Look im getting really frustrated trying to pick a lens for my SL2 before my trip to the Olympic Peninsula next month. Ive been reading that the 24-90mm is the gold standard for landscapes but then half the forums say its way too heavy for long hikes and the autofocus hunts in low light. Then others say just get the 21mm Super-Elmar but I dont want to be swapping primes in the mud and rain. My head is spinning with all the conflicting info.
- Budget is around 5k max
- Needs to be weather sealed for the PNW
- Not a total anchor in my bag
- Ridiculously sharp for big prints
What are you guys actually using for high-res landscape work that doesnt break your back?
Honestly, that 24-90mm is basically a gym weight and I wouldnt recommend it for hiking. If youre going to the Olympic Peninsula, you might want to consider the weight-to-sharpness ratio before committing to a heavy setup. I would suggest looking at the lighter Leica zoom or even the Panasonic L-mount glass to save some cash and weight. A few things to keep in mind:
- make sure to check the lens gaskets for dust before you get into the wet stuff
- stay away from the heaviest f/2.8 zooms if you want to keep your pack light I use the Leica Vario-Elmarit-SL 24-70mm f/2.8 ASPH. and it is plenty sharp for large prints without being a total anchor. If you need something wider for those mossy forests, the Panasonic Lumix S PRO 16-35mm f/4 L-Mount is weather sealed and way easier to carry. Just be careful with those heavy lenses on slippery trails... its a lot of glass to risk.
