Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: Camera Hiking Backpack  (Read 17630 times)

Kerry L

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 177
Re: Camera Hiking Backpack
« Reply #20 on: June 13, 2015, 09:53:05 am »

I went through this same a couple of years ago looking to replace an original design LowePro. Nothing that I looked at was ideal. My dilemma was resolved when my sons gave me a LowePro AW-400. I, like you, wanted a bag that would work all day while based at either my car or trailer, so no over night hard core camping.

This pack has some irritating design flaws. The pockets on inside of the opening flap are too small for most items unlike the original which had a few large pockets. I find the water bladder to be useless and have discarded it & use that pocket for rain gear, gloves, hats, etc and energy bars depending on the season. There are 6 little flap pockets for CF/SD cards, again useless. I use 16g cards and as a landscape photographer I couldn't imagine needing any others . I wish Lowe had spent the time & energy wasted on the design and sewing of these stupid little pockets for something more useful  or simply eliminated them and dropped the price of the pack.

I do like the tripod pocket on the back, but don't use the two on the sides. Yes there are 3 tripod pockets so that means that those other 2 spaces can't be use for other functions. Or put zippers and/or velcro at the top and bottom so they cold be used for something else.

As far as accommodating camera body lenses and accessories, The bag is OK, but just OK. There is no space for filters. Does any pack designer understand that these days many lenses use big diameter filters, 72mm-77mm-82mm?

Cleaning stuff, the pockets in the lid are too small for a blower brush. Speaking of the pockets.... the translucent plastic is nearing opaque making it difficult to see what is in the actual pocket and the zipper design restricts access to the pocket.

Regardless of what I see as design short comings for photographic equipment, the pack is comfortable and carries a heavy load. I'm just over 6' and am able to adjust the pack to fit over summer to winter clothing.

FWIW - 5 lenses and a pro body, 3x & 10X ND and pol filers in 3 sizes, medium weight tri-pod, remote, headlamp, gps, blower & cleaning stuff. The camera holds 2 cards so I don't carry any spares. If I did I'd use one of the hard wallet types not the stupid little pockets.

And no one I know or have met on the trail has carried a 15" laptop. A couple have carried an iPad; this option needs a serious rethink.

FINALLY,TO ALL PACK MAKERS: , make it truly modular, inside and out. Quit trying to make a "one-style-fits-all" from landscape to sports to travel.
Logged
"Try and let your mind see more than you

torger

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3267
Re: Camera Hiking Backpack
« Reply #21 on: June 16, 2015, 10:52:10 am »

Carrying big tripods is messy. I have a Gitzo 3541XLS with an Arca-Swiss D4 head, the whole package is 3kg. Carrying that on the back of my F-Stop Satori bag sort of works but makes the bag unbalanced and not so comfortable to carry (too much weight far out from the body), and the balance is not good carrying it attached to the side either. So what I usually do is carry the tripod in my hand or over my shoulders.

On hikes when I carry camping gear too I use a Bergans Powerframe 130L+ military backpack with the camera gear in the X-Large F-Stop ICU in the bottom compartment. I really like the concept of fitting all gear into one simple rectangular box that can be moved between backpacks.

The aluminum frame of the large military-style backpack is certainly large and sturdy enough to carry the tripod on side of the bag without balance issues. The whole backpack with camera + camping gear and food is ~28kg / 60 lbs or so, ~12kg of that is camera gear. When on the trails I'm kind of the opposite to the trendy lightweight backpacking, but much of the camping gear is indeed still of the lightweight kind to be able to carry heavy camera gear :)

Anyway, my experience is that once your tripod is heavy enough it can't be carried comfortable on a backpack, unless you have a huge expedition style backpack. Over 2kg it's start becoming problematic. Storing the tripod and head separately helps of course, which I sometimes do for longer walks, but I prefer to have them mounted together to be quicker to set up.
« Last Edit: June 16, 2015, 10:58:17 am by torger »
Logged

NancyP

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2513
Re: Camera Hiking Backpack
« Reply #22 on: June 16, 2015, 03:48:05 pm »

Anyone use an old-fashioned external frame pack?
Logged

John Koerner

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 866
  • "Fortune favors the bold." Virgil
    • John Koerner Photography
Re: Camera Hiking Backpack
« Reply #23 on: June 17, 2015, 12:38:10 pm »




I've had my Tamrac 777 Summit for 7 years, have hiked all through any number of Florida swamp areas, the mountains of Tennessee, Georgia, California, etc. ... carrying a lot of gear ... getting rained on (it's water proof from rains), sand, dirt, etc. ... and not a stitch has come out of it. It literally has zero wear and tear on any aspect of it.

