Thank you so much for your detailed explanation. This makes me reconsider the Targhee.
GroovyGeek wrote:
I have the Targhee 45, Kamber 42, and a F-stop Tilopa. All will fit a Pacsafe medium ICU or a F-stop PRO medium sloped ICU. I never need to carry anything more than a medium.
In terms of ease of ICU fit, I would rate them Tilopa > Kamber > Targhee. The Targee narrows at the base somewhat, and while the medium ICU fits, it requires a bit of finagling to work the zippers.
In terms of ease of utility as a purely photography oriented pack my rating is still Tilopa > Kamber > Targhee. Being designed as a photo pack, the Tilopa has a few more pockets and features to help get you organized.
In terms of tripod carrying system the rating is Tilopa ~ Kamber >> Targhee, The provided straps on the Targhee are simply too flimsy to reliably carry a tripod. I had devised a workaround with a Mindshift gear strap on top and a TT tripod pocket on the bottom that worked well enough.
In terms of weight distribution and comfort on longer hikes the rating is Kamber ~ Tilopa >>> Tilopa. The Tilopa simply is not very good as a pure backpack. If most of your photography is 1-2 miles from the trail that is not a big deal. If you need to haul your gear for 4-5 hrs the difference is night and day. Disclosure; I have not been out with the Kamber of a real hike yet, but the shape of the straps and the overall feel in short tests around the house are similar/better than the Kamber.
It terms of overall quality of construction it is Kamber > Tilopa > Targhee, Both the fabric and the straps of the Targhee have this ever so slightly flimsy feel to them. The Kamber has the Osprey "God almighty no questions asked" warranty. If you manage to break it they will fix it.
It terms of customer service, it is Osprey > Gregory >>>>>> F-stop. I don't think words can express how pathetically lousy the F-stop customer experience used to be. I hear that maybe things are changing but over the past 6 years they have managed to piss me off enough that they are never getting any money from me....Show more →
Yes, it should have read Kamber ~ Targhee >>> Tilopa. The Kamber and Targhee are true hiking backpacks, made by companies that have been doing this for ever. Until you have them side by side and you put on a Tilopa, then switch to either one of these backpacks, you don't realize what you have been missing.
One thing I've come across with respect to Kamber v. Targhee for hydration users. On the Kamber, the zip away back panel includes the straps. On the Targhee, the straps are not part of the zip away portion.
Therefore (i think) when the Targhee unzips, the hydration hose is left running through the main compartment whereas on the Kamber it would be remain entirety out of the way. Hope that makes sense.
RobDMB wrote:
One thing I've come across with respect to Kamber v. Targhee for hydration users. On the Kamber, the zip away back panel includes the straps. On the Targhee, the straps are not part of the zip away portion.
Therefore (i think) when the Targhee unzips, the hydration hose is left running through the main compartment whereas on the Kamber it would be remain entirety out of the way. Hope that makes sense.
That is one of the reasons I went with the Kamber. The Mammut Trion I had last year, the straps got in the way, and the opening tapered too much at the bottom (near the hip belt). It was comfortable, but too much compromise).
The biggest drawback to me on the Kamber is lack of water bottle pocket; but that is because I am a water bottle advocate . Luckily I have a Hydropack 3 Liter bladder that fits perfectly in here, I just have to get used to it.
If you live near an REI that sells Ski stuff, they should have this pack soon as we have been getting our snow sport stuff in slowly. You can always check rei.com and check which store has it as well. You are always welcome to bring in your camera gear and try it out. I am sure there are photographer employees that work there that would be interested in this. I know I get quite a few in at my store
Sorry to bump this but for those that own teh Kamber 42 - what is the actual height(from bottom to top) of the bag when not full. The website lists 27" for the M/L but I'm not sure if thats stuffed with the top expansion of not.
Currently I have the lid taken off of my pack (or brain), I measured about 23 inches from bottom to top of handle. With the lid on it and filled with stuff, I bet 27" is accurate.
If anyone on this thread has purchased the Gregory Targhee 32L or the Osprey Kamber, can they post updates on how those are working out for them? The Gregory being able to hold an F-stop large ICU has me leaning toward that one.
Interested in a proper backpack after a Disney trip showed me the limitations of a messenger bag.
I have an old Kata 3n1 but prefer a proper backpack that can better position weight and keep off my back for a summer trip in Europe. Also don't want a gigantic pack and these both look reasonably sized.
