Question about View Camera article "bags, bags, bags"
I got ahold of the recent issue of View Camera and wondered if I was just missing something. Theres a good article in it about bags for field cameras. Talks about alot of reasonably priced bags (most geared towards the fishing crowd) and how they are good for field camera usage.
Question I had and wondered if anyone else had, is what size "field camera" is the writer talking about the bags working with? The writer mentions that the "Cabela Fowl Proof Bag" works well for an 8x10 Tachihara, but fails to mention anywhere else in the article (that I could locate) what size field camera the other bags work well with. 5x7? 4x5? 8x10?
This seems like itd be a pretty important thing to specify so it can be taken in context. Anyone have a clue about this?
I was having this crazy idea on how I will be carrying an 8x10 camera with me on a backpack. I alreay have a couple of Pelican cases and I tought, it would be great to have it on a backpack.
Then I came up of this idea of getting a large EXTERNAL FRAME hiking backpack, and either the Pelican fits in it or somehow rig the Pelican onto the rigid backpack frame.
Just a thought....
I can't help but cynically posit the notion that such information WAS included, but monumentally sloppy proofing left it out. That's why I chose not to renew my subscription...waaaaaay too many uncorrected errors to qualify View Camera as a professionally produced periodical.
Go ask on the LF forum - the author of the article hangs out there and I'm sure he would be happy to answer
I tried posting to the VC forum but wasnt letting me. Ill try LF.info
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Thanks Tim, of course I hang out here too ... just not enough time to hang here too much.
No draconuan editing .... just my assumption that the picture of all th equipment wasa pretty clear. I'll plead guilty to not captioning the equipment shown in the grouping as to what size camera it is since I thought it would be obvious it was a 4x5. I don't know of any metal folding cameras larger than 4x5 that would easily be confused with what you see in the picture, especially relative to the other equipment pictured. Not to mention that the film and holder is also a tipoff. Sorry for any confusion there. Also note that in the discussion fo the William Joseph bag I specifically mentioned that its taller 'lid' made it possible to use it with a Canham T57.
Hope this helps and send me a PM if you want any more info.
As to monumentally sloppy proofing, I suggest you take another look sometime. Sure things were pretty bad but I do believe that you will now find that things are much much better. Sure, not always perfect but a lot lot better.
this thread wasnt meant to bash VC or any such thing.
Just a bit of confusion on my part as a reader.
Thanks so much for clearing it up Ted. Im looking for a nice bag for my 8x10 thats easier to work with then my current one. So it sounds like the Cabela Fowl Proof bag would be a great option. Thanks again for the informative article. It was nice to see some more reasonably priced options out there to haul our gear around.
Originally Posted by scootermm
I haven't seen the View Camera Article, but if you don not have it here is the link for the Cabela Fowl Proof Camera Bag:
Glad it is claered up. For referene the camera pictured with the gear is a Toyo AII and the one in the Orvis bag later in the article is a Wista 4x5. The Willam Joseph is shown open with the Canham 5x7 inside.
Regarding the Cabela's Fowl Proof Bag you might want to PM Hany who actually put the bag through its paces in the field much more than I did.
I've been wondering about that too. My case and camera weight is around 47 pounds so that's not going on MY back in this lifetime. I did an 80 pound pack on the AT when I was a lot younger and it about killed me. I would hovever like to be able to hike with the 8x10 rather than only the 4x5. I'll have to get a copy and read the article. That bag looks like a shoulder bag, which is not as comfortable as I would like, but for that price, it sure looks good!
Originally Posted by eric