Camera backpacks

Hi,

I don't know how big the 80-200 is, but my 100-300 is just over 7" long, and fits as the lenses are displayed on the Lowepro page. With the dividers being removable, you can probably get a lens up to about 9" long sideways in there. I'll check with a 300 prime later, but it looks as though it should go.

http://www.pentax.co.uk/product_details.php?divisionid=2&productid=105&p...

I've just found this, and yes (at 191mm), at a squeeze, it'll go upright, but will easily fit if you change around the dividers to load it lengthways.

Cheers

Liam

For those of you that are unaware of the brand I would strongly recommend that you check out Domke bags.

They are the choice of photojournalists because they are incredible hard wearing and most importantly they dont look like a camera bag, perfect if your in a place where your likely to get mugged, like Brixton or Iraq!

On the downside they are far more expensive than other brands but they do stand the test of time and are the top choice for the Pros. I bought mine from Jacobs in New Oxford St. I think Tiffen imports them from US so there is a website too.

Hi Niblue,

I used by bag for the first time "in the field" so to speak at the weekend, and then realised what you may have been asking. It carries the the DL with the 100-300 attached with a good 1" to spare, and at a squeeze probably 2-21/2" spare, so as that's the lens you're probably going to have as a walkabout lens (if I found the correct dimensions for it), it'll fit just fine.

You need to take the bottom divider out, or release it on one side and fold it back (velcro), but that still leaves 4 lens slots, plus the top and back pockets.

BTW, it does what it says on the tin. Just swing it around and open the bag. You can adjust the straps without losing a stride, if you want a tighter fit for cycling etc.

Cheers

Liam

Liam,

Thanks for that. Definitely sounds like it could be an option for me so I'll see if any of the local places have got one in so I can have a closed look.

Thanks again
Regards
Steve

You're welcome Steve,

make sure you get to road test the 200 though, as it's significantly roomier than the 100 according to the Lowepro site spec.

Cheers

Liam

I think the important thing is to try the bag with your own gear, because it can be very difficult to guage sizes from looking at pictures on a website or even handling the bag in a shop

I've got the 100, but I originally bought a 200. For me the 200 was too big. The main problem being the vertical height of the bag. With my *istD there was at least an inch of extra height and the camera just bounced around when I was carrying it. I suppose it would fit well with the grip attached though...

The 100 would definitely be too small for your 80-200 though, as it only just fits my M*300 and then only if I don't close the zip all the way

Reuben - what do you typically carry in the your 100? I wouldn't have thought that your M*300 would be all that much smaller than my 80-200 F2.8.

At the moment I've got appropriate bags for my lightweight setup (DS, 10-20 F4-5.6, 24-135 F2.8-4.5, 2x TC) and for my heavy setup (DS, 4 or 5 lenses, flash, tripod, etc., etc.). The middle setup I was thinking about would probably be along the lines of the DS, 10-20 F4-5.6, 80-200 F2.8, 2x TC, 55mm macro and some filters. It would be nice (but not essential) if the 80-200 could be carried fitted to the camera body, and it'd also be nice if the combination of the DS, 2xTC and the 80-200 fitted in - if I'm shooting wildlife that tends to be my preferred setup (I don't have any AF lenses longer that the 80-200). My DS also has a little grip strap thing fitted (sourced from China via Ebay, but really meant for a Canon of some kind) but it doesn't add much to the vertical height.

Any idea if the 100 or 200 would be a better option for my middle kit?

Hi Steve,

Interior dimensions...

100 7.5W X 5.1D X 9.8H in. (19 x 13 x 25 cm).

200 8.7W x 5.9D x 11.8H in. / 22 x 15 x 30 cm



Looking at the dimensions, the 100 is 7.5" wide, and the 200 is 8.7" wide (interior dimensions). I've just got the tape out on my DL + 100-300 FA and it comes to 8.5. Now I've got a couple of cased SD cards in the pocket that's on the lid, it's a comfortable fit.. but not tight, and there are lots of other pockets I can use if this became an issue. This is with the end divider (the one pictured at the end of the attached lens) removed. So if you wanted to carry the 80-200 attached, then the 200 is going to be the only option. Unattached it'll fit in the case, but you'll have to keep changing the lens to a shorter one, if you want to put the camera back in the bag. As for the amount of kit, the 100 will carry the short lens, long lens, 2x and all your odds and sods.

The top pocket on the 200 will carry a thin waterproof anorak (my example being a Berghaus NON fleece lined) example, made for the chunkier of frames . The pocket on the 100 should be capable of about the same, but it'll be close, due to losing an inch in each direction.

It also has the sliplock attachments on the top, front (back???) and side (underside when swung around to access), on each bag so you could always add an extra lens or two if needed, in individual cases.

I hope that helps,

Cheers

Liam

According to Bojidar's site the M*300 is 132mm long and the FA* 80-200/2.8 is 195mm, so there is quite a difference.

I usually carry around a set of smallish primes: Z16/2.8, FA*24/2, A50/2.8, FA77/1.8 and the FA31/1.8 on the body. All this fits in the 100 (with an extra pair of dividers).

There's also plenty of room in the top comparment, where I usually store a set of extension tubes, a pocket tripod, spare batteries, lens hood etc.

I hope that helps give you an idea of the size!

Sounds like the 200 is probably the better bet for me then - at least I hope so given I've just ordered one from warehouseexpress...!

Thanks for the advice

Regards
Steve

Warehouseexpress were as efficient as usual so the new bag arrived this morning. The 200 looks like it should be a good size for my needs - I'm pretty sure the 100 would have been too small.

Cheers
Steve

Hi Steve,

glad we could help..

Cheers

Liam