Also really interested in how this worked out for everyone. I have a Mindshift Ultralight which is great for carrying camera gear and easy access, but awful for longer hikes for back support and sweat issues. Have been thinking about the Osprey Scarab, Talon or Kestrel, but hadn't heard of the Kamber.
The targhee 32L is a great backpack. I used it with a fstop medium ICU. Carries really well (much much better than dedicated camera backpacks). I also tried a mammut nirvana pro 35 with a medium ICU and LOVED it. I took it on a trip to Iceland and UK and really impressed with it. This is my go-to bag and will be for a long time.
eyal wrote:
If anyone on this thread has purchased the Gregory Targhee 32L or the Osprey Kamber, can they post updates on how those are working out for them? The Gregory being able to hold an F-stop large ICU has me leaning toward that one.
I prefer larger packs, so my experience is with the 45L versions. My personal preference is
Kamber > Targehee >> Tilopa >>> any pack from the mainstream photopack companies. Have not tried the Mamut.
Dustin Gent wrote:
The biggest drawback to me on the Kamber is lack of water bottle pocket; but that is because I am a water bottle advocate . Luckily I have a Hydropack 3 Liter bladder that fits perfectly in here, I just have to get used to it.
Hear hear. Seems like A LOT of the hiking backpacks nowadays eschew water bottle pockets in favor of bladders. I find bladders too fussy to deal with and difficult to control how much water weight I carry. I often shoot in the desert, where if I am going on a daylong trip away from base camp I will carry 2x32oz bottles plus an Evernew collapsible bottle. But if I am dashing from the Jeep into a canyon to see what is there I may take just a half-full 32oz Nalgene. I have two of these that I attach/detach as needed. There are cheaper options that are good now https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00QWFVK1A
I will probably end up getting a Kamber 32 as well, since I am down sizing my gear (no longer shooting film - so no need for 3 bodies ).
Recently talked with our Osprey rep, and she said that Osprey is indeed looking into the photography market. I emailed them the thread i made, so they can see that there is indeed a huge market for this.
My pack is still holding up. Again, no need to worry about craftsmanship with these companies. Both have fantastic warranties, and Osprey probably has the best warranty of ANY company on the planet. Seriously.
Dustin Gent wrote:
I Recently talked with our Osprey rep, and she said that Osprey is indeed looking into the photography market. I emailed them the thread i made, so they can see that there is indeed a huge market for this.
Don't know about "huge", at least by their standards. But they probably see what F-stop charges and are thinking that there is profit to be had. All they have to do to the Kamber to make it one of the best on the market is lighten up the brains, add a couple of zippered mesh pockets in the front compartment, rework the front straps a bit to make them more tripod-friendly, add water bottle pockets, and come up with their own ICU to maximize profit.
So who here has the Atlas Athlete backpack? Thoughts? It looks like it might fit the bill for what I'm looking for. A very comfortable pack designed for photographers. Packs down well when you don't need to bring a lot of non-photography gear, but plenty of room for when you do.
I have the Athlete, and posted back on page 1. It's a real solid pack. Well made, works great as a pack and as a photo pack. Well thought out. If the storage size works for you, I highly recommend it. If you want more info, feel free to PM me.
Selected the Athlete over the Adventure. Been using it for a few weeks.
Really like being able to fit a full sized tripod inside the main pack instead of on the side.
Large enough to carry the landscape essentials. 16-35, 70-200, 2 - 3 primes and Sony a7 body.
i still use the f-Stop Ajna. its comfortable enough with the general load i am carrying (approx 35lbs) for. it must be because the past 40 years of carrying packs but it does many jobs pretty well. but then i'm traveling around with a D850, 70-200/2.8, 24-120/4, 17-35/2.8 and a few other sundry items including quite a bit of water. i do it modular.
I opted for the Atlas Adventure only because I run a gripped body and have a long lens thus needed the space. I'm hoping Allan comes out with a version of the Athlete that is a little deeper to accommodate a gripped full frame DSLR. When people say photo centric packs don't carry like hiking bags, then they haven't tried Atlas. The Adventure carry's as good as any of my hiking backpacks from Granite Gear and Osprey. They are near perfect. My only addition would be 4 loops attached at the bottom of the pack and attached bungees to tie things on like poles etc.
Oh and Atlas has the best customer service I've ever experienced with any company.
. Luckily I have a Hydropack 3 Liter bladder that fits perfectly in here, I just have to get used to it. 