# Canon 600mm f/4L IS II USM Lens and Backpack-Roller Bag



## Gman (Jun 24, 2015)

I am in the process of choosing a "medium size" backpack-roller bag for use to primarily transport a Canon 600mm f/4L IS II USM lens. The Tenba Roadie II Universal Hybrid Roller/Backpack represents one of the style bags I am considering.

As part of my pre-purchase research/due diligence, I forwarded the following question to a Canon Service Center for consideration.

"I am not asking for specific feedback on this bag. I would like to get your opinion on transporting this lens in a roller bag in general. Assuming the bag and lens are properly cushioned, are there any serious concerns about subjecting a lens like this to the sustained vibrations that a rolling roller bag is likely to create?"

The Service Center representative response:
"Thank you for contacting Canon support regarding transporting your EF 600mm f/4L IS II USM lens. I have not heard any feedback either way, but probably would be reluctant, myself."

I might add that in addition to generally very smooth surfaces associated with airport walkways, I would likely also want to use such a roller bag on semi-smooth surfaces such as cement & asphalt sidewalks and roads as well tiled surfaces that might have mortar gaps, etc.

The feedback from this Technical Support representative gives me reason to question a backpack-roller bag as a solution for my 600mm lens transportation needs. Any thoughts on the Canon rep feedback? And/or any thoughts about such roller bag vibrations affecting this particular lens and such a roller bag being appropriate?

Also, it would seem that one of the implications of the statement from the Canon Service rep is that they may not endorse the concept of the "big whites" being transported with roller bags. 

Should I scrap the idea of a roller for my 600?


----------



## Deleted member 91053 (Jun 25, 2015)

I have heard horror stories of carrying big lenses in roller bags but cannot confirm if there is any truth in them. 
Personally I use the Lowepro Lens Trekker 600 AW (Mk1) for my 800 F5.6 L IS and find it great, or if I am carrying more stuff then I use a Lowepro Super Trekker AW ii - but then things get a bit heavy!
Personally I find roller type bags to be an absolute pain as I am always tripping or bashing my ankles with them!
Probably not much help but just my experiences.


----------



## Gman (Jun 26, 2015)

John, thanks for your thoughts. I have a Lowepro Lens Trekker 600 AW Version II. Have not tested it in the field yet. Seems to ride a little too high on my back -- plus not sure I could get that backpack on a plane. A mid-side roller-backpack -- with lens hood folded and camera off -- seemed to be the best solution as I have tried using a rolling duffel bag. But, if a very expensive lens is going to take a sustained pounding with a roller and a Canon Factory tech basically says rethink it -- I guess the rolling option may not be the best.


----------



## photo212 (Jun 26, 2015)

I've used a Pelican 1510 to transport my 500mm (notched the top foam) on many an airport travel. Never had an issue, and I've crossed several textured sidewalks and ramps. Keep in mind these lenses are delivered via trucks traveling thousands of miles on highways. If vibration were an issue, they would be ruined before you ever touched one.

I've switched to using a Gura backpack, and rigged a shoulder strap for it for use in an airport. Not due to vibrations, but due to ease of transport.

My Lowepro Trekker sits idle most of the time since it cannot also carry all the other junk I always think I need but never use.


----------



## Vern (Jun 26, 2015)

I have used this roller bag: http://www.thinktankphoto.com/products/airport-security-v2-roller-camera-bag.aspx to carry my kit and did not have worries about too much vibration. It can be converted to an "emergency" backpack but is really not designed for extended use in that configuration (similar to the Tenbe perhaps). However, I have not tried to squeeze my 600 into it and have instead carried the 600 in a lightware z600 with the shoulder strap: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lightware-z600-Case-Review.aspx. The review captures its pros and cons well. I did get hassled a few times at gates about the weight of my carry on when the think tank was full but persuaded the agents it could not be checked. IMO you would be OK with a well padded roller if you pick it up over curbs etc and don't let it rattle around. As you say, in the airport you'll have mostly smooth sailing. I have also carried most of my gear in a lowe pro 400 (w the 600mm in the Lightware) and it does get heavy running around to make connections. So, if a roller is what you need at your destination, I would tend to go for a bag that was a good roller and would trust it with the 600 if you avoid rough spots.


----------



## Northbird (Jun 26, 2015)

I've used the Pelican 1510 for my 300 2.8 for air travel and never had any issues with it. I use the Tamrac 5793 Super Telephoto Lens Pack for my 600 II and find it fits my needs very well. I am able to walk as far as five miles per trip without any discomfort.


