backpack for 4x5" monorail - does it exist?

Jon Shiu · May 11, 2005

You might try one of those wide-mouth tool bags with shoulder strap. The camera will fit upside down in the bag and the rail might stick out the ends, depending on the size of the bag and rail.

Jon

medform-norm · May 12, 2005

Jon Shiu said:
You might try one of those wide-mouth tool bags with shoulder strap. The camera will fit upside down in the bag and the rail might stick out the ends, depending on the size of the bag and rail.

Jon

Hi y'all,
thanks for all the useful, interesting and pricey or not so pricey tips you've given. Can't sling the camera +tripod over my shoulder whilst on a bike...and in Holland we use a bike a lot, are forced to use the bike a lot to get to places quickly. Cars are nice, but not for quick inner-city trips of interesting architecture (no parking places and if any, they're paid for = expensive). And while on a bike, you want both hands free... Bike bags are unfortunately not an option, as the camera would shake way too much on bumpy roads and get damaged.

We haven't decided on anything yet, but as I've never heard of the Arca Swiss Discovery line, I'll check that out on the web...maybe I'll get an inspiration. In the mean time, our old 70's adidas sports bag will have to do for old GVII. It says in very big letters 'sports and friendship' and has always gotten very positive feedback from the public

cheers,
norm

Frank Petronio · May 12, 2005

The Arca Discovery is a great camera, but if you are on a budget, the older, pre-F, pre-1980 Arca-Swiss cameras are a bargain. I think they are much nicer to use than a Graphic View, as well as being as light and compact as any full-featured 4x5 monorail can be. They are low priced in the USA ($300-500 USD) and offer all of the usability of the current models. The newer Discovery and other Arcas are much nicer of course, but the old Arcas are not bad at all and well worth the money.

There was an overview of the Arcas in View Camera magazine a few months ago, plus there is information here: Dead Link Removed

I agree that it is silly to spend more on a backpack than what the camera is worth!

Dan's45 · May 12, 2005

backpack for the 4x5" monorail-does it exist?

I have a Sinar F1, I am of the idea of OLE. take your tripod attachment off the rail and leave it on the tripod and leave your bellows attached...as i see you have no choice in this matter other than to leave them on. but as i was saying, when your get to where you're at, simply break out your tripod and and mount your camera. focus and your ready to rock and roll. as far as cases go...try looking into a used pelican, they're not exactly light but are durable and great when it come time to travel by plane. you might have have to get new foam,depending on what cond. the current foam is in. but its not too terribly expensive to own...i got mine for 80.00 USD used(200.00) new. anyway i hope this helps you out...later!
Happy Shooting,
Daniel

medform-norm · May 12, 2005

Graeme Hird said:
I've got a little demonstration on my web site about the back pack I converted for carrying my camera. Go to :

http://www.scenebyhird.com/BackPack/index.html

Cheers,

Hi Graeme,
We enjoyed your demonstration! Great business idea. But maybe I would change the hot glue bit with proper stitching...anyhow, our GVII will not fold up so small unless we saw the rail into pieces.
We did like the tool bag idea - now looking at the Bucket Boss Gatemouth Long Boy (that's a mounthful) -seems okay made and not too expensive. Here in Holland, we don't see these types of tool bags very often, so we never thought of those being an option. See, learned something new today. Oh, what a joy!

Anyone ever actually used such a tool bag for photo gear? What is the quality of the fabric in practice?

cheers, medform-norm

Jerry Thirsty · May 12, 2005

I also use the Kelty Redwing 2900. I have posted a pic of the arrangement I use at

http://www.pbase.com/jthirsty/image/43297347

I leave the GV tripod head attached to my real tripod head and just mount/dismount it from the monorail clamp. The pack is technically too large to fit me like a real backpacker would want (I'm 5'9") but by using the waist belt to put all the load on my hips it works fine. The farthest I've ever carried it over rough ground or in deep snow was a couple of miles; on smooth going I doubt I could do more than five miles with it. But it works okay as long as I stay fairly close to the car. I don't really have a good way to carry the tripod on the pack, so I spare one hand to carry it slung up on my shoulder.

