Re: [Leica] Re: Expensive Bags

["Joe Codispoti" <joecodi@thegrid.net>]

At last a revealing, sensible, and accurate opinion of  camera bags. I agree
on all points.
If the camera must cost thousands, the bag need only be functional,
protective, and not an ego symbol. My vote goes to Tamrac.

Joseph Codispoti



- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Doug Cooper" <visigoth@echonyc.com>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Cc: <leica-users-digest@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Saturday, June 10, 2000 9:47 AM
Subject: [Leica] Re: Expensive Bags


>
> I find this talk of bags a bit amusing.  The Billingham in particular is
> hilariously overpriced, and seems to offer nothing over a no-name bag I
> could buy on 14th St. for a few bucks.  It also looks moderatly expensive
> (if not particularly beautiful); if I were a thief, I'd be tempted.
>
> The Domke too strikes me as a joke.  I shot with one in Kyoto, and
> not only does it offer very little protection -- supposedly a feature, not
> a bug -- but it has way to much metal on it for my liking:  just the thing
> to scratch a lens in the field.  And you can find stuff like this in army
> surplus stores for a *song*.  Just buy a Tenba insert (twenty bucks, and
> unlike the Domke, capable of modification) and you're off and running.
>
> I use Tenba bags mostly -- at least they're well-made -- but I'm starting
> to think they look too expensive with the leather trim.  My favorite at
> the moment is a Tamrac fitted backpack:  I can carry all my equipment, and
> barely feel it.  (And it's about a third the price of a Billingham.)
>
> Feeling the flames already,
>
>
> Douglas Cooper
>
>
>