 17/4 as well (it was the second of the i-series lenses I bought, just after it'd been released) and I'd agree that it's probably too wide as an every day carry lens. It's really great at what it does, though: I've used it to photograph churches without the usual perspective distortion - at the cost of chopping off the bottom third of the image: September 2023, August 2023

And some more conventional wide angle photos: September 2023
 
Thanks everyone, the 17/4 looks like a nice lens but the 24/3.5 the most versatile prime. @Pete_W do you also have the 18 - 40, if so which do you find yourself using more?
 
I don't know if you'd be open to adapting, but if you are you can find some very small film-era lenses. Here's a comparison shot of some 35-70 film lenses I like alongside the Lumix 20-60:


35-70 Lenses.jpg
  • Apple - iPhone 13 mini
  • iPhone 13 mini back dual wide camera 5.1mm f/1.6
  • 5.1 mm
  • ƒ/1.6
  • 1/121 sec
  • Pattern
  • Auto exposure
  • ISO 50


Two I'd point out in particular: The Minolta MD 35-70/3.5 Macro next to the 20-60 is a very high quality lens and works very well on my Sigma fp; I used it extensively on my trip to DC last year, for example, and captured other favorite photos like this:

53366029935_a2dfe27a0f_b.jpg
20231118-SDIM8265 by Travis Butler, on Flickr

And if you want one of the smallest zooms I've ever used, the Olympus OM Zuiko 35-70/3.5-4.5 at the right of the lineup hasn't wow'ed me quite as much as the Minolta, but still does pretty respectably:

54459481199_0c4a8eed80_b.jpg
20250417-SDIM3658 by Travis Butler, on Flickr

(Took this one today as a sample for you; the lighting wasn't great, but it at least shows a reasonable look at the technical capabilities of the lens.)

And if you want something wider, my favorite OM Zuiko 24/2.8 weighs practically nothing and is very small - another test pic from today:

54458451952_55cf00e620_b.jpg
20250417-SDIM3674 by Travis Butler, on Flickr

Not sure how well it'd perform on the higher-res sensor on the fp L, but on the fp you can read the railroad crossing signs if you click through to the original pic and view at 100%.
 
andy3009 said:
Thanks everyone, the 17/4 looks like a nice lens but the 24/3.5 the most versatile prime. @Pete_W do you also have the 18 - 40, if so which do you find yourself using more?
Click to expand...
If I had to select one, it would be the 18-40mm because the focal range is more versatile. The Sigma contemporary lenses are all sharper, but I would find a single focal length a bit too limiting, personally.
 
Good idea @Travis Butler but I'd prefer AF. You reminded me I have a Tamron 24mm that I've used on both the fp L and the CL, so I can check those images - although the lens has fungus so it's fuzzy in places...I have an old K mount 35 - something that I may try one day. @Pete_W thanks for the reply, I may have time to try an 18 - 40, I'd kind of dismissed it but it's becoming more appealing.
 
In the spirit of @Travis Butler suggestion I did a quick non-scientific comparison of the 20 - 60 and my old fungusy Tamron 24mm f2.5 in our back garden. Posting the photos for your amusement, as although both are set to daylight WB, the Lumix looks a little red / warm. Anyway it confirmed I'm looking for 20mm or wider, also that the vintage lens with adapter is too heavy and bulky. I also considered the APS-C Sigma 10 - 18, which I think would be great on the fpL (indeed I saw Sigma promoted it as a compact option for the fpL) but having revisited the reasoning behind the equipment I currently own, how I plan to use it and what I'm doing with the images, etc etc, for now I'm going for the 18 - 40...
 

Attachments

  • SDIM4165f5.6_Lumix20mm.jpg
    EXIF
    SDIM4165f5.6_Lumix20mm.jpg
    606.5 KB · Views: 14
  • SDIM4166f5.6_Tamron24mm.jpg
    EXIF
    SDIM4166f5.6_Tamron24mm.jpg
    608 KB · Views: 14
andy3009 said:
In the spirit of @Travis Butler suggestion I did a quick non-scientific comparison of the 20 - 60 and my old fungusy Tamron 24mm f2.5 in our back garden. Posting the photos for your amusement, as although both are set to daylight WB, the Lumix looks a little red / warm. Anyway it confirmed I'm looking for 20mm or wider, also that the vintage lens with adapter is too heavy and bulky. I also considered the APS-C Sigma 10 - 18, which I think would be great on the fpL (indeed I saw Sigma promoted it as a compact option for the fpL) but having revisited the reasoning behind the equipment I currently own, how I plan to use it and what I'm doing with the images, etc etc, for now I'm going for the 18 - 40...
Click to expand...
Makes sense, and it's always good to test. :)
 
Both Sigma I-series 24mm lenses are superb. I prefer the f/2 for the extra speed but the f/3.5 is just as good optically and much smaller.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top