PDA

View Full Version : 4x5 Packpack - suggestions



steve_geo
27-Apr-2007, 17:04
Hi,

I need something to put my horseman 45FA + 3 lenses + 2 rf holders into, was thinking of a back pack.

Any suggestions as to what's the most practical layout and cost effective?

Have seen many recommendations for f64 packs, .. I can't seems to find a web presence for these packs, anyone know a good web site I can check out what they have to offer.

Thanks - Steve

BradS
28-Apr-2007, 08:40
I've been researching backpacks for my kit too. I've settled on the Photo Backpaker system...I just need to save up some money. Check out their stuff at:

http://www.photobackpacker.com/

Jack Flesher
28-Apr-2007, 09:41
I like the f64 backpacks for both 4x5 and 8x10 (and even my 35mm DSLR). I use the LARGE size for 35mm and 4x5 and the XL for 8x10. I can get my 4x5 body with one lens mounted, 4 to 6 other lenses, 20 - 40 sheets of readyload film, holder, loupe, meter and darkcloth inside the large pack. Pockets on the inside flap hold filters, tools, cleaning, spare meter battery, etc. The XL has two main compartments and I can easily fit my Arca 8x10 in the lower compartment with 4 large lenses, meter and loupe in the upper. An outer back pocket holds three 8x10 film holders. Both packs come with removable side pockets, large enough to hold two smaller water bottles each. B&H usually has them in stock: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=4429&A=details&Q=&sku=91693&is=REG&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation

I have stopped using the dedicated lens compartment dividers in these packs and instead wrap each lens in a lens wrap -- I tend to swap lens sets around depending on subject and location, and find this makes the most efficient use of pack space and offers superior protection to each lens. Plus the caps never fall off. I then use a sharpie to mark the focal length on a small strip of male white Velcro which sticks to the outer surface of the lens-wraps for fast/easy ID.

The main upside to these packs is they are lightweight. The downside is they are lightweight and thus the suspension systems are not very sophisticated -- fine for a few miles, but not a lot longer. For longer day-trips however, these packs serve as padded cases that slip right inside my proper Dana Designs mountaineering backpack.

For extended backpacking trips, the gear gets trimmed to bare minimum, each item is packed in its own wrap, and placed directly in the Dana pack with my normal pack gear.

Lastly, I have found a Domke shoulder bag quite useful for location shooting. In the J1, I can stand my Ebony 45SU upright at one end with lens mounted and store 4 wrapped lenses, readyloads and holder in along with it, darkcloth stuffed inside as extra padding. Loupe, meter and extras are in the side pockets. The big advantage here is I can easily grab the gear and go without having to zip up flaps or fuss getting into a backpack. I grab and go to the next location, drop the bag and start right in. Everything remains quickly accessable and protected from the ground.

Cheers,

Eric James
28-Apr-2007, 12:23
There are two general ways to go: using a dedicated photo pack, or buying a backpack and tailoring it to your needs with accessory cases. (Perhaps the photobackpacker system is a hybrid of these two.) If I'm working from the car I prefer the ease of use of my LowePro Trekker AW packs - mine is heavy but everything is right there; open the main flap and I'm ready to go. If I'm hiking more than a couple miles I use a well-fitted backpack designed for backpacking (currently I'm using an Arcteryx brand (Bora 55), but there are plenty of good packs out there - Dana, Gregory, Etc.) My LowePro carries okay, but my Arcteryx fits like a glove and is a good deal lighter. My Arcteryx is composed of one large watertight compartment - it can rain as hard and as long as it wants and I don't have to worry about my gear. Coated cordura leaks.

A big factor is: what else will you carry beside photography equipment. Clothes food and water don't mix well with lenses so you'll need to have a compartment for these extra - strapping things on here and there decreases carry efficiency, so it's better to have these extras in the pack.

As Jack points out, you'll want different systems for different applications. Sure, some folks carry everything in one big pack and use this set up for everything - but some folks are stronger than others.

Ted Harris
28-Apr-2007, 13:46
Steve, if you are interested in a Lowe Pro Trekker .... brand new .... at a great price send me an email or PM.

Doremus Scudder
29-Apr-2007, 01:49
For day trips with the 4x5, I use a combination of fanny pack, fly-fishing vest and a padded pouch slung over my shoulder. I find it better than a backpack for scrambling over rocks, climbing, etc.

