Spec me a Bag please :)

domthecondom · 3 Sep 2013 at 10:14

Hi Guys,

I am going Travelling for around 6 months in October and need a new Camera bag.

I would ideally like to spend £100 maximum, but could spend more if needed and I can warrent it

It needs to fit the following items into the bag.

Nikon D7100 with Battery Grip,
Nikkor 10.5 Fisheye
Nikkor 50mm
Nikkor 18-135mm
Nikkor 55-200mm
2x SB600
All my Filters and Batterys
And Cleaning stuff.
A Laptop + harddrive.
And A tripod (if possible)

Would be amazing if I could fit a little more inside (GoPro + accessories)

And as I will carry it around for about 6 months it would be nice to be comfy.

Would be amazing if it could benefit from Zip with double Zips (So I can padlock them together)

Much Appreciated.

Nexus · 3 Sep 2013 at 10:52

One of the key things you haven't specified is what kind of style of bag you want....

Roller Bag?
Shoulder Bag?
Backpack?

Ringiho · 3 Sep 2013 at 13:15

I am also on the hunt for a decent bag (backpack probably!) and the Lowepro 'Bag Finder' was pretty helpful in suggesting me the ones I'd be interested in.

King Damager · 3 Sep 2013 at 13:28

I quite like my kata... It's certainly grown on me

kd

Columbo · 3 Sep 2013 at 13:38

Lowepro Flipside 400AW should fit the need and budget perfectly.

Mine fits in:

D7000 & Grip
Tokina 12-24mm f4
Sigma 17-70mm f2.8-4 OS
Nikon 35mm f1.8
Sigma 50mm f1.4
Sigma 50mm f2.8 DG Macro
Nikkor 85mm f1.8
Nikon 55-300mm VR
Nikon SB400
Yongnuo YN468 II
Filters and memory cards...

Raymond Lin · 3 Sep 2013 at 13:48

Have you considered the weigh of that lot ? for 6 months?

Janesy B · 3 Sep 2013 at 13:49

Yeah, that's going to be heavy.

Columbo · 3 Sep 2013 at 13:53

Raymond Lin said:
Have you considered the weigh of that lot ? for 6 months?

Ray has a point tbh.

While my bag houses all that gear I very rarely take it all out in one go and generally it will just sit in the boot of my car, I then simply take what I think I'll need with me in my slingbag.

ElDude · 3 Sep 2013 at 14:04

Raymond Lin said:
Have you considered the weigh of that lot ? for 6 months?

It's way too much to lug around constantly. I have an almost identical bag and it weights a ton. That's without the camera, 35L & 85L & flash too!

Personally I'd recommend taking a minimum and setting your mindset towards a certain look for your trip. I use a Lowepro event messenger 150 for gigs, but there's a slightly larger 250 available too. That holds a gripped 5dmk3 (without lens attached), 35L, 85L and space on top for either another lens like my 70-200 or a flash unit. It's got a slot inside that fits an ipad and there's a pouch at the front for batteries, manuals, maps etc.

Jase · 3 Sep 2013 at 15:54

Have a look at the Tamrac Expediton series, the 5 would probably be ideal (whch is what I used) :

http://www.tamrac.com/products/expedition5x/

Nexus · 3 Sep 2013 at 16:16

The other factor as well, depending on where you are going travelling and how you are doing it might require having something which doesn't look like a camera bag....

Raymond Lin · 3 Sep 2013 at 16:30

Do not make the gear too heavy, the weight will make you resent the gear, and all that gear make you a target for thieves.

First thing I'd do is forget the grip, you don't need it to make a camera work.
Forget a tripod, you can use your clothes or something to create angles for landscapes shots, if you really want, a small bean bag would work or perhaps a gorillapod at most.
Just 2 lenses would be fine, one you will be using 99% of the time, I guarantee you that. Something in the 24-70 range for FF would be what you want, and perhaps a 50/1.8 as backup (night time), it's small, light, cheap and fast.
I wouldn't take a flash either, also with a flash you need batteries and batteries are heavy.
I wouldn't take a laptop either, perhaps a netbook at most, consider taking a dozen memory cards and post 1 home every 2 weeks in your journey.

1 camera, 2 lenses, 2 batteries (perhaps 3), 1 charger, bunch of memory cards (split your basket to smaller ones incase you have it stolen).

Change your strap to something plain. Stick on some ducktape round the edges (perhaps provide better grip too) to make it look old and cheap and close to falling apart (a Joey Lawarence trick). And tape over the Canon/Nikon sign at the front while you are at it.

Also, in this instance, I would put a UV filter on the lenses for protection.

Job done.

Enjoy the travels

GodAtum · 3 Sep 2013 at 16:35

I love fstop bags and modules. I have a number of ICUs which are so useful in helping pack suitcases, backpacks etc

http://fstopgear.com/product/mountain/icu

D.P. · 3 Sep 2013 at 17:07

GodAtum said:
I love fstop bags and modules. I have a number of ICUs which are so useful in helping pack suitcases, backpacks etc

http://fstopgear.com/product/mountain/icu

^^^^ This TBH, makes other brands look like fisher price toys.

I have the Tilopa with medium ICU and it is by far the best camera bag I have ever seen for people who actually do stuff with their camera.
E.g., supports skis in a diagonal and A-frame mount very well, very stable.

The smaller Loki bag is good if you are mostly interested in carrying camera only gear, I need space to pack avalanche safety gear, climbing or glacier gear, or a tent+sleeping bag etc. The Tilopa is slightly too big for a pure camera bag if you don't haul around big lenses.

