Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Michael -- review of Think Tank backpack?  (Read 10043 times)
marty m
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 335


WWW
« on: January 12, 2006, 02:05:07 AM »
ReplyReply

In your discussion of equipment that you used in China, you mention the Think Tank Photo Addicted to Airports bag.  You apparently stopped using the Moose backpack and switched to the Think Tank backpack.  You said that a review is forthcoming.

I suspect that other demands on your time have prevented the posting of your review.  So, in the meantime, could you briefly summarize what you think the strengths and weaknesses are of the Think Tank packpack as compared with the Moose MP-1 bag?  Comparing the two in features; capacity; ergonomics and comfort as a backpack, etc?  How did the Think Tank backpack work for a carry-on bag for international and domestic flights?

Thanks  very much for your response.
Logged
mikeseb
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 482



WWW
« Reply #1 on: January 12, 2006, 07:11:44 AM »
ReplyReply

I second the motion. I am trying to find a bag that will contain a Contax 645 and about 5 lenses, a few film backs, and assorted gewgaws. I have a cavernous LowePro shoulder bag, but getting stuff out is like an archaeological dig. Other backpacks are just too heavily padded, and therefore heavy.

Any input from Michael, or anyone else, re Think Tank or Moose bags would be welcomed.
Logged

michael sebastian
Website  |  Blog
michael
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Online Online

Posts: 4782



« Reply #2 on: January 12, 2006, 09:03:38 AM »
ReplyReply

You're right. My Thinktank review got sideswiped by a few other priorities.

It's a great bag. Possibly the best one out there. But, it is very heavy. Just the opposite probem of the Moose bag, which whiule very light isn't sturdy enough.

I hope to have a review some time soon.

Michael
Logged
bob mccarthy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 372


WWW
« Reply #3 on: January 12, 2006, 09:09:47 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
It's a great bag. Possibly the best one out there. But, it is very heavy. Just the opposite probem of the Moose bag, which whiule very light isn't sturdy enough.


Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=55828\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

QUESTION : "Not sturdy" meaning :  

poor construction or

lack of padding/protection   or

All the above?


I cell foam (wetsuit material) wrap all my lenses within the bags/backpacks for additional protection. I was thinking the Moose was protective enough. But is it durable enough?

Bob
« Last Edit: January 12, 2006, 01:04:38 PM by bob mccarthy » Logged
eleanorbrown
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 612


WWW
« Reply #4 on: January 12, 2006, 09:38:47 AM »
ReplyReply

I have a gripe about all photo backpack manufacturers.  I don't think these guys that design these have ever had a "real" pack on---one that is designed to transfer the weight of the pack on to the skelatal structure --namely the spine hips and legs (while remaining lightweight as possible).  The packs have these hugely padded sholder straps thinking dumb macho photographers are going to want the weight on their shoulders.  these giant sholder straps only add to the weight and bulk of the pack.  then if the photo pack has a hip strap at all it is also hugely padded with thick foam stuff, also adding to the weight and bulk.  I wish the photo pack manufacturers would study harness systems of  backpacking packs (and the materials used in these systems) that are designed say for a weekend trip.  Our photo backpacks would be much the better for it--.  If a pack is properly made, a pack with heavy equipment cant be carried for long periods of time and one would hardly notice it's there (provided you're not walking uphill at high altitude or something like that).  Camera pack manufacturers take notice (I only wish).  My two cents, Eleanor
Logged

Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7789



WWW
« Reply #5 on: January 12, 2006, 02:58:51 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I have a gripe about all photo backpack manufacturers.  I don't think these guys that design these have ever had a "real" pack on---one that is designed to transfer the weight of the pack on to the skelatal structure --namely the spine hips and legs (while remaining lightweight as possible).  The packs have these hugely padded sholder straps thinking dumb macho photographers are going to want the weight on their shoulders.  these giant sholder straps only add to the weight and bulk of the pack.  then if the photo pack has a hip strap at all it is also hugely padded with thick foam stuff, also adding to the weight and bulk.  I wish the photo pack manufacturers would study harness systems of  backpacking packs (and the materials used in these systems) that are designed say for a weekend trip.  Our photo backpacks would be much the better for it--.  If a pack is properly made, a pack with heavy equipment cant be carried for long periods of time and one would hardly notice it's there (provided you're not walking uphill at high altitude or something like that).  Camera pack manufacturers take notice (I only wish).  My two cents, Eleanor
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=55835\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Eleanor, you are so right.

The best photo backpack I have ever used (and still do) is my 1970-vintage Kelty big bag frame pack. When I got it I added two 3-inch machine screws in the topmost cross bar of the aluminum frame. I can hang one or two cameras on those hooks, and the weight is supported by my hips. I can hike for hours that way and my neck never gets sore or stiff. A secondary benefit is that by pulling the camera straps tight, I get support that is at least as good as a monopod. Nothing in the "photo" line that I have tried even comes close.

Eric
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
eleanorbrown
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 612


WWW
« Reply #6 on: January 12, 2006, 03:19:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Eric, I used to tear up a large lowepro pack, taking out the inside(camera equipment spaces), and take all the supporting so called harnass structure off.  then i would place what was left of the Loewpro  in a Gregory pack that was designed for backpacking for a few days and that opened the way the usual camera packs open.  The sholder straps and waist belt on the Gregory were made of firm dense materials so it was somewhat stiff and held it's shape but wasn't bulky at all.  What was so awesome is that there wasn't much "padding" in the shoulder straps and waist belt but  the fit was awesome and gave tremendous support of a heavy load--i barely knew it was on.  As I mentioned,  the materials they used on the harnass were very dense, not all that thick thick cushy harnass stuff that I think photopack manufacturers think will sell their products (PR type cushion I call it).  The Gregory wasn't cheap but it was worth every penny of the cost. eleanor

Quote
Eleanor, you are so right.

The best photo backpack I have ever used (and still do) is my 1970-vintage Kelty big bag frame pack. When I got it I added two 3-inch machine screws in the topmost cross bar of the aluminum frame. I can hang one or two cameras on those hooks, and the weight is supported by my hips. I can hike for hours that way and my neck never gets sore or stiff. A secondary benefit is that by pulling the camera straps tight, I get support that is at least as good as a monopod. Nothing in the "photo" line that I have tried even comes close.

Eric
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=55867\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged

DarkPenguin
Guest
« Reply #7 on: January 12, 2006, 03:36:43 PM »
ReplyReply

The little Kata r102 (or something like that) is quite nice for a limited amount of gear.  And if you need food or water you'll be hanging it from the outside of it.

Its advantage is that it tries to keep everything very close to your body.  So nothing pulling you back or forth.  Much nicer than the horrid tenba I used to use.
Logged
John Camp
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1257


« Reply #8 on: January 12, 2006, 04:08:36 PM »
ReplyReply

I have the Kata r102 as well; good for one D2x, plus space for three lenses, depending on what they are, and how much other stuff you carry (like a flash.) It's good if you know what you're going to do, and aren't going far. It does not transer weight to the hips, but it's so small, that you don't feel too much weight on your shoulders anyway, because you can't carry that much. I bought a Kinesis belt system a couple of years ago, and it didn't work too well for me, but the Kinesis bags have belt loops on the back and it's easy to tie them into the loops on the outside of the Kata - you can carry a water bottle, another lens, etc. They're even color-compatible (the Kata is black-and-grey nylon, the Kinesis bags are black nylon.) You could probably do the same with other belt-system bags. I think Kata got the padding about right.

One thing about the Kata is that it's pretty quick to get at the camera (it's under a special flap, and you normally carry it with a lens mounted) and yet it doesn't look particularly like a camera bag -- it looks like a book bag, or a college backpack.

JC
Logged
eleanorbrown
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 612


WWW
« Reply #9 on: January 12, 2006, 04:36:17 PM »
ReplyReply

Interesting you all should mention Kata.  My current pack of choice is the Kata "Teddy" (dumb name I know)--i think this pack has been discontinued however.  This has a rod that circles three sides of the pack and hooks onto each side of the waist belt to transfer weight from the pack to my hips and legs and spine.  The shoulder straps and waist belt are not bulky and work fairly well tho they need to be stiffer and the materials need to be more dense.  One good thing is that it is lightweight.  Nothing compares to my Gregory pack tho.  I've even thought about putting my Kata inside the Gregory, but this isn't ideal either.  eleanor

Quote
I have the Kata r102 as well; good for one D2x, plus space for three lenses, depending on what they are, and how much other stuff you carry (like a flash.) It's good if you know what you're going to do, and aren't going far. It does not transer weight to the hips, but it's so small, that you don't feel too much weight on your shoulders anyway, because you can't carry that much. I bought a Kinesis belt system a couple of years ago, and it didn't work too well for me, but the Kinesis bags have belt loops on the back and it's easy to tie them into the loops on the outside of the Kata - you can carry a water bottle, another lens, etc. They're even color-compatible (the Kata is black-and-grey nylon, the Kinesis bags are black nylon.) You could probably do the same with other belt-system bags. I think Kata got the padding about right.

One thing about the Kata is that it's pretty quick to get at the camera (it's under a special flap, and you normally carry it with a lens mounted) and yet it doesn't look particularly like a camera bag -- it looks like a book bag, or a college backpack.

JC
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=55878\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged

macgyver
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 510


« Reply #10 on: January 12, 2006, 04:39:38 PM »
ReplyReply

I've started using one of the Think Tank belt systems, it's great for light loads.  Think Tank's gear is built amazingly, you can tell that they are acctually photographers.  I'd love to hear what you think of the airport bag.
Logged
eleanorbrown
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 612


WWW
« Reply #11 on: January 12, 2006, 06:16:48 PM »
ReplyReply

I just checked out the kata r102 on the web.  it's the one that I saw in my local camera store.  Well made and if you want, you can pile a lot of equipment in it.  (Kata's stuff is well put together and sturdy).... here's my gripe..MAJOR GRIPE...no belt, none at all, to transfer wt. to the skeleton...the one place the weight isn't noticed.  Personally I don't want 20 lbs of gear hanging from my shoulders all the time.  a hip belt wouldn't up the cost of the pack that much and would make this a much better pack.  eleanor

Quote
I have the Kata r102 as well; good for one D2x, plus space for three lenses, depending on what they are, and how much other stuff you carry (like a flash.)
One thing about the Kata is that it's pretty quick to get at the camera (it's under a special flap, and you normally carry it with a lens mounted) and yet it doesn't look particularly like a camera bag -- it looks like a book bag, or a college backpack.

JC
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=55878\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged

Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad