Kelty Redwing pack for ARCA?

[Ryan Hill]

Hello all,

I have seen quite a few posts where people extol the virture of a Kelty Redwing Pack as their camera bag. I was wondering about the suitability of one for use with an ARCA-Swiss Discovery. I know that might be some other alternative packs like a Mountainsmith or Osprey, but the Redwing seems to be the standard pack used.

I have the ARCA case and it is great for holding the camera, but not so great for carrying on a longer hike. I purchased a LowePro Super Trekker to use. I have had alot of luck and comfort while carrying other LP packs, but I detest the Super Trekker. It is really more of a piece of luggage than a pack. From the zip on strap covers, to straps that way way too long, to it will not stand up, to it just does not fit the camera very well-it is not the pack I was hoping it to be. It certainly is not "super" to me, except is cost a super amount of money.

I like the look of what some folks have done with their Kelty Redwings. Has anybody done that to carry an ARCA camera? Is the Kelty big enough? Any other bigger models that do the trick. I find that the ST gets filled but it is not very efficient in it's use of all that space.

My typical load
Discovery on 30 CM rail
dark cloth
3 lenses on the 110 boards
Quickload holder
1-2 boxes Quickloads
Soligor spotmeter
loupe
Cokin p filter fit and cd case with filters.
odds and ends like a headlamp and cleaning cloth

I would ideally like to be able to add a light rain jacket, small first aid kit, lunch and a water bottle to this bag for day hikes.

I saw the Photobackpacker cases and they look like possible way to, although I do not know if they have a case that would hold the ARCA. If I went to a folding rail or removed the rail will that open up some options?

As an alternative does anybody know of a pack that that would take the Discovery on the 30cm rail? I might look at a folding or telescoping rail as a way to make the camera flatter but if I could stay with the standard 30cm that would be a cheaper route -yes, I know "cheaper route" is an oxymoron with ARCA :)

[Emmanuel BIGLER]

Ryan
There is a solution that could work for you : carrying the camera with a packframe rucksack using only the frame. So you have the benefit of the excellent carrying straps and aluminum frame, and you can accommodate whatever suits your camera on the frame. Including the Arca Swiss case attached to the frame if you wish. Plus all other personal equipement.

Dedicated photo rucksacks are nice but not really designed for long-range walks including food, clothes, etc...
Pack frame rucksacks used to be popular in the seventies and eighties, and are no longer as popular as they used to be, at least here in Europe. I remember visiting King's Canyon NP in 1987, the majority of locals had huge "king-size" packframe rucksacks fully loaded with everything needed for maximum comfort in the Wilderness, whereas our European party only used small-size rucksacks ;-);-) However I'm sure that you can still find a frame to suit your needs, we discussed this recently on the French LF forum and one of the LF-enthusiats had no difficulty to locate a pack frame in a Parisian store.
for example a lightweight model, about 1 kg (2.2 lbs)
http://www.au-vieux-campeur.fr/gp/asp/produit.asp?codprd=74099

There is also this heavy-duty model, with its general purpose carrying platform, but 2.7 kg (close to 6 lbs) looks really heavy:
http://www.au-vieux-campeur.fr/gp/asp/produit.asp?codprd=74100

[Greg Miller]

I put my A-S 4x5 F-Line Field in a padded insulated soft sided lunch carrier. I was lucky and found one with almost the perfect dimensions (with the folding reail folded). This protects the camera nicely. The same concept could work well with the photobackpacker setup.

In my case, the camera (in its case) goes into an Osprey daypack along with everything else (My lenses are safe in a GnassGear lens case). The Osprey clamshell design means my Gitzo 1325 CF tripod attaches easily on the outside of the pack in a vertical position and centered left to right for good load balancing.

[Ryan Hill]

Emmanuel-
I'll have to look into that type of frame. In my Scouting days I used a Kelty external frame pack that was like that. It might be a little bigger than what I was hoping for in a daypack.

Also, thanks for your constant ARCA info. I have really liked your Galeire Photo articles- they were a great help in deciding to go for a Discovery.

Greg-
Sounds like you have a set up similar to what I am looking for. Does the Osprey offer enough room? Does it offer enough protection? I like those Gnass cases and since I have three lenses I think I would just need a single case. Do you have a picture of what it looks like?

