Does anyone have a backpack recommedation for a 6x7 with the TTL meter and 55 f/4 attached?

I think I have seen a couple of postings about Tamrac models and one of the Lowepro Trekker models, but I can't relocate these postings. Also, in checking out the specs on these packs, only the very largest of the packs seem to be able to accomodate the camera with the prism and lens attached.

I have measured the camera to be 7 inches in width (along the back), 6.5 inches in height (includes a Kirk QR plate), and 7 inches in depth (from eye cup to tip of lens).

I have tried the "regular" backpack thing and find that it is not convenient when it comes to accessing the gear. (Granted, regular packs are more comfortable, but I am willing to trade some comfort for the convenience...)

-- Deron Chang (dchang@choate.edu), January 16, 2000

Answers

I have used the Tamrac 767 backpack type for a number of years with good results. It fits under airliner seats well and will hold five lenses(<400mm)plus body and filters. If you plan on getting additional lenses beyond the 55mm, this Tamrac will hold them. There is another Tamrac backpack type that is 50% larger but if you fill it up with equipment, it weighs a ton! SR

-- Steve Rasmussen (srasmuss@flash.net), January 16, 2000.

Deron, the clearance is close on the Tamrac but the body will fit without removing the prism. It you have a quick release attached to the bottom of the body, it will still fit, although after much use, the paint will wear off the top of the prism. SR

-- Steve Rasmussen (srasmuss@flash.net), January 16, 2000.

I too have struggled with this dilemna! My first bag was a Targa 5400. I was able to hold a 67II with a 55-100 attached face down and a 165ls and 200mm in either of the side pockets. This bag "unfolds" leaving a space above the body to store film, meter, etc...

Recently I purchased a Lowepro Trim Trekker and have been very pleased with it. It's much smaller than their monster packs but since I carry a regular pack too, it's perfect for wearing on my chest where I have faster access.

Just my dos centavos! Hope it helps.

-- Rolf Strasheim (rolfs@ionet.net), January 16, 2000.

Thanks for the responses so far, but I do have a question...

I just checked the specs of the Tamarac 767 and the Lowepro Trim Trekker and they both have depth measurements under 6.5 inches (6 inches and 5.5 inches, respectively). Since the 6x7 with the TTL prism is almost 6.5 inches in depth (top of prism to the qr plate bottom) doesn't this present a fit problem? Is there more room than the specs say there is or am I going to have to resign myself to packing the camera without its prism attached.

I also remember someone in this group saying that removing the prism and lens in a certain order was required in order to prevent the little chain from breaking. Any truth to this?

-- Deron Chang (dchang@choate.edu), January 16, 2000.

A P67 with TTL prism with RRS plate attached fits fine in the Lowepro Trekker AW. Placed upright (with RRS plate down)the prism extends about 1/4 inch above the top of the bottom half of the pack. Don't forget the decending front lid is cushioned fabric and will give nicely to protruding objects.

-- Garrett Adams (gadams@jps.net), January 16, 2000.

These aren't hard cases. There is plenty of give in the padded cover. I use the Lowe Pro Mini Trekker. I carry a 67II with RRS plate, TTL prism, 105/2.4 and eyecup in the top of the pack pointing downward. I fold the eyecup back against the prism. Like Steve said, eventually the cover would wear paint off the top of the prism. Mine is black plastic so I won't worry about it.

On one side I have a 200/4 and a set of extension tubes.

On the other side I have a 55/4 and an empty slot the size of the 200/4. I sometimes carry my camcorder there.

I have a 35/4 fisheye in the bottom center pointing downward and a couple small pockets between it and the 67. These will hold a point&shoot and a good amount of spare film.

You can pack quite a bit into even the smaller backpacks. I haven't been happy with any arrangement of the tripod straps though and I still just carry it over my shoulder.

-- Chuck Bernards (chuckb@hevanet.com), January 16, 2000.

Deron, I have a Lowepro Nature Trekker and fit my P67II in the upper part of it, face down. As you stated the height of the camera+AE prism+release plate exceed the depth of the case but it's not a hard case so it will fit anyway. In order to prevent wearing off of the paint I put an adhesive piece of foam attached to the internal part of the backpack cover although when I travel I remove the prism from the body. Furthermore I made a corrugated plastic backbone (I modeled myself using my kitchen stove)and stick in the large internal pocket of the backpack cover in order to improve its stiffness. The backbone is as wide as the backpack and only 15-20 cm high (thus covering only the upper part of it). The edges of the plastic backbone lean on the foam main frame of the backpack so the shock are absorbed by the case not by the camera and thanks to the corrugated shape I have also protected extra room for the prism.

