Photo backpacks and hi-packs for dayhiking?

I

ishpop

tall person
Local time
9:36 PM
Joined
Jan 7, 2007
Messages
434
Location
Seattle
View My Gallery
So all the camera bags I have (crumpler, Lowepro, Tenba) are one strap shoulder bags. They each serve a purpose, but for hiking around all day, none of them are very ideal. So I know there are a plethora of combination hiking/photo bags out there, some made by Lowepro, some by Crumpler, but I am not sure how functional or comfortable they really are.

I am headed to the Olympic mountains, Deer Park camground this weekend, and going to head over to Glazer's in Seattle to check out some bags.

I will likely be bringing the following gear:

Hasselblad 501c with 80mm Planar.
Minolta CLE with 40mm rokkor and 90mm elmar
Olympus om1n with 24mm
holga

So not a ton of space is necessary, and as such, not looking for an expedition backpack, haha. A good combination of light and functional would be best.

Any experience with a quality bag that can hold some camera gear and water/snacks as well? Best to go with one of those hip packs?
 
I use a Lowe MicroTrekker 200 because it is a backpack and the weight disappears on your back. It is very comfortable for transporting the gear but it's hard to work out of it because it's on your back and you have to take it off got get access to your stuff.
 
In my experience, backpacks always seem hard to use because whatever you want is always in the bag and not in your hand. One can reduce this by putting the current preferred camera-and-lens combo in a pouch on the hip belt of the rucsac, then it is more likely to be used !

Also, depending on where you are going, I wouldn't overlook a safetyline with a couple of karabiners that you can clip to the camera and to your harness or rucsac - just in case of accidents . . .

EDIT: In the past I've used cases or bags inside a 'normal' rucsac, rather than one of the specialist photo-bags. Those always look like they are intended for large-format or portable-studio sort of use, but then again, for a trip whose purpose is solely photographic and in a couple of locations a fitted-out bag could be ok.
 
Last edited:
Lowepro Rover AW or CompuRover.
Enough cargo space in the bottom camera compartment for all your gear, with the top portion separate for normal items.
I have the CompuRover and use the laptop compartment for extra clothes. They can hold a tripod too.
 
I have a Lowepro Nature Trekker II. It will hold my 501CM w/80mm and PME 5, SWC, 150mm lens, an extra back, film, spare meter, filters hood etc. Then I add a Gitzo tripod, water, bear spray, poncho and lunch. It weighs in at about 35 lbs. (The pack empty, weighs in at 8 or 9 lbs.)

This is a perfect set up for a really fit 25year old. Except I'm not a fit 25 year old. When I hike 20 miles with this outfit I'm a tad bushed.

The new Bessa III and a fanny pack is starting to look really good.
 
I bought a Domke Armadillo last year and like it a lot. It weighs about 5½lbs and holds my Fotoman 617 and a couple of Leicas or my Fujifilm S5 with the 17-55/2.8 zoom. Very capacious, lots of pockets, and holds a serious tripod externally. Very comfortable to wear, distributes the weight evenly with a harness/aluminum frame that shifts the weight from back to hips. They are very hard to find and I think Domke stopped production, it took me ages to find mine. I have read that Kata make a similar bag, but I have not seen it.

http://www.cambags.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/168
 
Like most in this forum, I have plenty of bags for all possible occasions. The lowepro rover is fine for city shooting, but doesn't work well for me for heavier gears and trips that require substantial hiking. Mine is mostly sitting in the closet in the last few years.

For a while I have been using a standard 20-30L Arcteryx backpack mainly due to the thermoformed padding that I find a lot more comfortable than most photopack. Cameras would go in wraps and straight into the bag when not shooting. Camelbak-type Water bladders takes care of the liquid storage.

Speaking about Kinesis. I've been quite impressed with their products of late, and to solve the issue of heavy photo gears sitting at the bottom of my pack (and hurting my back after a long day of hiking), I've just bought the Journeyman backpack where the interiors are customizable. Its rather large at around 45L, but I will soon be on a multi-day hiking trip, so half camera, half clothes is what I'm after. Their packs come with plenty of attachment points outside the bag, so you can decide where to attach tripod, additional bottles, bags, etc using compression strap. I've not really put it to test so I can't tell you if it works as advertised, but I'm confident it will.
 
Last edited:
Aren't the drizones heavy? I've never tried one before. They look a little too bulky/heavy for what it carries.

Double Negative said:
Lowe Pro - killer backpacks. I have the MiniTrekker Classic, CompuTrekker AW and DryZone 100. Very comfortable, great build.

