What follows is the evolution of my camera bags.
My very first camera bag was a small Tenba shoulder/belt bag. I got it for Christmas when I was 17 and had just gotten serious about photography. It is just big enough for a film SLR and one small zoom or 2 small primes, and a few rolls of film. It's over 30 years old now and works just as well now as it did when I got it. I stays mostly in the closet holding odds and ends. I could use it inside another pack when hiking, if the kit were really really tiny.
 |
| small Tenba shoulder bag |
My second camera bag was a Techniche shoulder bag. My dad has one and liked it so I saved up and got one for myself. And quickly overloaded it, discovered it hurt my shoulders to carry it full, and promptly relegated it to storing extra items in the closet. I still have it, and it still lives in the closet. That was the point where I realized that I really needed a backpack.
 |
| large Techniche shoulder bag |
My first camera backpack was a LowePro Phototrekker (now called classic). It was thin, good for a small SLR and a few lenses. It was tall enough to fit a 400mm f/5.6, 100-300 f/4, or lenses of similar size. It lacked a good hipbelt and water bottle pockets. It had an outer pocket in which I could fit a few extras like snacks, small bottle, etc. At the point I owned it, my film kit was small and carrying a few of the lenses was no problem for it. I didn't hike that far and only sort of wished it had a water bottle pocket, etc.
 |
| Original, very thin Phototrekker backpack |
At the same time I owned the Phototrekker, I had a LowePro Sideline Shooter (which I reviewed). I still have the Sideline. I used it for my "holy trinity" of landscape lenses... a 24, 50, and 100mm, some film and a couple of filters. Later I used it to hold my 100-400 mounted. It was a tight fit but it worked.
 |
| Sideline shooter |
When I went digital, I found the original Phototrekker was too shallow for the DSLR kit. I had fewer lenses, but they were bigger. I sold the thinner bag and got one that was 2 inches deeper... but otherwise the same model. It was at this point that I realized I was again carrying too much kit and I was hurting my shoulders by using it.
 |
| Both Lowepro Phototrekkers |
Quick, easy access has always been a concern, and I tried the Kata 3N1-30. I liked the concept. You could wear it as a sling or a backpack and it had a separate top compartment for non-photo items or anything I wanted. I quickly found that in practice, the side opening was horrible, slow, and unreliable. I couldn't close the zipper while in sling mode and ended up setting the pack down to close it, so it defeated the purpose and I sold it.
 |
| Kata 3N1-30 |
My first decent backpack was the F-stop Loka 37L (also reviewed). I liked the hipbelts. While they aren't anything great by my current view, they were an amazing revelation to me vs no hipbelts at the time! I liked the versatility of the ICUs... just pick the size you need for your gear and the leftover space can be used for anything else. I got this in response to my back going bad as well as having kids and suddenly needing to carry a lot more gear... like diapers! Once the kids could walk with me, I used it for water and snacks for them. I still like the concept and the versatility. It was my first rear opening pack and that feature is a miracle. See the review for more details.
 |
| F-stop Loka 37L |
I had some credits at B&H so I also picked up the Mindshift (now merged back with Thinktank) Backlight 26L (my review is here). Like the Loka, it is also a rear opening pack with decent hipbelts. It lacks some of the versatility of the Loka but I feel it is better made and more comfortable, though it isn't great for long hikes. It isn't meant to hold much beyond camera gear. I use it for urban outings and times when I am close to the car. It is easy to use, has nice water bottle pockets, and is spacious for my gear.
 |
| Backlight 26L |
In response to wanting more space for survival gear in the mountains and a desire to hike much further, I found and bought the Seek Outside Exposure 5000 (reviewed!). This one has a much better fully adjustable harness vs nearly any other pack I've tried or owned. However, it is big (80 L!) and awkward to use. When I set a bag down to get images, I tend to move around just far enough that I won't leave my gear "over there", so I have to pack up and move it with me. It is a panel loader, but not a dedicated photo pack so you have to open the pack and open the camera compartment, and it is big. I just found it to be too many steps. It takes up way more space on the ground than my other packs and is hard to use in a crowded area. It is a great pack, it just didn't work for my preferred shooting style.
 |
| Seek Outside Exposure 5000 |
While thinking about shorter outings, shooting from a stream, or laying a larger pack in mud or snow and pulling out a padded bag to use in a smaller radius, I got a Mountainsmith Descent sling (yet another review). It is very well made, well padded, perhaps slightly too stiff. It is large enough to handle a 100-400 or 70-200 mounted and a couple of other fat lenses, which means in general, it is slightly too big for most people. Mountainsmith made a smaller model which I felt was too small, not much bigger than my first bag, the Tenba. I like the access, but in the end I prefer a backpack with a rear opening.
I tried on several ski packs with rear openings, usually in the 40-50L range. The ski packs generally lack water bottle pockets (if you crash while skiing, you lose the bottles), but I wish they at least provided side zip pockets so nothing could fall out. I tried models from Deuter, Osprey, Gregory, and Mammut. All are well made. The Gregory Targhee 45 was my favorite; it fit me the best by far of all the ski packs I tried... literally like a glove where I barely noticed it on my back... but it lacks water bottle pockets and finding a good fitting insert for the camera proved a challenge, so I reluctantly gave up on it. Mammut's new Trion 50 has side stretch pockets and holds my f-stop ICUs very well, but it didn't quite fit my back, and the harness was a bit on the thin side for carrying heavy stuff. But all of these brands are worth a look, particularly if you are into water bladders. All are well-made and the main question is how they fit.
I also tried some more panel loaders in the store for fit. The Gregory Zulu lineup seems to fit me very nicely, as does the Mountainsmith Apex 60, but decided to hold off on them until I'd exhausted all my other options. I figured that after my experience with the Exposure 5000, these would be similar if not more difficult to work with for camera gear.
After all these experiences, I've come to realize a few things. Fit is paramount. Water bottle pockets are a must for me. Having a taller, thinner pack is very important. The height allows load lifters to do their job. Being thin means the weight stays closer to your center of gravity. The shape of the back panel is very important; you need lumbar support that fits your back. Good hipbelts are a must: Good padding with enough support to keep the weight of the pack mostly on your hips is critical. The best hipbelts that fit me well are of the floating type... not sewn onto the sides of the pack, but the entire belt needs to wrap around the back and hips and hold the pack in place, yet still allow some natural movement. And there are no camera packs that can fit like that... or are there?
After searching online forums again, I stumbled onto mention of the Atlas camera backpacks. I looked at many images, read every review I could find, and really liked the design. And I read raves about the customer support, which is very, very rare lately. So I started a conversation with Allan Henry, Atlas' general manager. He replied quickly each time, and then told me he'd be coming to a nearby city and I could try the packs on in person and to bring my gear to check for fit. Seeing the shape of the pack as well as reading so many raves, I had a strong feeling one of their packs would end up in my possession. I was right. Allan gave me about 2 hours of his time showing me the fit and features. We loaded my gear into each of the two packs and both felt amazing. The hipbelts beat everything else I've tried, and the torso fit is good. Loaded up with my gear, I barely noticed the weight, and I didn't feel like my movement was restricted at all. Not since trying the Gregory Targhee 45 have I found such a good fit. I ordered the smaller of the Atlas packs (the Athlete) that evening and had it in two days. It is a wonderful design. A full review will be coming later, but after one long walk and a decent hike with the pack, I think this is finally the pack for me.
 |
| harness of the Atlas Athlete pack |
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete