Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Waterproof bags  (Read 7731 times)
Peter Morse
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6


« on: May 27, 2007, 01:01:46 AM »
ReplyReply

Most of my photography involves the outdoors and fly fishing so I'm always around water, either  on the ocean in boats, on the beach, or rocks or in the bush on a river or a lake. Much of it also involves a good deal of hiking. I have tried several different types of bags and have dismissed them for various reasons - too bulky, too difficult to get into, too small, too large, not really water proof etc. I'm reducing what I carry on longer hikes (I'm on the wrong side of 50!) to one body (Canon 5D) two lenses (17-40 - to probably be replced by a 24-105,  and a 70-200 f5.6 with a 1.4 extender) and a flash unit.

I'm currently looking at the Ortlieb Aqua cam but dimensions are misleading as there are no indications of the thickness of the padding. Has anyone tried one - I can't find them locally (I'm in Australia). Any other recommendations would be appreciated OR SOMEONE PLEASE MAKE SOMETHING!!!!!!!!!!

Thanks.
« Last Edit: May 27, 2007, 01:03:53 AM by Peter Morse » Logged
fennario
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 61



« Reply #1 on: May 27, 2007, 09:36:12 AM »
ReplyReply

Neoprene wraps and a dry-bag might work (The bomb-proof PVC kind made for canoeing/rafting/etc. which one rolls up and clips shut with a fast-tek).  This bag will be fully waterproof and nicely shock resistant.  Given the gear you want to pack, the dry-bag can be pretty small and should easily fit inside a normal daypack.  


http://www.rei.com/online/store/ProductDis...t_cat=undefined

Accessibility will be the biggest draw back (having to open the backpack, bag, and a wrap), but the easier it is to get to, the less the protection.  Lowezone Dryzone backpacks may be another option, they are fully waterproof and float, but are bigger, bulkier, and heavier.[IMG]http://media.rei.com/
« Last Edit: May 27, 2007, 09:43:18 AM by fennario » Logged
ndevlin
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 514



WWW
« Reply #2 on: May 27, 2007, 09:38:00 AM »
ReplyReply

Peter,

Have you rejected the Lowepro waterproof bags? The smaller of them, the Dryzone 100 is a fairly reasonable size. More than you need for your setup, but it would leave speace for some of your other essentials.

I agree that these bags are a lot of hassle and size for limited return, which makes me wonder if you really need true waterproof.  In Antarctica, most of us stopped using using or sealing-up our Dryzones, just because it was such a pain. Foolish,  I know, but the human reality. Unless you are doing serious canoe-in trips, I wouldn't use one.

Cheers,

- N.
Logged

Nick Devlin   @onelittlecamera
Hank
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 679


« Reply #3 on: May 27, 2007, 09:40:03 AM »
ReplyReply

My uses and age are similar, though I live well north of the equator.  Like you, I long for better solutions.  In the meantime I rely on a small "dry bag" intended for boating.  No shoulder straps or padding, but it fits nicely into a daypack.  Within that, my lenses go into padded MAS pouches from Tamrac, which I also use away from the water to suspend gear from a belt.  None of the pouches are right for a largish DSLR body, so I simply wrap mine in a small hand towel.

Not a perfect solution, but it works.
Logged
MarkKay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 587


WWW
« Reply #4 on: May 27, 2007, 11:42:35 AM »
ReplyReply

I am going on a rafting trip and purchased the smaller dryzone.  It is heavier but seems really well designed.  I have not tried it yet in the field. I probably would not need something so water proof if I was exclusively using it for hiking etc.  Most good backpacks are water repellant but if there is any chance for going over board or large amounts of water --- well not worth taking the risk.

Quote
Most of my photography involves the outdoors and fly fishing so I'm always around water, either  on the ocean in boats, on the beach, or rocks or in the bush on a river or a lake. Much of it also involves a good deal of hiking. I have tried several different types of bags and have dismissed them for various reasons - too bulky, too difficult to get into, too small, too large, not really water proof etc. I'm reducing what I carry on longer hikes (I'm on the wrong side of 50!) to one body (Canon 5D) two lenses (17-40 - to probably be replced by a 24-105,  and a 70-200 f5.6 with a 1.4 extender) and a flash unit.

I'm currently looking at the Ortlieb Aqua cam but dimensions are misleading as there are no indications of the thickness of the padding. Has anyone tried one - I can't find them locally (I'm in Australia). Any other recommendations would be appreciated OR SOMEONE PLEASE MAKE SOMETHING!!!!!!!!!!

