Domke Bags In The World Of Modern Cameras

I think it is time to explore the Domke bag range and how it does or does not service the needs of the modern photographer.

Please excuse the motley collection of workman-like pics (or not), I have been a little busy lately and grew tired of writing this and not getting the shots done.

I will rate these bags from 1-5 in the following criteria;

• Handling smaller (M43) gear. This includes the “floating” lens issues bigger bags can create.

• Handling bigger pro cameras which means big bodies with integral or added grips and fat zoom lenses.

• Accomodating all of the other stuff you may need from lights to phones etc.

• Last but not least comfort.

F2 Shoulder Bag

(New Ballistic and 40 year old faded black)

After a year of constant use, it still looks neat, but the 40 year old one is not much different.

The F2 is the very first Domke and shows it’s 50 year old thinking, but that is maybe not a bad thing.

The 1970’s when it was made, was the era of the slim mechanical film camera and prime lenses. These lenses were also fairly conservative and regulation in size. Some of us dreamed of the legendary f1.2 or 1.4 super primes, but for most the reality was more like f1.8 to f4 with a 49mm to 58mm filter thread. If you want examples, look at the legacy lens collections of some working videographers.

The F2 was designed to take 2 bodies with or without winders with 3-5 lenses in the cross-divided middle section and ends. A flash, note pad, film and filters rounded out the set. This was the working kit of so many news photographers.

Kits usually consisted of something like two bodies (FM2/3, F1, LX, M4) a 20 or 24 f3.5 to 2.8, 28 or 35mm f2.8, 50mm f1.8 to 1.4, 85mm f1.8 to 2, 135 f2.8 to 3.5 and 180 or 200mm f2.8 to 4, although many shooters dropped one or more of these tending to skip every second length as unnecessary (maybe a 20/28/50/135 or 24/35/85/200).

With the recent shift back toward smaller cameras and prime lenses, away from the monster zooms and bulky AF SLR’s of the 90’s and after, it has become again the most useful of bags.

The bag has great end pockets, decent front pockets (note book = modern phone size), two thin pen pockets (that I love), a good lid, full length rear pocket, ideal for many slightly bigger items and the inner dividers that could take the above kit or modern equivalent.

This full length rear pocket is the lung it needs.

Fits; EM1 (with optional grip because it can sit on top) + 40-150 f4 nose down in one of the cross sections, G9 + 12-40 f2.8, 17, 45 & 9mm primes, with a flash*, off camera controller, small LED, OSMO, small reflector and large note pad in the back pocket, phone and mic in the front).

*My only complaint and the reason the F7 is my current work bag is the Godox 860 flash struggles to fit in the end pockets.

My news paper day kit before the F7 came back from Japan with us. 2 Bodies, lenses which cover from 18-300 (ff) over two zooms and three fast primes, three lighting options, the OSMO and a decent mic. The small front pockets are handy enough and the height of the bag helps keep small primes easy to reach.

Small kit 4.5. Fits the above neatly and smaller items do not get lost. If I was an all primes user (close to that Nirvana), it would be a 5.

Pro kit 3.5. One fat lens tends to undo the inside layout and no way it can be mounted without gutting the bag. I did experiment with two pro cameras with mounted zooms (EM1x + 12-40 and EM1x + 8-18) and it worked with a slim twin lens divider, but no room for a big tele zoom.

Other stuff 3.5. The full length rear pocket and decent end pockets make all the difference.

Comfort 4. Sits well on the hip and is “boxy” enough to provide a good surface to put a note pad, but it does roll around in the car.

F7 Shoulder Bag

(Sun-faded black)

My “special edition” gunmetal grey F7, is actually a light faded black display model, bought for half price. For a working bag, a real win.

The “Twin AF” is an odd one. Designed apparently to take a pair of big AF cameras and the holy trinity of wide, standard and tele f2.8 zooms, I fail to see how that would. It has 2 almost square compartments and a slim double lens compartment. The bag is essentially a tall F2, so a big camera and big lens mounted simply do not fit without taking out both of the square inserts, which only leaves you with two lens holes. These are deep and reasonably wide, but still a push for a 14-24 f2.8 Nikkor for example.

From a M43 shooters perspective, the 8-25 and 40-150 f2.8, with maybe a 17 and 45 1.8 for speed would actually work or maybe the 8-18/25/40-150, but you need to make the holy trinity a divine double!

The height advantage (dis-advantage?) of the F7 is slight, but handy, about the depth of a camera body or taller lens.

The big square pockets are oddly near useless for their intended kit. They take a small camera and zoom face down, but the F2 can take the same side on. The height suits big cameras, but not with large lenses mounted. The small divided compartment is good for lenses as large as the 40-150 f2.8, but not with its big hood (I use a screw-in metal one). Personally I would have liked something along the lines of a full sized compartment, but more modular.

I put the same kit in it as the F2 above, with more room to spare and a general feeling of everything easing off. The front and end pockets are bigger and the bag taller, but it lacks the rear pocket (used as belt loops) and the lid is decent, broken into more compartments.

The small primes are a long way further down than in the F2, the 9mm hidden under the EM1.

Small kit 3.5. It is roomy for M43, but the extra height can cause its own issues. It does not actually hold much more than the F2, with the exception of handling some slightly larger lenses and feeling “roomier”.

Large Kit 3.5. Designed for this as the name suggests, but the inserts seem to fight that.

Other 3. No rear pocket or inside insert pocket means bigger items like a 60cm reflector, A4 note pad or small computer have nowhere to go. Unlike the F2 it falls over but does not roll. The top flap is my favourite and folds back well and has separate velcro pockets for batteries etc.

Comfort 4.5. With the Domke shoulder pad, it is very comfortable with the exception of a couple of decent seams running down the back where the belt loops are. It potentially could hold more than an F2, which might be too much.

F802 Satchel

(Green cotton)

My first serious work bag, even though I had others.

This bag was the ideal for my early kit, which used the 40-150 f2.8 exclusively. That lens forced a height over width thinking and did a great job. The issue and it could be a big one, was the height with smaller M43 lenses.

Old kit, but a good array to show the massive capacity of this bag. Note, it looks less green and more worn in these days. Where did the little 25mm end up? Mostly forgotten as it goes. I never carried this much, but a rain jacket, water bottle, even a laptop did make it.

Putting a couple of primes in it meant either stacking them or wasting a lot of space. Neither is ideal. My “A” game kit (EM1x, G9, 8-18, 12-40, 40-150, 15 and 75) would be ok but not great. My current day kit would be a disaster of fishing around in the depths for lost bits.

The Tenba insert I bought for it is seemingly made for the space (better than any Domke inserts), which helps, but only to a point.

I felt this would not be deep enough for a grip mounted EM1.2 or EM1x (so I bought the F804), but it turns out, that was not the case.

Width of the bag can be deceptive. I bought the F804 to accomodate an EM1x sized camera with lens attached, but it turns out the F802 does that fine.

It does however have good rear and internal A4 sized pockets, two decent outside flap pockets (which can also be too deep), two huge front pockets and the ability to take (and I have these) two large or huge pouches on it’s ends.

This is a huge advantage over the F804, which lacks the raised external main strap for the pouches to slip under.

The top flap folds down nicely against the body, just remember to zip up the outside flap pockets! I “lost” three batteries one day, finding them the next day in the rear pocket.

Small kit 2.5. Just too deep and roomy for smaller gear.

Large cameras 4. Deep and tall enough for pro gear, probably the ideal bag to live up to the F7’s promise. I believe that with the big end pouches, this may well hold the most of all the shoulder bags.

Other stuff 4.5. Big reflectors, multiple flash units, a rain coat and lots more. It is probably my best non-camera, camera bag truth be told.

Comfort 4.5. The satchel shape seems to take weight well and the rigid top keeps the bag straight and “right” feeling. This is the one bag I will continue to wear while shooting thanks to its slim-line dynamic.

F804 Satchel

(Black cotton)

The problem solver that basically failed. The only real use I have for this bag is as a haul bag option with my roller case (it has a rear slip-over panel for the case handle) or a big lens sports bag that I can wear more easily than a backpack. This means it tends to be my day bag for stills when the 217 roller is taken for video.

As a travel bag it is good, a camera bag less so.

It is huge and with that comes the same issues as the F802, but the F802 is more practical and more comfortable to wear. Basically if you take the F802, remove the rigid top panel and make the top flap stupidly long, then add about 3” of extra depth inside with the (owner provided) insert, then remove the option of end pockets and the back pocket, you have a bag that takes a decent kit of big items, but for me, what and why? It is probably a better F7 as the F7’s intended use.

The top flap is excessive and without the F802’s reinforcing, less useful.

Small kit 2. Just huge, like the F802 only deeper.

Large kit 4. The provided insert (the Tenba or another from Ebay) are required or it is just a huge hole.

Other 4.5. Probably a better non-camera bag and likely that is what it will end up being. As a travel bag with a small camera bag inside it, it may be ideal.

Comfort 3. I find the size less hip-hugging than the F802 and the large seam running along the base rubs noticeably. The top flap can be flipped backwards when used, but unlike the F802, it actually hangs below the base of the bag. For its size it is a good weight bearer.

F3x

(Olive rugged wear)

This is another “old school” bag, one that I have owned a few times and usually parted with as it is a poor choice for M43 kit.

The shapeless blob that is the empty, light weight “rugged wear” F3x. The Olive RW is rare as, coming from a few Bic Camera stores in japan, some now gone all together. A must have, I would happily swap it for a Ballistic nylon one (which I had).

The F3x is a dream never realised. I chased a Ballistic one recently, but switched to the F2 because it was available and that was probably for the best.

It is the contradiction of a small bag for large items.

A large camera like the EM1x, a D6, Z9, EOS 1D or the like, with a decent standard lens mounted, a pair of f4 wide and tele zooms could fit well. The main compartment is divided by a single thinly padded wall (missing from the image), that also holds the two sewn-in side pockets out.

If I could bring myself to be a one camera-zoom only shooter, it may be the “one bag” answer.

Still shapeless, which I guess can be a benefit, it is the ultimate hip hugger (but watch light coloured clothes as the oil can rub off). It has the rear, front and end pockets that do make a difference. Probably best as a single camera, three or 4 lens bag.

Designed to take a large SLR with lens on, a flash and a couple of pro zooms in sewn-in pouches and blessed with the little slip pocket inside, a rear one and decent end pouches, it holds a surprising amount, but not enough for me and the rugged-ware cloth feels, ironically, less robust than the regular cotton or ballistic nylon.

It would be the ideal fit for the front pocket of the 217 roller which was designed for that.

Small kit 2. All the compartments are aimed at larger items and the sewn-in pockets are not grounded so smaller lenses can float. You need to add an insert to it (The F2’s works) and then it lacks room for any large kit. I had the most success with a two part Billingham divider, but sadly, not enough to use seriously.

Large kit 4. Oddly, being the smallest bag here, it takes a decent amount of larger kit.

Other stuff 3. A surprise here, sporting many of the pockets that some larger bags lack, the long pockets are paperback sized and the end pockets are the same as the F2’s.

Comfort 4.5/5. There is a photo I saw somewhere of a photo journalist with an over stuffed and well worn F3 looking like a time loved pair of jeans (that he was also wearing). It has that very Domke hip-hugging shape with the added benefit of not being able to take too much. This is as Domke as a Domke can be. The rugged wear is thin feeling, which sometimes means you can feel gear on your hip, but a little padding like a note pad or soft cloth in the back pocket can fix that.

