Having bought way too many bags over the last few months, the idea of looking back and revisiting my thought processes (my spending spree), is a little daunting, but often the best lessons are learned by looking back.
It started with a perceived need for another, better bag for my work with the paper. I had a very workable Domke F802, but wanted to keep it for the school, which at the time was half of my work, and felt the layout was possibly not right for the paper. Other options were the Filson Field Camera bag, Domke F3 rugged, an ancient Domke F2, LowePro Pro Tactic 350 and the Think Tank Turnstyle 10.
Crumpler Muli (4000?). This bag prompted an article on the perils of buying sight unseen as the usual problem of the supposed capacity and the real capacity were at odds. The bag does hold exactly what some have said, but in the wrong configuration for me (read broken-down, not ready-to-go). For a single camera and a couple of lenses it is fine, but for me it excels as a getting to work bag. It is quite rigid, which makes toting a laptop and other bits reassuringly stable. Putting this down to a learning opportunity, I moved on.
Height and depth was the main issue. With my new kit (40-150 f4 and 9mm with gripless cameras) it is probably better, but at the time the f2.8 and 8-18 pushed it too far and a lack of extra pockets is a pain.
Domke 804 black. This one was a lucky find, but has proven to have the rare and unlikely issue of actually being too big. It will get, as all my Domke bags do, plenty of use in a role not yet defined, but as a day kit bag it is massive and unnessary. The main idea was to replace the F802, my workhorse with a bag that could take a body with battery grip (EM1x, EM1.2 with grip), which it turns out is total overkill. From here I went back to the F802 for the height without the depth and the added pockets I have for the F802 mean it is actually bigger in real terms.
The Domke F3x ballistic. This did not happen, but I wanted it to. In hindsight, the F2 is the better choice I guess, although my current push for a smaller kit might have been a perfect fit for it (the bag was made for a small film era kit like an F3 with drive, 20, 35, 85, 180, which is surprisingly close to a modern mirrorless kit). In other words, this bag might have saved me getting both the F2 and the Photocross 10, but more likely, each of these is a better bag at their respective jobs, but still……. . I actually have one of these in green rugged-ware (very rare BIC camera special edition), but I would prefer a lined one.
Domke F2 ballistic. This is an old friend revisited and updated. The older F2 is now 30+ years old and lacks the lining of the ballistic bags. This is a win mostly, apart from still being a shoulder bag. I will use this for full day kits as it is perfect for the kit it was bought for. The 4 compartment divider and decent main camera compartment fit my gear as well as any bag and I appreciate the pen holders, small front pockets and the way the bag sits on the floor, but the boxy shape can haep it roll off a car seat and it is big on the hip.
See a trend?
Mindshift Photocross 13. This one, like the F3x was the wanted item that turned into something else and probably for the better. I wanted a bag that could take my sports kit, but was more convenient than the Turnstyle 10 (too small) or the Pro Tactic 350 (too….backpack).
Mindshift Photocross 10. This is the (hopefully) right bag for the job above. I think that maybe the 13 would have carried too much and been too big. The 10 is more likely to do a better job of the TT10’s role.
The search for the perfect bag is as futile as much as it is fun, but the need to get something that genuinely does the job when you actually need it for work (not just a hobby) quickly sorts the junk from the winners. I have lots of bags, some not even mentioned here, but they are all useful for something.