Right now I lay the camera in the bag so that the frameset is perpendicular to the bag. It sticks out a little further than the internal dimensions of the bag. The bag still closes but there is a bulge in the pack. I use the leather wide angle bellows and since that is a bit wider than the frameset, I worry about friction and wear on the bellows. I lay a camptowel over the camera but would like a better fitting bag than the Super Trekker. Loved how my Photo Trekker carried my medium format equipment, but really dislike how the ST carries my LF equip.

I would rarther not disassemble the camera, so I think I may need to look at a folding rail as a way to get flatter. Ideally a bag would hold everything safely and be comfortable when you where it.

[Ron Marshall]

I use the Kelty Coyote. It is much larger than the Redwing and it has an adjustable suspension. It is a bit heavier, but has more room and is very comfortable. It has much more room than is needed for the camera alone; I bought it to use for two or three day hikes, so I planned a bit of extra room. It was on sale at REI for $100.

[jdavis]

As a caution - I too read the positive reviews about the Kelty Redwing and bought one sight unseen online. I highly recommend you try one on before buying. I am currently looking for something else - the Kelty straps and suspension dig in to my shoulders something fierce. I just don't think they are very well designed and my not be that much of a step up from the Super Trekker.

Of course, everyone's body is shaped differently. For what it's worth, I have found that Marmot makes very comfortable packs, and I am hoping to find one to replace the Kelty.

- Jack

[Emmanuel BIGLER]

I would rarther not disassemble the camera, so I think I may need to look at a folding rail as a way to get flatter

Yes, the folding rail is extremely efficient. It will allow you to avoid carrying the whole Arca bag with a packframe ;-) the 30 cm (12") rail folded in halves yields a maximum height of 15 cm (6") which is compatible with the depth of most rucksacks.

It is wise not to take the function carriers off the rail. Personnaly with the Arca 6x9 model I do'nt take the function carriers off, but the whole camera can be carried in a Lowe Pro mini-trekker without folding the 30cm rail. With the discovery you probably want to lay the standards flat against the back of the pack. The depths of many rucksacks is larger than 15cm so you have many choices.

Another recommendantion would be to let all the the movements unlocked when carrying the camera in the back pack. One of the Arca Swiss users (I probably read the useful suggestion here) actually locks the camera by a rod secured in the filter holder clamp, one clamp in front and one additional at the rear standard, a 8mm rod will do the job and will avoid strain on the function carriers and will avoid any unwanted collapse of the standards against each other.

[Ryan Hill]

[i]I

Yes, the folding rail is extremely efficient. It will allow you to avoid carrying the whole Arca bag with a packframe ;-) the 30 cm (12") rail folded in halves yields a maximum height of 15 cm (6") which is compatible with the depth of most rucksacks.

.

Yes, getting the camera flat in the pack will probably improve how it carries significantly. I also agree about not wanting the standards to be "floating around " without some sort of connection. I had not thought about using a rod between the compendium holes.

The two options I looked at were buying the folding 30cm rail or to buy a 30cm rail clamp and either take a hacksaw to my current standard rail into two 15cm halves (or maybe buy a 15cm standard rail). A third option might be to get the 15cm extension for use with my existing rail.

My lenses top out at a 210 since that is about the longest lens you can use on the 30cm rail and with the wide angle bellows. So, at the moment I do not need a rail longer than 30cm. Of course, as soon as I would buy a folding 30cm rail, you know I would somehow end up with a 300mm lens and then need an extension. But since I am topped out at 210 right now, lets worry about just having 30cm of rail.

Any of those options sound better or worse than the other?

a- buy folding 30cm rail

b-buy 30cm rail clamp and 15 cm rail (or cut standard 30cm rail in half)

c-buy 15cm rail extension and always be sliding rail onto it and then onto longer rail for use

Thanks.

[Photobackpacker]

Hi Ryan:

I have had so many requests from Arca-Swiss owners to make a compatable case, I am working on several approaches. So far, the people I have talked to are using the folding 30cm rail and the smallest lens board. If you have a few minutes, email me at brucel@photobackpacker.com. I would like to talk with you about your specific needs.