Ciao, Roberto

-- Roberto Manderioli (ik4jqw@amsat.org), January 17, 2000.

Deron, there is a genious invention called LowePro Mini Trekker. Here's why:

It is almost perfect for my Pentax 67. I can squeeze two 67 bodies comfortably in it, and four to five lenses, leaving space for a lightmeter and film. My record was a recent session : two 67 bodies, one with a grip, and a Polaroid 600 SE with 127mm lens and a timer clock fixed w/velcro, 2 SMC lenses, Pentax eyecup magnifier (but detached from the prism), Pentax 'chimney' focusing hood, 3 5-packs of 120 Kodak VS, Sekonic 408 meter, a Yashica T5 compact camera, cleaning cloths, levellers, a spare roll of 120 Portra and my Panodia VF reporter vest. The Mini Trekker looked like it would explode, but the zipper closed normally and it provided the carrying protection I needed for the day. Mind you, I didn't trek with it, I only used it to go from location to location on a fashion shoot. Once there, my equipment was put out and used, only to be packed back in (every time a bit differently, this happens when you are in a hurry) and taken to a new location. The Mini Trekker is my #1 bag (or make that backpack), the other two being a LowePro Super Trekker AW in which I store my entire Pentax 67 stuff (3 bodies, several lenses etc.) and take with me on bigger jobs AND my trusty Domke F2 for EOS equipment. It is the best combination for my personal needs, but you must find your own set of bags while going through a process of acquiring/testing them and see which suits your needs, fulfills your expectations and fits your style.

-- Alex B. (samedobrefotke@hotmail.com), January 18, 2000.

On a related note, my 67II with TTL prism does not fit a Tamrac Half Moon hip pack in any convenient orientation, with or without lens mounted. My Half Moon is a holdover from my 35mm gear, but it is too shallow for the 67II body no matter how you arrange the internal pads. The only way to pack the body so that the top zips shut easily is to lie it flat, which isn't much use. Just FYI in case someone was contemplating this pack as a light bag for their 67 gear. It's a great bag for 35mm, though.

-- Bill Baker (wab@well.com), January 26, 2000.

Well, I went to the store to check out the suggested packs and this is what I found:

The Tamrac 767 and 777 have harness systems that are too small for my body (I'm only 6 feet tall). As a result, too much of the weight is transferred to my shoulders. If I loosen the shoulder straps to the point where the waist belt takes some of the weight, the pads on the bottom end of the shoulder straps are practically behind my back. (Even with the adjustable harness system on the 777 racked all the way up.)

The Lowepro trim trekker and the Minitrekker are too small to fit much beyond the essentials and don't have the quality harness systems of the larger packs (of course, since you carry less weight, there is not as much of a need). I clearly want to have more room to allow for expandability.

The Nature Trekker AW and the Phototrekker AW seem to be the way to go (so far), but the zippers are so difficult to unzip (as compared to the Tamrac packs). If only I could combine the Tamrac bags with the Lowepro suspension systems...

Has anyone tried one of the f64 packs? I might need to take a trip to B&H this weekend.

-- Deron Chang (dchang@choate.edu), January 31, 2000.

One question you have to answer is how strong are you? A 6inch high Lowepro will work fine for the 67II with AE viewer, lens and tripod quik-connect. I am happy with the Lowepro AW Trekker (12x6x19) which holds my 67II with 300mm mounted and with 45mm, 90 mm and 165mm beside it. That's at the bottom. At the top is my Nikon 6006 with 80- 200 mounted and quik-connect, 20, 28PC, 35, 50, TC200, 600f9. And strapped securely on the outside is my 135-400 for the Nikon. I carry my Bogen 3036. This holds all my gear plus film, filters and batteries. It weighs 35 lbs. I mainly carry it from the house to the car and then work on landscape photos from the car! I can carry it into the woods 1/2 mile and, hopefully, back.

-- Tom Goodrick (tgoodrick@earthlink.net), February 04, 2000.

I took the plunge and bought a TENBA P264 (large pack with medium format divider system). This is the best pack for the job. I promise you.

The Tenba shoulder harness and waistbelt system is far more advanced (like a combination of Mountainsmith and Gregory real backpack systems) than any other pack. Comfort makes a huge difference especially when you consider the weight of the P67 system.

I tried ALL the packs at B&H last weekend: Lowepro, f64, Tamrac, Domke. While the divider systems are pretty much identical within equivalent sized packs, the shoulder harnesses and waistbelts varied considerably. (Tamrac bag quality was great but they were the least comfortable on my body.) Tenba was the best all around. Check it out if you are in the market for a new pack.

-- Deron (dchang@choate.edu), February 11, 2000.