Backpack Opinions

[Don Burkett]

I'm in the market for a new backpack and there seem to be a number of quality backpacks these days with Kata, Lowepro, ThinkTank, Tamrac, etc. My dilemma is that I'm going to have to buy it sight unseen as there are no quality camera shops conveniently located except Calumet. Since they started building their own brand the retail store isn't carrying much inventory of other brands.


I've read most of the reviews available but I'm looking for recommendations from individuals who have some first hand knowledge. What's important to me is:

The capacity to carry my equipment.

Extra capacity for stuffing a shirt or two (I dress in layers so you know the drill), sandwich style lunch and a few beverages.
Comfort for the longer hikes (less than 10 miles)
Small enough for domestic air travel. (removable or concealable waist belt)

Laptop is purely optional



The equipment I always carry is: 40D, 70-200 f/4L, 24-105 f/4L, 17-40 f/4L, 100m f/2.8 macro, 100-400, 1.4 ext., Kenko Extension Tubes, 430ex, fliters and accessories. I have an extra body that I don't have room for and someday I plan to add a 135L.


Finding a bag with the equipment capacity is pretty easy from manufacturer specs. Bullet two is more vague in most reviews and bullet 3 is subjective.


Any recommendations you can provide would be appreciated.

[Stefan Stuart Fletcher]

Hi Don,


My first thought reading your specs and your load is that the ideal carrying tool would be a SUV... You haven't stipulated whether quick access to your kit is important or not.


If it isn't, I think I'd go about itanother way. Customise a good hiking rucksack to store your kit. It would certainly be cheaper (why do all manufacturers of photography accessories assume shooters have more money than sense?). You haven't mentioned the need to carry a tripod, so I assume that it isn't high on your list of priorities.


My expensive experience with backpack hold-alls (won't mention the C, L or B names) is that they are a compromise, especially if you do need to lug a laptop with you. They do a little of everything rather badly. Now I take a large slingshot in my other luggage for convenience.


Hope that helps.

[Don Burkett]

Hi Don,


My first thought reading your specs and your load is that the ideal carrying tool would be a SUV... You haven't stipulated whether quick access to your kit is important or not.





LOL. I actuallly have an SUV so I'm all set in that regard. Quick access is less important that my other needs. My fundamental problem is twofold. I lack a photographic discipline. I'm as likely to set up on macros and spend a day within 3' of the car as I am to go after wildlife or landscapes. Two, my daytrips are usually full day trips, so during the course of the day I'm likely to shoot a variety of scenes and I like being prepared. A tripod is an essential piece of my gear, but I usually carry that off the bag or on it's own sling. [:)]

[twistedphrame]

I got a LoPro nature Trekkar for christmas this year and it would probably fit almost all of the equipement, you might need to fork out a little extra for the side pouch things they make for it. They are super ridgid and seem like they'd take a whole LOT of beatings before they hurt your stuff. possibly the larger model would do ya. There are straps for all sorts of stuff, and the get in the way a bit around the house but outside it is wonderful, and access is OK if you leave the belt strap on and just twist the pack to your front. SUPER well built from what I can tell and most certainly worth the money.


Just know they are BIG for most indoors stuff.


The one I have is: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lowepro-Nature-Trekker-II-AW-Backpack-Review.aspx


two larger ones are: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lowepro-Photo-Trekker-II-AW-Camera-Backpack-Review.aspx


http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lowepro-Pro-Trekker-II-AW-Camera-Backpack-Review.aspx





hope this helps, I'm SUPER SUPER SUPER pleased with mine

[Don Burkett]

I got a LoPro nature Trekkar for christmas this year and it would probably fit almost all of the equipement, you might need to fork out a little extra for the side pouch things they make for it. They are super ridgid and seem like they'd take a whole LOT of beatings before they hurt your stuff. possibly the larger model would do ya. There are straps for all sorts of stuff, and the get in the way a bit around the house but outside it is wonderful, and access is OK if you leave the belt strap on and just twist the pack to your front. SUPER well built from what I can tell and most certainly worth the money.
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>



Thanks, that's a great suggestion and has been the front runner of my choices. I currently have the mini-trekkar and a number of the side pouches and have been happy with the LowePro brand. Does the Nature Trekkar have a large outside pouch like the mini and does the waist belt remove or tuck away? If it does, I'll be all set as it seems to be the right size.

[twistedphrame]

it has an outside pounch that has no pockets inside of it (I just throw a water bottle or two and some snacks in there) t also comes with a mini backpack that can strap on to the nature trekkar for added random stuff storage. The waist belt is actually my only complaint now that you bring it up. As far as I can tell it can't be removed or tucked away and for alot of cases (especially setting it down) it gets in the way. I may just not have figured out how to do it though someone else may know more difinitively.

[Anthony]

I just use a Canon 200EG, which is great for my needs. Probably not as good as lowepro, etc, but its also smaller and didn't cost no $250+. However, think its too small for your needs, you'd probably have to leave at least one lens at home if you used it.