217 Roller Case

(Black nylon)

Bought as a day to day kit hauler for my job at the paper (I park 1km away), I soon re-purposed it as a video kit home. My video kit is just that, video. For more cinematic gear I use a 511 Range Ready bag.

This has the magic dimensions of both useful practical area and decent depth. The lid in particular is expandable and the inside and outside pockets are huge and useful. I can even leave a handle on a rig and it works, but worries me a little.

It is U.S. airline sized, but I have not pushed it locally.

The top pocket can take a Portrays 5” monitor in its box, tool kit and cable, the bottom takes a 13” M1 Air or a camera bag (F2/3x) and the whole lid is expandable. The inside lid has a full sized deep expansion pocket and two pockets (M1 sized).

As a base to work from, it is ideal.

This can hold my entire S5 and G9II video kit* with cages, handles, 62/67 filter kits and 8 lenses. The extra depth means many lenses can stand up, which is a massive advantage.

The G9II and S5 caged, my Lumix lenses for both (the hole is for the 35mm still coming), the fast Sigma, handles, filters etc. The whole compartment is removable, so the bag can be a regular suit case as well. Even the 85mm with tall hood on does not touch the lid. The square “bumper” stickers are for video lenses, round ones for stills and bigger squares for cinema. My coverage is 16-120 in M43, 20-130 in FF, with many longer M43 options available.

Small kit 2 or 5. It is a suit case for better or worse.

Large kit 5. A decent sized suit case.

Other 5. Still a suit case.

Comfort 3 or 5. With wheels.

*The 511 Range Ready Bag is better suited to the massive cinema lenses and accessories, mat boxes, rigging gear etc.

*

My ideal Domke?

A ballistic nylon F7 in dark green with the F2 rear pocket (but bigger) with a velcro bottom to allow water release and to slip over a suit case handle, and F802 style outer lid pockets.

I have had other Domke bags and may even have others in the future, but these days, all my bags fill a need or they go, simple as that.

Other than Domke?

The above mentioned 511, the big Neewer backpack for sports gear, several shoulder bags, mainly to look less Domke, more regular camera bag.

*G9II, S5, gages, handles, 35/50/85/20-60 Lumix S, 12-60/8-18 Lumix G, 30 Sigma, two filter stacks, two small LED’s. It could also hold my entire full frame video kit including cine lenses.

Domke F7 A Mixed Blessing

The F7 has become my work day bag.

Compared to the F2 it has more depth which helps with larger lenses mounted on cameras and lets me take the odd larger lens as needed.

The pockets are larger (F802 sized), making it even better than the F802 (4 pockets over two-but pouches optional for the F802) and the F804 (smaller profile and more practical shape with again more pockets).

Big enough for a pair of flash units side by side, but also big enough to loose things down deep, which can result in things “jumping” out when rummaging.

These pockets make a difference, but it lacks the F2’s rear pocket, the F802’s internal slip pocket or the outer lid pockets of the F802/804, so swings and/or round-abouts I guess. In effect it is a roomier F2.

The internal dividers are interesting.

If the left one was a few inches longer and the right one a four-way lens design like the middle one, it would be more useful to me.

It has two “box” shaped ones that are too small for a larger camera and standard zoom unless squeezed in facing down, but too big for said camera and small prime. The bag was called the “twin AF”, but I would rather it had a bigger main divider for a larger camera (1D/R3, D6/Z9, EM1x) and standard zoom on, then replace the twin lens pouch and second box with a flexible four part divider like the F2. I may do something similar with the thinner divider reserved for a smaller camera and lens (EM1 Mk2-no grip), then divide one box with separate dividers.

For M43 gear it tends to loose smaller lenses in these big holes and it lacks the micro organising of the F2, but overall it has a more relaxed feel.

It carries well. Even with the same kit as the F2, it feels maybe more evenly distributed, but when heavily loaded, it does collapse in a bit.

It has not however, proven to be a lucky bag.

I have left gear behind at jobs, dropped a G9 from sitting on top (nasty scratch, but still working), forgotten I have things hidden away, been generally disorganised and felt out of sorts since coming back, some of which can be put down to new bag warming in, some just bad luck.

The Domke F7, Where The Hell Did That Come From?

So on my first day in Japan I went looking for the Kyoto station Bic Camera.

Gone?

A helpful hotel staff member drew me a map, but it looked like they used their initiative and pointed me to the closest thing, the Kyoto Yoda-bashi (same, but different).

Shopping list;

Shoulder pads (various).

Possible second hand lenses or camera bodies.

Small bag for day trips, because muggins packed and unpacked an effectively weightless Crumpler, but failed to actually decide on it.

Failed with all those because I found something else.

The Domke F7?

No, but for two reasons.

The first is, it has not been an affordable option in a world already full of bags.

Secondly, it was always thought to be too big for M43 gear, which deserves an ironic laugh heard from the stalls as we consider the bags I have been buying lately (Domke F804, 511 Tactical Ready Bag, Neewer monster back pack etc). The reality is, I still have the same issue with my 40-150 f2.8 (with a screw in metal hood attached and mounted on camera) and the 300 f4 as a daily carry.

I would love to have a day bag that can take sports sized gear and again, video gear has that “boxy” problem.

The two big inserts are D6, EOS 1, EM1x sized cameras, the middle one will take big lenses like the 300, something I have struggled with. The fading is a lot less obvious in reality than the photos make it look. My other black bags look much the same, only the bit under the flap giving this one away.

The things that sold me on it were also two fold.

Ooooh I thought, it’s available in a dark, classy grey finish, which turned out to be black with light fading…..

….revealed when you lift the flap.

Actually having a chance to look at it, the relatively shallow depth, but added height make it a contender for the role the F804 has not fit perfectly (the deeper than an F802, but taller than an F2), ideal for taking an EM1x with 40-150 f2.8 attached or the 300 on its own.

Secondly, it was ex-display stock, a little light faded* so I got it for just over half price or to put it another way, about what my last F2 cost me in Australia at a discount (and my original F2 cost in the 1980’s).

The F2 bag would have cost me something like $350au in Japan, the F7 closer to $480au, but I got it for $250au. Considering the first ten years in the life of a Domke bag is wearing in, the next ten is comfortable use and the last ten concerned with wearing out, I think a little fading is irrelevant for the saving and I actually like the newness removed.

The Domke belt that came with it, a $40au saving alone.

This is just another in along line of Domke bags, but I know a bargain when I see one.

Anyway, as Meg said, Japan, Domke, something to remember the trip, all good.

*In Tasmania, UV is lethal, so fading can be a bad sign (and comes on quickly), but northern hemisphere fading worries me less. I may have lost a year of working oife from the bag, but that year will never be needed by me in my working life.

Reclaim The Street, Some Thoughts, Part 1

I have enjoyed the big monster of a book that is Reclaim The Street.

This is the only image of or from the book for copy-rite adherence. The rest of the images are my own because I can show them without fear.

It has done nothing to re-define my thinking or definition of Street photography, because many of the contributors highlight their own struggles with this.

Street photography can mean many things to different people, so by definition, it defies clear definition.

The thing I have liked about this books handling of this difficult subject is it has not taken a side, it has showcased a wide variety of practitioners and allowed them their voice. Many of these voices are themselves dissenting opinions to the common definitions.

The thing to keep in mind of course is this is a showcase of their best or favourite work, drawn in some cases from decades of honing their craft.

From my own perspective I have discovered several new and inspiring shooters, had my eyes opened to new techniques and found some small validation for my own work. I see much that is better, but I am in the same ball park philosophically and even sometimes technically, so yes, we can all get there if we persevere, I just have to persevere.

“Don’t Stop”. Yellow is such a strong anchor.

The artists, a personal take based only on initial impressions.

Shin Noguchi.

Coincidence, irony and layering, from, and of, an awareness of the native shyness of the Japanese. He is brave and old school, shooting film from eye level and never to a set theme, until one emerges naturally. His is the cover image, which I like the most.

Tavepong Pratoomwong.

A question asking coincidence and depth manipulating shooter. I am guessing he shoots a lot at very small apertures and is very patient (but aren’t they all). My favourite is “Dream Beach”.

Melissa O’Shaughnessy.

A good exponent of strong light and theatrical staging a little like Jan Meissner another favourite, she uses very normal subjects, looking for interactions with each other and light. “Doyers Street, New York” is my pick.

An image of the same type.

Dan Szpara (Portfolio; Extreme caution)

This one struck me as a personal project undiscovered. I have tons of images of cones, but have never thought to collate them. Once discoverred, they are abundant and photogenic. Hard to pick a favourite as they are en-mass and uncaptioned, relying on their quantity for strength.

One of my loose project on street corners in Japan.

Rammy Narula.

A master of negative space, contrast and colour. These are strong to my eye and it is hard to say which I like most. Probably the Monk from the Platform 10 series, but I like them all.

Not sure what platform.

Eleonore Simon.

A home shooter, creatively a mix of M.C Escher and early black and white shooters like Saul Leiter, Ernst Haas or David Vestal, she is clever and timeless. Cerro Conception Valaparaiso is my mind bending favourite.

Nayeem Siddiquee.

A Bangladeshi photographer, which is a rare and precious commodity, Nayeem goes into the places many go, but as a peer, not a visitor. Being close to adversity and poverty, as well as personal illness has not stopped him from experimenting and leading the emerging Bangladeshi street scene. My favourite is “Summer, Noakhali”, a shot of a goat eating a mellon with a slightly sinister blood-like vibe.

The Domke 217 Roller Bag

Seeing as there are precious few reviews about for this bag (read; almost none), and even though it is effectively discontinued, I thought I would whip a quick one up, because I am well impressed.

It does not look to be that big at all, only about the same footprint as my Neewer back pack and all good for onboard air travel. It is square and deep, both efficient things and it can it seems, be deceiving. The lens with the Lumix cap, is actually my 40-150 pro, which protrudes a little, but the lid still closes comfortably. There is about 2” of clearance without the lid expanded. The little lenses all have enough clearance for another in the same compartment if individually bagged.

The EM1x sitting on its strap. The 300mm and both cameras are sitting on top of their respective straps, so nice and neat, nothing “floating”.

Before it came, I was of two minds. Did I want a huge hauler or a smaller more workable addition to a shoulder bag combo? I basically got both.

The lid has a thick, soft plastic lining with two pockets. They will not quite hold my 13” Macbook Air, but could hold a rain jacket, three pairs of socks and monitor or similar.

Looks like a forgot to shoot the outside pockets, but here you can see the inner zip pocket behind each flap covered one. The flap pockets are buckled with better buckles than the usual Domke clips and velcro. The bottom one will take my 13” Mac, the top would take a full sized iPad. These are the heavier Nylon that Domke uses for their bigger bags and the lids are slightly padded. Apparently, Domke designed the pockets on the lids to take a flattened F3x or F2 and I would believe it. The inner ones are even sealed, so the oily F3x Rugged wear would not “infect” other items.

If you extend the lid, you gain about the depth of the average 50mm 1.8. If this creates a migration path for smaller items inside, they supply a half dozen elastic straps to close some compartments.

The whole inner liner can be removed. The lot can be slipped onto a shelf for storage and the case used for other tasks.

