Lowepro Photo Classic Vs. Photo AW

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Large format photography : One Thread


Looking into buying a Lowepro bag for my Large format equipment.

Im deciding between the photo trekker classic and photo trekker AW.

what are the diffenrences between the two? is it worth the $80 difference?

Thanks for the advice...

-- Enrique Vila (evilap@hotmail.com), March 10, 2002


I was in the same situation one month ago: I went for the Photo Trekker AW and haven't regretted the choice. The AW version is extremely well padded, and having owned another AW backpack for a few years I would say the padding is important to protect our expensive equipment. The cons are cost and weight (3.2 Kg + the equipment = well over 10Kg on your shoulders). But in the end IMHO I would say it is worth the extra $ . Ciao

-- Roberto Manderioli (rmander@libero.it), March 10, 2002.

I used to have the original PhotoTrekker and recently got the PT AW. Highly recommended, better harness, larger and still cary-on-able for airline travel.

-- Jeffrey Scott (jscott@datavoice.net), March 10, 2002.

Enrique: I carry a Linhof Master Technika with 5 lenses, 10 holders and a case for about 8 Lee filters along with lens hood and focusing cloth in the Pro Trecker AW. This all fills the backpack to the hilt. It is a perfect fit with no space to spare. Everything else goes into a bellypack such as meter, small flashlight, loupe, etc.; The tripod goes on the shoulder. The Pro Trekker is a little larger than the Photo Trekker and one size smaller than the Super Trekker. The Super Trekker is perfect for LF, being a little larger. I have it but I have had to reduce weight, ---in the backpack, so the ST stays home. I also tried several regular packs. Those can have an excellent fit, slightly better than photo backpacks, but are pitiful for removing and putting equipment back quickly. If you are tall enough and strong enough I'd recommend the Super Trekker, but the Photo Trekker I think is OK for 35mm but too small for large format. Lowe Pro makes an outstanding product with excellent guarantee. Get the AW, keeps the bag dry in a sudden downpour.

-- Julio Fernandez (gluemax@sympatico.ca), March 10, 2002.

Depends what you want to carry. I had the original version of the Phototrekker which was bigger than the current version - I found it great for MF and for a small LF outfit. But I got the Super trekker for my full outfit and its great!! It does weigh a lot when empty, but the harness makes it feel half the weight when carrying it. If the Super is too big for you then take a look at the Pro, same harness as the super but a bit smaller. BTW, I like having a pack bag that allows a bit of spare space when full, this means that I have a work space for putting screens, loupes, meters, lenses etc when setting up a shot etc.

-- paul owen (paulowen_2000@yahoo.com), March 11, 2002.

I too use Phototrekker AW, has been brilliant. Manage to carry Ebony RSW45, 90 and 120 lenses, 6x12rfh, bronica SQA with 80 and 150lenses, meter, loupe , filters and in front pckets I put 10DDslides. Once taken I swap the DDS to pocket on other side. Needless to say not much room left which my wife and bank is happy about! Harness is very comfy

-- Baxter Bradford (baxter.bradford@btopenworld.com), March 15, 2002.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