I cannot imagine any other bag being as durable, handy, or as good an investment as this one.

Seriously.

Jack
Logged

John Koerner

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 866
  • "Fortune favors the bold." Virgil
    • John Koerner Photography
Re: Camera Hiking Backpack
« Reply #24 on: June 17, 2015, 12:46:06 pm »

If you don't want a backpack quite this big, or expensive, then look at its little brother that Tamrac 767 Summit.

No other backpack is as durable as these IMO.
Logged

alan_b

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 318
    • West Coast Architecture + Interiors Photographer
Re: Camera Hiking Backpack
« Reply #25 on: June 17, 2015, 02:53:56 pm »

That photo illustrates a major problem with most photo-backpacks: they're usually comically short.

OP, check out Gregory's Targhee packs - available in different torso lengths and have back access like the F-Stop packs.
http://gregorypacks.com/en/GM363_cfg.html
Logged

John Koerner

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 866
  • "Fortune favors the bold." Virgil
    • John Koerner Photography
Re: Camera Hiking Backpack
« Reply #26 on: June 17, 2015, 04:54:36 pm »

That photo illustrates a major problem with most photo-backpacks: they're usually comically short.

OP, check out Gregory's Targhee packs - available in different torso lengths and have back access like the F-Stop packs.
http://gregorypacks.com/en/GM363_cfg.html


Actually, that backback is comically-long (and comically-red).

Who in the world would want to take a 3'-high, bright-red backpack out on a nature trek ???

Maybe if you plan on walking in a perfectly-erect posture the entire hike ... scaring every sentient creature in your path away with your obviousness ... while never actually intending to bend down, get into position, and take photographs ... your vote might be a perfect solution.

But if you plan on actually taking nature photographs whilst wearing your gear ... which involves squatting, changing position, and maneuvering ... I do believe a shorter backpack is the far better choice ... not to mention the matte-black color being far less of an eyesore to everything within a hundred miles :D

Jack
Logged

NancyP

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2513
Re: Camera Hiking Backpack
« Reply #27 on: June 17, 2015, 06:35:48 pm »

Why have a bright red or orange pack? So you are identified as a human and not a turkey, duck, or deer. I pay attention to the hunting seasons at the local conservation areas and parks, and always wear some blaze orange. I'd rather be ugly than dead. Note: Some hunters are not safe hunters - they may drink in the field - so it pays to be cautious. Most hunters are responsible. Still, there are stupid accidents every year, usually involving the hunter only (deer treestand falls are #1), but every few years there are friendly fire incidents.
« Last Edit: June 17, 2015, 06:42:04 pm by NancyP »
Logged

alan_b

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 318
    • West Coast Architecture + Interiors Photographer
Re: Camera Hiking Backpack
« Reply #28 on: June 17, 2015, 06:37:01 pm »


Actually, that backback is comically-long (and comically-red).

Who in the world would want to take a 3'-high, bright-red backpack out on a nature trek ???

Maybe if you plan on walking in a perfectly-erect posture the entire hike ... scaring every sentient creature in your path away with your obviousness ... while never actually intending to bend down, get into position, and take photographs ... your vote might be a perfect solution.

But if you plan on actually taking nature photographs whilst wearing your gear ... which involves squatting, changing position, and maneuvering ... I do believe a shorter backpack is the far better choice ... not to mention the matte-black color being far less of an eyesore to everything within a hundred miles :D

Jack

I know, right?  If only they came in other sizes and colors, like black...

Logged

brandtb

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 972
    • http://www.brandtbolding.com
Re: Camera Hiking Backpack
« Reply #29 on: June 18, 2015, 03:32:13 pm »

Fstop gear packs are the best out there...and very very light....which was important for me.
I use the Satori EXP for overnight, and the Guru for day trips. They are very well designed with all the various ICU options. For most trips I use a sm. pro ICU....and I usually use a pair of their gatekeeper straps with them.. .sm. for tripod on Guru e.g..and lg. for tent or bag on Satori (I've put away all that Lowepro stuff etc for good)
Logged
Brandt Bolding
www.brandtbolding.com

John Koerner

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 866
  • "Fortune favors the bold." Virgil
    • John Koerner Photography
Re: Camera Hiking Backpack
« Reply #30 on: June 19, 2015, 01:14:04 am »

Why have a bright red or orange pack? So you are identified as a human and not a turkey, duck, or deer. I pay attention to the hunting seasons at the local conservation areas and parks, and always wear some blaze orange. I'd rather be ugly than dead. Note: Some hunters are not safe hunters - they may drink in the field - so it pays to be cautious. Most hunters are responsible. Still, there are stupid accidents every year, usually involving the hunter only (deer treestand falls are #1), but every few years there are friendly fire incidents.

I've managed to make it to 50 years without dying, how about you? (And I have done some crazy $#!^)

And I'd rather not be ugly, either :D

I'd also rather be able to photograph what I'm after, rather than scare everything away ;)

Jack

PS: Like I said, nothing is more durable than the Tamrac. Nothing.
Logged

chez

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2496
Re: Camera Hiking Backpack
« Reply #31 on: June 19, 2015, 04:13:19 pm »

I've managed to make it to 50 years without dying, how about you? (And I have done some crazy $#!^)

And I'd rather not be ugly, either :D

I'd also rather be able to photograph what I'm after, rather than scare everything away ;)

Jack

PS: Like I said, nothing is more durable than the Tamrac. Nothing.

I had a friend who was just out for a hike shot and killed by a hunter. I would not joke about a real dangerous issue.
Logged

OneSparrow

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7
    • OneSparrow Images
Re: Camera Hiking Backpack
« Reply #32 on: June 20, 2015, 07:17:14 pm »

Will be considering a fstop santori in the near future - but it will have to be real good to make me leave behind my current day hiking pack - a regular arcteryx 40 litre one.  I chose a top loader simple design because fit was of utmost importance (it has taken me through at least 50 20 km + day-hikes in the Rockies.  I am a bit of a minimalist, so the pack is not bristling with photo gear.  I just put the light fluffy stuff on the bottom (coats, first aid kit, emergency tarp), with camera lenses and extra camera (in their pouches) above that.  The key to it all is that I use a waist pouch to carry a go-to camera and lens (readily accessible).  As well, what is quite important is that there are straps and a base cup for your tripod on the side of the pack.  Found it to be real problem to carry any sort of heavyish tripod on the back of your pack, as that magnifies the weight - instead keep that weight close to your body tight on the side of your pack.
Logged

NancyP

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2513
Re: Camera Hiking Backpack
« Reply #33 on: June 22, 2015, 01:42:33 pm »

I am sorry to hear that, Chez.
If you aren't inside a blind, the birds will see you no matter what you wear - they are sensitive to motion, and they have very good vision, including some UV as well as the entire human visual spectrum. The best bet is to get them used to you or your blind - if you aren't a threat further away for some time, you can creep a bit closer. It is nice if you don't stare at them 100% of the time, but look around a bit.

Deer - they don't have good red color vision, hence the use of blaze orange on hunters, other people, and occupied blinds.
Logged

Gilgamesh

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 27
Re: Camera Hiking Backpack
« Reply #34 on: June 22, 2015, 01:56:11 pm »

 What's getting mixed up here in this set of replies is that the basic premise is that you are only out for a few hours and that you were back at the car sometime in the evening.

Having done the full Paine National Park circuit and not just the little W in Patagonia,  which really dictates that you take a normal rucksack because you have to take a tent and stove, sleeping bag, clothing,waterproofs, food, and then add your camera gear tripod Etc

 For me I have two Lowe Alpine camera backpacks, one being a cracking day pack, the other, one I rarely use, can accommodate a vast amounts of gear.

 If you took the latter and filled it with all manner of 300 mm lenses and four bodies and motor drives in flash units then yes it would take it and it would take you down with it .  The Lowe day pack however would you split into two relatively small compartments cakes are surprisingly good amount of equipment plus some water and some waterproofs and offer ago and since there is and any more room to take an all-star it doesn't get taken and I am never ever been caught out .

 I suggest that you lay out your equipment you absolutely have to take with you and then that in turn will dictate the size of pack which in turn dictate which manufacturer you end up going with. The Lowe kit is bomb proof.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up