BillBingham2
Registered User
While I never had a problem carrying Amy's purse ("I am what I am" which made her very confused....It was the early '80's and all) when she asked. Didn't do it too often and it often clashed with my outfit so I was fine. I used a small Domke F8 back then, way too wide a strap to be a purse (IMHO).
I got over how I looked carrying things completely when I used a fanny pack for my sons diaper bag. When I had to carry what my wife carried, it was much more feminine looking. Not to say fanny packs are butch.
I had an old Spiratone camera bag for much of High School, was an AV Geek, wore a couple of shirts that closed on the wrong side (made by my mother), so I'm not sure I would be one to look to for style guidance.
B2 (;->
.
I got over how I looked carrying things completely when I used a fanny pack for my sons diaper bag. When I had to carry what my wife carried, it was much more feminine looking. Not to say fanny packs are butch.
I had an old Spiratone camera bag for much of High School, was an AV Geek, wore a couple of shirts that closed on the wrong side (made by my mother), so I'm not sure I would be one to look to for style guidance.
B2 (;->
.
Retro-Grouch
Well-known
One can follow fashion, or one can set it! Sounds like you were in the latter category.
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
I have looked admiringly at the Ona Bowery bag, both online and in the camera store. I never bought one, I guess because it won't really do anything that my Domke F5xb won't do; and because I seem to always want my Think Tank Retrospective 5 along. It has become my security blanket, I guess you might say. But it won't serve the man-purse purpose because it's too bulky. Well maybe one of these days I will get the Ona. It should serve nicely--elegantly--as long as I don't need to bring too much gear; say, a Leica body with one lens or two, but not several lenses.
580/Q
200 frames a day
Bill,
To the first, yes. It's anecdotal but I point cameras at people most of the day and every day and I find that the smaller cameras, including the cellphone produce a very different response than the D3 or even the D750 (brilliant cameras but just too big on several fronts) when I am observed taking a photograph. To the second point, absolutely: Technique and personal deportment counts for far much more than camera/lens size. Most of the time I just pick the moment when whatever is happening has absorbed everyone's interest and try and take a picture. I sneak without looking like I'm sneaking, I guess.
But....My favorite focal lengths (in 135) are 21 and 35 and 70. And, I travel for work an immense amount. I'm on the road for 200-300 days a year and I have to keep it light because sometimes I'm the pilot but sometimes I'm not and everything has to go into two rucksacks and a duffle.
An X100F, a GR III with the 21mm conversion lens, and a little Nikon A900 for when I just cannot get close enough, covers the waterfront. The technical image quality of the Fuji and the Ricoh is stellar and, if one is very, very careful, excellent results can be produced with the Nikon point and super-zoom.
So in a three-camera kit that weighs less than a full-frame body I can run and gun 21mm through 800mm equivalents. Yes, the palettes, if you will, are very different and I work with that consciously. It all fits in a Domke that I've had for a long time. I think it's called an F-5XB.
The F-5XB clips on to the back of one of the rucks sometimes, but usually it's over a shoulder and one of the cameras is in my hand - most often the Fuji.
The smallness of the GR III is offset by the rather large conversion lens. I gave up on the teleconverter for the Fuji because of the size. It's ridiculous. The Fuji 28mm conversion lens is more manageable but lately it's been sitting in one of the rucks and I'll probably drop it off next time I get home...September.
Cheers,
Shane
To the first, yes. It's anecdotal but I point cameras at people most of the day and every day and I find that the smaller cameras, including the cellphone produce a very different response than the D3 or even the D750 (brilliant cameras but just too big on several fronts) when I am observed taking a photograph. To the second point, absolutely: Technique and personal deportment counts for far much more than camera/lens size. Most of the time I just pick the moment when whatever is happening has absorbed everyone's interest and try and take a picture. I sneak without looking like I'm sneaking, I guess.
But....My favorite focal lengths (in 135) are 21 and 35 and 70. And, I travel for work an immense amount. I'm on the road for 200-300 days a year and I have to keep it light because sometimes I'm the pilot but sometimes I'm not and everything has to go into two rucksacks and a duffle.
An X100F, a GR III with the 21mm conversion lens, and a little Nikon A900 for when I just cannot get close enough, covers the waterfront. The technical image quality of the Fuji and the Ricoh is stellar and, if one is very, very careful, excellent results can be produced with the Nikon point and super-zoom.
So in a three-camera kit that weighs less than a full-frame body I can run and gun 21mm through 800mm equivalents. Yes, the palettes, if you will, are very different and I work with that consciously. It all fits in a Domke that I've had for a long time. I think it's called an F-5XB.
The F-5XB clips on to the back of one of the rucks sometimes, but usually it's over a shoulder and one of the cameras is in my hand - most often the Fuji.
The smallness of the GR III is offset by the rather large conversion lens. I gave up on the teleconverter for the Fuji because of the size. It's ridiculous. The Fuji 28mm conversion lens is more manageable but lately it's been sitting in one of the rucks and I'll probably drop it off next time I get home...September.
Cheers,
Shane
Attachments
Lee Rust
Member
Everybody I know is accustomed to the little black bag that's usually slung over my shoulder or around my neck, and it really doesn't matter what anyone else thinks.
Actually, I've got five identical ThinkTank 'Mirrorless Mover 10' bags that are set up for a variety of smallish cameras plus filters, meters, notebooks, pencils, SD cards, batteries, film etc. When these bags are full they each measure about 6x6x6", which is just compact enough to not be overly burdensome or obtrusive. To me, one of the nicest features of the Mirrorless Mover is the zipper + magnetic flap closure instead of a fussy buckle or noisy Velcro.
I have a variety of 35mm or digital cameras with short lenses that will fit, including Leica, Epson, Kodak or Canon rangefinders, Pentax ME or MX reflexes, plus Olympus or Mercury half-frames. Once in a while there's even an ancient Zeiss folder or oddball Agfa Flexilette TLR in there. When carrying film cameras I usually keep a tiny digital Canon SD1000 in the front pocket for macro or flash or for when the film runs out.
Larger cameras and/or longer lenses are reserved for special occasions or dedicated photo expeditions.
Actually, I've got five identical ThinkTank 'Mirrorless Mover 10' bags that are set up for a variety of smallish cameras plus filters, meters, notebooks, pencils, SD cards, batteries, film etc. When these bags are full they each measure about 6x6x6", which is just compact enough to not be overly burdensome or obtrusive. To me, one of the nicest features of the Mirrorless Mover is the zipper + magnetic flap closure instead of a fussy buckle or noisy Velcro.
I have a variety of 35mm or digital cameras with short lenses that will fit, including Leica, Epson, Kodak or Canon rangefinders, Pentax ME or MX reflexes, plus Olympus or Mercury half-frames. Once in a while there's even an ancient Zeiss folder or oddball Agfa Flexilette TLR in there. When carrying film cameras I usually keep a tiny digital Canon SD1000 in the front pocket for macro or flash or for when the film runs out.
Larger cameras and/or longer lenses are reserved for special occasions or dedicated photo expeditions.
boojum
Mentor
I've been following this thread and giving this "bag" thing some thought. And it is all about the shape. If the bag is boxy it is fine and "masculine." Flatten is and it becomes unmasculine. How weird is that? And where is the crossover point? Is there a neutral shape? All very puzzling.
I do not think it is shape completely ... it is size, material and aesthetics. The prettier, the more man purse looking.
markjwyatt
Well-known
For portable I have a "fanny pack" where I can store a Retina IIIc, light meter, filter box, lens brush and a few rolls of film. No wide angle. It may not be stylish, but it is compact and works with the folder.
Exploring RF
New at RF
I may have to try this Mirrorless Mover as it has the feature I like most in shoulder bags: rotating/swiveling strap hooks. I like the Peak Design bags generally, but this rotating/swiveling feature allows me to just throw the bag over my shoulder without struggling with the strap. Genius. Plus, I can just take the strap off to use the bag as a stuff bag inside luggage or whatever. My other preference is no logos or minimalist logos. I can get fussy over these bags.
boojum
Mentor
Yes, you are right.
aizan
Mentor
Does anybody else accumulate freebie canvas shoulder bags? I take one with me everywhere. Current bag for the last few years is from the Internet Archive.
I can carry any camera if there's a never-ready case or pouch for it. Leica M, Fujica GS645, Rolleiflex, Fujifilm GW690III, Pentacon Six, Polaroid SX-70, you name it.
So, no, the larger wide lenses designed for digital rangefinders don't make a difference. I don't rely on coat pockets as much anymore, and I can take a bag with me in any weather.
I can carry any camera if there's a never-ready case or pouch for it. Leica M, Fujica GS645, Rolleiflex, Fujifilm GW690III, Pentacon Six, Polaroid SX-70, you name it.
So, no, the larger wide lenses designed for digital rangefinders don't make a difference. I don't rely on coat pockets as much anymore, and I can take a bag with me in any weather.
580/Q
200 frames a day
azian, I have used a Danish schoolbook bag (photo below, now marketed by Globetrotter(?)) off and on for years and I love it. I too use the never-ready half-cases or else I have to put an insert in or things get damaged. Like in the photo! Erk. Normally, I have a wooden ruler in the flap to keep the bag from sagging. I have a couple of other canvas bags but none are as good as this one.
Attachments
kshapero
South Florida Man
Everyone tells me I carry a purse.
It,s a Gordy bag.
It,s a Gordy bag.
furcafe
Mentor
Normalize man purses.
I prefer small lenses because it means I can carry a camera and lens or two in a small bag that doesn’t get in my way. Gets in the way less in size and weight.
I’ve found people to be less intimidated when smaller lenses are pointed their way. It comes across as either more casual photography or less ‘singled out’ than larger lenses.
I think the non-elderly male population normalized man purses/man bags in the U.S. at least a decade ago (probably earlier in Europe & Asia)
Personally, I've favored Chrome "Mini Metro" messenger bags, mostly w/Billingham & Domke inserts (Chrome now offers their own), for over 15 years now; inside a Mini Metro, I can easily carry 2 RFs w/lenses inside the insert w/room for a small inside pouch of lens cleaning supplies, batteries, etc. Cross-body messenger bags work better for me because they allow faster access to equipment than backpack-style bags. Of course, now that I'm firmly middle-aged, I have to be more careful wearing a heavy bag on 1 shoulder for extended periods of time to avoid aches & pains (fortunately, I have Chrome bags in both left & right-shouldered versions from back when they offered those options). More than 1/2 the time I'm out shooting, probably close to 90% of the time, I'll have no bag at all, just the camera & lens.
BillBingham2
Registered User
Didn't know he built them!
I'm thinking it has to do with the width of the strap. Camera Bags being wider (IMHO).
B2 (;->