My fanny pack holds a wooden folding field camera (Wista DX or the like), four lenses (90mm SA f8, 135mm Nikkor W, 240mm Fujinon A, and 300mm Nikkor M), one stored in the camera, the others in their own homemade box, a set of 6 52mm filters, and a set of 6 67mm filters, both in folding pouches. My darkcloth straps onto the outside of the fanny pack.

The fly-fishing vest holds Pentax spot meter, viewing filter, tape measure, focusing loupe, flashlights, etc., etc. 6 filmholders, my exposure record notebook and an Ektar 203mm f7.7 fit into a small padded pouch that I carry cross-body over my shoulder. (In practice, the Ektar and the 135 take turns between the pouch and the camera.)

The tripod is usually in my hand except for more dangerous climbing and scrambling, when it gets strapped on to the bottom of the fanny pack. A water bottle hangs from my belt or from a strap on the vest. Sandwiches get stuffed into pockets.

I feel I have better balance with this rig than with the backpacks I have tried. Additionally, the fanny pack has a shoulder strap that allows me to simply unsnap the belt buckle, swing it around to my side and work out of it like an over-the-shoulder bag. I never have to set my gear on the ground. (I have worked knee-deep in water a time or two this way.) When I set up, the pouch with the filmholders gets hung on the knob for the center post of my tripod. I can work out of it there and it provides some extra weight for the tripod on windy days. I can get the vest on under a heavy coat in the winter or wear it over just a tee-shirt in summer. When canyoning or going downhill in rough terrain, I often wear the fanny pack on the front so I can sit down and slide on my butt if I need to in tight situations. It is also easy to take the whole rig off and lower it ahead of me if I need to.

I did have to do some shopping around before I found the right combination of right-sized fanny pack, short enough fishing vest (so it rides above the fanny pack) and right-sized pouch for the filmholders, etc. I am really happy with the compactness and ease of portability of this set up.

Hope this helps,

Doremus Scudder

Nad45
29-Apr-2007, 03:17
I have an F64 backpack and I find it too big for me. I usually carry three lenses, four film holders, changing bag, box each of Tmax and 100VS, spotmeter, set of filters, and a Linhof Technikardan. All this fits nicely in a Tamrac Expedition 5. If you need additional gear you can buy add ons that attach to the bag .
Hope this helps you. BTW this bag is usually for a 35mm or medium format camera.

Nad45

steve_geo
29-Apr-2007, 07:16
My fanny pack holds a wooden folding field camera (Wista DX or the like), four lenses (90mm SA f8, 135mm Nikkor W, 240mm Fujinon A, and 300mm Nikkor M), one stored in the camera, the others in their own homemade box, a set of 6 52mm filters, and a set of 6 67mm filters, both in folding pouches. My darkcloth straps onto the outside of the fanny pack.
Doremus Scudder

I love to see a photo of your fanny pack (with something to give size reference), .. I can't imagine how large it must be to fit a camera and 4 lens, .. I made up a fanny pack for my Canon F1 (with lens) + 2 additional lenses. and I thought that was on the large size.

Rider
29-Apr-2007, 13:04
This is one of the two dilemmas I'm facing. I already have too many photo bags as it is, and yet I don't have a back back that will fit my field camera. The last short hike I did, I had to carry the camera in a a shoulder (which I find very uncomfortable). I'm looking into a Photo Trekker AW II as a good compromise between a true hiker's back-pack and a dedicated backpack. I have a feeling this will not be the last backpack I buy.

Rider
29-Apr-2007, 13:30
Actually, I've switched gears in the last few minutes.

Taking into account what Jack, Eric and Doremus said, how about an F.64 Large (the smaller size) for light excursions.

Throw the whole thing into a Bora 50 or whatever for longer trips?

Eric James
29-Apr-2007, 14:06
I love to see a photo of your fanny pack (with something to give size reference), .. I can't imagine how large it must be to fit a camera and 4 lens, .. I made up a fanny pack for my Canon F1 (with lens) + 2 additional lenses. and I thought that was on the large size.


Mountainsmith makes some big-ass fanny packs - check out their website. They also sell a couple photo packs.

Jan Pedersen
29-Apr-2007, 14:31
Tamrac Expedition 8 will hold a 4x5 plus 7 lenses and 15 film holder + all the small stuff.
Very comfortable. I also use a 7 for my medium format gear.
The 8 is slightly deeper but i belive a 7 could be used for a 4x5 with 3 -4 lenses instead of 7
Was considering the Photobacpacker but it is to expensive.

Doug Dolde
29-Apr-2007, 14:54
I'm good with my Lightware BP1420. It wouldn't be good for real long hikes but the harness isn't bad at all.

John Voss
29-Apr-2007, 15:57
I'm looking into a Photo Trekker AW II as a good compromise between a true hiker's back-pack and a dedicated backpack. .

I just bought one of these, and so far, I think it's excellent. It'll take half a day just to figure out how to use the space and install the dividers since so many options are possible. It also has an attachable day pack for other than photo gear.

The harness can be adjusted in a number of important and innovative ways especially regarding how high or low it rides on your back. After futzing with it for a while, I adjusted it to ride very comfortably. There are abundant attachment points on the back and sides, so you can take along everything except your mother-in-law.

The only downside is that the thing weighs a good deal all by itself. The upside is that it does so while accomodating as many things as it does. You may feel like a refugee from somewhere while carrying it and possibly even envy the other guy on the trail who was using his cameraphone, but when you recover your senses, you'll know you're a keeper of the one true faith, and a real photographer just doing a little penance! ;)

Herb Cunningham
30-Apr-2007, 10:32
Just went thru this-I sold my f64, it was too big and heavy, got a Photobackpacker
Kelty 3100 and a few of Bruce's inserts. I ride a bike with it - carry ARCA, lenses and the usual stuff. Tripod strapped to frame of bike.

If you can try one out it is best. I went to REI and tried on about six packs with my ARCA in the pack, did find one that was just ok, which led me to the pack from Bruce.

He is really good to work with.

Ben R
30-Apr-2007, 11:32
I couldn't believe it but I can fit a 4X5 (Tachi) with 2 lenses on boards, 2 holders dark cloth and a 5D + 24-105L in a Slingshot 200 with room for a loupe, filters, and other small acessories. If you didn't have the DSLR then there would be room for a 3rd lens and biggish spot meter. It does help that the boards for the Tachi are tiny. This is a pretty small bag made for working out of and I couldn't be happier that I can fit my kit in it.

Gordon Moat
30-Apr-2007, 12:09
Lowepro recently introduced a Slingshot 300 model. This is larger than the Slingshot 200, and has a stability strap added at waist level. Seems like it would be easier for carrying on a bicycle or motorcycle.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
A G Studio (http://www.allgstudio.com)

David Karp
30-Apr-2007, 12:12
I use a Kelty Redwing internal frame backpack.

Louie Powell
30-Apr-2007, 12:46
I use a LowePro NatureTrekker pack. Holds the 4x5 camera, two lenses, 6-7 holders, meter, darkcloth and a CD case that I use to store Cokin P filters. And the Tiltall tripod goes on the outside.

Whole thing weighs in at about 28 pounds - not too heavy for modest hiking, but a bit clumpty when the time comes to put it on. Also causes shop clerks to get nervous if I try to walk through a store wearing it!

Sheldon N
30-Apr-2007, 19:39
I use an Osprey Atmos 35 - a phenomenal lightweight internal frame panel loader designed for backpacking. It's the most comfortable pack I've ever used. The pack itself is just over 2.5lbs empty and has a nice mesh panel resting against your back (with the pack raised away and open air behind it) so that you don't get all sweaty.

Holds my Wista DX, 4 lenses, meter, film, filters, loupe, darkcloth, etc with ease and comes in at well under 20lbs (sans tripod). I could not justify packing the several extra lbs for one of the Lowepro backpack models. Instead I have individual cases for each item so they can be stacked in the Osprey pack without damaging each other. Cases are:

Lenses -> Gnass case
Sekonic Meter -> Sekonic supplied case
Filters -> folding filter wallet
Film Holders -> Gnass Rapid File 3 Pouch holder
Camera -> Neoprene case designed for a portable DVD Player - $20 at Best Buy and fits perfectly!

Songyun
30-Apr-2007, 20:25
Lowepro recently introduced a Slingshot 300 model. This is larger than the Slingshot 200, and has a stability strap added at waist level. Seems like it would be easier for carrying on a bicycle or motorcycle.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
A G Studio (http://www.allgstudio.com)

to me making 300 is a bad move, with 200 loaded, it is not very comfortable. I can not imagine a loaded 300.

Songyun
30-Apr-2007, 20:28
I use an Osprey Atmos 35 - a phenomenal lightweight internal frame panel loader designed for backpacking. It's the most comfortable pack I've ever used. The pack itself is just over 2.5lbs empty and has a nice mesh panel resting against your back (with the pack raised away and open air behind it) so that you don't get all sweaty.

Holds my Wista DX, 4 lenses, meter, film, filters, loupe, darkcloth, etc with ease and comes in at well under 20lbs (sans tripod). I could not justify packing the several extra lbs for one of the Lowepro backpack models. Instead I have individual cases for each item so they can be stacked in the Osprey pack without damaging each other. Cases are:

Lenses -> Gnass case
Sekonic Meter -> Sekonic supplied case
Filters -> folding filter wallet
Film Holders -> Gnass Rapid File 3 Pouch holder
Camera -> Neoprene case designed for a portable DVD Player - $20 at Best Buy and fits perfectly!
The only problem i have with the osprey 35 is that the back of the backpack is not flat, it is not very easy to get the stuff organized.

Eric James
30-Apr-2007, 22:36
The only problem i have with the osprey 35 is that the back of the backpack is not flat....

Is this one of those packs with a built-in mini trampoline? (If that's the case,) I agree with you Songyun - how do you load it up Sheldon?

I can believe that those new-wave packs carry well, but they seem cumbersome to pack.

Doremus Scudder
1-May-2007, 00:53
For those still interested, here is a link to a photo on my web site showing my fanny-pack/fishing-vest/pouch set up in action on the Oregon coast:

http://www.doremusscudder.com/index.php?m=9&s=40

The vest is obvious; the fanny pack is at my side, open so I can work out of it. My Wista DX is on the tripod and the pouch for the filmholders is hung on the center post knob of the tripod.

Best,

Doremus Scudder

Rider
1-May-2007, 06:30
(1) For people who use the Lowepro Slingshot 200 or 300, how do you carry the tripod?

(2) For people who use backpacks that were not designed for photography, I don't full understand how you manage to put everything in the backpack neatly and in such a way that nothing gets damaged?

thomas
1-May-2007, 07:05
This is one of the two dilemmas I'm facing. I already have too many photo bags as it is, and yet I don't have a back back that will fit my field camera. The last short hike I did, I had to carry the camera in a a shoulder (which I find very uncomfortable). I'm looking into a Photo Trekker AW II as a good compromise between a true hiker's back-pack and a dedicated backpack. I have a feeling this will not be the last backpack I buy.

I had the same problem last week on a trek to WV - I adapted a cheap backpack (with wheels on the bottom, which is nice for places where it can roll) by putting the field camera into a cooler bag, and the lenses into a smaller cooler bag, and all fit into the backpack. My conclusion - next time I'll try making padded partitions for the gear in the backpack.

Thomas

Rakesh Malik
1-May-2007, 07:50
Another option worth checking out is Kinesis; I use one of their Journeyman packs with several add-ons and pouches, and it works well for my kit. And I'm one of the carry everything types... :)

Gordon Moat
1-May-2007, 11:14
to me making 300 is a bad move, with 200 loaded, it is not very comfortable. I can not imagine a loaded 300.

It really is something that needs to be tried in person. I would not recommend getting one of the Slingshot bags without trying one on first. The 300 is scaled up everywhere from the 200, with a wider shoulder strap, wider back area, and generally much more room. It is a little weird to get off an on, unless you unbuckle, but then you are handling the bag by the strap.

I had an extensive shoulder repair done in the past (surfing accident) leaving five titanium rods in my left shoulder. Comfort is a big issue with any bags I use. The wider strap on the 300 helped that comfort level over the 200, but these are not backpacks. The Lowepro Slingshot series is not good for having a bag on your shoulder for many hours; it is better when you are constantly in and out of your bag, or for short carry times. A backpack would be much better for longer carry times, or when you do not need to get into your bag that often. With that in mind, I have not made a decision to get a Lowepro Slingshot bag, though I might at some point in the future.

As someone else mentioned, carrying a tripod is another issue. I got the Manfrotto sling for my tripod, but it is not really that great for long time carry use. When I have my backpack, I usually place the tripod in the centre carry set-up. Another thing I have considered is the leg padding for my tripod, which might make it more comfortable.

Probably more than a few of us end up with several bags, each for different sets of gear. I even have a should bag for my smaller format cameras, and a couple lighting gear bags. I also have a giant rolling duffle when I need several cameras and assorted gear (lights, grips, etc).

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
A G Studio (http://www.allgstudio.com)

Sheldon N
1-May-2007, 21:50
I've found a system with my Osprey that works quite well, no shifting of the gear and no damage, even on extended hikes. It's hard to describe solely with words, so I'll attach a few photos.

