PDA

View Full Version : Insert for 70-200mm 2.8


xtianh
12-05-2008, 01:46 PM
Hi,

I'm trying to find which insert would fit a Canon 70-200 2.8 IS with hood reversed. And if possible with Tripod mount ring as well. But if worse comes to worse it can be an insert without hood and without tripod mount.

based on that I will be choosing a bag =)

Jon
12-05-2008, 02:09 PM
I keep mine in one of the end compartments of a 720-230 3-compartment insert. It's a snug fit with the hood reversed, and manufacturing variations seem to affect how well it fits. The tripod ring would want to hang over the edge of the insert. If you want it to be mounted on a body, you'd want one of the taller bags, like the F-7 or the F-802.

In the F-1 or F-2 I lay the camera and lens combo on its side (resting on a few battery boxes) in the main compartment with the 720-230 (F-1x) or the 720-220 (F-2) on the back of the bag for other lenses.

Without the hood, the 720-200 will hold a 70-200 2.8 or 100-400 OK. I don't use the 4-compartment inserts, even though that's what comes with the bags; they just don't let me arrange my gear the way I like.

If I only have one camera, it will fit in the F-3x with a 70-200 mounted and another lens in the main compartment; the top bulges up some, but not annoyingly so.
So I'd really suggest not choosing based on just that one lens, but on all of what you'll be carrying.

Arnaud
01-26-2009, 01:33 PM
I had a F2 ballistic and now a canvas F-1.
The F-1 is not much bigger than F-2 in external size, but can hold a lot more. Courtesy of my girl friend Claire who worked on, I elected to withdraw the interior and one side of a 4 compartments insert and can perfectly protect my D3 with the 20-70 ready to go..
On the other 3 compartment combinaison inseret, there is a Nikon D2x and two lens.

Jim Domke
04-16-2009, 11:05 AM
With the internet we can get feedback workwide. We're working on a new Domke Bag to serve the digital photographer. Quick access without having to stop and reverse the lens hood. This means it will probably be more like a school book backpack than a shoulder bag.

We're thinking of a bag that can be carried in cities, and unlike a hiking backpack can be quickly taken off the shoulder easily to sit down in a bus or car. It is also important that you can access the contents without having to stop and put the bag on the ground (When I see a photo, I want to walk/climb to get the best angle and not be slowed down by my bag.)

Generally I hand hold the camera so the tripod mount is left off my lens and kept in a side pocket. I do reverse the lens hood, and hate it. This takes time, and risks missing a shot. So I often don't bother with the hood and end up leaving it in the bag. I also like the rubber ones that collapse, does anyone make them anymore?

I feel we need a new taller bag, I wish they could go back to having the lens hood slide up or collapse down the side of the lens.

Any ideas are welcome, I started in 1975 modifying a fishing bag dividing the main compartment to have 3 pockets in the front and the back half left empty. New York Times photog Gary Settle saw it and suggested making it like a six-pack which led me to the 4-compartment insert. So suggestions are welcome.

Jon
04-20-2009, 09:55 AM
Interesting that you started out with a 3-compartment insert; my favourite one is the 720-230 3-compartment; I don't even use the ones that come with the bags. I run it on the back, not the front, side of the bag though; when the camera's out the unused lenses don't "sag away" as easily. I'd really like to see a 2-compartment (720-220 type) that had compartments a bit over 3" square - the 3" compartments of the other inserts don't take my larger lens hoods well, but the 3.5"x3" of the 3-compartment does very well. But with the F-1x and F-2 I need to have one body and long lens (70-200 2.8 or 100-400 f/4) on its side.