Lowepro Nature or Photo Trekker?

[sam_portera]

Let me say first that I have read all that one human can about

backpack suggestions for 4x5 cameras and I have narrowed my choices

dow to the Lowepro Nature Trekker AW II and the LowePro Photo Trekker

AW II.

 

I have no local shops that carry these items and I have a few

questions? It seems that the photo trekker has a little over 2

inches of room in it but this 2 inches in very expensive. The Nature

Trekker $189 at B&H and the Photo Trekker is $229.

 

I plan to carry a 4x5 field camera 6-10 holders, two lenses, light

meter, Leica M6 with three lenese OR Nikon Slr with a few lenses.

 

I don't want too big of a bag. I have a giant F64 shoulder bag that

can carry just about everthing I own but its just too big to use in

the field.

 

It must also be carry-on.

[pawel1]

Sam,

Have you tried measuring how much space in your F64 bag your minimum equipment list (described in your question) takes up? will it fit into the smaller Nature Trekker? Another way to think about it - based on your description, your F64 bag is larger than the Photo Trekker - how much larger? would the PT provide enough of a difference in size from the F64 to justify the expense? or would the NT and F64 pair be a more versatile combination?

[rob_skeoch]

This won't really answer your question but.... I use a Nature Trekker when I take my 8x10 in the field. The camera, meter, two lens, a couple of holders and small stuff. It does work well but I won't want to carry any more weight while hiking. I would go with the smaller one and keep the weight done.

-Rob Skeoch

[daniel_jolicoeur]

Check out this inexpensive bag. It can be carried as a duffle bag or on the shoulders like a back pack. Here is the description and a picture. You can also buy a used military surplus one in green. Both are $25. inside pocket is 30"x11"x14"

 

Israeli Defense Force Assault Bag in BLACK, Military style IDF bag constructed of heavy black cotton canvas, three zippered outside pockets, side-end pockets, inside patch pocket, waterproof bottom, reinforced carry handle, and ID holder. Military design with cleaver dual adjustable shoulder straps and padded top so you can carry this bag on your back like a pack. Great situation bag when your actions require a hands free assault. Brand new condition about 30x11x14", end pocket 14x11x1.5", and 11x6x2" and 11x4x1" with vinyl bottom, ID holder and shoulder strap.<div></div>

[ed_candland1]

It's funny how people see things differently. You thought that the

extra 2+ inches (it's also about a half inch wider) were very expensive and when I bought my Photo Trekker AW I was thinking I might as well go with the Photo Trekker AW instaed of the Nature because there wasn't much difference in price compared to the jump in price to the Pro or Super Models. I'd go with the Photo Trekker AW II considering your wanting to carry on some 35mm gear also. I'm also pretty sure the Photo Trekker AW is the largest pack that Lowe says fits for carry-on. I'll be interested to hear about the new AW II. I hear they have a better harness.

 

 

Good luck, Ed

 

Good luck

[sam_portera]

Thanks for the advice.

 

My F64 bag is large enough but not really for carrying all day or walking through tight spaces with it. I use it transport a lot of equipment to one location like a wedding or location portrait shoot. My goal with a Backpack is to comfortably carry a smal 4x5 system and a small 35mm sytem together for a day. The photo trekker may be the way to go so that I have the room if needed.

[Ed_Ingold]

I've packed a Speed Graphic and a Nikon F3 into a Photo Trekker AW. It's a squeeze, but possible (If I removed the optical viewfinder). I don't think a smaller pack would work. Forget carrying any big Nikon zooms in this situation.

 

The straps are reasonably good, but the pack is not as comfortable as the larger Pro model. My choice was based on mainly the airline carry-on rules, partly on cost. On the latter issue, it's cheaper to get the size you need, than to buy a 2nd pack when the first one proves too small. You don't have to fill it up -- that's a joke!

[paul_kent2]

I can get the following inside a Nature Trekker (old version): a 4x5 Tachihara, Wista

darkcloth, a 90/f8, 150/f5.6, 240/f9 and 400T/f8 (big), lightmeter, 5-6 holders, and an

assortment of filters, cokin p holder, lupe, spare batteries, whistle etc. in the inside

pockets. I regularly add a quickload box and holder to this which strains the pack slightly,

but appears to be OK. If I reduce the number of holders, give up the 400T and 150, I can

also fit a small bodied Nikon, a wide angle, and a slow 70-210mm zoom. There is not

enough room for f2.8 pro zooms and the 4x5 gear. In short, the Nature Trekker is just

about OK size wise. The back system *is* terrible compared with decent non-photo

backpacks - this difference becomes really obvious on steep hikes, but is more tolerable

on the flat. A Gitzo 1228-sized tripod works well in the supplied holder. The 13xx series

are a bit large (tall), but I have seen it done.

 

You should also consider working out of a regular backpack and using lens wraps/plastic

boxes/cut foam (etc.) to hold your gear.

[gone nomad]

I have the Photo Trekker. Like Paul, I carry a 90f/8, 150f/5.6, 240f/9, and a 400Tf/9. I can just fit my lenses, 15 holders, wista body, filters, and a pentax spotmeter. However, if I'm walking any distance I take a regular pack with quickloads. The suspension on the photo trekker just isn't up to long distance trekking.

[d_poinsett]

If I correctly understand what you want to carry, I think the Nature Trekker big enough but the organization would be quite different between each of the groups you mentioned. You might have to reconfigure the moveable velcro-attached panels for each arrangement.

 

I use the Nature Trekker with a 4x5 field camera, 2 lenses, light meter and about 10 film holders. I have it organized pretty well but there is not much additional space. At first I thought I had made a mistake by not getting a larger pack but now I like the smaller size.

 

One last note... if you have a tripod that would be considered normal size for LF, do not plan on attaching to the Nature Trekker. The tripod attachment feature is designed for a much smaller tripod.

[lloyd_lim]

If you need it to be carry on, then how about your tripod? In theory it should fit inside the bag to be carry on...unless you are checking in your tripod.

 

I have the Photo Trekker AW (Original version) and it is exactly the size for carry on (if you do not fit anything into the front pockets.)

 

The PT AW II has a tripod holder and if you use larger tripods, then it will definitely not fit "Carry on" size.

[jean-louis llech]

Sam,<br>

You should consider another solution, as I did. I use two bags, a backpack and a shoulder bag.<br>

Precedently, I carried all my equipment in a Super-Trekker backpack. (I carry a Master Technika, 6 lenses, 10 holders, meter, Pola backs...)<br>

The Super is heavy and cumbersome. My vertebrae were put "on strike".<br>

Now, I use both a lighter backpack (Nature Trekker) and a shoulder bag (Stealth Reporter 600 AW).<br>

Since I tried the two-bags solution, I think it is easier to carry all the equipment.<br>

For long trips, I always use the Super-Trekker, but fixed on a three-wheeled baby stroller.<br>

Regards.