It's My Bag, Baby!

Started May 16, 2012 | Discussions thread
RoyGBiv
Senior MemberPosts: 1,956
Like?
w/ m4/3, I find very little need for padding.
In reply to whoodle, May 17, 2012

whoodle wrote:

Thought you might want to see the bag I bought for my still-backordered OMD, as well as the 'finalists' that might suit your needs/tastes even more.

I based this on being able to handle body w/12-50 mounted, 40-150, 14mm pancake & flash (maybe w/grip eventually)...and maybe another lens down the line. I wanted a thin profile, about 10-12" long and not too tall....but not too 'purse-looking' (kinda hard w/that criteria!) I'm not big into buckles, at least those that single-handedly keep the lid closed...but some of the ones I liked have 'em, of course.

The inertia of these lenses are so small that I find very little need for padding, which makes the bags larger than they need to be. It's the same logic as to why rugged compacts are built lightweight. If you have less mass, you aren't as delicate. I have one bag that is big enough to hold the whole kit, but most of the time I travel lighter, just taking 1 or two lenses. When I have an ambition to be focused on photography, I might take the bigger bag w/ the whole shebang. But most of the time, that's not the case. My big bag isn't even a camera bag. It's a lumbar pack. These lenses are so much lighter than my dslr lenses that they really don't need much protection.

-- hide signature --

'I have no responsibilities here whatsoever'

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow