What's in your kit bag when shooting?

[Steve Kaluski]

OK folks, someone asked the other day the above question and certainly over the many years on the Forum I keep being asked - 'how do I pack my gear?', and so as I'm just about to set off I thought it would be worth posting this FWIW. Plus, if folk wish to chip in and ‘bolster’ the thread so it benefits even more, or it generates further questions great. The bonus for Jon A with Olympus is the lenses, light & compact so a smaller bag is required.

The last bag was a Kata (Bomb proof), now I currently have a Think Tank 32L, not sure they still do them, I have used/tested the f-stop which is great, but it’s buying all the internals that racks up the price, but it's a really cool bag. I have avoided the cases with wheels, for obvious reasons… especially if you rock up in some remote location!!!!


This now currently holds

A. RF 24-70mm f/2.8
B. Canon Control ring Mount adaptor
C. EF 500mm f/4
D. Canon R5
E. Canon R3
F. RF 100-500 f/4.5
G. RF 70-200 f/2.8
H. EF 1.4 & RF 1.4
I. Canon TC-80N3 Remote Switch


Outside pocket contains: RF 15-35mm f/2.8, R3 battery charger and cables, Mac cable

 

[Steve Kaluski]

The Laptop takes:
R5 Charger
2 Card readers & cables
Power cable
MacBook Pro 16 inc 2022 SSD M1 pro with upgrades
2 G-Tech 5TB amorATD SSD ext HDs

 

[Narayanan Mangalath]

Hello Steve,
Thank you for this interesting and very useful post !
Are you able to pack EF 500mm F4 and all other stuff in one bag? That sounds like a big bag. I have a Think Tank bag just for the 500. So I end up taking just that or others (leaving behind 500 F4).

I had purchased 500 F4 going out of my budget thinking I will be able to take out of the world pictures (even though I know the skills comes first and then the tool !).
Due to the attention it gets, I am hesitant to take it in many local places being afraid of theft and such.

I am wondering if 500 F4 has any much significance especially now as we have relatively cheap 200 - 800 lens available. When do you suggest me taking 500 F4 vs a 200 - 800 (I do not own it now, but I have the 400 MM 5.6 prime).

Thanks
Narayanan Mangalath

 

[Steve Kaluski]

Hi Narayanan,

I'm glad you found it of interest.

Are you able to pack EF 500mm F4 and all other stuff in one bag?

Yes, but the hood is either packed in hold luggage, or clipped to the outside of the bag. Please note, you might see some folk attach their bodies to the lens in the bag, my advice don't, I had a very expensive skiing accident doing so. They say that they are then ready for action and can be deployed quickly, rather that connecting thing up, which is true, but if the mount brakes, it's a costly mistake.

I had purchased 500 F4 going out of my budget thinking I will be able to take out of the world pictures (even though I know the skills comes first and then the tool !).
Due to the attention it gets, I am hesitant to take it in many local places being afraid of theft and such.

It's a sad state of affairs when you here this and even walking with smaller, lightweight lenses you still have to be conscious of your environment.

I am wondering if 500 F4 has any much significance especially now as we have relatively cheap 200 - 800 lens available. When do you suggest me taking 500 F4 vs a 200 - 800 (I do not own it now, but I have the 400 MM 5.6 prime).

OK, this is just my take, others I'm sure may disagree....

This 'Hobby' shall we say, is like any other, in that once you start and emerge yourself into, it it's all going to get expensive - fact! You either upgrade bodies lenses or computer kit, but you will be glad to know there are some nice breaks in between each purchase.

I have had both the 500MKI & MKII f/4 for over 25 years and its my workhorse go to lens, but saying that there are other lenses worth considering now. You mentioned the 200-800 and I had that on order when it first came out, but during the short wait, I had files back from friends who 'had one' and personally I thought the file quality was pants. Then a 300f/2.8 mint condition, (with everything) came up for sale, more that I was going to pay for the 200-800 (as I had a discounted rate), best purchase I have made for a few years.

Basically what is it that you photograph? How close can you get and is a zoom worth a thought, like the 100-500. The issue is it's a little slow, but it's good and lightweight. The EF lenses work just as well with mirrorless, the amount I paid was a 1/7 of a new RF400 f/2.8 and its as sharp as it ever was.

Build your kit, and if you can, always go for the higher spec and you might find Trading in gear also works. As Gabriela knows, I'm going through a lot of upgrading across the board, but I'm looking ahead and to a degree, 'future proofing' things.

If you need any other help, please just reach out and send me a PM. I will PM you anyway, as you need to think how you pack your 500f.4

 

[Narayanan Mangalath]

Appreciate taking so much time to really "help me" explaining like a good friend World is so much better with people like you !!!

I am glad that you shared the feedback regarding 200-800, so that I have one less lens to consider against. Do you always use 300 2.8 with extender or do you find opportunities without the extender?

Regarding always going for higher spec, that is what I did with the 500 F4 II. The original 500 version was available on sale, but considering the weight (I am referring to as higher spec) , I thought better to invest in the right one than investing less and not using it. I realize that is true more and more as I find the version 2 lens also very heavy to walk around.

Many people suggested to use big lenses to planned shoots rather than exploratory shoots where you need to walk a lot. I had several instances where I got so tired without any luck. I feel I made more usable pictures when I had less weight and was able to explore more in one session.

Thanks for your offer in PMing for more questions.

 

[Steve Kaluski]

Do you always use 300 2.8 with extender or do you find opportunities without the extender?

It all comes back to... how close you want to get to your subject and by getting too close without you spooking them, or encroaching on their comfort zone, so it's your call. If I do, it will only be the 1.4, but then you go from 2.8 to f/4 no problem and light enough to HH.