[Sean Setters]

Amazingly enough, the Canon 200EG is a terrific starter backpack. That was the first photography backpack I ever purchased, and it held everything I needed it to for quite some time. The only reason I switched backpacks (recently) is because I wanted a more indiscreet backpack that didn't scream, "Hey, I've got expensive equipment in me!!" However, I wouldn't recommend the backpack to anyone who's actually doing some serious hiking. I simply used it to carry my stuff from the car to my shoots (a short distance away). My newest backpack is the KATA DR-467. While it's about the same size as the Canon backpack, it seems you can't put quite as much stuff in it, however, it does have a laptop pocket I'm not using at the moment.


Kata DR-467 review


http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=518789
<h1 class="irregualrHeader"] </h1>

[Andrew Lee]

Crumpler have some great bags. I have this one and am extremely happy with it -https://www.crumplerbags.com/flash/flash.aspx#/english/product-details/karachi-outpost-ko03a.html


There is a larger bag with a drag handle that might suit too -https://www.crumplerbags.com/flash/flash.aspx#/english/product-details/cork-and-fork-cf01a.html





Cheers,


A.

[Sam Sroka]

I recently purchased a Burton Zoom Pro with very similar capacity requirements as yourself and have absolutely loved the bag.


Was in Paris last weekend with this bag fully loaded, hiked around for a day (decided to opt out on public transport outside of getting too and from the train station to leave town) and still felt like I could have gone for more when the day was done. I am a bit surprised I've enjoyed it this much.


I think the bag is definitely designed for those of us with some height. I'm 6'4" if that helps.


You might want to check cambags.com as they typically give excellent reviews for most bags.

[jasonnoll]

Don,


I also have the LowePro Nature Trekker II AW. I am very pleased with it's quality, construction, fit, etc. I've taken it on numerous trips and it's held up like a champ.


Just to give you an idea on size, right know I have in it: 1 body, 70-200 2.8 L IS, 25-105 f4 L, 10-22 wide, 15 fisheye, lens baby, 430 flash, batteries, cables, filters, cleaners, hoods, extension tube,misc. ...and it is slam full. I have the small day pack that can be attached to the front of the pack that I use for layers (jackets etc.), the water bottle attachment, and the tripod attachement (Gitzo 3530lsv + Arca Z1). As you can see it can handle a lot. My only concern with this particular model is if you will be able to fit all your lenses. The 100-400 is big/long and would have to battle with the 70-200mm for the center position, etc.


The other thing to consider... do you realize how heavy your bag would be with all the stuff you listed? With all the gear I have, which isn't a whole lot,my pack is over 40lbs. Now, I'm 6'-3", 240lbs and pretty big and fit, and luggingmy pack around is VERY burndensome for long periods of time. Especially traversing hard terrain or up and down Mts... ...my Yellowstone trip nightmares are starting to come back now.... thanks for that... So please consider what you are going to use you backpack for; trip length, type, temp., terrain etc in your decision. You can then prioritize you gear and save yourself from a very painful situation.... [:'(]


In conclusion the nature trekker II AW model might not be the right size for you, but Lowepro makes great products and I would recommend anything from them.


- Jason

[peety3]

As others have said, the LowePro Nature Trekker is a great backpack. Adding the external pouches can significantly boost the capacity of this bag, though could be an issue for air travel (where simply a larger backpack would have been a better choice).


I also have the Deluxe Waistbelt and the Suspenders. When out shooting, I tend to use that combo (along with external pouches) instead of the backpack when I expect to be doing a lot of changes or simply using my cameras for a while. I put two small carabiners on the D-rings of the suspenders, and hang my cameras there instead of over my neck. For pouches, I have the Lens Case 4 and 4S, the Pouch 50AW, the Utility Case, the (discontinued) Film Drop, and the water bottle holder. I've successfully put both lens cases, the utility pouch, and the Film Drop on my Nature Trekker, but it became a little tricky to sneak onto airplanes.


At this moment, my NT is in my trunk, loaded with the following: 1D body, 40D body, 24-105, 85L, 50/1.8, four Speedlite 580IIs, a CP-E4 battery pack, and little stuff. Both bodies are ready-to-shoot. There's also a 70-200/2.8 in the Lens Case 4 on the outside. Three folding lightstands and an umbrella, ball-bungeed together, and I'm ready for tonight's shoot with one hand totally free to open doors, etc.

[Don Burkett]

Thank you all for your thoughts. Ok, so maybe I'm nuts but I have the mini-trekkar and the equipment I really always carry is: 40D, 70-200 f/4L, 24-105 f/4L, 17-40
f/4L, 100m f/2.8 macro, 100-400, 1.4 ext., Kenko Extension Tubes,
430ex, fliters and accessories. The 100-400 goes on an outside pouch and the flash goes in the outside pocket, everything else fits. I haven't put it on a scale, but I doubt it's 40lbs. And if it is, I'm in better shape than I give myself credit. I put a bottle of water in the big pouch with the McClamp and strap my coat or extra layers to the outside. I want a more efficient set up so I can get rid of the outside stuff and maybe add 1 lens or body. I really, truly don't have plans to do Yellowstone with this set up but on any given daytrip end up using just about everything in the bag at least once. The Nature Trekkar seems like it gets me close except for the waist belt that can't be hidden for flights. Anything bigger than the Nature Trekkar in the LowePro line seems like it puts me at risk of not getting on the airplane at all. [:D]. I guess now that I think about it I always still have the mini-trekkar as a fallback plan in that regard.