Regards

Bruce

http://www.photobackpacker.com

[Scott Knowles]

I can't answer if an Arca-Swiss will fit a Kelty Redwing pack, but I can answer about the pack. I like it for the front-loading capability and I've had one for a long time, but most of that time is sitting in the closet. It's a good pack and seemed to fit me well as carry my 35mm camera system and supplies, but I found the quality lacking in quality as it always seemed to be popping some seam or strap, especially the compression straps. I ended up buying a Sundog Art Wolfe photo-pack which hasn't let me down since. I wouldn't do a long hike (2-3+ days) with it but for shorter hikes it works for me and holds everything I need including both camera gear and hiking supplies. I don't think it's produced anymore. Good luck.

ps. Bruce, the stuff arrived, thanks. Now if the L-45A will arrive, I can start.

[Emmanuel BIGLER]

Any of those options sound better or worse than the other?

a- buy folding 30cm rail

b-buy 30cm rail clamp and 15 cm rail (or cut standard 30cm rail in half)

c-buy 15cm rail extension and always be sliding rail onto it and then onto longer rail for use

I would rule out option b If it implies to cut a rail, I do not want to touch a good 30cm rail.

Options a or c sound equally practical.
May be for a 4"x5" camera I would prefer the forlding rail approach.
I would favor option c for a 8"x10" camera.

As far option c is concerned, if you are looking for a used rail element and extension bracket ( as called in the Arca Swiss catalogue), beware that there are two kinds of Arca Swiss rails, type 1 and type 2. Type 1 was used on pre-1984 Arca Swiss (Oschwald) camera and continued for some time after 1984. The discovery and all recent F-line cameras use type 2. So look for a type 2 rail and type 2 extension bracket

[Ryan Hill]

Hi Ryan:

I have had so many requests from Arca-Swiss owners to make a compatable case, I am working on several approaches. So far, the people I have talked to are using the folding 30cm rail and the smallest lens board.
Regards

Bruce

http://www.photobackpacker.com

Bruce-

I have seen your website and your product is a good looking solution I would consider. My biggest concern has really been the camera and how to best carry it. With a flat camera and knowing it would fit a Kelty I like your stuff even if I had to aggie-engineer a camera case.

[Ryan Hill]

[i]Any of those options sound better or worse than the other?


I would rule out option b If it implies to cut a rail, I do not want to touch a good 30cm rail.

Options a or c sound equally practical.
May be for a 4"x5" camera I would prefer the forlding rail approach.
I would favor option c for a 8"x10" camera.



The folding rail sound like the most convinient solution. I wonder if having to put the extension in to use option c would be become an annoyance since you have to do it everytime you use the camera.

When you get right down to it I think the best thing is to find the right product for actual use and then shrug off the cost. If the ease of use and the resulting picture are worth it-who cares.....ok the wife, for one ;-)

I wonder if a folding 40cm rail would be a better choice instead of the 30cm??? That works out to about an 8" deep package vs a 6".

[Greg Miller]

Greg-
Sounds like you have a set up similar to what I am looking for. Does the Osprey offer enough room? Does it offer enough protection? I like those Gnass cases and since I have three lenses I think I would just need a single case. Do you have a picture of what it looks like?
.

I'll try to take some picture this weekend - it has been a busy week (I have an opening tonight at the City Lights Gallery in Bridgeport, CT called "Skin" (group show) - www.clitylightsgallery.com (http://www.shadowlens.com/citylights/show-skin.html)).

The Osprey has plenty of rom. It holds my A-S 4x5, darkcloth, Gnass Lens case (4 lenses) Gnass film case with Quickload holder and lots of quickloads, light meter, 2 filter cases, darkcloth, and SLR cmaera with 2 or 3 lenes (and the pack really isn't that large; smaller than my Osprey Aether 75 backpack that I use for overnight trips). The pack offers no additional protection other than being a very sturdy qaulity pack. I have had no isue with damage.

The other advantage of the Osprey pack is it is a back loader. So I take off the pack, lay it on its front and unzip the pack (zipper is closest to the back panel). This is different from most photo packs where you lay the pack on its back, getting the shoulder straps and back panel dirty/muddy.

[Tom Westbrook]

I carry my F-Line Field Compact in a Redwing 3100. It fits fine with room enough for camera, two long GnassGear lens cases, accessory bag, filter case, compendium and film holders. I'll post a photo of it later today. It's a nice compact bag that's comfortable to carry--though the longest I've walked with it on has been under an hour. I tried the Mountainsmith Ghost, but I think the Redwing is better suited as a camera bag since it has stronger pack cloth and is overall more robust in construction (if a bit heavier).

