gdanmitchell
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.1 #11 · Anyone try the Tenba BYOB inserts? | |
For some purposes, that Tenba bag (and other similar products) can be a good option. It all comes down to what compromises you want to make, along with your personal approach to photographing on the trail.
A small insert like that is great for situations where several factors are in play:
- You are doing some serious hiking, where typical photo backpacks either don’t do a great job of accommodating important non-photo gear (water, food, extra clothing, etc.), and/or…
- you need to go out with reduced photography equipment (fewer or a single lens and perhaps no typical landscape tripod).
There are some downsides:
- If you have a top-loading backpack, access can be problematic — put the camera insert on top and access to the non-photo gear is impaired. (Imagine having to quickly pull out raingear when that thundershower hits and it is beneath the camera insert, you lunch, extra water, and…)
- Inserts aren’t particularly flexible, at least not in the way that dedicated photo backpacks are, with their systems of movable dividers.
On the other hand, a photography-specific backpack can be a better option if:
- you need more gear, perhaps including a serious tripod, and…
- your hiking distances (and challenging terrain) are more limited — perhaps you are not hiking off—trail or going out for more than a half-dozen miles.
- Dedicated packs often have much better systems for carrying tripods. (You can do it with some non-photo packs, but it is often a serious kludge.)
They also have some downsides:
- While things have improved, harness systems on photography backpacks generally don’t match the best systems on non-photo packs.
- Because of protective padding, these packs tend to be a bit (sometimes a lot) stiff compared to regular internal frame packs.
- their capacity for that non-photo gear can be limited, both in the amount of extra space and by design.
Another option is to put individual pieces of photography equipment directly into the pack, enclosed in individual protection — for example, things like padded lens sleeves and smaller camera-sized bags. There are pluses:
- Loading is very flexible. For example, you might put a rarely used lens at the bottom of the pack, and the camera with the most used lens at the top. Unlike larger rectangular inserts, the individually packed items are smaller and fit into odd spaces.
Minuses:
- Since each item is packed individually, the sum of the padded material can be large.
- Gear may hot all be in one place.
Another useful option that I’ve used in the backcountry is a chest-harness camera pack. (I use a larger one from Lowepro.) Pluses:
- Camera with lens attached is immediately accessible without removing the pack. Depending on the gear and the pack, you may be ale to include a second ens in the pack, along with a few other small accessories.
- In camp, the chest harness will work on its own (unlike an insert) in the field, either chest mounted or, with some designs, slung over the shoulder.
Minuses:
- A large chest harness pack in front of you can impede your visibility of the ground in difficult class 3 and higher terrain. (I learned to look around mine, but it still can be an issue.)
- You’ll still have to remove the pack to get at a tripod.
- You are going to seat under it!
The right answer? It depends. I’ve used a camera and single zoom lens for weeklong backcountry trips using just the chest pack. I use a day pack with individually packed items for many local hikes. I’ve used inserts for travel, along with a daypack. I’ve used a regular photo pack (from Lowe and from Mindshift) to card larger amounts of gear into the backcountry. Unless you do just one sort of landscape or other trail travel, there’s a good chance that you’ll want more than one option.
ONe thing I’ve learned after doing all of that for years is… that no one solution is always the best one!
|
