semrich
Well-known
Usually I pack light, one camera and lens, film and other accoutrements in a backpack, and when photographing the camera is in my hand on a wrist strap. During times when I want to photograph different subjects and take 135 and 120 gear and more lens choices I don't want any extra weight from the backpack. The gear is protected by OP/TECH covers and I use a Golite backpack:
http://www.golite.com/carry-gear/mens/hydration-and-day-use/rush
http://www.golite.com/carry-gear/mens/hydration-and-day-use/rush
paulfish4570
Veteran
i much like my two golite top loaders, in long size. they would require some inserts for gear. but talk about light: 13 ounces per pack ...
NLewis
Established
I consider the "photo backpack" a rather dubious proposition. They are only useful when you are in a real wilderness situation IMO, for example hiking for nature shots. If you have that much gear in a city type environment, you are probably better off with a big shoulder bag or even a hard case on rollers.
If you are hiking, you will probably want some room for clothes, lunch, water, etc. Get a real hiking backpack, maybe around 40 liters which is a nice roomy daypack size.
Then get some sort of well-padded camera case, anything from a Pelican box to a waistpack to your existing shoulder bag, whatever suits you, and just put it in the hiking pack. Simple as that. When you arrive at your destination, you can pull out your camera bag and have at it.
Waistpacks seem to work well for outdoor use, when you are actually using them. They look really funny so it is not what I would use when walking around Venice. However, it is nice to be able to pull it to the front and have a sort of cabinet of gear at your waist, for lenses and filters and stuff, that stays up and out of the dirt. Then, you can push it to the back and scramble around with both hands free and nothing swinging around your neck. So, you might think about a photo waistpack that you can then throw in your hiking pack
If you are hiking, you will probably want some room for clothes, lunch, water, etc. Get a real hiking backpack, maybe around 40 liters which is a nice roomy daypack size.
Then get some sort of well-padded camera case, anything from a Pelican box to a waistpack to your existing shoulder bag, whatever suits you, and just put it in the hiking pack. Simple as that. When you arrive at your destination, you can pull out your camera bag and have at it.
Waistpacks seem to work well for outdoor use, when you are actually using them. They look really funny so it is not what I would use when walking around Venice. However, it is nice to be able to pull it to the front and have a sort of cabinet of gear at your waist, for lenses and filters and stuff, that stays up and out of the dirt. Then, you can push it to the back and scramble around with both hands free and nothing swinging around your neck. So, you might think about a photo waistpack that you can then throw in your hiking pack
Tim Gray
Well-known
Thanks for more suggestions. The Tamrac looks interesting. The waistpack might work in conjunction with storing it in a backpack for the traveling bits. Also will look at the Golite bags.
To further clarify, I'm not actually hiking - usually in urban environments. At the same time, I'm usually out all day on my feet, camera in hand. It's not very practical to leave camera equipment back at the room for fear of theft, so I tend to bring it with me. I've learned the lesson of traveling with too much crap, but at the same time, I'd rather not go without a backup body. It's not a lot of equipment, 2 RF bodies, 3-4 lenses, film, and meter, plus any other normal supplies I might need: fleece pullover, book, water, etc. At the same time, from my last trip to Japan, my messenger bag was killing me after 10 hours. Its great for travel, as a carry on, or for a couple hours out, but I'm finding it leaves something to be desired for a 10 hour day when it's packed to the brim.
I don't really need a real full blown photo backpack - they look way to serious to me and usually provide too much space for photo gear.
To further clarify, I'm not actually hiking - usually in urban environments. At the same time, I'm usually out all day on my feet, camera in hand. It's not very practical to leave camera equipment back at the room for fear of theft, so I tend to bring it with me. I've learned the lesson of traveling with too much crap, but at the same time, I'd rather not go without a backup body. It's not a lot of equipment, 2 RF bodies, 3-4 lenses, film, and meter, plus any other normal supplies I might need: fleece pullover, book, water, etc. At the same time, from my last trip to Japan, my messenger bag was killing me after 10 hours. Its great for travel, as a carry on, or for a couple hours out, but I'm finding it leaves something to be desired for a 10 hour day when it's packed to the brim.
I don't really need a real full blown photo backpack - they look way to serious to me and usually provide too much space for photo gear.