The first two photos are just the exterior of the pack. Yes, it has one of those fancy trampoline backs! :)

The interior shot shows how I arrange the gear. The Gnass 3 lens case (which contains 4 lenses - 120, 150, 240 & 300) makes up the foundation of the pack at the bottom. At the bottom right edge is the Gnass Rapid File 3 pouch film holder (Contains Fuji Quickload holder, 15 or so Quickloads, and 2 conventional holders for B&W). At the bottom left edge is a filter wallet (with roughly 6 filters and Cokin Holder/2 ND Grads). The Wista DX (in neoprene case) sits in the center of the pack on top of the Gnass Lens Case. The Sekonic L558 in case is at the top left of the pack, and the BTZS Darkcloth fills the empty space at the top center. Loupe is in the zippered interior pocket at the top, a homemade wire/string scene and focal length finder plus a level are in the exterior back pocket, an Olympus XA rides in one belt pocket, and a cool caribiner/backpack hanger rides in the other belt pocket.

I got tired of putting my backpack in the dirt on the ground so I bought some canvas strapping and a lightweight/high strength climbing caribiner to hang my backpack from. The internal frame of the pack rests against the tripod legs, so it doesn't hang underneath and swing in the wind. This is shown fully set up in the fourth photo.

When shooting I just set up the tripod, hang the backpack, hang the film holder, then set up the camera while working out of the bottom of the backpack (only partially unzipped). It's faster to lay the pack on the ground if it's a nice clean/dry area, but I don't mind working out of the hanging pack either.

All in all it's a setup I'm quite pleased with. Hope this is helpful to you all!

Eric James
1-May-2007, 22:20
Very nice Sheldon! The trampoline back doesn't seem to interfere with the panel loading design; I’ve seen these as top-loaders mostly. Thanks for the detail post.

Lee S
2-May-2007, 09:54
Hi Steve,
I have a neat arrangment using a back pack by "Case Logic". I picked it up at Fryes Electronic for US $120.00. it is well paded and has all of my LF gear which includes two lenses and eight film holders. If you can find someone over there that stocks the brand, you might take a look.
Leland

ljb0904
2-May-2007, 11:43
I use Lowepro phototrekker ii for day hikes. After I've loaded it with gear, food, water, and spare clothes it pushes 40 lbs. I'm good for 2-3 hours at that weight and then it starts to wear on me. At the end of an 8 hour day, I can't wait to get the damn thing off. But it is convenient for quick access.

For backpacking, I'm going to trim down to 15.8 lbs for photo gear, at least that's my plan. (I still have yet to go BPing with this junk.) I'll carry everything including tent, 2 days of food, water, sleeping bag, stove in my Osprey Aether 70. All that added up to about 40 lbs when I weighed it the other day. Not so bad for a weekender.

justin mueller
2-May-2007, 13:16
I went down to a second hand shop and bought an old '70's style exposed frame hiking backpack, removed the existing pack, and made up some webbing with snap-clips to tie my lowe pro nova 5 pack onto the frame as well as a tripod. This is A BETTER backpack than my lowe-pro trekker that i used to have. The camera is secure in it's nomal environment and the load is well distributed...and it cost the equivalent of $5-00. Ok maybe not a trendy looking fashion item, but how many times have you been asked of your ebony : "sir ? is that an old-fashioned camera?"

Dave_B
2-May-2007, 14:11
FWIW, I use the Photobackpacker system and find that it works very well for my 4x5 system. The cases for the camera and lenses are solid but quite light, the Kelty backpack that they modify works well and is comfortable for long hikes. It opens up completely to allow easy access to the gear when shooting. There is a nice pocket on the side that my Gitzo tripod fits into and stays safe with a stap that holds in in place. I've walked a long way with this gear and find it easy to carry and efficient to use when taking pictures. It gets my vote.
Cheers,
Dave B.

Rider
7-May-2007, 19:08
How about the Lowepro Vertex 300? It seems a lot lighter than the Photo Trekker, but the same size.

Don Boyd
7-May-2007, 19:54
One more option. I just ordered an REI Mars backpack that is both front and top loading. I needed something larger than my Lowepro Pro AW II so that I could do multiple day trips with my gear. I have done a lot of online research about which backpacking harnesses work the best and the REI Mars consistently received very high marks. At 5200 cubic inches it should carry my Arcas Swiss, too many lenses, etc., along with some minimalist camping gear. Here is a site from one photographer who is already using this system: http://baconphoto.com/equip.shtml. And, the Mars is on sale at REI's site for $134.95, down from $195 (Although, I just got on line to post the URL and the pack is no longer listed. So, the warehouse may be out but it is possible that some still exist in their stores?)