medform-norm · May 13, 2005

Jerry Thirsty said:
I also use the Kelty Redwing 2900. I have posted a pic of the arrangement I use at

http://www.pbase.com/jthirsty/image/43297347

I leave the GV tripod head attached to my real tripod head and just mount/dismount it from the monorail clamp. The pack is technically too large to fit me like a real backpacker would want (I'm 5'9") but by using the waist belt to put all the load on my hips it works fine. The farthest I've ever carried it over rough ground or in deep snow was a couple of miles; on smooth going I doubt I could do more than five miles with it. But it works okay as long as I stay fairly close to the car. I don't really have a good way to carry the tripod on the pack, so I spare one hand to carry it slung up on my shoulder.

Hi Jerry,
thanks for sharing this. I see what you and Ole mean by leaving the tripod head attached to the tripod - and I see now where our problem is different. Our GVII never came with a tripod mount and buying a new one for $99 wasn't an option, so we constructed one ourselves. It's very sturdy, but it doesn't come off as easily as the 'official' ones, so we'd rather leave it on the rails. But perhaps it could also fit in the Kelty and we'd have to sacrifice space elsewhere. It's not quite how we image an 'ideal' situation, but perhaps an 'ideal' situation is currently out of our budgetary range. OTOH, I do carry my Kiev gear in a Billingham, which is also out of proportion somehow.

Cheers, medform-norm

I know what the solution is: sell some less frequently used cameras and buy a nice bag instead, but that's a real sensitive issue...

medform-norm · May 13, 2005

PCGraflex said:
If you go with something different I would like to hear what you decided on.

Today, the better half of us went on a bike tour looking for tool bags that look like the Bucket Bosses (latter are unavailable here). The European equivalent seems to be the Tool Pack. After a grand tour of all likely shops and nearly giving up today, he went to our local DIY shop in our local crappy shopping centre, because 'hey, you never know'. Upon a dusty shelve two of these Tool bags sat. One already had its outer mesh pocket nibbled on by a mouse. The other one was dusty but okay. Great suprise: bag is exact the right measure for a GVII! See attachments. Bottom is made from thick rubber, balistic nylon for sides and plenty of room for modifications. Inside bags are not attached to the bottom, so they can be pulled up and out...to attach a rigid sheet of metal on one side - this is part one of turning it into a bag you can carry on your bag like a Billingham. Tripod can be attached to one side, but needs more straps to secure it. The zipper is not the most winning part of the whole thing, as it is a one piece thing and not made of two separate pieces. It needs to covered by a flap to make it more weatherresistant.
With the GVII inside, there is still plenty of room for other stuff. Can't show that yet, bag is one hour in the house. Maybe later, when we had time to modify it.
With the mouth wide open, you can take the camera out quite comfortable. AND tripod mount can stay attached. Bag is high enough to leave room for extra padding on the bottom, although the rubber bottom is quite good and sturdy in itself.
Pockets on the front are not too big/wide. Room for a pen and a piece of paper + sunglasses? Inside pockets perhaps useful for flattish thingummies (cable release?).

All in all, we're quite happy with this solution right now. Didn't cost must - 50 euros. The other bag where the mice had nibbled at, is still there for 40 euros. Hmm, maybe good for Pecoflex??? It's so nice to have a bag for each camera and not have to swap everything each time you change cameras.

From the same company there is also a larger, longer version available - for longer rails or larger equipment sets. Costs around the same price.

Last but not least, the colors sort of match with the Samsonite Trunk & Co line of bags...