Nice unders. If the wheels ever wore out, I would probably just get a small hand cart for the bag.

Real leather bits and like some cases, it feels lighter full than the sum of its parts.

With the f804 on, a nice little package, well balanced and sturdy and this can actually hold my entire kit, all cameras, lenses and accessories. Not something i would like to try in another configuration.

This has given me a very versatile problem solver. For my trips to the paper, I have a shoulder saving option, if travelling, I have a case that is also a gear bag and just for storing between jobs, it is the ideal organiser.

Any negatives?

The extension handles feel a little wobbly, but I have plenty of cases and hand trucks like this that have been fine. There are better ones around, but there are also worse and the bag is not huge, nor will it be ridiculously heavy so strain will be controlled.

A great purchase, one I may even repeat so I have one in reserve.

The Domke F804, Problem Solver?

The eternal search for the best camera bag for each task has notched up another win.

Fated to be, I grabbed likely the last new one I can find, “out the back” at the distributors, forgotten, or maybe waiting for me? This is probably not a useful review, simply becasue these are a discontinued model, but just in case you have one and want to compare, or are looking at a second hand one (or want to make one I guess), becasue I did not find much out there.

My current Domke Family. Many others, mostly small ones have come and gone (sadly), so this is both the “working” and the “for pride” pack. The ancient, early 1980’s F-2 front right is now doing time as a lighting cable bag, the F3x rugged (special edition) is seldom used, but a keeper and the F802 (right) and F804 (left) backing up. These last two are the current work bags. Funny to think the F3x and F-2 share 30+ years of difference in age.

The big problem, a gripped camera face down mounted on a long lens. Width, height, depth and sharing with others make this problem child an ongoing issue. The F804 is basically the same size as the F802, except for depth, which is almost double. The lid closes without distorting any other pocket and there is still room in the bag. I can even reverse the camera, making the other compartments more accessible. The tiny bit of extra height and length (about 1” each), just gives the bag some breathing room.

The Tenba insert fits comfortably, but does not just float around. I have a different one coming from ebay that may be a little deeper that will also fit no problem.

Although the F802 managed the kit, it did not do it without compromises.

I will get another insert for the F802, because it is just too good a fit, but I still need one for the 804 to control all that space.

The big difference. The pockets are about the same, but the base depth of the main compartment is very different. The F804 gets a semi hard base board which is apparently the same one the F1x uses. I have another coming as they are scarce and another shoulder pad. I have two of these also, but several bags that could do with them.

The F-2 and F804 share roughly the same footprint.

The two big differences between the F804 and F802 apart from size are, no top handle and a base board, making the F804 less of a satchel and more of a tote bag.

Happy?

Could not be more so. The bag was growing bigger in my head, so to see it basically just a little bigger overall than the F802 was a relief. The extra space has however made a massive difference. I can now pack for anything, not just a specific job.

I seriously doubted whether I could find a bag I liked more than the 802, but it looks like I may have.

Domke, Always Domke?

I often end up here, with a Domke camera bag as the best, maybe the only solution.

Big statement, but considering the realities of online bag purchasing, long term satisfaction and general useability, they are just the best option for me, but please find your own way as suits.

How did I get here?

The First Bags

The F-2, “The Original” Domke was my first serious camera bag.

It was bought sometime in the early 1980’s, the same time I bought my first Manfrotto tripod, the venerable 055 (also still going, but sold to a friend for $50). This was the time of manual focus, sometimes even fully mechanical cameras (Canon F1’s, T90’s), black and white film (Tri-X, FP4) and gear bought for a distant future.

It was the time of Domke, Billingham and early Lowe Pro and to be honest, not much else.

The F-2 has fallen away these days, as it does not provide the best shape for my current gear, but to honest, if I only had one bag this could be fine and it is still used for transporting lighting gear. My main issue with it is height. I like my gear to be at the ready these days, longer lenses included. The boxy F-2 was designed for cameras with medium range primes on and teles packed separately.

F-6 “little bit smaller” was my second bag, taken as payment for a job when working at a camera store/studio in the 1990’s. My wife dyed it for me from sand to a mottled brown (trying for black, the weatherproofing fought back). It ending up looking something like the brown rugged wear ones of today, so go us. It went to a photographer friend who wanted a cool day bag.

This period was not all Domke. I remember having the enormous LP Commercial, several smaller bags, some generics, but the only ones that made it out of this period were Domkes.

Going Bag Nuts

Following my slow beginnings, came a period of working in camera shops, loving and buying all thins photographic and with decent pricing and availlability a massive gear merry-go-round, something that has not yet really stopped, but I hope my purchases have become more head, not heart based.

The F-8 (rugged brown or maybe green?) was a little disappointing, literally a very little F3x. Bought from the image which made it look like a bigger bag, I just did not realise how small it was (the hint was the relativey huge label attached to it). If I needed a single camera with standard lens and accessories only, then it would be fine, as would an F5 of some sort. Sold on soon after and my only dissapointlemnt with Domke, but really my own fault.

F-3x. I have actually had three of these (green, nylon, rugged green). They are the epitomy of “old school” in design and function. The F-2 was the two camera, four lens bag, the F3x is the one camera, three lens model. I love it, but find it nearly useless for M43 gear without some major accessorising. Can’t see myself without my last one, a special edition green rugged wear from Bic Camera in Japan and wish I kept the nylon one, but I also struggle to find a use for them. If an EM1x, 40-150, 8-18 and 12-40 were my kit, it would actually be ideal, but it was designed for bullet proof, manual focus stuff like an old FM2, 180, 85, 35, 20 kit.

Another F-6 (green), likely from one of the sales at Photovideo Extras in the ACT, which is where I grabbed most of these. I remember trying several F3, F5 and small bags thanks to these clearances, but strangely the still surviving F3 came from Japan, my old F2 from a now defunct local shop and my first F6 from another defunct local shop.

F-5B. Had at least two of these (green, nylon, maybe a black) and for a small camera and 2-3 small lenses (85 f1.8 sized), they are neat, just a little small, almost handbag like. I like the zip top opening. Sold all that I had, but chased a special edition green with leather trim for a while. Need to stop that.

F-5xc. I have had more than one of these, a nylon, green canvas and black canvas. They are great if you want a slim, low profile bag that carries a surprising amount. Once, for a dare I came in to the store with a 5d2, 85 f1.8, 35L, 70-200 f4L, 50 macro in one. Clever bag, but limited and gear is usually broken down and I removed the front velcro which was a little too efficient. Watch the rugged wear one, because it lacks the useful front access flap to keep it weatherproof.

Again, these Domke bags were only a part of the story. LP Flipside 400, Pro Messenger 200, some Billinghams, Filsons, generics, the odd Crumpler, lots of inserts and others all shared this space, but again only the Filson and Domke bags survived.

The New Era

The F-802 satchel is the main one now and to be brutally honest was the first bag I purchased since my very first Domke, simply to fill an actual, practical role, not just because my imagination ran away with me. M43 cameras can generally tolerate slim bags, and the satchel shape takes height and weight well. I have basically evolved from boxy to slab shaped. My current one just keeps delivering as the all purpose day bag for my current job. It is however too small for the news kit I am intending to use, so the search for a bigger bag was started and guess what? After a few days of fruitless searching and a mis-purchase or two, another Domke came to the rescue.

At that perfect age where it feels worn in, with minimal sign of wearing out, like a favourite pair of jeans. Shame it is just a little skinny to accomodate a very square camera face down, with laptop etc as well.

F-804. The great hope. Footprint of a F1x, height of an F802, this one, now discontinued was a find and hopefully a problem solver. A marriage of boxy and slab shaped, it will be my pro kit with daily extras bag.

F-901/2 bags. These are added to the F802 as needed, giving it potentailly four large pockets and one or two are on the list for the F804 once I see the true size of it.

Again, others share this space. I literally have a dozen of the “same bags only different” floating around, none of which are perfect, nor useless. The Crumplers, Think Tank Turnstyle 10, Neewer Backpack, the Filsons, some generics and hard cases, all share the load as the mood takes me, but bag number one is always a Domke.

The Future

The F808, discontinued, but a few around, the F1x, maybe an F803 or F5B special edition? Not sure. One issue is I will never wear out the ones I have, so I am only buying out of curiosity or to hoard old models soon gone forever. I have also got my eye on the 217 rolling tote.

On Other Bags

The Filson Camera Field Bag (caramel) and medium Field Bag (otter green) are good, better made even than Domke (somewhere between Domke retro and Billingham stately), but less thought out photographically. Some Nat Geo photogs had a hand in their two camera bag designs and they are lovely, but designed for a specific kit, not my kit. I will hang on to both bags as selling them would be a retrograde move (irreplaceable collectables now especially at todays prices) and these are pleasant, just not core options.

Just a gorgeous bag really, but not the first choice for every day work.

Lowe Pro have been given a good go sometimes hitting the mark (Pro Messenger 200, Flipside 400) and sometimes missing (Pro Tactic 350), but they seldom stick for one reason or another.

Crumpler. These Australian bags are often like a new age Domke. They are new tech not old, pretty not rustic, but practical and honest, just like their American cousins. Even after a half dozen or so, I usually end up selling/gifting them, not sure why. The little one and new Muli are nice and useful, so they will stay….. probably.

A nice, practical bag, useful and reasonable value, but it added nothing to a bagoholics arsenal except a nice “presentable” option.

Think Tank/Mindshift. The Turnstyle aside, my initial love of the Retrospective series turned cold, so cold that even when the shop I was working at had the leather special edition ones for under $100 for staff, I was still not tempted. The Retrospective 20 or 30 did blip the radar again on my recent quest, but for the price, they just seemed like a less certain bet than another Domke and they always seem too soft/crammed internally in most images (these are one of the biggest offenders for what fits theoretically vs what fits practically).

Billingham. I have had them, used them and moved on from them. They take a long time to wear in and even longer to wear out, but look “nice”, even if more dated than the Domkes. For me they are less useful than you would imagine. I feel today, the company (and its’ many clones) is catering more for the huge and growing Asian hobbyist market where they seem very on-trend, but to me they are just dated, a bit twee even.

Wotan Craft. This small Korean company made a bag, no, they made “the” bag for a short while (The “Safari”). Long gone from their catalogue, but not my memory it will always go down as the one that got away. To be clear, they are expensive even by todays standards, but over ten years ago when I first discovered them, it was just astronomical ($500+ U.S when a Billingham was $250au). Still, I have regrets. They do one now called the “Trooper” which comes close, but again, enough money to buy a decent lens.

If Filson, Billingham and Indiana Jones had a love child…………

The others, like ONA, Manfrotto, Tenba, Tamrac etc are always hovering, but to honest, I have more than enough brands to do my head in. ONA, like Think Tank were all the go for a while, but they are over padded and too rigid for my liking and I have read plenty of mixed reports about their quality and service for the money (Filson fix damaged bags no questions asked, something others could learn from).

Generic bags, modified for use like Timbuk2, hand made leather or canvas satchels and even fishing bags (where Jim Domke and Billingham got their inspiration). I like this idea and have put several good bags into service (and still do). This space is a comfort when pondering small and expansive bags like Billinghams or when travelling for both security and general handiness. Cameras bags are rarely made with other purposes in mind, other bags can often dual role better. They always rely on a decent insert, the Tenba in particular, so I have a few of these up my sleeve.