[Greg Miller]

Do you have a picture of what it looks like?


308 This is the Osprey Eclipse 42+5 model with my tripod securely attached with the clam shell design.

309 This is a view of the pack with the back panel unzipped. This design keeps the back panel out of the dirt. The yellow container is the softsided lunch carrier with my Arca Swiss F-Line Field inside. To its right is the Gnass 4 lens carrier. The red container in front is a Gnass film carrier which hold my quikload holder and enough quickloads for a day of shooting. It lays nicley on top of the lens case when the pack is closed. There is plenty of room left in the top of the pack for lunch and clothing.

310 This is a close up of the "camera case" . The front pcoket is unzipped and holds my dark cloth and 15cm extension rail. The top pocket holds my loupe and the tripod mount/rail bracket.

[Mike Herring]

Hello all,

I have seen quite a few posts where people extol the virture of a Kelty Redwing Pack as their camera bag. I was wondering about the suitability of one for use with an ARCA-Swiss Discovery. I know that might be some other alternative packs like a Mountainsmith or Osprey, but the Redwing seems to be the standard pack used.

I have the ARCA case and it is great for holding the camera, but not so great for carrying on a longer hike. I purchased a LowePro Super Trekker to use. I have had alot of luck and comfort while carrying other LP packs, but I detest the Super Trekker. It is really more of a piece of luggage than a pack. From the zip on strap covers, to straps that way way too long, to it will not stand up, to it just does not fit the camera very well-it is not the pack I was hoping it to be. It certainly is not "super" to me, except is cost a super amount of money.

I like the look of what some folks have done with their Kelty Redwings. Has anybody done that to carry an ARCA camera? Is the Kelty big enough? Any other bigger models that do the trick. I find that the ST gets filled but it is not very efficient in it's use of all that space.

My typical load
Discovery on 30 CM rail
dark cloth
3 lenses on the 110 boards
Quickload holder
1-2 boxes Quickloads
Soligor spotmeter
loupe
Cokin p filter fit and cd case with filters.
odds and ends like a headlamp and cleaning cloth

I would ideally like to be able to add a light rain jacket, small first aid kit, lunch and a water bottle to this bag for day hikes.

I saw the Photobackpacker cases and they look like possible way to, although I do not know if they have a case that would hold the ARCA. If I went to a folding rail or removed the rail will that open up some options?

As an alternative does anybody know of a pack that that would take the Discovery on the 30cm rail? I might look at a folding or telescoping rail as a way to make the camera flatter but if I could stay with the standard 30cm that would be a cheaper route -yes, I know "cheaper route" is an oxymoron with ARCA :)
Ryan, Take a look at the Granite Gear Nimbus Access FZ 3800. It has two zippers for fron panel access and a GREAT hipbelt and harness. I use mine with the photobackpacker.com backboard, camera case and lens cases. This outfit worked great on my recent trip to Zion National Park And Bryce Canyon National Park.
Bruce Laughton is "THE MAN" to speak with about the exact case for your camera.
Take care,
Mike

[Mike Herring]

Marmot should make very comfortable packs.....They purchased Dana Design, the company that has produced some of the finest backpacks every designed.
I like the Granite Gear Nimbus Access FZ 3800.
Take care,
Mike

[Ryan Hill]

Greg-

Those pictures help alot. Thanks.

Mike-

I'll look into Granite Gear. Dana Design was good stuff. I'll have to check out the Marmot packs now.

This is looking like a better solution than I thought. Might be time to take some gear to my local outdoor store.

[Ed Richards]

Greg,

I am intrigued with how you mounted the tripod within the pack. What keeps it from sliding out of the bottom of the pack?

[Greg Miller]

Greg,

I am intrigued with how you mounted the tripod within the pack. What keeps it from sliding out of the bottom of the pack?


Ed - The pack has a built in stretch mesh panel under the clam shell panels. The tripod feet go into the mesh panel and 3 adjustable quick release straps hold the tripod in place vertically. The mesh is more than up to the task - I have no fear of tearing it - and I do not baby my gear.

I find the Osprey line to be the best packs in terms of overall comfort, durability, and light weight. My Osprey Aether 75 backpack is about 3 pounds lighter than my Gregory Lassen and is more comfortable and packs better. And Gregory is a very fine brand in the backpacking world.