Thanks.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=119785\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
John Camp
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1258


« Reply #5 on: May 27, 2007, 12:02:52 PM »
ReplyReply

I spend quite a bit of time in small fishing boats and canoes, and have tried a variety of different bags. I currently use a soft bag that I bought at a fishing store designed to keep a six-pack of beer cool -- it's waterproofed nylon on the outside, has insulation which serves as padding, and has a full plastic liner. There are three pockets arouind the edges for small accessories. While it might not be technically waterproof, the inside plastic liner is seamless, and no water has ever gotten in. But -- it's not a backpack style. It looks like a squarish old-fashioned camera bag with a shoulder strap. I put a Domke liner in it to separate lenses from body. In terms of size, it's big enough to hold a six-pack plus one of those plastic "blue ice" things that you freeze and then use for cooling...so say about half again the size of a six-pack. Mine was made by Rapala, the fishing gear maker, and I bought it on-sale for about US $20. The store had quite a variety of the things, in different shapes and sizes; I don't carry my Nikon gear in it, but I believe it would hold a D2x body and as many as four lenses, if they were smaller.

Take a look -- you can find them in any well-stocked fishing store, assuming that Australians drink beer.  

JC
Logged
Peter Morse
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6


« Reply #6 on: May 27, 2007, 04:58:10 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks guys, I realised this is in the wrong section - first time here........

I had one of the Lowepro dryzones - the large one and wore it out, the zipper in particular. Access is also a problem with three layers to open and shut everytime you want to get in there. I currently have a roll top dry seal back pack made by Wetex that I'm using and have fitted the inner lining from a Lowepro D550AW into it, and even though I had the depth of it reduced by a local bag maker its still like the black hole of Calcutta to get stuff out of and to put stuff into - it is fully waterproof though as I have found out through experience.

The Ortlieb single camera pack is a beauty with a heavy duty ziplock style seal and then a roll top - its really waterproof and friends who use tham say they fallen into rivers and had it fully submerged  without a problem - but its only a single camera unit.

It astonishes me that no one has really made anything suitable because I'm certain the demand would be there from hikers, canoeists, skiers, fishermen etc etc etc. Everything currently available is a compromise.

Morsie
« Last Edit: May 27, 2007, 05:00:28 PM by Peter Morse » Logged
David Anderson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 464



WWW
« Reply #7 on: May 27, 2007, 05:34:24 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I am going on a rafting trip and purchased the smaller dryzone.  It is heavier but seems really well designed.  I have not tried it yet in the field. I probably would not need something so water proof if I was exclusively using it for hiking etc.  Most good backpacks are water repellant but if there is any chance for going over board or large amounts of water --- well not worth taking the risk.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=119843\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Mark, Morsie and I both use/used the Dri-zones and hate them.
The zippers are at best crap, they need constant attention and seperate with even a small amoumt of pressure.
I'm on my second after returning the first for zipper failure, my current one has done around a dozen trips and the zipper no longer stays together, I will not be replacing it.
The design of the bag also makes it a long process to get your gear and adds a lot of weight.

How hard could it be to make a camera backpack that protects your gear from rain ( don't anybody talk about those silly little rain covers that only work in drizzle ) and impact, carry a small tripod and not weigh more then the gear..

Wasn't a man put on the moon around 40 years ago ?
Logged

lightstand
Guest
« Reply #8 on: May 29, 2007, 09:53:48 AM »
ReplyReply

not specificily for cameras, but for a good dry bag look at the Watershed bags their site is drybags.com, jeff
Logged
gerry s
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 19


WWW
« Reply #9 on: May 29, 2007, 01:44:19 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
not specificily for cameras, but for a good dry bag look at the Watershed bags their site is drybags.com, jeff
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=120111\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

What bags did most of you find suitable on the antatrctic trip, Ive looked at the dryzones and they seem terribly ungainly.
Logged
Nill Toulme
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 741



WWW
« Reply #10 on: May 29, 2007, 03:07:42 PM »
ReplyReply

I use two waterproof bags on my flyfishing trips.  One is a Patagonia daypack that I don't think they make anymore.  It's basically one waterproof zippered bag in a sling arrangement with straps that makes it into a very serviceable daypack, but not one with all the little extra pockets and such that we tend to be accustomed to on that sort of pack.  The zipper is a little stiff, but it's usable.