*

At the end of the day, out of the brands I have used, only Domke, Filson and Billingham bags age well, even desirably. Most others just look worn out, dirty and dated, about when these three are just starting to look good and as the months go on, the difference increases. Domke has the distinction of being timeless (never beautiful, always workman like), more gear practical and cheaper than the other two brands, so for me, they are the first port of call.

Domke F802 And Bags Generally, A Longer Term Followup

So a few years of work have passed, leaving me with a lot more thoughts on bags, their strengths and weaknesses. This is a further update on my last “what bag I use now post”.

The Domke F802 has settled as the “everyday” bag, holding comfortably what I would call my basic kit required to walk into any relatively unknown job photographically speaking.

The bag is a little more worn, slightly faded and softer, making it more form fitting (early concerns the rigid top plate would make it boxy were unfounded), but it has not lost its integrity. The newer Domke bags seem to be made of a less hardy/harsh canvas (possibly to reduce wear on the user!), but only a lot of time will tell if they still stand up to decades of abuse my ‘80’s era F2 has endured. The straps have, as predicted, faded to a slightly lighter yellow-green, but on the olive bag, they still look alright. The orange case is not for glasses (still in denial there), but for my safety net battery and card backups.

The original shot.

Compared to the first picture taken three or more years ago, this is similar, but less “particular” setup. The “ready for anything” boy scout has made way for the harder, more pragmatic “no fat” practitioner.

The main camera now has a grip and strap. The grip fits fine as the bag has lost some of it’s more rigid shape and the strap (a Domke) is an admission that one camera on the shoulder is the way to go. Many of my favourite shots have been taken seconds after walking in the school gates, opportunities I previously missed with gear stowed.

The second camera now has a wide angle 8-18 instead of the 12-40, something that surprises me, but the reality is, as the kids get used to me and I them, getting in close is the norm. The 12-40 is now used on the video-centric G9, where its range and fixed maximum aperture work best. Ideally, I would have the new 8-25 Pro, but it did not come out in time.

The two primes are a consideration for my very low light or shallow depth of field needs. Neither requirement is as common as I would have thought as C1+No Noise has fixed my high ISO needs and single person, shallow depth portraits as lovely as they are, are rarely needed. The 75 has really become a specialist lens, the however is 25 a must take.

The flash is there with it’s off camera controller, along with a small Olympus one (surprisingly handy for daylight fill). What is not shown is a 60cm 5-in-1 reflector, an occasionally taken 16” circular flash soft box and some black foamy things for bounce. These hide away in the large front pocket.

The LED is gone as it is rarely used and now that I actually shoot video (still can’t believe that), the LED has a proper job to do. Come to think of it, I may need to carry that again :).

If I absolutely have to, my Mac Air goes in either the main compartment, wedged between the insert and main walls or the rear (or front) pockets. Spoiled for choice really.

The two enormous front pouch pockets are largely vacant, but that does give me clothing options (light rain jacket etc), or the ability to drop in a second flash unit, remove the end pocket, or take a video mic/LED etc as needed.

*

The next most used bag is the enormous Neewer backpack. This is was the event bag but is now the “video” bag, holding the G9, several cases of mics etc and the OSMO.

Surprisingly comfortable full, this one gets me where I need to go and can be worn with a spare shoulder bag for stills gear and a large tote can still be carried for stands, lighting gear etc.

*

Other bags that still get a go are;

The Filson’s (Medium Field and Field Camera bag), which are simply more attractive than the Canvas Domke or Neewer/Lowe Pro Nylon options. Probably the least practical overall, these are comfortable and acceptably low profile when worn at events (see above). They have no provision for a lap top and the Camera Field bag sags annoyingly when over filled.

The Lowe Pro, Pro Tactic 350 (older model). I do not love this bag, but sometimes it is the right one. Ideal for a 2 body, big lens kit, it often gets to go to the field sports I attend and is rigid enough to travel under foot or safely overhead. I can take a lap top and it probably offers the most protection.

The other Domkes are sadly overlooked.

The F2 has insert/shape issues (but may find a new life as a video field bag), making it less handy than the F802 (40-150 pro on body fits “ready to go” in the F802, but has to be dis-assembled in the F2 or it takes up half the bag and the other inserts don’t work). Lap top? Only if it is mini ipad size.

The F3x also shows it’s SLR roots, being a great EM1x with 3 zoom lens bag, but that is rarely how I go. If it is howling down outside, the waxed F3x gets a look in as I feel it is the most waterproof working bag I have (the waxed Filson Field Camera Bag has a smaller cover flap). Lap top? No way.

Both the F2 and F3x are old school SLR bags. In their day, they were real game changers, but these days mirrorless cameras tend to float around in them and big camera/lens combos tend to eat space if in “assembled” configuration. Satchels like the F802, once considered “journalist with a camera” bags are now more practical for small, slim cameras and laptops.

The Think Tank Turnstyle 10L is very occasionally used as a backup to a shoulder sling camera and 300mm at field sports events (an EM1 with 40-150 and grip just fit. This one is also ear marked for light video work. It can just take a standard ipad inside with no cover or a mini in the dedicated slip pocket.

One that looks to be getting more use is the LP Inverse 100 (brutally modified with the belt straps removed-see previous review). Handy for maybe video etc. We will see.

*

Looking for a small bag for that 2 small body/prime lens kit, with an extra lenses or a flash (sometimes I actually know what to expect). This would be especially useful in a crowded class room or bus. I do have several nice bags that hold just that kit, but they are bigger than needed for what they carry. Sometimes in-efficiency is not a plus just for good looks.

I almost pulled the trigger on a Domke “Heritage” green F5xb deal on Amazon. Pulling out of the purchase because my bank’s web site was just finished doing maintenance and would not accept funds transfers (or the fact I existed apparently), I cancelled it, thinking maybe it was for the best. When I sorted it out later the same morning, I revisited the amazing deal and found it mysteriously gone anyway. With bag back to a much higher price than these little guys should ever be, I had a chance to rethink.

I have had several F5’s before and they are great, but the smaller ones can look a little hand-baggy, which is at odds with their army surplus vibe. My favourite was the F5xc, able to hold a 5D, 70-200 f4, 17-40L, 35L and 85 f1.8 and accessories in a very small and flat form, but the F5xb is ideal for the above kit.

Not deterred, I continued browsing and found a better one. The Crumpler “Lite Delight 4000” in understated black with high vis yellow interior. This is slightly more versatile, easier on the eye and $10 cheaper than the Domke with the good deal. I like Crumpler quality and quirkiness, but have kept few of their many bags over the years (they are not alone). The extra internal height may be handy and the front pocket is secured unlike the Domke.

This is now the little job, no intrusion bag I need.

This bag reminds me of a great little bag I had from Kata bags, who were swallowed up by Manfrotto. Super light, smart and useful. I think I gifted a while back :(.

Same old story. No such thing as a perfect bag. What has become evident though is no matter how hard you try and how bad you want it, the wrong bag cannot be made right, but the discarded bag may also come into a new period of usefulness as gear and needs change.

Hope this helps.

Thoughts On The Bags I Use Now

Having the privilege of working as an actual photographer, in an environment that throws up all manner of challenges, I have been putting my bag collection to the test.

The overall winner on a standard shooting day is the Domke F802 (reviewed) with or without it’s 2 extra pouches. At first I used the deeper Filson Camera Field Bag more, as I was carrying an EM1 and Grip with 12-40 attached, which did not fit comfortably in the thin profile F802 , but seeing that the gripped EM1 was overkill for many standard tasks, I switched to two EM10/EM5’s (with smaller grips) or an un-gripped EM1 and another body and the Domke has become “the one”. The huge pockets allow me to pack for anything, which I am quickly learning I need to.

Just some of what the F802 can squirrel away without effecting my basic camera kit.

The 802 really excels with flash bits and accessories thanks to it’s ample pocket size. Each of the front pockets and the optional smaller end pouch easily hold a full sized flash or small LED with accessories (each) and the folio pocket between the front pockets and main compartment holds two decent modifiers, freeing up the inside for 2 cameras and 5 lenses. If I add the even bigger end pouch I can add a decent sized tele or even an item of clothing. The top flap pocket takes my spare cards, batteries and ID. The bag is ageing nicely, softening and taking on a “worn jeans” feel.

One thing I still find surprising is how a fully loaded F802, with the Domke non-slip, rubberised postmen’s shoulder pad, can feel effectively weightless. I can carry it for hours with no ill effect and this is after years of shoulder abuse with all connected problems. I put this down to the semi rigid top plate and wide-flat shape. It seems to distribute weight very evenly and keep it’s form. If I need to run anywhere or manoeuvre through a tight space, the top handle is a real boon or the bag worn cross-body and stabilised with one hand works well also.

The Filson Field Camera Bag (reviewed), although a sentimental favourite, sags a little in the middle when fully loaded and pulls a bit on my shoulder. It is also prone to rolling on my hip and slipping off my shoulder if unevenly loaded. If a light kit is needed or just a nicer looking bag, it is always a temptation, but from a practical standpoint, switching gear out from the Domke is rarely a good idea. This year I will keep things simple.

On a light sports day, I will use the Think Tank Turnstyle 10 (reviewed), as most of what I use is “in hand” (or on shoulder), the bag is only required for extra bits and backup lenses etc. The Turnstyle has the magical ability of “disappearing” when not needed, but can take an EM1 with grip, flash and 2 bigger M43 lenses when broken down. It can even take my 300 f4 and a smaller lens.

A new Neewer Pro Backpack has been added for a 2 camera, with 2 mounted tele lens sports rig, now that my trusty 75-300 has been replaced by the 300 and 40-150 pro for most field sports and the 8-18 is included. This bag was cheap, is huge inside and is light. How it holds up will be interesting to see. No other bag I own could handle this pair mounted (i.e. ready to go) including my surprisingly small capacity and often frustrating Pro Tactic 350.

A Small flash upgrade kit (a couple of stands, modifiers and accessories) is housed in a very cheap feeling Neewer bag, that I will likely soon need to replace. Most other bits for my basic flash rig are separately bagged, such as my reflectors and LED lights.

When a big flash kit is needed, I use a much sturdier Neewer 31” Lighting bag and longer extras like tall or C stands and backgrounds go in a longer Neewer Bag. A Neewer square tote holds my flash units and accessories. If I need more than a single camera and lens (that go in the Neewer), I will take a second square Neewer tote. These are nicely low profile for events.

Another bag I have occasionally turned to is the ancient Domke F2 (reviewed). If a large camera, lens and flash with attached modifier are needed “ready to go”, I can gut the bag and configure it to take nearly any shape need. The extra pockets then provide useful space for any “plan b’s”. This is a case of the older “brick” shaped bag showing it’s utility.

My rare and precious Domke F3x rugged (Olive/reviewed), is a bit like the F2. If I need to wear multiple cameras, the F3 sits cross body, snugly on my hip carrying any spare bits needed. This is sometimes more practical than a sling or backpack with multiple slung cameras and is much lower profile than the F2/802. Generally not overly practical in the mirrorless world, the F3’s shape still occasionally has it’s uses.

Book review 2; Photo Techniques May/June 1997

As my second book to review, I have chosen….a magazine. Not even a magazine title as a publication in total, but a single edition of that magazine.

