F-6 vs. F-3X

#1 08-25-2009, 12:03 PM

I'm just getting into digital. I have a Canon Rebel XSi with 18-55mm and a 55-250 mm lens. The camera has a battery grip. Of course, there is other impedimenta: hood, battery charger, extra battery, cable, AA batteries for backup, lens cleaning kit, and several memory cards.

I'm planning a safari to Tanzania, and I want a bag which allows me to keep the 55-250 lens attached and ready for quick use. It's likely to see lots of dust and have to sit on floor of Land Rover; rougher use than normal.

Can anyone advise which of the above is likely to work best? Or is there another Domke bag which I should consider?

Jim Domke · #2 09-02-2009, 06:54 PM

The way I look at it, don't set the bag down. Not only do you risk it being stolen, but it could bounce out of the Land Rover. I'd recommend the FX4 AF (Like the classic Super Compact FX3 but deeper) it is small and doesn't call attention to you. When walking around in the street, I'd keep the shorter lens on the camera and turn it around so the flap opens toward you.

But when you are out in the bush, keep the camera ready with long lens around your neck and the bag on your shoulder, so it won't fly out of the Land Rover or get crushed.

If you stop for lunch you can stick the camera and lens down (lens hood reversed) with body up and covered with the flap so it won'd be noticed. To protect it from the dust, use a garbage bag. I've written before on :eek: how Sports Illustrated photog Bill Eppridge carried one. He cut the bottom open and then duck taped it shut around the base of the shoulder strap and let it hang down. Bag was big enough to fold and keep the fine dust from getting inside the bag.

When it wasn't dusty, he bunched it up into a ball and tied it onto the shoulder strap.

#3 09-16-2009, 11:50 PM

[QUOTE=Jim Domke;949]The way I look at it, don't set the bag down. Not only do you risk it being stolen, but it could bounce out of the Land Rover. I'd recommend the FX4 AF (Like the classic Super Compact FX3 but deeper) it is small and doesn't call attention to you. When walking around in the street, I'd keep the shorter lens on the camera and turn it around so the flap opens toward you.

But when you are out in the bush, keep the camera ready with long lens around your neck and the bag on your shoulder, so it won't fly out of the Land Rover or get crushed.

If you stop for lunch you can stick the camera and lens down (lens hood reversed) with body up and covered with the flap so it won'd be noticed. To protect it from the dust, use a garbage bag. I've written before on :eek: how Sports Illustrated photog Bill Eppridge carried one. He cut the bottom open and then duck taped it shut around the base of the shoulder strap and let it hang down. Bag was big enough to fold and keep the fine dust from getting inside the bag.

When it wasn't dusty, he bunched it up into a ball and tied it onto the shoulder strap.[/QUOTE]

Jim a question that has always haunted me
a bag that does not call attencion to you, which colour would you say more fits that in the f3/f6 including the new waxwear

Dave

Jim Domke · #4 09-17-2009, 11:42 AM

Ansel Adams designed a bag that was white on the outside to reflect heat and black inside to avoid light from fogging sheet film. The black bag is the least conspicuous, looks like a shadow and has become the professional look.

But, it is dark inside and there is no contrast with black lenses and lens caps. I like tan/sand for my FX-3 because I can find things inside pockets, etc. it's a small bag so you don't stand out as a photographer.

I liked the chocolate brown, because it was darker than tan, but not so dark that you can't find the lens cap. I'm excited about the new "waxed" stone washed bags! Fashionable, professional looking, but not something that will call undo attention to thieves. Something you can work out of.:p

The whole idea is to get to the equipment when you need it, and get the picturte. Not have to stop and set the bag down, or have to leave it in the car because you are scared to carry it in public. No funny pockets that flop down and have to be secured before you put the bag on your shoulder.

#5 09-17-2009, 03:04 PM

I had to clean out my parents house recently. I hadn't lived there since I moved out for college in 1980. In some boxes, I came across a cancelled check to J.G.Domke for 52.50 on 3/21/80.

Memories flooded back. How many miles I travelled with that comfy blue canvas bag!

Unfortunately, some bugger broke into my apartment years ago and stole it. And since I had moved over to an administration job, I never bothered to replace it.

Now that I'm shooting again for fun, I'm looking to replace it. But I sure wish I could have my first one back again. My own little bit of history. Oh well, at least I have the check!

Eric

#6 09-19-2009, 12:17 AM

[QUOTE=Jim Domke;962]Ansel Adams designed a bag that was white on the outside to reflect heat and black inside to avoid light from fogging sheet film. The black bag is the least conspicuous, looks like a shadow and has become the professional look.

But, it is dark inside and there is no contrast with black lenses and lens caps. I like tan/sand for my FX-3 because I can find things inside pockets, etc. it's a small bag so you don't stand out as a photographer.

I liked the chocolate brown, because it was darker than tan, but not so dark that you can't find the lens cap. I'm excited about the new "waxed" stone washed bags! Fashionable, professional looking, but not something that will call undo attention to thieves. Something you can work out of.:p

The whole idea is to get to the equipment when you need it, and get the picturte. Not have to stop and set the bag down, or have to leave it in the car because you are scared to carry it in public. No funny pockets that flop down and have to be secured before you put the bag on your shoulder.[/QUOTE]

how about if you line the inside of the wax wear bags with a white lining.
just a food for thought

Dave

#7 10-08-2009, 10:51 PM

are you by chance the original Jim Domke

Dave

admin · #8 10-09-2009, 06:30 AM

I'm not, but any posting on this site with his name is the original Jim Domke.

#9 10-09-2009, 10:40 AM

[QUOTE=admin;1020]I'm not, but any posting on this site with his name is the original Jim Domke.[/QUOTE]

Well to Mr. Jim Domke
i tip my hat to you
[B][U]Great Bags[/U][/B]

Dave

Jim Domke · #10 10-09-2009, 03:05 PM

Thanks for the kudos, but every year we've made changes, listened to users and tried to make it a better bag. The original idea was simple. Make it flexible, because every photographer had different equipment and had his/her own unique way of working.

Like the camera gear, the bags keep evolving, I still like to carry a shoulder bag, rather than a stiff hard case or backpack. But today's camera bag is a lot more useful that the earlier bags. They keep getting better.:eek:

Here's a photo of me with the Original brown with tan trim Domke Bag, taken by Philadelphia Inquirer photog Akira Suwa back in 1977.:D