The other one gets a lot more use and is still available. It's the Simms Dry Creek Roll-Top Lumbar Pack, basically a smallish drybag in the form of a fanny pack.  It's the perfect size to hold a smaller DSLR and a couple of lenses, and the roll top makes it reasonably easy to get in and out of — I'm usually standing in the middle of the stream when I do it.  I wear it in lieu of a wading belt, and use it to carry whatever my travel rig is at the moment, currently a 400D with 17-85 IS and 70-300 IS.  Recommended.  Simms also has a few other packs in their Dry Creek waterproof line.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net
Logged
heinrichvoelkel
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 368


« Reply #11 on: May 29, 2007, 03:40:22 PM »
ReplyReply

Hello,

I'm not sure if Rimowa in Germany is still making those, but these are waterproof and you can stand on them, very reliable and well constructed. They are called the ultralight series. Very accesable, but offer a lot of protection. Tese bags/boxes were available in various sizes, a small one and a large one. I think the samll one would be good for you.

http://i23.ebayimg.com/03/i/000/a1/f2/0953_1.JPG


RIMOWA link

These bags show up quite frequently on ebay, at least over here in Germany at  ebay.de

Regards
Logged
heinrichvoelkel
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 368


« Reply #12 on: May 29, 2007, 03:52:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Sorry, just called Rimowa and they are not making them anymore. But they confirmed me, they were waterproof. Maybe you have to look at ebay.

Regards Heinrich
Logged
Peter Morse
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6


« Reply #13 on: May 29, 2007, 05:02:22 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for your suggestions guys - Watershed make great bags, I've had a good look at their larger ones and I believe they will do custom jobs - obviously at a price. Simms is good stuff too, might be just a tad small but I'll look into one.

Cheers.

Peter
Logged
CatOne
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 381


WWW
« Reply #14 on: May 30, 2007, 10:42:34 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
What bags did most of you find suitable on the antatrctic trip, Ive looked at the dryzones and they seem terribly ungainly.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=120141\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Most people had the DryZone bags. Use the included lube on the zippers, and they work pretty well.  The lub is ABSOLUTELY MANDATORY or you will most definitely have separation problems with the zipper.

Others used the "stuff sacks" where you drop the backpack in the sack, get to shore on the Zodiac, and remove the bag.  A much cheaper route -- and works great as long as it's not raining on shore.

I personally had a DryZone 200 and think it's a very good bag.  Yes, access is a bit slow, and it's tough to reach stuff in teh bottom of the bag due to design, but IMO a very useful, very functional bag.  And I'd say there were at least 20 of those bags on the Antarctica trip.
Logged

jorgedelfino
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 90


WWW
« Reply #15 on: June 04, 2007, 10:35:18 AM »
ReplyReply

I sailed halfway around the world on a small boat, with a nikonos III and then a V, the beauty of them is that you dont need the bag!
Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #16 on: June 13, 2007, 04:58:36 PM »
ReplyReply

Waterproof bags; and it sounded such a potentially exciting topic! Guess you´d need a couple if you were sailing around the world with them - hope they could cook!

Rob C
Logged

MarkKay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 587


WWW
« Reply #17 on: June 13, 2007, 06:44:54 PM »
ReplyReply

After reading previous posts, i might not have ordered a dryzone but since I had already taken delivery, I was stuck.  I have to agree with you once i put the lube on the zipper worked fine and I took the bag on a white water rafting trip and no problems.  SO what is that lube made out of so I can buy some more when the time comes?

Quote
Most people had the DryZone bags. Use the included lube on the zippers, and they work pretty well.  The lub is ABSOLUTELY MANDATORY or you will most definitely have separation problems with the zipper.

Others used the "stuff sacks" where you drop the backpack in the sack, get to shore on the Zodiac, and remove the bag.  A much cheaper route -- and works great as long as it's not raining on shore.

I personally had a DryZone 200 and think it's a very good bag.  Yes, access is a bit slow, and it's tough to reach stuff in teh bottom of the bag due to design, but IMO a very useful, very functional bag.  And I'd say there were at least 20 of those bags on the Antarctica trip.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=120354\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
David Anderson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 464



WWW
« Reply #18 on: June 14, 2007, 01:56:50 AM »
ReplyReply

I would keep an eye on the zipper Mark - they work well for a while.  

I now use 'Ziptech' from Aquaseal.
Logged

Jack Varney
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 392


WWW
« Reply #19 on: June 18, 2007, 05:33:25 PM »
ReplyReply

Don't have a Drizone but I have found paraffin to be a good lube for zippers. They run smoother and the wax does not come off on contact with equipment or clotheing. Rub the bottom of a candle on the zipper to test it.
Logged

Jack Varney
Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad