Camera bag recommendations

Hello,

I recently acquired a tank-like lens (the EF 70-200 IS) and the issue I am
having is what is the best way to carry my gear. Typically, this is what I
would want to carry (note that I dont have all this gear yet, but they are
on the list)

20D
70-200 IS
16-35 f2.8
100mm f2.8 macro
some prime (maybe 50mm f1.4 or something)

I can see that the usual "lunch-box" style bags will not house the body and
the 70-200. I see the following options:

1) Backpack
This will see to fit a 20D with a mounted 70-200 and the other lenses. Issue
with this is that I now have to go everywhere with a backpack - well, not
everywhere, but anytime I want to shoot.

2) Gadget bag + lens bag
This option involves keeping the 70-200 in its supplied canon bag and all
the other goodies in the "lunch-box" style gadget bag. Drawback of this is
that I always need to keep the body without a lens, when it is not being
used.

(Note: I have a tripod bag already)

What are people using for this type of "problem" - ie a big lens.

Thanks
Musty.

"Musty" wrote in message
...
Hello,

I recently acquired a tank-like lens (the EF 70-200 IS) and the issue I am
having is what is the best way to carry my gear. Typically, this is what I
would want to carry (note that I dont have all this gear yet, but they are
on the list)

20D
70-200 IS
16-35 f2.8
100mm f2.8 macro
some prime (maybe 50mm f1.4 or something)

I can see that the usual "lunch-box" style bags will not house the body
and
the 70-200. I see the following options:

1) Backpack
This will see to fit a 20D with a mounted 70-200 and the other lenses.
Issue
with this is that I now have to go everywhere with a backpack - well, not
everywhere, but anytime I want to shoot.

2) Gadget bag + lens bag
This option involves keeping the 70-200 in its supplied canon bag and all
the other goodies in the "lunch-box" style gadget bag. Drawback of this is
that I always need to keep the body without a lens, when it is not being
used.

(Note: I have a tripod bag already)

What are people using for this type of "problem" - ie a big lens.

Thanks
Musty.



Add a flash to that list.... (eg speedlite)

Musty wrote:
"Musty" wrote in message
...
Hello,

I recently acquired a tank-like lens (the EF 70-200 IS) and the
issue I am having is what is the best way to carry my gear.
Typically, this is what I would want to carry (note that I dont
have
all this gear yet, but they are on the list)

20D
70-200 IS
16-35 f2.8
100mm f2.8 macro
some prime (maybe 50mm f1.4 or something)

I can see that the usual "lunch-box" style bags will not house the
body and the 70-200. I see the following options:

1) Backpack
This will see to fit a 20D with a mounted 70-200 and the other
lenses. Issue with this is that I now have to go everywhere with a
backpack - well, not everywhere, but anytime I want to shoot.

2) Gadget bag + lens bag
This option involves keeping the 70-200 in its supplied canon bag
and all the other goodies in the "lunch-box" style gadget bag.
Drawback of this is that I always need to keep the body without a
lens, when it is not being used.

(Note: I have a tripod bag already)

What are people using for this type of "problem" - ie a big lens.

Thanks
Musty.



Add a flash to that list.... (eg speedlite)

I'll be eager to see responses to this, also. My last outing was pre-
70-200, and I managed something very like your list by keeping the
20d/24-70 in one hand on the way in. Once the RebXT with 10-22 came
out of the hip- fanny- or bum-pack it was all quite comfortable. I
can't yet see how to add the B I G lens without increasing complexity
and size beyond tolerance, without shedding something else (like
simplicity and compactitude). Ah, the travails ...

--
Frank S

"Verbing wierds language."
—Calvin

Musty wrote:

Hello,

I recently acquired a tank-like lens (the EF 70-200 IS) and the issue I am
having is what is the best way to carry my gear. Typically, this is what I
would want to carry (note that I dont have all this gear yet, but they are
on the list)

20D
70-200 IS
16-35 f2.8
100mm f2.8 macro
some prime (maybe 50mm f1.4 or something)

I use a Lowepro Nova 5 bag (shoulder strap) which holds two bodies, 5
lenses (incl. an 80-200 f/2.8 tank and an 28-70 f/2.8) and two large
flashes, a bunch of 72mm filters, angle finder, a bunch of film,
lumi-quest, stofen, various doo-dads, gadgets, thingamajigs,
whatchamacallits, quarters for phone calls and a band aid. I strap my
meter to the back with caribiners, and carry a couple garbage bags in
case of rain or to put the bag in before coming in from the bitter cold
(or for you hot weather types, before exiting an air conditioned vehicle
into humidity).

I've had this bag for over 5 years, treated it with little affection and
it is still very good looking and in perfect repair.

Domke is another popular brand with photographers. Domke users says
that "Lowepro screams amateur". Some people have complexes, I guess.

(bag fight ! bag fight !)


I can see that the usual "lunch-box" style bags will not house the body and
the 70-200. I see the following options:

The Nova 5 is 'lunchbag' style... big lunch.

1) Backpack

I don't like backpacks for photogear. It's great if you hike to your
shoot, but if you shoot various locations where you're in and out of the
bag a lot, a backpack is tedious at best. YMMV.



2) Gadget bag + lens bag
This option involves keeping the 70-200 in its supplied canon bag and all
the other goodies in the "lunch-box" style gadget bag. Drawback of this is
that I always need to keep the body without a lens, when it is not being
used.