----------



## East Wind Photography (Jun 26, 2015)

Northbird said:


> I've used the Pelican 1510 for my 300 2.8 for air travel and never had any issues with it. I use the Tamrac 5793 Super Telephoto Lens Pack for my 600 II and find it fits my needs very well. I am able to walk as far as five miles per trip without any discomfort.



Have you had any issues with the airlines using that Tamrac? I've deferred using my 600 for air trips in favor of my 300 and 2xiii but I always miss the 600 and wish I had lugged it across the country.


----------



## Northbird (Jun 27, 2015)

East Wind Photography said:


> Northbird said:
> 
> 
> > I've used the Pelican 1510 for my 300 2.8 for air travel and never had any issues with it. I use the Tamrac 5793 Super Telephoto Lens Pack for my 600 II and find it fits my needs very well. I am able to walk as far as five miles per trip without any discomfort.
> ...



No issues at all, the height of the Tamrac is almost identical to the Pelican and it's actually a bit narrower. Works like a champ and there's room for most body's (not the 1DX) with lens attached and hood reversed. There is room for extra batteries, memory cards, etc. A very good solution for carrying the big glass. I attach a Tamrac M.A.S. Pro Lens Case to the side attachment point to carry an extra lens or teleconverters.


----------



## East Wind Photography (Jun 27, 2015)

Northbird said:


> East Wind Photography said:
> 
> 
> > Northbird said:
> ...



Will it fit under the seat or is it a strictly overhead item?


----------



## Northbird (Jun 27, 2015)

East Wind Photography said:


> Northbird said:
> 
> 
> > East Wind Photography said:
> ...



Both the 1510 and the Tamrac are overhead only bags in my experience.


----------



## Gman (Jun 27, 2015)

Great discussion about the challenges of transporting big glass safely...


----------



## East Wind Photography (Jun 27, 2015)

Gman said:


> Great discussion about the challenges of transporting big glass safely...



Yes. Usually taking big glass on an airplane means either having to leave some other options behind or put them at risk in checked baggage. It is often a trade off between need and being versatile. I've been indecisive about taking the 600 on many trips for a lot of reasons, transportation being one of them. In order to support using one somewhere you also need to take a large tripod, gimbal head and/or monopod. The amount of gear required goes up the larger the glass.

I've recently opted to take my 300 F2.8L IS II and the suite of extenders. It's a very portable option that's almost as sharp and only 1 stop loss of light over the 600 prime when used with the 2xiii extender. However I always 2nd guess my decision when I need to shoot very early morning or late evening and 1 stop can make a big difference.

I suppose if you dont use the 600 when you want to then what's the point of having it?


----------



## Vern (Jun 29, 2015)

East Wind Photography said:


> Gman said:
> 
> 
> > Great discussion about the challenges of transporting big glass safely...
> ...



I've vacillated over the same decision with the same options available. I've decided that unless I am backpacking on the trip (which definitely rules out the 600), I take it along. Visited Yellowstone this winter and used the 600 a lot with the 2X III (some good IQ results at f11 as long as there wasn't backlighting) and would have really regretted not bringing it - despite the burden. I recently picked up the 100-400II and use that as my backpacking tele solution as the 300 is just a little too heavy - I'm afraid I am aging out of carrying a pack over 50 lbs and enjoying myself. I still use the 300 on day hikes if I anticipate good wildlife opportunities.

I still second guess my options while packing though - good to share the pros and cons.


----------



## Gman (Jul 1, 2015)

photo212, Any chance of posting a photo of your 500mm inside the Pelican 1510? Will a 600mm fit inside this case? If so, any suggestion for the padding -- the "pick and pluck" foam option?


----------



## rancho_runner (Jul 1, 2015)

Hi,

the 500mm f4 II fits well into the 1510; with some maneuvering I am even able to fit the 500mm F4 II+1.4 tele+gripped 5d III combination (including the lens cover). This is using the padded version of the 1510, not the one with custom foam.


----------



## LDS (Jul 1, 2015)

East Wind Photography said:


> Yes. Usually taking big glass on an airplane means either having to leave some other options behind or put them at risk in checked baggage.



If you can, it may be better to ship it separately using a reputable shipping service with full tracking. You may also "double pack" the lens - put it in a good hard case with foam, then put the case into a cardboard box with some dampening stuff between the two. This makes the box safer, less interesting, and will also protect the hard case handle, locks, etc.


----------

