How do you pack your back?

[hotshoe]

Any best practices or advice on how folks pack their digital backs & camera into backpacks? My setup is IQ4/ALPA and will shoot w/ a 40 most of the time, so I'm inclined to pack as complete assembly (back and 40 mounted to camera), which my backpack is deep enough to accommodate, but barely. However, if I remove the lens, I can orient the camera/back to have better protection. So there's a tradeoff between better protection and less setup & risk of dust on the sensor. IQ4 sensor is large and exposed, which is why I ask. Any words of wisdom are much appreciated. Thanks! : -)

 

[hotshoe]

This is prob OK. The pesky stitching adapter "foot" sticks out past the ICU a little but no prob closing the bag; however, not loving that the foot is right behind my back (if I were ever to fall and land on my back). Still, any words of wisdom much appreciated re: if better to break the camera down or not.

 

[dchew]

Is that the 12+?

 

[dchew]

I suggest at least trying it lower in the ICU. I don’t like suggesting that because as you probably know, it helps to have the weight centered and close to your back. But if you can place that tripod plate in the small of your back where the pack arches out, it may be more comfortable. Here is a pic of my “full” kit. 5 lenses, DB and the 12+.

The reason I asked if that is the 12+ is because I ditched the grips. They wrap around the camera making it wider. Without the grips, I can place the camera sideways in the pack so the stitching adapter is oriented the other way. I’ve positioned the camera horizontally to align with the shape of the pack and my back. In the picture the stitching adapter is pointing to the right. Obviously this is not an F-stop bag, it is a Mammut backcountry skiing bag.
As for assembled or not, I think it is better assembled if, as you state, you are usually grabbing the same lens and that lens isn’t too big or heavy.
Also, consider arranging the camera so it is aligned pointing up/down when you are walking. This is pure conjecture on my part, but I suspect the thousands of individual steps we take represent the biggest source of forces the camera/lens/back assembly sees. If you orient it so the assembly is aligned with those vertical forces, it lessens the risk of alignment issues over time. Again, just a presumption.
Dave

 

[Geoff]

There is always a conflict between ease of access (keep it all together, ready to pull out in a moment) on the one hand, or better security for the individual items on the other, each in its own protection. Others are far more knowledgeable but one approach is to separate them for long travel (air travel, etc.); I put each in its own protected case (especially for the back and lenses), but then combine them for a day's work or hike. When all is together, they are more exposed to shock; reducing the amount of time its assembled can reduce the risk. Or do others think that a well packed assembly is good enough? (sorry - Dave - wrote this before seeing yours... thinking along the same lines).

 

[dchew]

I think if you take some care to cradle the lens in a sort-of yoke around the neck, it is ok. But in general I agree with Geoff. I wouldn’t do it with the 32 or the 138, but I used to hike that way with the 60xl attached and never had a problem that I know of.
Dave

 

[algrove]

This discussion only emphasizes in my mind why the STC was the way to go for trips where IQ back/STC w/1 grip/40 lens (my most used of 5 lenses) were always ready to go. I used this approach with 4 different Phase backs and never had a problem even with flights to Europe.

 

[dchew]

This discussion only emphasizes in my mind why the STC was the way to go for trips where IQ back/STC w/1 grip/40 lens (my most used of 5 lenses) were always ready to go. I used this approach with 4 different Phase backs and never had a problem even with flights to Europe.

Absolutely. If I only one technical camera it would be the STC.

 

[hotshoe]

Thank you very much for the advice, which is more than I was expecting to see so quickly on such a mundane topic.

Is that the 12+?

Yes, sir, and keen eye.

The reason I asked if that is the 12+ is because I ditched the grips.

I gave thought to removing the grips because, as is your case, doing so fully solves the height in the bag problem. It's a tough pill to swallow given their cost (and they do function very nicely as grips), but you've strengthened my resolve. I take it the orange rope is your "handle"?

I suggest at least trying it lower in the ICU.

Good advice, and I'm also not keen on having it centered, as shown. I originally had it in the bottom slot, but it puts stitching adapter protrusion near base of rear flap, causing adapter to sort of "dig in" to rear flap instead of flap laying flat over adapter foot. If I ditch the handles as you did, solves this problem too.

Also, consider arranging the camera so it is aligned pointing up/down when you are walking. This is pure conjecture on my part, but I suspect the thousands of individual steps we take represent the biggest source of forces the camera/lens/back assembly sees. If you orient it so the assembly is aligned with those vertical forces, it lessens the risk of alignment issues over time. Again, just a presumption.

Interesting hypothesis that I think has merit, at least intuitively. Hard to know, but now that you've made me think about it I will reorient the assembly as you suggest, because I tend to agree with your reasoning.

This discussion only emphasizes in my mind why the STC was the way to go for trips...

Absolutely. If I only one technical camera it would be the STC.

I have only one technical camera. Lol.

For now, I'm going to pretend I didn't read this and blissfully go on about my way, confident in my choice to get the 12+ : -) That said, one of the (several) reasons I decided to go with the ALPA -- thank you Lou, for kickstarting me to change my compass heading -- is because of the various camera configurations available, so I expect I'll add another camera at some point for when needing smaller bag for getting on plane, etc., which is not a problem these days (unfortunately).

