Best camera bag for multi-lenses?

August 8, 2006 10:28 AM

What's the best shoulder bag for a Nikon D50, a telephoto and fisheye lens, and external flash.

I'd like something that has separate compartments for each lens to avoid any "collisions", but also something soft and easy to pack up for long trips. Preferably something under $299.

posted by bronxteacher to technology (8 comments total)

I've always preferred a bag that isn't a "camera bag". It draws little attention and you probably already own something suitable. I use inexpensive dividers (available from B&H Photo) and padded lens cases to protect the lenses and camera bodies.
My main two bags are a twenty dollar, waterproof padded bottom nylon bag from Columbia (got that one at Campmor) and a small Timbuk2 messenger bag for one body/extra lens/flash/etc. You'll save a ton if you go this route, and you won't stand out as a photographer or tourist - which is particularly good if you're shooting on vacation/out of the usa or in higher crime areas.
posted by blaneyphoto at 10:38 AM on August 8, 2006

Yeah, I'm with blaney on this one. The best camera bag isn't a camera bag. I use an old vinyl bag from the '80s that looks like something you'd buy at a yard sale.
posted by MrZero at 10:43 AM on August 8, 2006

LowePro Nova 3.

About $40.
posted by mmdei at 11:12 AM on August 8, 2006

I have a D50, a hefty Tokina 12-24, a Nikon 28-200, memory cards and all my other supplies in a Tamrac Velocity 7 slingbag. It's great for swinging in front of you to pull the camera out quickly. If you had your telephoto on the D50 and set that in the middle of the bag face-down (there are dividers included) then you could easily fit a fisheye on one side and a flash on the other side. Cost me around $50 a couple of years ago - looks like it's still the same price.
posted by aceyprime at 11:55 AM on August 8, 2006

I really like my domke f6. It looks really beat up now after a couple years of heavy daily thrown-in-the-mud use, but still works as well as the day I bought it. Usually doesn't look like a camera bag, but be aware that in foreign languages it will very often be called a purse and people will think that you're carrying a purse (which isn't a bad thing if you're a girl, but may be a bad thing if you're a boy in a place where boys aren't supposed to do that). The logo on the front is easily removable. Repositionable compartments, pockets, etc. The bag is worth it just for the strap. Be aware that there's absolutely no padding anywhere, though. Not a problem if your cameras outside the bag taking pictures; that's where it should be anyway. Like most camera bags, though, it's murder on your back/shoulder/posture. I've also found that it works as a pretty good pillow if you're worried about it getting stolen on a train or bus to places unknown. Seems like the price has gone up a bit since I got mine, but it's still well below your maximum. Make sure you don't get the canvas one if they still make those; the ballistic is reasonably water proof. Held up well for me in near-monsoon rains.

It doesn't seem like you're the war photographer type, but I know a lot of people who swear by Newswear's documentary chestvest for that sort of situation. Though, it should be said, there's a large number of people using those who've been hassled or targeted for being suicide bombers...

I'm soon going to go the other way, though, since I very rarely carry much equipment with me. Quite a few people I know use something like a climber's chalk bag hanging off their belt and that's it. Since you're only using one lens anyway (well, you aren't now, but who needs a fisheye...) and because your camera is always in your hand or around your neck, it makes a lot of sense to get all the weight off your back/shoulder and just hold your cards/film, flash and cord, and extra batteries in a small pouch.
posted by msbrauer at 1:10 PM on August 8, 2006

My god, they really don't make anything that doesn't look completely ridiculous do they?

I just ordered this last night and it's due to arrive tomorrow, just in time for my trip to San Francisco on Thursday. It's made for a cannon, but with the flexibility it should work nicely for me and allow me to take everything I need and then some.
posted by FlamingBore at 2:05 PM on August 8, 2006

Coming a little late to the thread, but I can't believe no one mentioned Crumpler Bags — they're known for amazing bags that don't look like camera bags. Well under your $299 limit and you really can't go wrong. I use a Six Million Dollar Home that fits a D50 body, D70 (with lens attached), a couple spare lenses (a zoom and a 50mm prime), an external flash, and a blower. It's pretty tight with all that, but you might prefer one of the smaller bags. Look at the selection — the bags are amazing enough that I wish I had other cameras, so I had to get more. Really.

Definitely stop by one of their NYC storefronts to check out the quality for yourself. You won't be sorry.
posted by rafter at 12:42 AM on August 10, 2006

rafter, thank you!

I got the Canon bag and it's just not as I was hoping. It's probably fantastic for someone with just a bit more gear. I might hang on to it so that I can grow into it, but the Crumplers look exactly like what I really wanted. I will try to stop into a store in San Francisco and check out the 4 and 5 Million Dollar Homes.
posted by FlamingBore at 8:35 AM on August 10, 2006