so I finally saved up for a proper travel setup for my trip to Kyoto this fall and I'm stuck on which zoom to grab for my S5II. i really dont want to be swapping lenses in the rain or crowded streets. right now im looking at the Lumix 24-105mm f4 vs that Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 Art.
the Lumix has macro and that extra reach which is tempting but then the Sigma has that constant 2.8 for the night markets. budget is tight at around 1200 bucks max so i gotta choose one. is the extra 35mm on the long end actually more useful than the faster aperture for a general walkaround lens? kind of leaning toward the Panasonic for the dual IS but i dont want to regret it when it gets dark...
> is the extra 35mm on the long end actually more useful than the faster aperture for a general walkaround lens? Honestly, the extra reach on the Panasonic Lumix S 24-105mm f/4 Macro OIS is way more valuable for travel than that extra stop of light. Ive been using this lens for a couple years now on my S5II and it basically stays glued to the mount. Youre going to Kyoto, and youll want that 105mm for compression on those narrow streets or capturing detail on temple roofs that 70mm just wont reach. People worry way too much about f/4. With the Dual IS2 on that lens combined with the S5II body, you can easily shoot handheld at 1/10th or even slower. Ive shot plenty of night markets at f/4 and just bumped the ISO; the sensor handles it fine and the images look clean. Plus, the 0.5x macro is the secret sauce. Being able to get close to food or small crafts without swapping lenses is huge in crowded spots. The Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG DN Art is a beast, no doubt, but its heavier and feels like more of a studio tool. For a one-and-done travel lens, the Panasonic is just more practical. I have no complaints after thousands of shots. If you really need crazy bokeh for a specific shoot, you can always grab a cheap prime later, but for a walkaround, this is the one.