...but one approach is to separate them for long travel (air travel, etc.

I think this makes a lot of sense. For long trip to destination, I would def breakdown the camera. My question is more centered around at destination, while hiking.

 

[dchew]

For now, I'm going to pretend I didn't read this and blissfully go on about my way, confident in my choice to get the 12+ : -)

Ah! Well, let's see if I can lower your anxiety and keep Dante at bay for you, at least temporarily: As usual, a comment like I made should include the phrase, "...for the photos I take." The STC is certainly limited, but the smaller size allows me to put a 3-lens kit together all in the f-stop small pro ICU. That ability to pack smaller is of such importance to me that I'd give up concurrent shift and rise/fall for the size benefit if I was forced to. I actually shoot in the field with the 12+ more than I do the STC these days. The 12+ is a wonderful package, and I think you made a wonderful choice.

Dave

 

[hotshoe]

Thanks Dave! Indeed, I'm very happy with my choice to go w/ the 12+ and, as per the 138 heft thread, my strategy for needing to pack only two lenses revolves around having access to concurrent movements. If it turns out to be a bad strategy, it won't be my first mistake :- ), but I want to give it a shot.

Instead of 12 STC, I've been thinking of the 12 TC (no movements) as a potentially good complement to the 12+ for situations where I feel the 12+ is too much camera (size, weight). In such scenarios, I envision taking just the 40 and rely on crop in place of carrying a longer lens. However, this is a purely hypothetical scenario for me right now, so no plans to get one at this time.

 

[JeffK]

Thanks Dave! Indeed, I'm very happy with my choice to go w/ the 12+ and, as per the 138 heft thread, my strategy for needing to pack only two lenses revolves around having access to concurrent movements. If it turns out to be a bad strategy, it won't be my first mistake :- ), but I want to give it a shot.

Instead of 12 STC, I've been thinking of the 12 TC (no movements) as a potentially good complement to the 12+ for situations where I feel the 12+ is too much camera (size, weight). In such scenarios, I envision taking just the 40 and rely on crop in place of carrying a longer lens. However, this is a purely hypothetical scenario for me right now, so no plans to get one at this time.

I saw a TC on the B&S recently. Really decent price. I'd consider it, but already have a MAX, STC, P1 DF, P1 DF+, 6 lenses for the DF's. So don't need another frame. So glad my wife doesn't follow this forum.

 

[hotshoe]

So glad my wife doesn't follow this forum.

LOL

 

[hotshoe]

Thanks again for all the advice. Below is how I netted out, and chose to follow Dave's lead by removing the handles (and will similarly use rope in place of). I'm going to go shooting now : -)

 

[tcdeveau]

Instead of 12 STC, I've been thinking of the 12 TC (no movements) as a potentially good complement to the 12+ for situations where I feel the 12+ is too much camera (size, weight). In such scenarios, I envision taking just the 40 and rely on crop in place of carrying a longer lens. However, this is a purely hypothetical scenario for me right now, so no plans to get one at this time.

idk if you were to get a second body, I’d go with the STC over the TC. It’s not a lot bigger than the TC and you still get one axis of movement. Im currently rocking a STC and 70 HR as my small/lightweight run and gun setup and it’s great being able to use movements and stitch when I want panos or want to go wider. I know you said it’s hypothetical at this point but Dante was compelling me to play devils advocate

I briefly had a STC and 12 + and felt they complimented each other well. The 12+ is just awesome (I only sold it because our air conditioning went out in the Atlanta summer when my wife was pregnant, and AC>12+ at that point haha). Would love to get another at some point, and the 138, but it’s not in the cards or remotely practical for me right now.

good topic for a thread. Back to the original Q I’m with others in that I disassemble for long travel, and leave things more or less assembled for hikes and stuff.

 

[JeffK]

Anyone have experience with the Mindshift Backlight Elite 45L with their ALPA gear?

 

[tcdeveau]

Anyone have experience with the Mindshift Backlight Elite 45L with their ALPA gear?

I’m using the Backlight 26L and really like it

 

[hotshoe]

idk if you were to get a second body, I’d go with the STC over the TC. It’s not a lot bigger than the TC and you still get one axis of movement.

Thanks @tcdeveau , I hear you. Frankly, I should see them in person if ever needing to decide between the two. If I'm going to get something smaller than the 12+ then it's be because I'm seriously space constrained. By the specs, the TC takes up less than half the volume of the STC, has about 40% less frontal area, and is almost one-third the weight. So on paper it least, it's a significant difference, but I completely get that in person, and practically speaking, the difference may be less compelling. I'm in no hurry to decide so I'll wait until a situation where my 12+ is too big forces a decision (if ever happens) and let it inform the best choice. Thanks again! :- )

 

[epforever]

Thanks again for all the advice. Below is how I netted out, and chose to follow Dave's lead by removing the handles (and will similarly use rope in place of). I'm going to go shooting now : -)

View attachment 191457

@hotshoe what's that pack?

 

[hotshoe]

@hotshoe what's that pack?

f-stop Shinn 80L. If thinking about it, just keep in mind prob too big to meet carry-on size restrictions.