The May/June 1997 edition of Photo Techniques magazine changed my life.

In this edition, Mike Johnston introduced a concept to the western world that he and John Kennerdell, a colleague and contributor had been discussing for a while.

It seems John made him aware that the Japanese had for many years categorised lenses with more than the usual measures of quality. They took careful note of the qualities of out of focus blur different lenses rendered and their effect on the images made. They even named the types of blur they discussed.

John Kennerdell, who was living in Japan at the time, had noticed a habit of local reviewers referring to the out of focus (OoF) areas of an image with terms such as Ni-sen (cross-eyed), rather than simply ignoring them all together as reviewers in the west did. Many photographers all around the world used terms like the “draw” or rendering of a lens, but there was little clarity to that thinking other than on a lens by lens basis.

The irony was, the Japanese had been making lenses for a sharpness hungry western consumer, while at home, they often preferred German glass for its less measurable characteristics.

The editor of Photo Techniques, Mike Johnston, decided to make Bokeh* the theme of the May/June 1997 edition. It is important to realise, the term Bokeh and even the line of thought it created had never been used in western photography before this point.

In hindsight, it was a brave move. The predicted result would have probably been a foot note in photographies “odds and sods” ledger, but on a scale no one expected, the concept took off to heights unprecedented. There is now seldom a lens review or conversation to be had about lens character or performance that does not have an element or reference to Bokeh in it. Many lenses now made with Bokeh (or at least one form of it) as their primary design objective. As the article explains, some companies were already trying to satisfy this deeper need of Japanese photographers, by incorporating Bokeh into their designs. Canon seems to have made “good” (smooth and controlled) Bokeh one of the parameters of their new EF lens range as two of the lenses specifically mentioned in the article were from their early “ugly duckling” range. Bronica is also mentioned specifically along side the German makers.

Unassuming, classy and modest, this periodical was an automatic buy for me along with Camera and Darkroom, mostly for the articles about photographers current and retrospective or advanced technique as well as the dry wisdom of David Vestal. Pretty good condition considering. I still have a hoard of 50 or so mags from this era, as they are far too precious to me to toss. It is amazing how relevant they still are.

Sorry about the rough and ready pics, but I am not going for archival quality, just the feeling of the actual mag.

It took 28 pages before it got to the main article spread, but I was instantly hooked. It had the perfect combination (for me) of being relevant information, a reveal of mysterious secrets and eminently applicable technique. It did not hurt that at the time, I was using two of the lenses in the samples (100 f2.8 EF macro, the old one, and the first EF 35 f2) and it also referenced a brand I had just moved out of, but had great fondness for, Zenza Bronica.

Even though I loved the article, I and I guess everyone else out there had little idea how important this would become. Mike followed this thread up in later years on the Luminous Landscape site and others, but this is ground zero. My instant reaction was “some lens very bad, some lens goood :)”, so even I, a fan, did not really get the intended meaning. All Bokeh has it’s place. More recently the 3D vs flat argument has surfaced, which I think is closely linked to Bokeh, so maybe we are entering phase two?

One of the strongest lessons I learned from the article, one sadly forgotten in more recent times, is that Bokeh, in it’s many forms, is important in almost every photographic situation that has any amount of OoF area regardless of focal length, aperture selected or distance. There is no right or wrong, nor a fixed formula to achieve that mythical, ideal look. The point to take away, is that Bokeh, however you like it, may only be achievable under some conditions and these may change with any slight variation in lens use of the very same lens. The frame bottom right was from a “Bokeh king” semi wide angle used at a medium aperture and focussing distance, not wide open and up close as is so common these days. This kind of talk does not wash with many currently, but is at the essence of Bokeh and it’s true exponents.

Oren Grad followed up with an overview of the terminology used at the time, which has now grown and changed into more westernised terms like “feathered”, “onion ring” or “solid”.

Then the more technical article, that I must admit I have not properly read as I find this type of thing efficiently removes the joy from something as intuitive and emotional as Bokeh.

Lots of this. Too dry for me, but technically sound stuff and the foundation of the future math and understanding. Ahead of it’s time really.

There was lots of other good stuff in there as usual. Inspiration abounds, but the Bokeh article cemented this edition into modern photographies history. It is kind of weird that no mention is made of OoF elements in any of the articles, except the ones that only talk about it. This was about to change.

And the final word by Mike. Of note is his description of using the EF 35 f2 lens.

I must admit to being ignorant of the influence Mike Johnston had in the photographic world at this time, but after this article, I became very aware of him. He was a strong voice in the Camera and Darkroom, Darkroom and Photographic Techniques > Photo Techniques and many other books and periodicals.

The very first blog I went looking for when I went “online”, was anything connected to Mike, which turned out to be The Online Photographer. Here you can find a lot more by both he and John Kennerdell, including the article called “in defence of depth” or the anti Bokeh as super shallow DoF only, rallying cry and “A little lens tale” that highlights both long draw Bokeh lenses and lenses that put natural three dimensionality ahead of sterile fault correction (coming to much the same conclusions as Yannick Khong but this time without defined terminology).

Their can, their worms, their cross to bare I guess, but I am glad I was in on the ground floor.

*A term he coined, taken from Boke-Aji or the “flavour of the blur”, used in Japanese art, shortened to Boke with an added h for pronunciation to make Bo as in bone, -Keh as in kettle)

Think Tank Turnstyle 10L V2

The perfect bag….

No such thing, but some are better than others at the job they are designed for.

The light travel sling bag has been on the radar for awhile. I know as well as anyone who shleps gear all day that even a few kg on the shoulder seems to double in weight over a day. Heat or cold force tough decisions, as do places where going unnoticed and out of the way is important.

Shoulder bags have their place, but travel is not one of them.

The TT Turnstyle 10L (chosen as the best fit for me out of a 5L and 20L) in Charcoal fits almost all of my needs perfectly.

The main compartment holds bigger M43 gear (EM1 with 12-40 or 12-100), a second body with/without mounted lens and a third lens option. All are in the “ready to go “ configuration, so not reversed hoods or caps needed.

EM1 with 12-400, EM5 with 75mm and little prime on the end.

Deceptively tall, accommodating my 75-300 easily and any other lens but that one mounted on a camera.

The internals are divided by three tall and one short divider (one removed for this kit and the small one on the floor for added cushioning). They are thinner than Lowepro ones, but stiffer and more padded than Domke. The velcro is very tight and grippy, not the sort that will fuzz up with repeated changes (like a Billingham insert). A small Billingham 2 lens box divider will fit in one section also for an all primes day.

Almost a deal breaker for me, the rear padded ipad pocket will hold an ipad mini, but only “naked”. Mine is on a protective case and would not fit. This pocket is however ideal for sensitive documents being the nearest contact point to the body and well hidden.

Then I discovered the bigger internal one. All sorted. This could hold a naked full size ipad.

The front pocket will hold several small items like a phone, note pad, pen, map, batteries, cards etc. It is flat, but roomy.

The broad and very comfortable strap runs up-down when worn at the back and makes the bag feel effectively weightless. I am not sure a fully loaded 20L would feel the same, but it would definitely feel lighter than a shoulder bag. The strap is easily adjustable which is good as the bag feels better when tighter-higher up the back, but a lower sit gives more “swing around” room when fiddling with gear. The only thing I would add is a small strap anchor for an optional phone or utility pouch to be placed on the front.

A handy top strap. The bag stands up well when full, if loaded sensibly.

The optional stabiliser strap and rain coat pocket. I will remove the strap as the bag will not be used for extreme sports. This can also be used to turn the bag into a fanny pack. It would also allow for small utility pouches or a water bottle pouch to be added.

Overall the bag feels better finished than many others I have tried and has the feel of long-term sturdiness that is reassuring. It is also nicely classy in a low profile, modern street kit way.

Not only is this bag ideal for a small kit over long distances, but it manages to become effectively invisible when not in use.

Lowe Pro Inverse 100 AW Review (Well Sort Of)

There are a lot of very good photographic back packs on the market. It seems to be the growing trend in camera bags, even more than the problem solving sling type.

The problem with them is quite often, no matter how well made, clever or durable they are, they are only made for a day trip or extreme sport event. As a long term hiking pack, they are nearly useless as they prioritise camera gear over survival gear, leaving only a small area for food, camping and trekking gear, almost as an after thought.

What if you need to carry a small “at the ready” camera kit and a heavy expedition pack?

Peak Designs and others offer a lot of handy clips and straps, but that still does not cover the slightly bigger kit (2 lenses, filters etc) some shooters need at hand when trekking. It is desirable for some to be able to take a serious image quickly, with all their options at hand without taking off their heavy pack each shot and/or they like to have their camera protected in a padded bag, not out in the elements.

Some people even skip a good shot out of effort induced laziness….not mentioning names.

Here is a little solution I came up with a few years back when re-purposing my bag stash for an anticipated trip to Nepal. My 80L pack was going to be full, but obviously camera gear would be the bulk of the point of going for me, so I needed the big pack and a separate, but integrated camera bag solution.

The Lowe Pro Inverse 100 and 200 bags have been around for a while. To be clear this is NOT a new bag review, but different concept and application for an old bag.

No, it’s not thirsty. The tongue hanging out is it’s weather shield cover. It also comes in basic black and a fetching Cobalt blue. Note no fanny pack wings, just bag. The clips at the front are the restraining straps for the front flap pocket. When pushed out fully the gap created can hold a camera body or lens while changing things out or expand the capacity of the front pocket. If the rain cover is removed, the pocket will hold even more as the two pockets occupy the same space.

They are bulky extreme sport “bum bags” or “fanny packs” by design, but can double up as shoulder bags and in doing so provided a solution to my problem. The thickly padded “wings” can tuck away in a large padded waist loop at the back. To be honest I hated to do that as the bag became very deep, almost round, especially the 100 model, so it fell into disuse.

Very big and well padded. The wings that fold into this are also quite thick and heavy. You can also see where the shoulder strap attaches. It is slightly off angle to make the bag better for cross body wear than shoulder use. Once attached, the bag can be moved anywhere on the front or side hip as needed. Another small bonus is the padded waist loop can cover the bigger pack’s waist strap clip, adding comfort.

Looking at the impossible combination of a waist mounted bag, sharing the same waist as the support strap for a heavy expedition pack, I had a rare light bulb moment. Taking one of my wife’s quick-unpick tools, I unpicked the stitching from the wings. They came off neatly. The wings had tightening straps that as fate would have it, neatly met each other in the middle of the bags back, allowing them to act as designed, tightening the bag in or loosening it off when the front flap is deployed for added work area.

Under the strap at each end is the standard water bottle pocket which could be used as small lens pouches with some padding added.

The basic bag holds my expanded day shooting landscape kit, with options.

Inside; A Pen F with mounted 12-100+hood (this can be mounted face down also, but I have lost one of the matched dividers), 75-300 and filters/batteries/accessories in the front flap. The front pocket can be pushed out giving the user an extra spot to put detached hoods or lenses etc. when fiddling. In the past it held a 5dII with 17-40 f4L and 70-200 f4L (hood inverted). The 200 model has basically the width of another large lens or body extra and can even hold a body with large FF superzoom or pro tele mounted. The capacity can also be expanded if Domke thin walled dividers are used.

The above combination is an example of a landscapers “day” kit. If using it for an expedition trekking, it would be an OMD with 75-300 and OMD with 12-40 both mounted and ready to go. Plenty of room for spares in the main pack, but this would be enough to handle anything I come across while trekking. Full frame or APC users could easily do a body with super zoom (28-300) and fast prime or wide zoom and macro tele/portrait lens and a compact camera.

Handy tripod, monopod or jacket strap. This is the usual overly hopeful accessory option for big tripods, but with light weight M43 cameras with gentle electronic shutters, I actually can carry a useful tripod here.

Notice how big the side pockets are potentially. The right one is a big water bottle size, the left a thinner, mobile phone or note book size.

Optionally, if travelling light, it can still be supported by a smaller day pack or simply worn cross-body on it’s own. Ed. The waist belt from my Pro tactic 350 with extra pouches also works if the fanny pack configuration is desired.

Working in the industry, I am more than aware of the ridiculous range of bags available. This exercise reminded me that when you have enough bags (more than enough according to my wife), the needed option is probably close at hand with a little lateral thinking.

Problem solved for me. Maybe an option for you to.

There are also plenty of images and reviews of the bag on line in it’s natural form.

Book review 1; Stay This Moment

There are always early influences that drive and help focus us when we take on any long term endeavour. These influences are pivotal to our development. Some are remembered frequently, some work away at our subconscious quietly, either way they are part of the puzzle that is us.

There were many, many (many) books in my formative years in photography. They were my inspiration, my tuition and often my haven. Lofty goals, feeding unrealistic expectations blossomed from these tomes, but don't we all strive for too much to reach enough. Possibly the getting of wisdom is recognising when/what is enough.

"StayThis Moment" by Sam Abell was not the first book I purchased, but was the first book that changed my view of how and why I photograph on a fundamental level.

Sam Abell once said in an interview "I believe in the staying power of the quieter image". This simple sentence freed me to take my images as they felt right. Early influences pushed and pulled me in many directions, but Sam's comment strengthened my own belief that you don't have to control, simply watch and wait and the image will come as it should. 

This was a long time ago mind you, so actually doing that was patchy at best, but the seed was sewn.

A time when his thinking and the inspiration of his technique resonate strongly with me is in Japan. Even with a long (20 year) gap between the first influences of his work and my own discovery of Japan, his way of seeing and philosophy is often on my mind. It fits very well with both the photographic subject matter and the Japanese way of life.

Sam championed strong light, early or late and especially the rare light before a storm breaks. My wife knows what I mean when I say "Sam Abell light". This did not stop him mastering all light. Many of his strongest images are in subdued or poor light.

Another practical idea of his that stuck with me was to compose from back to the front. This is a good tip for those why want to do documentary work as the image on a single plane can be literally single dimensional if over used. Allowing the total story to be told in a single image is a special and difficult technique to master. It is worth the effort.

The book itself is divided up like a retrospective portfolio, with chapters on Places (Canada, Russia, Japan), specific assignments (The West, Gardens, Shakers) and collections of miscellaneous images under a common umbrella (Canoeing, Faraway Places etc.). Most of the images follow Sam's career with national geographic, with some private, unpublished and earlier ones mixed in. They range from 1970 to the late 1980's. This is not a comprehensive work, but rather a "best of" up to a point in his career of review before change. I followed NG magazine for a few years, looking out for the names I knew, but Sam's work only featured a few times more. He went on to be a picture editor for the magazine and I think taught and lectured.

The reproduction was excellent at the time of publishing, true in feel and texture and beautifully bound. It lacks the pictorial "polish" of newer books*, but maybe dodged the bullet of over processing that many older works, recently republished suffer from.

He worked with Kodachrome and Leica's, sighting 28mm as his favourite focal length, but using 24-90mm also. 

Below are some badly copied images from the book. I am not going to try harder for a couple of reasons. The first is out of respect for the work. They are not mine, so they will not be manipulated by me, nor are they ever going to be as good as the sanctioned images in either the book or the internet. They are simply and roughly added as a taster. Assume a richer and deeper palette (and no sheen on the pages).

My very first blog post was entitled "Lemons and the Kremlin". The image above (bottom left) was the inspiration for the title. the image of the cowboy branding was used as an example by Abell in a Popular photography interview as an example of "back to front" composition. The sitting cowboys are in perfect "Sam Abell" light.

These images remind me that brilliant images and inspiring compositions are all around us. Michael Kenna does the same with mono. There is always something to photograph, just look and see.

I hope I have learned from him to be gentle, respectful, watchful and clear in my vision. 

This is not the only book he published, and I have two more, One on gardens and one on the process of image construction, but this is the seminal work of a unique image craftsman in my opinion. 

*Many of my older, favourite books are near technically perfect in my memory, but fall far short of perfection when viewed years later. I think this false memory haunts a lot of passive film worshippers also.

The Domke F802. The Bag that had to be.

Most of my bag purchases are made with roughly 60% desire, 30% practicality and 10% what is available with limitations imposed by the price/need equation. This has led inevitably to lots of bags for lots of situations but no right bag for just "getting everything there and being organised".

This latest quest started innocently enough. I am off to Japan in April and thought I might come across a special, bespoke version of one of my favourite bags, so some refresher research could be a good idea, you know, just to see what is out there. No harm.

The thing that kept coming up was that of all the bags I have, there is not one I can work from with everything I need properly compartmentalised and ready to go. I had some of these work bench” bags, such as the biggest Lowe Pro, Pro Messenger, Domke F832, or Billingham Hadley large when I had full frame Canon*, but they drifted away as the gear reduced. To be honest none were ideal anyway.

What is the point of a bag that theoretically holds everything, but only in it's "broken down" configuration (most brands are guilty of glossing over this when advertising, but what we photographers need to know is the real capacity for a working bag with useable kit). I do not want to have to fish out a flash from under three other things, have no where to put a lens during a change over or have to change and re-change lenses/hoods etc rather than have them ready to go. You want to be able to just drop things into their assigned spot without that very unprofessional look of not having enough hands.

One of the beauties of M43 gear is that you can carry that SLR kit you always wanted to have, but could not comfortably lift. My work kit is usually an OMD (+JB grip) with 12-40 Pro mounted, OMD (+JB grip) with 40-150 Pro mounted, 2 primes (25/75) with the option of one these being on a third camera, 1-2 flash units with controller, the little Olympus flash, flash modifiers and the possibility of adding 1 or 2 more lenses (75-300, 45) for long days (imagine carrying that in Canon or Nikon). I also need my cards and batteries organised and easily accessible and space for a note book, keys and a decent size diffuser/reflector that is preferably outside of the main compartment.

I also would like the bag to hold it's shape when full. Picky much?

And there you go. Note the almost 100% adoption of metal, screw in hoods. The 40-150 in particular sits nose down a bit better with a rigid hood, but the original is excellent for landscapes as it retracts easily for filter use.

This bag came out of the blue. I had rarely even looked at the F8xx series other than an ill advised purchase of an 832, which was way over sized for my kit and really did not understand them that well or even overly like the look of them. Another issue is, they all look the same in the photos, but are hugely different in reality.

The thing that made this Domke superior to all other contenders is the size of the outside pockets (frikkin' huge, ideal for dumping even big lenses in a hurry) and the ability to add two (or more) accessory pouches when needed (optional extras that as it turned out, I already have). The bigger pouch can hold something the size of an older Nikon 80-200 f2.8 and the smaller one easily holds a big flash or a soft bag protected 75-300 zoom.

As you can see, nothing is cramped. The cameras are smaller than the average SLR, but the big lens, flash units and other stuff are all full size. The flash guns can still fit in their protective cases or two can fit in one pocket! The Pen can go into a soft case for protection (Domke bags are tough, but not super thickly padded) or they can be mounted with a prime lens in the main bag and a second prime in the same pocket (again in a little padded bag). 

No doubt my entire kit (the above plus another OMD and optional Pen mini with two more primes) could fit to get from A to B, but as a working kit everything above has its “ready-to-go” place.

With Tenba insert. It even matches.

One of the other bags that came up during my research junket was the Tenba Messenger. The bag was good, but it lacked the needed pockets and I was more familiar with the Domke feel and durability. The insert (Pro 2) was, however available on its own for peanuts ($21 U.S.).

If Domke had made this insert for this bag it could not have been a better fit.

The length and width of the insert is ideal and gives the bag a more rigid shape. The height is just right for my gear although I think big SLR cameras might sit on top of the insert if mounted on a longer lens. The flap-eared dividers allow two bodies to sit on top, protecting the central section and the internal small dividers allow a few arrangement choices (I have one hard up against the end of the insert to hold a few filters or a cleaning kit and the second splits the middle section to separate the two primes.

Anything taken out, goes back where it came from. 

The slim front pocket, between the front pockets and main compartment, can hold an ipad or medium sized fold-down diffuser, a newspaper or even a small laptop and there is one on the back slightly larger. Because of the soft canvas materiel of the bag, the front pocket flexes to hold some quite large items.

The top flap protects all of the internal area with weather resistant canvas (already tested at a swimming pool where I knelt on the top flap, laying on a wet floor and the water "beaded" off well). The flap is split into two halves, each big enough to put a clenched fist into. Watch this flap though as on my first day using it, I forgot to zip up the battery side and the contents dropped quietly and perfectly into the big back pocket. I only discovered them after frantically searching back at the shoot site.

One thing I was not sure of and could not find any evidence of online was the possibility of attaching of the two pouches I had already (901/902) even though Domke says they can. Yes they do. The two velcro strips are placed to be a good, tight fit on the side part of the "all around the bag" shoulder strap and the bag has a clip on the side to keep it's profile slim that can be clipped onto the supplied metal ring for extra security. The small pouch fits within the profile of the bag, the bigger one is very slightly wider.

The bag is not as hip-hugging as say an F3x, due to the hardened top panel, which is about 2” wide, but is still comfortable and the panel helps the bag keep it’s shape (something the Filson Field camera bag could do with). 

I went for a green one over black (or tan) for the following reasons;

• It is a cooler colour (in temperature that is - fashion I will leave up to you).

• The less obvious Domke logo matches the bag, where on the black one it is red, drawing more attention, although they pick off easily.  

• The black canvas fades at a different speed than it's straps, giving a dark grey bag/yellow brown strap look as they age, while the green tends to age evenly from all evidence. I have been through that with my old F2, but it did take 10+ years before it became obvious.               

• The green does not scream "computer or camera bag", indeed it looks a cross between a casual satchel and army surplus bag re-tasked.                                                                                         

• I already had two matching green pouches that have never been used. 

The "perfect" M43 bag tends to be small, as the original premise (and promise) was for a light weight travel or street system. As more and more people are starting to use mirrorless gear professionally, the reality is you will get the odd (relatively) larger lens. Remember, an empty space weighs nothing, so more room is seldom a waste.

You can still make the most of the overall smaller form factor to comfortably carry your ideal large kit, configured how you want and take handy things like spare clothing or a book as needed (the front pockets will hold a rolled-up shirt!). I once owned basically this kit in Canon*. No way could I carry it all comfortably or with it "ready to go", so I would usually limit myself to 2-3 lenses and hope for the best. 

When full of the above M43 gear, the bag is not overly heavy and it holds it's shape, to the rigid top panel and the insert. The smaller cousin to this bag, the f803 also has the rigid top, which I feel I would not like on that smaller bag, but on one this size, it is a real boon. It stays slimmer than the usual box shape bag and is easy to access. People have even commented on it, not realising it is a camera bag.

Another cool thing is the price. $135 au from Photo Video Extras (Australia), delivered in 3 days or $99 U.S. from the usual suspects. This makes it cheaper than any other option except the basic Tenba satchel, now discontinued.

A final word on Domke bags, especially the “magic” of their design. They are the only brand of bag that I actually look forward to wearing in/out. The older they get the better. Like an old pair of jeans, they fit like no other and become an old friend, even dirty marks become like earned battle scars. The Domke’s seem to look even better with wear sometimes, where some damage seems a shame on the Billingham’s in particular.

The issue I had with Billingham bags, was the 10-15 year “breaking in” period. They seem too well designed for staying “nice” for too long. They looked dirty easily, but not worn in/out. Filson bags come a little worn in already, which is great except some of the bags history is not yours.

*Full and crop frame body, 17-40L, 35L (this would now be a 40mm saving considerable weight), 50 macro, 85 f1.8 (or 100 macro), 135L and/or 70-200 F4L, 400 f5.6L.

The Filson Field bag medium, The other Filson

"Before there was the Filson field camera bag there was the Filson field bag (medium, green)."

A long search trying to find the perfect bag almost ended with a non camera bag. The Filson's caught my eye at a time when Billingham's were looking too "nice" and Domke's too "ordinary" and ONA bags too "almost, but not quite".

I decided I wanted rough 'n ready, but did not want to wait 10 years for a Billingham to get there.

My search coincided with the launch of the Filson camera bag range. The McCurry was far too big, the Harvey...not sure, but the original field bag looked the goods. Getting Filson in Australia is a bit of an issue. The freight from Filson was quoted at over $100 making the bag $400+ Australian! No Australian stockist and huge price variances on ebay etc. meant a long and frustrating search. Eventually I found one reasonably priced in one of the big American camera stockist’s clearance catalogues, so I built up an order and grabbed it. 

Love the look of it, the workmanship and styling, but I overlooked some small issues. Firstly I knew I needed an insert. No problem ($30 in the order for the bag), but the non camera bag design meant long straps, noisy buckles and a small entry point to improve weather sealing. All annoying one way or another.

A total disaster? No, not really. The bag is a lovely travel bag for a non photo specific trip. I don't use the insert, but just throw a camera in on top of some clothes. Part of me really likes this dynamic. It's a bit more old school and less precious. It is for the traveller who is showing more interest in the people they meet and places they see, than the working photographer. My wife made me some little padded bags years ago that I use if I want to add an extra lens or two.

The Filson camera field bag was released not long after (or I missed it when researching earlier), coming out in a darker caramel twill than the light camel colour of the field bags. This became my standard camera bag, but it has to share the job with others.

The Bag

The Field bag and one image with the EOS 30 for scale.

The straps are long, designed to allow "stuffing" of the bag. I have seen these attached to motorcycles as panniers, really filled to bursting. The chocolate brown leather work is thick, not slim like a Billingham, and soft to touch. Years of wearing in before wearing out. In strong light, the colour looks a little washed out, think dark sage crossed with spruce green.

A nice feature is the rear mounted lugs. They allow the bag to sit well when worm cross bodied. The back pocket is fairly shallow, so putting in an ipad is possible, but not as safe as in some bags. The bag also has two fairly useless side pockets, that are far too short to put anything precious in and won't hold a medium sized water bottle. Maybe a cloth or compass? The front pockets are excellent for safety, but are not huge and a bit fiddly to get to.

The second image above shows the insert. It works as it should, but somehow I feel it misses the point. While the camera field bag harmoniously suits it's purpose, the field bag is just not a made to measure camera bag. It is a rugged, general purpose bag that can also hold a camera while looking good doing it. Maybe larger gear in a taller insert would work better.

Why do I like it?

I just do. Not everything we enjoy needs to be perfect or a perfect fit. Some things make you come to them, adapt and find a use for them.

Beauty and the beast, A Domke Duo.

My association with Domke bags goes back to their earliest days. When I first became interested in photography, the brands serious photographers lusted after were Domke, Billingham and Lowe Pro.

Billingham's were the Rolls Royce of bags, loved by world travellers and still a favourite of many. Domke's were the character filled photo journalists bags (and designed by one) and the Lowe pro's were the work horse problem solvers and outdoor expedition bags.

None of the brands had a lot of choice, Domke being the worst (best?) offender, with only the F2 at first, then F1 (bigger) and F6 (smaller) bags, all basically the same design. I purchased two things in the late 80's that stayed with me for a long time. A Manfrotto 055 (still going but owned by someone else) and a black F2. The F2 has been given away, gifted back and used more or less consistently for 35 years and is pretty much the only thing that has not changed through my whole photographic life.

The only other Domke I own at the moment was a purchase of weakness. When in Japan last year I found a bag that I had not seen before, a F3x rugged-wear in olive. The rugged wear bags are lighter and more weather resistant than the standard canvas Domkes, but have only been available in brown with light trim as far as I knew. Japan has a special relationship with Domke, often getting special edition or bespoke bags just for their market. I left the shop empty handed, but returned soon after. To put this into perspective, I was in the process of clearing out a lot of bags, two Domke f3x's (canvas olive and ballistic) included, so getting this was a little crazy.

Enough of my sordid recent history, lets look at the bags.

Age before beauty, the F2.

Looking a bit aged (and dirty), the F2 black canvas from 1980 something.

Notice the colour variation. The main strap has been replaced because it faded a yellowish brown like the front straps. It is a bit of a badge of honour having a faded Domke, but was really a bit too ugly for my tastes. Now I have to wait 10-15 years before the strap matches the rest! The bag still sits up proudly, with a veteran swagger, even after all of these years.

Above is a detail shot of the most worn part of the bag and the inside "lid" pocket (great for valuables), the front straps and the amazing "postal" shoulder pad. All Domke straps come with rubber veins running their length to reduce slipping. The shoulder pad is very good at that also and is very efficient at absorbing downward pressure. The fluffy mess on the right is from me cutting of a label clumsily, years ago.

What does it hold?

Simply put, enough gear to make your back ache, but doing it better than most bags its size.

The left hand image, shows it has room for a lot of M43 gear, but tends to swallow it. The compartments are fully flexible, with lots of options to buy (the main insert is a replacement) and the bag hip-hugs well even when full and an advantage of the canvas, like leather is that it gets better with age, not just older.

Domke padding is light and thin, but effective. No doubt I could get a lot more in, especially if I use the end pockets that would hold a camera body with a pancake lens on. The end pocket (open) has a neoprene lens bag for added protection and I have lined the bottom with thin foam for drop protection (my F2 has the old rigid wood panel with rubber coating floor). Nothing I have ever put in a Domke has ever been broken, which I put down to the feeling of “bag awareness” they provide.

The right hand image is to show the height using an old EOS 30 with grip for scale. Easily enough to hold a medium long lens upright (my 40-150 is on the right with metal hood on) or a pro Canon/Nikon body. All of the early Domke bags were designed for pro SLR's with motor drives and F2.8 zoom lenses or fast primes (I always picture in my head a pair of FM2's with drives and a 20/35/85/180 kit).

The two front pockets are roomy enough for any phone, notebook a medium sized flash. The back has a full length pocket capable of taking a full sized ipad or small lap top, but without a flap or any protection.

Complaints? Only my usual one about a weather resistant pocket on the back without a top cover or drainage holes and I have been worrying for years that something will fall out of an open topped front pocket, but nothing has. Oh and the metal flap clips that can whack a camera pretty hard (fixed with a little tape).

Loves? Durability, consistency and functionality...big time. It sits really well on the hip.

Things that can be both good and bad. Carries lots, looks old and worn and is thinly padded.

Now the F3x.

The less rigid rugged wear look. Remember this bag is only a year old.

Already looking like a worn in bag (probably why newer Domke bags don't seem to take with me, as they look too new compared to the F2), the rugged wear olive F3x is a darker, less military surplus and smoother looking fabric than the regular canvas version. It is also much lighter in weight.

As you can see from above, with nothing removed, it will squash into a suit case easily, but probably put it into a plastic bag as the fabric can leave waxy stains on some clothing and it smells a little "musty", especially when recently re-waxed. The lid also has a pocket like the F2, very secure for small important items and a back pocket big enough for an ipad (again no rain flap or drainage holes, grrrr). Note the two lugs for an optional carry handle or waist belt (the F2 has these as well).

The F3x only has one front clip*, making it easier to access quickly.

What does it hold?

Again the Canon Eos 30 with battery pack is used to show height as the Olympus cameras are swallowed.

The first frame is the standard configuration. The two inside pockets are canvas and extend all the way to the bottom, but are not anchored down. This is important as it gives the user more flexibility and allows some padding to be added to the bag's floor (like a folded scarf- always a handy thing to have) as the F3 only has a thin foam padded bottom. Again this bag swallows small gear which can be an issue with the non anchored compartments. I have had the little 45mm "migrate" from one to another. The lens in the right hand pocket is the 40-150 f2.8, so any older f2.8 or newer F4 full frame 75-300 tele zoom will fit. My first F3 was purchased with a small full frame SLR kit with a pair of F4 “L” series lenses and a fast prime in mind, which is what they were designed for.

If pushed it could hold 3 bodies, 17/25/75/40-150 f2.8/12-40, mini ipad, phone, note book and some flash gear, all with good to OK access and would look surprisingly unstressed. It would also need the postal service shoulder pad!

The second image shows the bag with a Domke optional insert, ideal for small lenses and the third is the same idea with a Billingham small/short insert. If you intend to carry two bodies use a bit of padding in the bag;s back pocket, as a space challenged body with lens on tends to stick into your hip.

Another set up that has worked is to use a square F2 insert and push the sewn-in pockets aside making a standard 4 section compartment.

The side pockets are huge, holding a camera body (the EM5 with grip in the one above is barely touching the sides), large prime, small zoom or flash at a pinch, but again are unpadded. A large pair of long balled-up sports socks floats around in them.

Unlike the F2, the F3 has a single, slightly bigger front pocket that can easily hold an ipad and is weather sealed when the flap is down.

Complaints? The same back pocket one (if I wanted a bucket I would have bought one). The smell and slightly greasy feel that I thought would bother me more, but really does not. The fabric is clearly softer and thinner than the canvas bags, so longevity will not be as good (probably longer than the camera industry as we know it). The shape and size are not ideal for mirrorless cameras, but the beauty of mirrorless is the easy to use size.

Loves. It feels like an unobtrusive old friend. 

*

A few thoughts on other Domke bags I have owned.

The F6 is basically an F3 without side pockets. It is a nice little bag, ideal as a mirrorless kit bag as it is more square than tall, so small gear does not disappear inside. the front pocket is zippered also.

The F5b is, I think the ideal day bag for a mirrorless street kit or a minimalist-small SLR kit. Even though it is tiny, it carries easily 2 OMD cameras with small to medium primes attached to each or a smallish (75-300) tele zoom. If I had one it would be coming to Japan next trip (maybe it will come back?).

The F5c. This is a "Tardis" of a bag. The design is odd, but brilliant. They have taken an F5b, added another floor, but given it a front entrance on the ground floor. You can put the same load as the F5b in the top and up to 3 prime lenses or equivalent in the bottom behind the front door, giving you depth without the need to empty out the bag to access the bottom (except the rugged wear F5xz that lacks the front access possibly due to the zip not being as water proof as the fabric?). It comes with two, narrow, three panel, jointed dividers to create steps, straight lines, "L" shapes or "U" shapes inside. I once carried a 5D mk2 with a 35 f2 mounted and 85 f1.8 in the top, a 17-40 L in the lower compartment and a 70-200 F4L lengthways from the top down and it did not feel heavy. My only slight dislike of the F5 bags is the zip top, but the large velcro flap usually makes it unnecessary. 

F8. Looks like an F3, but is really small. Watch out for this one as it is really too small to be useful and most online images of it are misleading. An OMD, 45mm and 17mm filled up the inside compartment and the other pockets only held batteries or filters. It is the only Domke I have ever owned that looked over padded for it's size.

F832. Not sure what I was thinking, but this one is a monster. It looks lovely and actually is, but it is designed for journalists with pro SLR cameras, big lenses with hoods in shooting position and large lap tops etc. Not me at all.

The finishes of the bags can vary a bit. The Ballistic can feel sumptuous in the bigger bags (F2-3), smooth and soft to touch, but much thinner in the smaller bags (F5's). The rugged wear is thin and comfortable against the body as long as the greasiness and smell do not bother you. I don't notice the smell unless I lock the bag in a cupboard for awhile and the greasiness is really only an issue when the bag is freshly done (it comes with a tin of wax).

The canvas is interesting. Many who own older bags say the canvas has lost some of it's weight in newer bags and the F6 I purchased a couple of years ago did feel a lot lighter, but I vaguely remember my first F6 (1990's) being lighter also. The F3/F802 olive bags and lens bag purchased 1-5 years ago are softer feeling than the old F2, but are also 30 years newer.

Are they for everyone? Probably not, but they are popular (often copied), respected and do the job they are designed for. For a very long time as it turns out.

*The clips are wrapped in tape to stop noise. Hate noise and the only two scars my OMD's are nursing came from an un-taped clip striking them pretty hard.

Hope this helps.

The Filson Field Camera Bag

Camera bags are my nearly out of control passion. I am pretty sure that my love of photography became linked to the process as much as the results in my early years and some things became intrinsic parts of the process. Cameras are the obvious first cog in that wheel, but I am not alone in sighting camera bags as another. 

Yes I do have a problem. I have tried all major brands, most styles and any solution that seems reasonable to get the perfect balance of form and function (it does not help that I keep changing camera systems and therefore bag needs).

Winners have been the Domke F3/2/6 and various other models, Billingham Hadleys and the odd Kata, Lowepro (Pro Messenger especially) and other "nylon" bags.  My only keeper up until now has been a 30 year old F2 Domke that has had constant but not heavy use, but is always there if I need it (my wife hates it though!). I remember buying it and a Manfrotto 055 when I got my first job in a camera store in the 80's and both are still going!

Taking the mantle into the next period of my photographic life are a trio of bags. A Domke special edition F3 Waxwear in olive from a trip to Japan, a Lowepro Pro Tactic 350 as a transporter bag and a Filson Field Camera Bag. Each has their place and uses. I will start with the most used of the three - the Filson.

Last year, after a bit of a search that included the Web, Japan and all of the suppliers in Australia, I picked one up at a good price from a store in Florida (can't remember the name, sorry). Ironically the store was recommended by Mike Johnson on his blog "The Online Photographer" (a real blog), after myself and others responded to his post about camera bags. He was looking for a bag better than the ONA or Temba he was reviewing, to replace an ancient Billingham (the best sort), and the Filson range looked to be perfect for him. They also filled the criteria of being American made, important for him and reassuring to me.

Filson do a couple of specialist camera bags in conjunction with some iconic National Geographic photographers, but they also do a camera version of their classic "Field Bag". 

In my eternal quest for the perfect bag, I bought a Filson "Field bag" in Olive green a couple of years ago. I loved the "idea" of it, but found it a bit impractical. Others have used them successfully as camera bags, but not me. It serves now as a life long over night or gear spill-over bag and has an interchangeable leather strap that sees some service on the camera bag (more about that later). 

First up lets look at the features of the bag.

The above image shows the bag in the caramel tin cloth/canvas twill combo, in its standard strap configuration. The only thing that is not as the bag comes is the Domke shoulder pad. This pad fixes one of my few complaints about the bag that I will go into below. This one has had about a year's gentle use (I don't see the point in reviewing something that has not been regularly used in its intended environment). The darker front and top flap, as well as the back pocket are  tin cloth fabric. This light and weather proof wax fabric is comfortable and flexible, but can feel a little greasy if you want it to provide the maximum protection. Mine has been let go in that area, so the greasiness is mostly gone, but the protection in heavy rain may be compromised slightly. Domke uses a waxwear cloth that is similar, but Filson's is less greasy, has no musty smell and is a heavier/more rigid cloth and an ONA bag's cloth is a cross between the weight/texture of the Filson Twill and the tin cloth.

The lighter sides and base are made of their heavy 22oz twill to give the bag a longer life as the twill is about twice as heavy as the tin cloth.

The leather is thick, the heavy bridle type, about twice as heavy as Billingham leather and more leather looking (Billingham leather can look a bit "vinyl perfect" for my taste) and it is very pleasant to feel. You really get the feeling of a "20 year+" bag, but unlike a Billingham, it starts out how it intends to finish. Billinghams take a while to get that worn in look, usually about 5-10 years!

The strap is made of smooth and slippery seat-belt nylon. It is a good width and plenty long enough to allow wearing across the body. I tried the matching Field Bag leather strap (available separately), but have now gone back to this strap with the added Domke shoulder pad.

This is my "B" configuration. The outside straps are clipped on to the front pockets so they don't hang out the front. The top flap still does a good job of covering the insides. 

The inside is a simple 3-adjustable divider design. This is perfect for my current kit, being 4 prime lenses and 2 bodies as a rule, (and will also take the f2.8 Olympus zooms I now have) but occasionally I switch bags to a Domke F2 or Pro tactic 350 back pack if I carry more to a location. It kind of holds my personal ideal, but sometimes I want the safety net kit for big jobs.

There is a large rear pocket, two small, secure side pockets for keys, batteries etc. and a zippered internal pocket, but that is all. No secret compartments or tablet storage here, just a camera bag for cameras. The internal lining is a smooth and slippery nylon that feels protective and pleasant. I have a bit of a habit of customising bags with assorted bits from other old ones, but not this bag. It actually feels like a real shame to mess with it.

I have always found it hard to reconcile the images or descriptions of what actually fits in a bag comfortably and accessibly with the actual gear being used. I will try to provide a couple of images to help here and follow that up with some context.

Ok. So as you can see above, the bag is fully loaded with my "maximum comfortable kit" for a day shoot. The lack of a fifth compartment is fixed with a little divider bag my wife made for me years ago. I also put the other strap on to show how well it matches. The size of my gear allows a universal switcheroo system (anything in/anything out) and lots of room for scarves as extra padding etc.

The next shot has the same kit out of the bag. To put this in context, an OMD EM5 with a JB grip is about the same height as a Canon 70d or Nikon d7100 body without grip, but not as deep. The 75mm lens mounted on one camera with generic hood is about the same size as the Canon/Nikon equivalent and the 75-300 is much the same size as any other "budget" tele zoom. There is another 2-3" of height to be used here (also note the nylon lining detail). I have placed the big lens on its own in and outside of the bag for more context. The liners do not have the annoying top flaps, popular with some makers, that are always in the wrong place, but this also means you have to be careful when two adjacent things are taller than them and can rub together.

Will the Filson hold a 70-200 f2.8 from one of the major brands?

Yes, with the hood swapped out for a small metal screw-in one or reversed. It will easily take the smaller f4 versions and bulky primes. The bag has plenty of room for my gear, but is designed for approximately a 2 SLR with 3 lens/flash kit, in a "ready to go" configuration or a bit more if some is broken down. If still using Canon, my old 5Dll+40mm, 70D+85mm, 35L and 70-200 f4L would fit easily.

Will it hold a Pro SLR body with a wide angle zoom, hood on?

Yes to that also. It may lose a spot for something else, a 1D with a 16-35L/70-200L/flash and spare prime or second, smaller body could work.

The front pockets hold large items, but it is a bit of a stretch to put in a lens as the pocket will probably not shut. Batteries, a charger/small flash, a compact camera, filters, a phone or a large note book are fine. These are not the gear swallowing Billingham Hadley or Lowe Pro Messenger pockets, but they don't suffer from the over stuffed, finger pinching tightness of some of the ONA bag pockets.

Likes.

I love the colour, feel and look of the bag. The Filson light tan twill is a bit light for my tastes, but the caramel tin cloth is much more worn in looking. After a bit of use, the bag sags a little when loaded, but never loses its shape (with my gear anyway) and fits comfortably on the hip. How a bag looks is not important. No, that's crap, actually it is, it really is. You may as well like your stuff. It is also elegantly simple.

It's not too "camera/computer bag-ready for the taking", but probably looks lush enough to get taken anyway, so still be careful. The bag lets you feel like a pro, but one that has a casual way of viewing the world. A bit old school, but not too "army surplus".

It is well enough, but not overly padded. Coming from a Domke bag users perspective it feels positively "fat" with protection, but not over stuffed like ONA. The base is lined with something shock absorbent, but I keep a scarf (pictured) in one of the compartments for a bit of extra confidence. Would it take the drop from shoulder height onto concrete test? Probably not without some extra padding, but not many bags will and those that do have other issues.

Comfort and carrying are excellent. I do not know what makes one bag better on the shoulder than another, but Billingham, Domke, Think Tank and Filson know the secret. I have found myself wearing this one on the shoulder rather than cross body and enjoy the way it sits.

It is made to last. The workmanship is a full level above brands like ONA and on par with, but different to, a Billingham. Their support (in the U.S.) is excellent. It will last as long as my old F2 Domke and outlast their newer bags, especially the wax wear ones. There were a few loose threads sewn into the leather trim, but no wonky stitching or poor finish.

(Minor) Dislikes.

A little thing first. I may be missing something here, but why do (many) bag makers put a rear pocket on their bags that is weather proof and then don't bother to put either a flap cover over it or holes in the bottom to let the water run out! Really! Nice bucket guys.

I also don't understand the use of the tin cloth on the back as it will wear faster than the twill (but then the water run off issue will go away, I guess!). Why use the sometimes greasy and thin tin cloth on the only part of the bag that will rub against you all day?

The shoulder strap irritated me. When wearing a light shirt, the strap slipped constantly as I moved and rubbed a bit. I thought it was just me at first (I am a delicate petal as my wife always tells me), but after a while it really became noticeable. Having tried the thinner leather strap, I switched back to the nylon with a Domke shoulder pad and it is now the most comfortable set up I can remember using.

There is nowhere to put even a small tablet except the exposed rear pocket unless you lose a camera or lens space. Not an issue for me.

One more divider would have been good for small camera users. I am aware that the Filson target market is the rugged Nikon/Canon SLR user and the American market for smaller mirrorless camera systems is still small by comparison, but how much for one more divider? 

Would I replace if it was lost? Yes, absolutely. Does it make my photos better? Probably not, but it provides the best, cleanest and least cluttered work method I have used in a while and it feels good to seen using it.