If you're looking for a day pack, and one that's waterPROOF in case you fall in the drink on those hikes, take a look at the DryZone Rover. If you want just camera gear, take a look at the DryZone 100/200 models. They even float.
Click to expand...
 
When I shot nature stock every day I tried a Lowepro backpack, but the first time I put it back on after changing lenses early in the morning I swore (and then swore off it). The thing got soaking wet in the dew and then my back was all wet. I worked out of a big Domke shoulder bag, easy to get anything without putting it down.
 
I don't like the hybrid packs that store the camera gear in the bottom compartment -- they get bottom heavy and cause shoulder aches pretty quickly.

I second the Kinesis recommendation. It's large, but it's very comfortable, even with a full load.
 
I can put a word for the stuff from w[B]ww.photobackpacker.com[/B]. Bruce is a very kind and friendly person. He ofers different Kellty backpacks that are slightly reworked to allow the full front panel to open. I got the Kellty 2650 (it fits the carry on requirements when not fully packed and is very light but still with a good harness and waist belt). Even better are his camera and lense cases - feather light but still enough protection. Although designed mainly for large format equipment - they are perfect for carrying other cameras and lenses too. I use one of his "double lens" cases to carry my Rolleiflex T. I use his other cases for my 4x5 equipment and couldn't e be happier. I have also a very good personal experience with Bruce and I would not hesitate to recommend either his products or himself as seller.

I have also considered the Kinesis stuff (www.kgear.com) - the backpack looks really good and they offer a lot of different accessories and they are more directed to MF/35mm users.

Also check out the ThinkTank stuff (www.thinktankphoto.com) - looks great - I have heard only good reports. I consider getting a belt pack form them.

I have had a look at the "standard" backpack from Tamrom, Lowepro and others and only found them too heavy and "dedicated".
 
I were you, I would get a color skopar, and take the CLE, 28/40/90 and leave everything else at home. Should fit in top and sides of a "normal" hiking back-pack.

I've tried Lowepro camera back-packs and hated it. Not the bag itself, but the stuff in it is never handy when you need it. You cann't always stop for a long break when you see a photo opportunity when hiking with other people. And no room for jacket, sweater, food and the necessary bottle of Merlot.

Cheers,

Roland.
 
Last edited:
Thanks everyone for the tips!

I spent some time at the store trying on packs with weight in them, getting a sense for how they might work.

The Crumpler backpacks, although universallly lauded it seems, were definitely not designed by anyone with hiking experience. The padding, shoulder straps and lack of hip wrap strap all signalled shoulder pain. pass.

The lowepro hip pack (several versions were there) were mixed. Some had great padding on the hip strap, and one of them was at the top of my list, albeit a tad small to carry more than your camera gear. Ultimately, pass.

The thinktank stuff was fine, couldn't find anything really wrong, or particularly great about them. ultimately, pass.

Kata's larger backpack stuff had some nice padding, but were heavy and huge and clunky. I like having options, but just felt overwhelmed. However, the N1-20 was there, and I liked how light it was, albeit lacking a solid hip-strap. I am hoping to find the N1-30 as I think it might have a better hip strap, and could be my ideal combo of weight, size, etc...

I tried some others, but its amazing how few seem to genuinely address comfort issues the way actual hiking bags do...

I am also considering just targeting non photo backpacks that have some compartments I can place padding into with the velcro stuff.
 
I carried a Burke and James 8x10 field in an Eagle Creek travel pack, tripod strapped to the side, quite nicely.

The Eagle Creek stuff has great suspension, but is designed as luggage, not hiking gear. Thus, it opens all the way around and has internal compression straps. Some have separate sleeping bag style compartments on bottom for bottom access or separating non-photo gear from the rest, which can be zipped open to make it one large bag.

If you're looking for a big, empty pack with easy access, it could be the ticket. Top-loading stuff sucks for photo gear.

You might take a look at a local dealer; both luggage stores and REI typically have them. Of course, I got mine over 10 years ago and I don't know exactly what the new models have to offer...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
Life's little (photo) lessons - what are yours?
4 5 6
Replies
114
Views
5K
kxl
kxl
A
Travel Gear and General EDC
Replies
14
Views
2K
wlewisiii
W
Bill Pierce
Bag It
2
Replies
39
Views
3K
huddy
H
B
New year resolutions (photo-centered) for 2025
2 3
Replies
41
Views
2K
JohnGellings
J
Bill Pierce
Bags
2 3 4
Replies
70
Views
7K
Archiver
A
Back
Top Bottom