Frank -- you're right, the 1325 probably is overkill for the Shen-Hao, but I also use it with some heavier equipment where it just feels more solid. I'd like to have a 12 series someday for hiking with the Shen-Hao, though.
Frank -- you're right, the 1325 probably is overkill for the Shen-Hao, but I also use it with some heavier equipment where it just feels more solid. I'd like to have a 12 series someday for hiking with the Shen-Hao, though.
Kerry asked >> Is that the actual weight of the f64 pack? <<
Hi Kerry:
It comes complete with the side pockets and waist belt, both of which are removable, and I assume 4.5 pounds is the total weight including them. I am tall (6'-6") so the waist belt is a joke as it rides too high, so I remove it. Without the pockets or waist belt attached, and with the dividers inside I need for my 4x5 camera, 4-5 lenses, quick-loads, holder, loupe and meter, the total pack empty tips my scale at exactly 3 pounds 8 ounces. I can strap my 1325 to the back or either side of the pack using a 1" web strap -- though like you, unless I'm planning on a few miles of hiking to get to my shooting destination, I usually just hand carry it.
In that configuration, the entire pack can then slip inside my full-sized Dana along with food, stove, sleeping bag and parka for an overnight outing. The tripod then gets attached to the back-flap of the Dana pack for easy backpacking.
I can probably get a photo or two of the entire outfit up tomorrow if folks are interested.
Cheers,
Jack
I've got a Bogen/Manfrotto 443 carbon-fiber legset that I use with a Gitzo 12 series off-center ballhead and my Shen Hao- I've taken it hiking and had no problems with support or stability. The 443 is at least the same as the Gitzo 12-series legs, if not a little lighter-duty. Unless you're mounting some beast of a lens with an Ilex #4 or #5 shutter on it, the Shen won't weigh in more than about seven pounds, eight tops, which is what a 35mm SLR with a decent size telephoto zoom will weigh. There are some advantages to having a heavier wood camera - the weight and the material dampen some of the vibrations. Another legset to look at, especially for hiking, is the new Manfrotto Neotec tripod - while not as light as a carbon-fiber, the legs are extremely stable with a load on them- they actually get more stable the more weight you put on them. I've actually seen a 125lb man support his entire weight on the mounting platform. Of course, this is not recommended practice on a daily basis. The legset will hold 17 lbs per official specs.
Another Kelty Super Tioga + 1325-carried-in-alternating-hands hiker checking in. The Kelty may be large, but it's not heavy, and even loaded feels light because it distributes weight so effectively to the waist belt.
Jack - I can probably get a photo or two of the entire outfit up tomorrow if folks are interested.
I'd love to see a photo or two when you get a chance.
Thanks,
Kerry
Sal - Another Kelty Super Tioga + 1325-carried-in-alternating-hands hiker checking in. The Kelty may be large, but it's not heavy, and even loaded feels light because it distributes weight so effectively to the waist belt.
Wow, I thought I was the only one. I agree with your comments on the Kelty. It's great for carrying heavy loads (I've carried in excess of 70 lbs. with mine and used to regulary carry 65 lbs. with it - including the weight of the pack itself). I've looked at many of the newer light and ultralight internal frame packs, but the only ones I've seen capable of comfortably carrying as much weight as the trusty old Kelty weigh as much or more (the actual weight of my Super Tioga- Tall is 6 lb. 8 oz.) and cost a small fortune.
For the last year and a half, I've been having shoulder problems (rotator cuff tendinitis in both shoulders) that may eventually require surgery. But surprisingly, caring a heavy load in the Kelty causes absolutley no discomfort in my shoulders. The frame does a great job of transferring the weight to my hips and keeping nearly all the weight off my shoulders. Hefting the pack on and off causes more pain than caring it for hours on end.
I'm sure there are some great internal frame packs out there, and I can understand why people who hike off trail and scramble/climb prefer a pack that keeps the weight closer to their bodies for better balance. But, as a counterpoint, that's another thing I like about the Kelty. With the external frame there is plenty of room for air to circulate between your back and the pack - thus reducing the "sweaty back syndrome" problem when using a body-hugging internal frame pack.
That said, the Super Tioga is not for everyone. It's a BIG pack best suited to people who are fairly tall and broad shouldered. The suspension is adjustable over a wide range, but the shear size of the pack frame can overwelm those of smaller stature.
I've attempted to replace my Kelty a couple times, but keep coming back to it. Over the last 15 or so years, I've gradually replaced pretty much everything else in my backpacking kit (including most of the camera gear) with lighter weight items. In addition to the lighter weight, most of my newer gear also offers better functionality and/or better comfort and safety. But, I haven't yet found a new pack that I like better than the old Kelty. The design and the "style" may be considered ancient and totally uncool by some, but it works for me - and that's what counts.
Kerry
Jack - I am tall (6'-6") so the waist belt is a joke as it rides too high, so I remove it.
This is also a problem I've had (I'm 6' 4") with most "photo" packs and many daypacks with a limited range of adjustments. Nothing like a "waist" belt (make that "waste" belt) that hits you 4" north of your navel to take your breath away. Sure some of the bigger photo packs offer a wider range of adjustments, but these packs are often very heavy (12 lbs.). In which case, I might as well carry my Kelty (or the Tenba PBH-K on the Kelty frame).
Kerry
Kerry >> This is also a problem I've had (I'm 6' 4") with most "photo" packs and many daypacks with a limited range of adjustments. Nothing like a "waist" belt (make that "waste" belt) that hits you 4" north of your navel to take your breath away. Sure some of the bigger photo packs offer a wider range of adjustments, but these packs are often very heavy (12 lbs.). In which case, I might as well carry my Kelty (or the Tenba PBH-K on the Kelty frame). <<
Exactly! Which is why I use the Dana/f64 as a combo. The Dana weighs 6.5 pounds, the f64 3.5, so I have a fully functional PADDED camera bag AND combined backpacking pack that is supremely comfortable, fits me perfectly, can carry 50 - 60 pounds with ease and weighs in at a total of 10 pounds! Not only that, when I get to my destination, I can shed the Dana and use the f64 by itself.
PS: I'll get some photos up in a few hours
Jack,
Thats REAL similar to the set-up I use with my Kelty Super Tioga and the 4x5 kit in a North Face Yavapai daypack with assorted wraps/cases. I've been using a similar set-up for over 15 years (same Kelty, but replaced the original daypack about five or six years ago). Your set-up sounds like it keeps the camera gear more organized than mine. It's amazing how light a 4x5 kit can feel on your back after you've been carry a 60 pound pack around all day. It's very liberating to drop the heavy pack and head off with the little daypack - tripod in hand - for some photography.
Kerry
Here are some quick snaps -- sorry for the quality but I took zero time processing these
First, the f64 loaded with my typical LF kit:
Next, the Dana Swiftcurrent (Note: Dana makes two similar packs, one is the Swiftcurrent shown here, the other is the Stillwater. The Stillwater has a more robust internal frame and slightly larger capacity with a divided lower compartment. It has a correspondingly heavier load rating and weighs about 1.25 pounds more than the Swiftcurrent. I own both and can heartily recommend either, though the Swiftcurrent is a bit more comfortable with loads under 45 pounds as it is more flexible on the body.) :
Here is the f64 inside the Swiftcurrent:
Here is the pair united, ready to trek, with the 1325 tucked in the "beavertail" rear storage flap:
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks