When the hot weather arrives, go to the corner drug store or Wal-Mart
and buy some of those foam rubber covers for keeping your beer can
cold on the beach. They cost $1.00 each, they can hold viewfinders
(or lenses for that matter), and they are indestructable.
Regards, Bob S.
On Thu, 17 Mar
Quoting Bob Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
When the hot weather arrives, go to the corner drug store or Wal-Mart
and buy some of those foam rubber covers for keeping your beer can
cold on the beach. They cost $1.00 each, they can hold viewfinders
(or lenses for that matter), and they are
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Quoting Bob Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
When the hot weather arrives, go to the corner drug store
or Wal-Mart
and buy some of those foam rubber covers for keeping your beer can
cold on the beach. They cost $1.00 each, they can hold viewfinders
(or lenses
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Quoting Bob Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
When the hot weather arrives, go to the corner drug store or Wal-Mart
and buy some of those foam rubber covers for keeping your beer can
cold on the beach. They cost $1.00 each, they can hold viewfinders
(or lenses for that
Sorry, no dogs and the yooungest kid is 20.
...but they are nearly indestructible :-)
Regards, Bob S.
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 11:06:43 -0500, Peter J. Alling
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Quoting Bob Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
When the hot weather arrives, go to the
I am looking at my camera bag and it needs to be retired. I would like to
replace it with a backpack, but I have not figured out where to put my LX
viewfinders. Where do you put the viewfinders in a camera backpack? Any
suggestions?
Village Idiot
- Original Message -
From: Village Idiot
Subject: Camera bags/backpacks
I am looking at my camera bag and it needs to be retired. I would
like to replace it with a backpack, but I have not figured out where
to put my LX viewfinders. Where do you put the viewfinders in a
camera
Thanks for the suggestion. I am sure that my wife will be very pleased to hear
that.
Village Idiot
- Original Message -
From: Village Idiot
Subject: Camera bags/backpacks
I am looking at my camera bag and it needs to be retired. I would
like to replace it with a backpack
Don't they come with a case, that will fit in the backpack?
I use a Lowepro Micro Trekker 200. Brilliant for walking - keeps you back
safe!
Can contain a samll 35mm/*isr D or a 6x6 Pentacon Six outfit.
http://www.lowepro.com/Products/Backpacks/classic/Micro_Trekker_200.aspx
Jens Bladt
mailto
Hi,
The problem with much of the good quality stuff is that (I get
the impression) one pays a significant portion for the name on
it. Whether this can be fairly attributed to RD costs, etc.,
I'm not really able to tell.
Certainly, good names don't seem to be of higher quality in
proportion to
- Original Message -
From: David A. Mann
Subject: Re: Camera backpacks
William Robb wrote:
Another case of 6x7 misconceptions.
To be honest I had assumed that you had some bigger/heavier
lenses.
Don't you have the just-short-of-40-pounds 800mm f/4? :)
I wish. I saw one
Bob Sullivan and I saw one of those at the Helix store in Chicago last
year. Wow! That's one big lens, and in a moment of greed and lust I
did a mental calculation of my bank balance ...
Thoughts of that lens brings up a question. When using a teleconverter,
the effective focal length of a
it custom-made from them ?
Thanks in advacne.
Anand.
From: Kevin Hall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Camera backpacks
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 21:59:49 +
My main bag is actually a cyclists' courier bag made by a company called
Timbuk2 in San
I have the old-style LowePro MiniTrekker. This weekend, I had the 67
with the 75mm attached at the top and the ME Super on the winder ME II
with the A* 200mm f2.8 attached at the bottom, with the 67's 105mm,
helicoid extension tube and my Sekonic 308 down one side and three 67mm
filters in
On Sunday, March 17, 2002, at 02:44 PM, William Robb wrote:
I have a MiniTrekker that does well for my 35mm gear (it holds
an amazing amount of equipment), but I don't think it is deep
enough to take the 6x7 body with prism and lens.
I don't know about the new version, but the old
William wrote:
I am looking at the following backpacks from LowePro:
Super Trekker AW
Pro Trekker AW
Photo Trekker AW
Photo Trekker Classic.
I am wondering if anyone has used any of these backpacks and can
comment, either favourably or otherwise.
The pack will have to carry a 6x7 body with meter
William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am in the market for a new backpack for my 6x7 gear, as I have
outgrown my previous camera bag.
I am looking at the following backpacks from LowePro:
Super Trekker AW
Pro Trekker AW
Photo Trekker AW
Photo Trekker Classic.
I am wondering if anyone has used
-0500, Mark Roberts wrote:
William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am in the market for a new backpack for my 6x7 gear, as I have
outgrown my previous camera bag.
I am looking at the following backpacks from LowePro:
Super Trekker AW
Pro Trekker AW
Photo Trekker AW
Photo Trekker Classic.
I am
Another pack that has not been mentioned in the Beseler Sedona 920. I use
one for my Kiev88 gear. I like the upper compartment as I can keep the prism
and 250mm lens mounted on the body and it fits with no problem. The lower
will hold several lenses and other items.
For my 35mm, I have a Lowepro
.
Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto
- Original Message -
From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 16, 2002 7:25 PM
Subject: Re: Camera backpacks
Tom, the reason I
JeffW. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For my 35mm, I have a Lowepro MiniTreker. A good bag but I
never could get
the medium format equipment to fit.
Hi,
I am eventually able to post something to the list after a week
so busy I couldn't imagine...
William's question is interesting, and I was a bit
- Original Message -
From: Gianfranco Irlanda
Subject: Re: Camera backpacks
JeffW. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For my 35mm, I have a Lowepro MiniTreker. A good bag but I
never could get
the medium format equipment to fit.
Hi,
I am eventually able to post something to the list
William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have a MiniTrekker that does well for my 35mm gear (it holds
an amazing amount of equipment), but I don't think it is deep
enough to take the 6x7 body with prism and lens. Also, I do
find
the backpack to be a bit unhandy. One of the things I was
at the following backpacks from LowePro:
WR Super Trekker AW
WR Pro Trekker AW
WR Photo Trekker AW
WR Photo Trekker Classic.
WR I am wondering if anyone has used any of these backpacks and can
WR comment, either favourably or otherwise.
WR The pack will have to carry a 6x7 body with meter prism and 7
WR lenses
At 14:14 16/03/2002 -0600, you wrote:
I am in the market for a new backpack for my 6x7 gear, as I have
outgrown my previous camera bag.
I am looking at the following backpacks from LowePro:
Super Trekker AW
Pro Trekker AW
Photo Trekker AW
Photo Trekker Classic.
Well I have the Pro-Trekker AW
William Robb wrote:
The pack will have to carry a 6x7 body with meter prism and 7
lenses, plus filters and other dreck.
And you're going to carry that?!?
Cheers,
- Dave
http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/ (out of date)
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go
packs
and comfortable to wear. My only criticism is that they are not lightweight,
however this is in comparison to regular backpacks I think that the camera
padding adds a lot of weight. From memory I think the nature trekker is
about 6 lbs. HTH
If you decide you might be interested in a Nature
I can certainly second the problem with backpacks. It seems that
getting things in and out quickly just doesn't work well. I prefer
more of a shoulder bag that I can set down and flip the flap back and
grab the camera/lens. My backpack would have to be taken off and
unzipped and then get
Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 16, 2002 3:14 PM
Subject: Camera backpacks
I am in the market for a new backpack for my 6x7 gear, as I have
outgrown my previous camera bag.
I am looking at the following backpacks from LowePro:
Super Trekker AW
Pro Trekker AW
William Robb wrote:
I am in the market for a new backpack for my 6x7 gear, as I have
outgrown my previous camera bag.
I am looking at the following backpacks from LowePro:
Super Trekker AW
Pro Trekker AW
Photo Trekker AW
Photo Trekker Classic.
I am wondering if anyone has used any
.
Bruce Dayton
Saturday, March 16, 2002, 6:02:17 PM, you wrote:
WR - Original Message -
WR From: Doug Brewer
WR Subject: Re: Camera backpacks
To differ from the popular opinion, I like my photo backpack.
WR It is a mini trekker and I've had a 67II and 165/4 LS in it
WR along with a PZ-1p
looking at the following backpacks from LowePro:
Super Trekker AW
Pro Trekker AW
Photo Trekker AW
Photo Trekker Classic.
I am wondering if anyone has used any of these backpacks and can
comment, either favourably or otherwise.
The pack will have to carry a 6x7 body with meter prism and 7
If you want to shoot big film, you carry what you have to carry. I hiked
quite a few miles into La Jolla canyon last month carrying three lenses
(including the large 300/40, a 6x7 body, handheld meter, several
filters, and tripod. It was not a burden, and I didn't give it a second
thought. I
Paul Stenquist wrote:
If you want to shoot big film, you carry what you have to carry. I
hiked quite a few miles into La Jolla canyon last month carrying three
lenses (including the large 300/40, a 6x7 body, handheld meter,
several filters, and tripod. It was not a burden, and I didn't give
Paul,
I did similar when I was in Hawaii recently. We did the Diamond Head
hike and I took the 67 with 55, 90 and 165 lenses and miscellaneous
items. It was heavier than a 35mm, but the results were worth the
effort.
Bruce Dayton
Saturday, March 16, 2002, 8:22:58 PM, you wrote:
PS If you
- Original Message -
From: David A. Mann
Subject: Re: Camera backpacks
A body and three lenses is easy. Even I've done that, with
an RB67
kit of all things. My comment was directed at the body plus
_seven_
lenses... that weight's going to add up quickly. What I was
really
, but it was quite a bit heavier than the 67 kit.
I personally don't find the 67 as heavy and unwieldy as many believe
it to be.
Bruce
Saturday, March 16, 2002, 10:36:00 PM, you wrote:
WR - Original Message -
WR From: David A. Mann
WR Subject: Re: Camera backpacks
A body and three
But what about the rest of the stuff, the f***ng heavy photo gear
which I have to struggle with all the time and which bogs me down
slowing me way behind fellow hikers ;-)
Sorry to jump in late here...
I haven't managed to find a photo backpack that I like yet, so for now
I'm using
Raimo wrote:
What´s the difference between Orion AW and Orion Trekker? I have the
Trekker right
here for trial - should I get the AW instead?
I'm really not that familiar with the Orion Trekker. The Orion AW can be
split up and uses as both backpack, shoulderbag or beltpack. In addition,
Looks like the difference is that the Trekker cannot be split up.
Raimo K
Pål Audun Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Raimo wrote:
What´s the difference between Orion AW and Orion Trekker? I have the
Trekker right
here for trial - should I get the AW instead?
I'm really not that familiar
Thursday, February 07, 2002, 9:02:49 AM, Pål wrote:
[...]
Any solutions?
PAJ Yes. As I said, the Orion AW. The Orion AW is a backpack with room for
PAJ other stuff as well.
Hi Pàl (can't get the a with circle right g, sorry), but I think
that Orion AW is a daypack - it certainly isn't 80litre
Hi Albano and Alin,
thanks to both of you for suggestions.
I like Lowepro's SF system quite a lot (although it's expensive, I
was able to buy few bigger pieces at sale-out //is that the right
word?// bargain prices, I am considering getting such a small case
into which a camera
Hi Frantisek,
I carry a 80 l regular backpack too and found the Lowepro Off Trail 1
the best solution for having the camera handy, om my hip.
Additional gear that doesn't fit in the bag goes in the backpack,
in similar Lowepro interchangeable bags.
Servus, Alin
Frantisek
I'm not sure if I'm helping or not, having missed the first bit of the
conversation, however I own a LowePro SF Rover AW system which includes
the backpack, harness and dedicated waist belt (Approx USD 150 new). The
backpack breaks open in the middle and reveals a smallish compartment with
the
PROTECTED]
Vastaanottaja: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Päivä: 07. helmikuuta 2002 9:25
Aihe: Re: Backpacks (WAS: Re: Take two MZ-S's and call me when you get back)
Yes. As I said, the Orion AW. The Orion AW is a backpack with room for
other stuff as well.
Pål
-
This message is from
Wednesday, February 06, 2002, 3:31:45 PM, Pål wrote:
PAJ Aaron wrote:
If you haven't seen them, you should check out LowePro's Street Field
backpacks. The one I'm thinking of specifically is a half and half
bag -- the bottom half is a traditional semi-rigid style camera bag, and
the top half
Frantisek wrote:
PAJ The LowePro Orion AW works in the same manner. I highly recommend it. In
PAJ fact, I would not recommend anything larger than this.
I think the original poster wrote about stuffing MZ-S in backpack, not
daypack. For mountain hiking or what he wrote about, 65-85l backpack
47 matches
Mail list logo