As to the weight of your gear, definitely try it out for extended periods to see how you get on. Think carefully about priorities. If this is a photography orientated trip then forget what people are saying about taking almost nothing with you, you are going to be prepared for taking more gear.

Also be careful what focal lengths you take if you do cut down. e..g Raymond suggested a 24-70 FF equivalent (17-55 on crop) but that assume you like photographing with HIS style. For em, I can't think of a more boring length for travel photography. I either want to be wider, exaggerating perspective and capturing dramatic scenery, or I want to be much longer, capturing details, flowers, animals, birds, patterns/textures. OF course, if you are only going to capture portraits of people then you might find that the 50mm alone is all you need.

Saying that I would definitely ditch the grip and at least 1 probably 2 flashed.

Raymond Lin · 3 Sep 2013 at 17:22

If I recall correctly, it's not a photography trip. It sounds like he just want to see the world because of his mum's condition. So I suggest the lighter route, experience the world, don't see it through a lens.

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18507354&highlight=Samsonite+username_Raymond+Lin

As for 24-70 is boring, may be its the most used but I wouldn't call it boring.

Taking 6 months worth of photos with a 12-24mm lens would be boring, I would go as far as tedious (unless that is the entire aim of the trip), can you imagine everything that wide, it'll be fun for the first few days but you soon will want a change, same as if you just take a 70-200, that is of course you want to carry around more gear to cover more range, and as I recall, it's not that kind of trip, unless I am mistaken.

King Damager · 3 Sep 2013 at 18:08

Raymond Lin said:
If I recall correctly, it's not a photography trip. It sounds like he just want to see the world because of his mum's condition. So I suggest the lighter route, experience the world, don't see it through a lens.

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18507354&highlight=Samsonite+username_Raymond+Lin

As for 24-70 is boring, may be its the most used but I wouldn't call it boring.

Taking 6 months worth of photos with a 12-24mm lens would be boring, I would go as far as tedious (unless that is the entire aim of the trip), can you imagine everything that wide, it'll be fun for the first few days but you soon will want a change, same as if you just take a 70-200, that is of course you want to carry around more gear to cover more range, and as I recall, it's not that kind of trip, unless I am mistaken.

Lets be honest though, he could probably do the whole trip on his 18-135. Would be worth taking the 50 for low light as well, and the 18-135 isn't exactly the highest quality lens, but it would certainly do the Job if its not a 'see the world through a lens' trip

kd

Raymond Lin · 3 Sep 2013 at 18:10

His 18-135 would be the lens I'd take if he doesn't replace it with a 17-55.

D.P. · 3 Sep 2013 at 19:34

Raymond Lin said:
If I recall correctly, it's not a photography trip. It sounds like he just want to see the world because of his mum's condition. So I suggest the lighter route, experience the world, don't see it through a lens.

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18507354&highlight=Samsonite+username_Raymond+Lin

As for 24-70 is boring, may be its the most used but I wouldn't call it boring.

Taking 6 months worth of photos with a 12-24mm lens would be boring, I would go as far as tedious (unless that is the entire aim of the trip), can you imagine everything that wide, it'll be fun for the first few days but you soon will want a change, same as if you just take a 70-200, that is of course you want to carry around more gear to cover more range, and as I recall, it's not that kind of trip, unless I am mistaken.

I had no idea on the purpose of the trip and preconditions my comment:
"If this is a photography orientated trip ..."
Which makes the rest of what you say meaningless.

Whatever your opinions on the 24-70mm focal length don't apply universally to other people. Plenty of other people will find that range boring, which is all I have said. All depends on personal preference. And no where did I say take one lens, I suggest taking 2, wide and telephoto and that will cover almost all photography IF the OP is like me and many other nature photographers.
Many of us find with a wide to normal lens we either only use the wide end or only the tele end, but nothing in between. That is often OK because it is like using 2 different lenses in one and is convenient but it is not ideal from a pure photography related pov where a double lens setup opens more options but with the hassle of swapping lenses. I love my 16-85 but I only ever use the 16-20mm and 85mm ranges, and with the later I m normally wish I was at 200mm rather than 85! But it is convenient to use when hiking.

EDIT: the other thing if photography is really not going to be the priority and just seeing the world is important, or you want yo go light and small and inconspicuous then I would leave the entire DSLR and lenses behind. The difference between a DSLR and 1 lens vs a DSLR and 2 lens is really meaningless considering the 2nd lens will weigh less than a bottle of water in must circumstances. Instead I would take competent compact like a Canon s110, panny lX7 or better yet would be to tak a small m43 camera with something like the 14-140mm lens. All far smaller, lighter, easier to hide and no one will give you any looks.

D.P. · 3 Sep 2013 at 19:35

Raymond Lin said:
His 18-135 would be the lens I'd take if he doesn't replace it with a 17-55.

If the OP only takes one lens then that would also be my choice.

domthecondom · 4 Sep 2013 at 18:45

Ha guys Thanks for the tips and tricks

I will deffo consider leaving some gear behind, but The SLR is coming (if it does get stolen or not). Upgraded my D80 to a D7100 just for the trip.

Fisheye is deffo coming, 18-135mm is coming and the 50mm is coming

. I can't imagine leaving the flash behind

.

Would hate to get into a situation where i could get an photo and then just be let down by not bringing my gear.

But making the Camera look old....hmmmm might have to do that.

Also... I don't want to come back after 6 months having to edit 6 months worth of photos.... Hmmm