Reduce parts count as much as possible; eg: one reasonable sized bag
that carries all neccessary gear.


(Note: I have a tripod bag already)

Screams amateur! I have one too, but I've never used it. I strap my
small tripod to my bag. I use an 18 wheeler for the other tripod.


What are people using for this type of "problem" - ie a big lens.

A big bag. Plan on room for doodads, etc. as described above.

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.

"Alan Browne" wrote in message
...

The Nova 5 is 'lunchbag' style... big lunch.

Not for Americans, it isn't...

In article ,
Musty wrote:

What are people using for this type of "problem" - ie a big lens.

I find the LowePro Nova 4 is a nice snug fit for a camera body
with battery grip and an 80-200/2.8 mounted, with room for a few
extra accessories (or lenses) in the other niches.

Musty wrote:

What are people using for this type of "problem" - ie a big lens.

I have a Kata camera backpack that can hold most, but not all, of my
lenses. A backpack is handy if your shooting involves a lot of walking,
for example if you do nature stuff. If you're just going to a place,
taking out your stuff and using it, then putting it away and leaving,
a backpack probably isn't the way to go. I've been looking for a more
"traditional" bag to use for that.

I've started dealing with the "equipment overload" by just leaving
behind the stuff I know I won't be needing on that trip. If less
bulk is in order, I have a smaller backpack I use, too; if I'm going
to be doing "street shooting", for example, there isn't any need for
a long telephoto zoom, or just about any zoom for that matter, so
they stay behind, as do things like flashes and the macro lens.

A 70-200/2.8 with stabilization isn't exactly a "general purpose"
lens; you know when you're going to need it, and if you won't,
there's point in lugging the beast around.

Unless I really need to not be carrying anything, I'll generally
have my 50mm and 17-35/2.8 with me, and add onto that as needed.
But for street shooting, the 17-35 is likely to stay home, and
be replaced with a 35mm and 105mm, and maybe a fisheye. (The
35mm and 105mm are, together, about the same bulk as the 17-35,
which is another "beast" of a lens to deal with.)

I literally never use flashes unless I'm doing setup shots, so
those don't even have a place in my bag. They live with the
light stands and umbrellas.

I'm also trying to figure out a good way to carry a monopod when
walking in the city or someplace like that. I can hang it off my
small backpack, but then it swings around and threatens to clobber
people as I walk past. In the hand, it presents roughly the same
silhouette as a sawed-off shotgun, which hasn't caused me a problem
yet, but you never know these days. It won't fit inside my backpack
unless I remove the head, which makes it a bit less convenient.

If I just need to not be carrying much of anything, I'll usually
mount the 50mm and leave everything else in the car. Funny how
liberating it is, not having all those lenses to weigh down your
creativity.

--
Jeremy |

Since switching to digital, I find my Domke F-1X bag is larger than what I
need. All my digital gear is smaller than the film gear it replaced. The
many exterior pockets were fine for carrying film canisters, but serve no
purpose now. Also, easy access bags, like Domkes, don't do anything to
protect from dust, and that has to be a concern. So, I too am on the lookout
for something else.

I like Lowepro's Reporter AW bags. The 400, and maybe the 500, seem well
sized for the type of gear I carry. I may get one of these, in combination
with something else.

I pretty much ruled out any backpack. It's too much of a pain to always have
to remove the pack everytime you need some little piece of kit. They also
seem universally designed to draw attention to their users - no problem on
some remote mountain top, but a big problem in urban areas.

If I were to get a backpack I'd probably settle for a Lowepro Rover Plus AW.
I like how it holds photo equipment in a seperate lower compartment, leaving
the upper portion for everything else. I wonder if that upper compartment
would fit a small laptop computer? In any event, it dosn't look as much like
a photo backpack. Have you seen the latest backpacks from Tamarac? What the
Hell were they thinking?! Ugly, and way too obvious!

Lowepro and Kenesis have a belt and pack system that I like from the aspect
of function - they work like military web gear, allowing you to add
different size and shape packs onto a carrying belt. It's an excellent idea,
but it calls too much attention to the user. Again, on a mountain top, no
problem, but I wouldn't wear a rig like that downtown.

What's the answer? Bag, backpack, belt pack? I don't know. Maybe a
combination of two or more, but that gets costly.

BTW, someone commented on Lowepro seeming amateurish. Not a chance. Where I
live, Lowepro has swept the market, including the local pros.

Rob

Basic Wedge wrote:

I pretty much ruled out any backpack. It's too much of a pain to always have
to remove the pack everytime you need some little piece of kit. They also
seem universally designed to draw attention to their users - no problem on
some remote mountain top, but a big problem in urban areas.

Exactly -- that's why I switch to a regular little backpack from the
Gap when in the city.

Just about everyone in the city is carrying something like it, and it
holds everything I need for that kind of walking around. It's just that
monopod that presents an issue...

--
Jeremy |

In article ,
Musty wrote:

What are people using for this type of "problem" - ie a big lens.

I'd seriously consider a separate Pelican case just for the big lenses.
A couple of "L" lenses would amount to a significan fraction of my net
worth. $200 for a case wouldn't be out of line for these, and I'd
choose Pelican over anything else.