500cm - how tough?

[david_waugh3]

<p>I certainly don't abuse my equipment, but foot and bike are my sole forms of transport. I usually have my 500cm in a camera bag (well padded) which is strapped to a rear rack on my bike. The camera certainly isn't getting beaten about as such, but there is a bit of high frequency bumps happening when riding off-road. Do you think I need to worry about anything? I am obviously very careful and not going fast or doing 10 foot drop offs :-) <br>

I know as a system it's extremely reliable, and take a certain amount of 'abuse'... just not sure whether I am risking it on the bike. I hope not, because I love cycling around with it!<br>

Thanks,<br>

David</p>

[leicaglow]

<p>You should be okay. They are both rugged and simple in design. If they can handle lift off and reentry, I would imagine they could stand a little jostling around. Make sure it's padded.</p>

[kentigern]

<p>I usually put mine in my handlebar bag (lens hood removed but there is enough room for it, with some padding), rather than on the rear as I think its less bumpy up front, I can keep an eye on it and it's handier to access, though of course has a weight penalty on the steering. If you are concerned, or thinking of longer journeys then perhaps it would be better in a pannier or other bag which is attached but not resting directly onto part of the bike.</p>

[david_waugh3]

<p>Thanks Michael and David. David - I'll try the handlebar bag or the pannier. Makes a lot of sense. I imagine there's not too much shock absorbency on top of the rack now I think about it. Thanks! I wonder if anyone has actually designed a camera-specific pannier? That would be cool :-) Could easily make up one anyway.</p>

[Ed_Ingold]

<p>The safest place for a camera on a bicycle is probably in a rack pack behind the seat. It's well protected in the event you go down (which is inevitable), whereas panniers end up on the bottom (half the time, anyway). The worst place is on the handlebars. Any significant weight on the handlebars is seriously destabilizing and can cause shimmying above a certain speed, as when bombing downhill.</p>

<p>A little foam (or bubble) padding in the rack pack will protect the camera. It helps to get your rear end off the seat in rough patches of road. A butted steel frame (e.g., Reynolds 532) and touring geometry has good shock absorbing properties. I hear they're coming back after years of cheap, welded aluminum imports.</p>

[smeitner300]

<p>If you carried it on your back, your body would absorb quite a bit of the high frequency vibration. You just want to make sure you don't go down. I hike with mine and never had an issue. Besides the vibration, you want to get it serviced more often. Hiking and biking exposes the camera to much more dust than sitting in a studio.</p>

[roelof_lucas]

<p>I would not carry it on me when biking. In the event of a fall you could fall on it and hurt yourself very seriously. The camera will problably survive but you will take very long to get well. I bought all my Hasselblad gear dirt cheap because it was dropped by the previous owners and although it looks ugly it functions without any problems.</p>

[richardw]

<p>I had a 35mm camera on a motorcycle trip around scotland, and had it on the rear rack, had no problems at all,<br>

the only thing I did, was, because of the vibration, winding the film just before the shot, so it was tightened. I heard that the vibration could loose the film a bit.</p>

[holger]

<p>Never put it into a backpack... I flew over the steering bar last week, due to a problem with the front break, rolled over a few times and got up unharmed (ex-skaters know how to fall...). I was extremely happy it did not happen with my usual backpack, loaded with the small notebook, D300, SB-600 and the small stuff. Not only would the camera have been harmed for sure, but try to roll over with a backpack on your back: chances are that you will get hurt, too. I will never put it on again out on the bike.<br>

Holger</p>