I realize that is true more and more as I find the version 2 lens also very heavy to walk around.

MK2 is lighter than MK1

Many people suggested to use big lenses to planned shoots rather than exploratory shoots where you need to walk a lot. I had several instances where I got so tired without any luck. I feel I made more usable pictures when I had less weight and was able to explore more in one session.

It's the price you pay, so perhaps the 100-500 is something to consider. Certainly hand holding the 200-400 for Sea Eagles is a workout on its own and not ideal for long periods your arms to get tired.

Perhaps a mono pod may be of use, but then you need to think carefully about a head for this, as I said, you will find you are constantly updating or adding.

 

[Phill Luckhurst]

I find the 200-800 quite manageable for long periods. I wouldn’t want to use it for shooting swift but the same could be said of the 300/2.8.

As for the lens quality, I find it a mixed bag. It does suffer whenever heat haze is present, even more noticeable than my 800/f11. But other time the image quality can be excellent. I do agree 100% that it is almost always better to get closer.

 

[Enrico Savazzi]

I am getting old and less and less willing to carry a heavy backpack. About 10-15 years ago I switched entirely to Micro 4/3 for field use, although I still use full-frame Sony Alpha in the studio/lab. My current birding/wildlife kit is Olympus OM-1, OM System 150-600mm f/5-6.3, and if I suspect it will be a long session a Leofoto MP-285C monopod with Wimberley MH-100 monogimbal.
Optionally, depending on expected needs, one or two additional lenses chosen among OM System 40-150mm f/4 Pro, OM System 90mm macro Pro, Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro or 7-14mm f/2.8 Pro.
If I need to save weight, I may replace some or all the above lenses with primes, including Olympus 300mm f/4 Pro, 60 mm f/2.8 macro and 12mm f/2, and use my legs and a teleconverter to do the zooming.

 

[Phill Luckhurst]

Have you considered not carrying the backpack? Used to do just that and looked like an ageing turtle. When it dawned on me how little of the kit in the bag I actually used on an outing I totally changed my ethos. Now I often only carry one lens, occasionally two. Yes, I may miss opportunities at times but it is far less than I used to fear. I think it was that fear that used to drive me to take far more than I actually needed. Now for macro I tend to take the camera with flash and either the EF-S60 or MPE-65 mounted and the other in my pocket. The 100mm barely gets taken out now. For wildlife I tend to take either the EF100-400II or 200-800 and just leave the rest in the boot. Landscape I just take what I plan to use, whether it is a couple of wide angle zooms or a couple of fast primes and f I am doing Astro, or just a long lens. When it does get heavy is if I want to use a sky tracker, but again I will carry the bare minimum and often be next to my car if I need anything extra. The change of mindset has freed me up quite a bit. Now I feel I am shooting more in a way I did when I was just enjoying photography as a teenager.

 

[Enrico Savazzi]

Have you considered not carrying the backpack? [...]

Excellent point. I forgot to mention - I am not using a backpack for my minimal kit (OM-1 with 150-600 + monopod + 1 optional lens) but a 10L or 12L Tenba Solstice sling bag. Unlike a backpack I only need to rotate the bag to the front of my body around the single shoulder strap to extract the camera. No need to take off a backpack and put it down on dirty and wet ground every time I need something.

 

[Phill Luckhurst]

That tenba bag looks really nice. It is not a brand I have heard of before. Next time I am in Wex or Park cameras I must take a look at their kit.

 

[Bruce Elkman]

On my last trip to Costa Rica my Gura Gear 32L bag weighed 37 lbs and I realized that having everything in one bag was not a smart approach. Now I take a 18L backpack as well and put as much weight in it instead of the big bag. Much easier on the body to have 15 lbs in one hand and 22 lbs in the other hand.

In choosing a backpack it is important that I can strap a tripod to the side and still have full access to the main compartment. It is also important to have pockets for small items like a filter wallet or spare batteries or a memory card case and can get to them without having to open the main compartment. This also applies to shoulder bags where the discontinued LowePro Stealth Reporter bags were terrific.

I have small, medium, and large bags and use the one that is the best size for my kit(s) on any given outing.

 

[Narayanan Mangalath]

Have you considered not carrying the backpack? Used to do just that and looked like an ageing turtle. When it dawned on me how little of the kit in the bag I actually used on an outing I totally changed my ethos. Now I often only carry one lens, occasionally two. Yes, I may miss opportunities at times but it is far less than I used to fear. I think it was that fear that used to drive me to take far more than I actually needed. Now for macro I tend to take the camera with flash and either the EF-S60 or MPE-65 mounted and the other in my pocket. The 100mm barely gets taken out now. For wildlife I tend to take either the EF100-400II or 200-800 and just leave the rest in the boot. Landscape I just take what I plan to use, whether it is a couple of wide angle zooms or a couple of fast primes and f I am doing Astro, or just a long lens. When it does get heavy is if I want to use a sky tracker, but again I will carry the bare minimum and often be next to my car if I need anything extra. The change of mindset has freed me up quite a bit. Now I feel I am shooting more in a way I did when I was just enjoying photography as a teenager.

I used to carry a big bag with all my gear and pretty much stick to what I am already hand holding. As you rightly said, it is the fear of missing an opportunity. I found focusing on one or two things actually bear more fruits. Now a days I just keep all my extra lenses and tripod in my car and come back after each stride. In fact, I found a new way to "rest" in between carrying big lenses. Yesterday I went to a state park. After a tiring 1 hour of walk , I came back to car and picked just the binoculars which I hardly used since I bought a few years ago ("in the fear of not having a camera when the opportunity arise"). I spent almost an hour walking through very light and enjoyed and saw another perspective of nature. So looks like it is all about discovering new ways to keep you untired and patient and prepare for the next shot little by little.