# Lightest, good, Shoulder Camera bag?



## fegari (Jun 23, 2013)

Hi

I have a Lowepro 160 pro Messenger which is a fantastic bag, nicelly padded, great storing features. However it is becoming too darn heavy for me. Even empty feels a bit of a burden (aprox 1.4Kg I believe)

http://store.lowepro.com/pro-messenger-160-aw

I thought of asking the community what would be the lightest bag to carry a 5d3 with a 70-200 2.8 + 1 or 2 primes? 

-I don´t care if they get really tight in the bag, the only thing it needs to have a minimun of padding betwwen the 2 or 3 compartments. I don´t need to have neither a multitude of pockets. One small pocket to put a spare battery and a 77mm filter would do.

Again, the first criteria would be weight an just a minimun of protection. 

Thanks for the feedback!


----------



## mwh1964 (Jun 23, 2013)

I am pleased with the Billingham Hadley Pro for same amount of gear.


----------



## fegari (Jun 23, 2013)

mwh1964 said:


> I am pleased with the Billingham Hadley Pro for same amount of gear.



Not bad, 1Kg. I´ll keep it in the candidates but maybe I´ll be looking for soemthing with less pockets to reduce a bit the external volume


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 23, 2013)

I'd look at a backpack rather than a messenger bag - even if the bag itself is smaller/lighter, the gear isn't and supporting it with both shoulders (and ideally a hip belt) would be better. 

I'd check out the Lowepro Flipside 200 or 300 (the latter for a gripped body).


----------



## fegari (Jun 23, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> I'd look at a backpack rather than a messenger bag - even if the bag itself is smaller/lighter, the gear isn't and supporting it with both shoulders (and ideally a hip belt) would be better.
> 
> I'd check out the Lowepro Flipside 200 or 300 (the latter for a gripped body).



Thanks, I do have a nice backpack that has served me more than well in plaines, trains etc but once arrived to the destination or even in my own city I only walk around with a shoulder bag and no more than 2/3 lenses (the camera always has one of those attached attached)

As I mentioned the lowepro 160 pro shoulderbag I have is really nice but would like something a lot lighter


----------



## RGF (Jun 24, 2013)

How does the 160 weigh. Have you looked thinktank bags?


----------



## roumin (Jun 24, 2013)

http://www.thinktankphoto.com/products/streetwalker-backpack.aspx


----------



## gjoyce3 (Jun 24, 2013)

The problem is the 70-200 2.8. I have been looking for the same thing for at least two years - let me know if you find something. 

I have tried a variety of solutions including the Thinktank retrospective 20 (1.5kg) - which got fairly heavy fairly quick. My solution so far has been to make the hard decision about whether I really need to the 70-200/2.8 for any given excursion. What I typically do is:

1) Pick a single lens (other than the 70-200) and use a Domke F5XB;
2) pick up to two lenses (e.g. the 100L and the 30/1.4) with a full accessory/Flash kit and use a Domke F4AF; or 
3) take the 70-200 in a LowePro Flipside Sport Pro 10 (a backpack which fits the 5DIII + 70-200/2.8 like a glove and is, for me, a far better solution than any of the myriad of holsters I have tried).

The Domke F4AF will fit the the 70-200 but not mounted on the camera and w/o the lens hood (which frankly means I do not use it that much in that much .

Good Luck!


----------



## Jay Khaos (Jun 24, 2013)

I have the Billingham Hadley Pro and I usually use it to carry my 5D3, 70-200 2.8 and 85 1.2 with one flash. All of that can be wedged into the main compartment, though its tight and probably not the best setup for quickly pulling a new lens. The outside pockets lay flat when not filled up, but they do make the bag fat and hard to shut if they are full. Storing the body with the 70-200 attached to it in the bag, requires laying it long ways.

For that same gear, I almost prefer using a smaller bag with the 70-200's soft case strapped onto it (or your belt I guess). When youre using the 70-200, you can slip a flash or another lens in that case. It tends to dominate any bag it's in and requires filling the bag around that lens.


----------



## RLPhoto (Jun 24, 2013)

Crumpler 7MDH


----------



## fegari (Jun 24, 2013)

RGF said:


> How does the 160 weigh. Have you looked thinktank bags?



Thanks for the feedback. Looked at the thinktakns and looked nice but pretty close if not identical to the lowepro in weight. 

The lowepro pro 160 is 1.4Kgs
http://store.lowepro.com/shoulder-bags/pro-messenger-160-aw


----------



## fegari (Jun 24, 2013)

gjoyce3 said:


> The problem is the 70-200 2.8. I have been looking for the same thing for at least two years - let me know if you find something.
> 
> I have tried a variety of solutions including the Thinktank retrospective 20 (1.5kg) - which got fairly heavy fairly quick. My solution so far has been to make the hard decision about whether I really need to the 70-200/2.8 for any given excursion. What I typically do is:
> 
> ...



Exactly, the 70-200 2.8 is clearly an issue here, specially if I want to keep it stored vertically and attached to the camera and carry 2 more lenses (in my case primes)...

I've foundthe Cullmann Madrid 330 series. Really simple bags, cheap and super light. Do not accomodate the 70-200 2.8 fitted onto the camera (vertically) but maybe by removing the spacers I can put the 5D3+70-200 diagonally or horizontally and stuff the prime along (in a soft pouch). Maybe that will do the trick for those kind of situations where I just need the zoom and a wide angle prime. Besides, hard to beat 550gr!

http://www.cullmann.de/en/detail/id/madrid-maxima-330-black.html


----------



## that1guyy (Jun 24, 2013)

http://fstopgear.com/product/black-box/district-15#.UcgAWfmR98E

I'll leave this here.


----------