We say thanks to all good people here for giving hints and tips and pics.
Cheers, medform-norm

PCGraflex · May 13, 2005

medform-norm said:
Today, the better half of us went on a bike tour looking for tool bags that look like the Bucket Bosses (latter are unavailable here). The European equivalent seems to be the Tool Pack. After a grand tour of all likely shops and nearly giving up today, he went to our local DIY shop in our local crappy shopping centre, because 'hey, you never know'. Upon a dusty shelve two of these Tool bags sat. One already had its outer mesh pocket nibbled on by a mouse. The other one was dusty but okay. Great suprise: bag is exact the right measure for a GVII! See attachments. Bottom is made from thick rubber, balistic nylon for sides and plenty of room for modifications. Inside bags are not attached to the bottom, so they can be pulled up and out...to attach a rigid sheet of metal on one side - this is part one of turning it into a bag you can carry on your bag like a Billingham. Tripod can be attached to one side, but needs more straps to secure it. The zipper is not the most winning part of the whole thing, as it is a one piece thing and not made of two separate pieces. It needs to covered by a flap to make it more weatherresistant.
With the GVII inside, there is still plenty of room for other stuff. Can't show that yet, bag is one hour in the house. Maybe later, when we had time to modify it.
With the mouth wide open, you can take the camera out quite comfortable. AND tripod mount can stay attached. Bag is high enough to leave room for extra padding on the bottom, although the rubber bottom is quite good and sturdy in itself.
Pockets on the front are not too big/wide. Room for a pen and a piece of paper + sunglasses? Inside pockets perhaps useful for flattish thingummies (cable release?).

All in all, we're quite happy with this solution right now. Didn't cost must - 50 euros. The other bag where the mice had nibbled at, is still there for 40 euros. Hmm, maybe good for Pecoflex??? It's so nice to have a bag for each camera and not have to swap everything each time you change cameras.

From the same company there is also a larger, longer version available - for longer rails or larger equipment sets. Costs around the same price.

Last but not least, the colors sort of match with the Samsonite Trunk & Co line of bags...

We say thanks to all good people here for giving hints and tips and pics.
Cheers, medform-norm

Norm,

Now you have an idea. For those short jaunts from the car, that bag would be better than dragging a hard case along. I can see where those instances a big bag would be better than a backpack.

Thanks for sharing.....

medform-norm · May 14, 2005

PCGraflex said:
Norm,

Now you have an idea. For those short jaunts from the car, that bag would be better than dragging a hard case along. I can see where those instances a big bag would be better than a backpack.

Thanks for sharing.....

Well, this bag will be turned into something I can carry on my back, the way you can carry a Billingham on your back by use of the harness. We have one of these set-ups and they work quite well. We're only going on moderate day-hiking trips anyway, so we don't need a super-techie muchos $$$$ backpack.

For the rest, we think it would be handy to use the bag as a backpack on the bike. As I explained before, we use the bike a lot to get around fast- and we can go where no car has gone before. We have folding bikes, so we can take them along on trips in public transport or the car.

Different from the US, cars are not the handiest/best ways to move around in the Netherlands. So the often quote thumb rule, that anything further away from your car than 500 ft (or what was it) isn't worth shooting, doesn't hold in our circumstances.

We will post back when we have made some experiences with this (modified) gear.

lrfoto · Apr 28, 2024

medform-norm said:
does anyone use a backpack for toting around a 4x5" monorail camera? We have succesfully resurrected a Graphic View II to working order, but are a little tired of lugging it around in an old Adidas Sports bag... Also, my Pecoflex needs a carrying case if I ever want to get around taking outdoor shots with it on a regular basis.
We looked at the f64 website, but their large backpacks seem only suitable for rail-less field cameras. We looked at fisherman's sitting boxes, but these seem a little clumsy and bulky.

Anyone here with hands on experience with monorail mobility/portability? My back is bad enough as it is and the other half of us has a bad hip and lousy feet, so we do care about ergonomics.

Thanks for any suggestions.
Cheers, medform-norm

Hi, Norm. I hope you're doing well.

I recently got a Calumet 540 4x5 camera with a 22" rail, and I found that I can fit it into a large, military-style expandable backpack. I think I got the backpack itself from Amazon for around $30 several years ago, and it's surprisingly well made. The camera just fits into the main part of the backpack, but it still leaves room for a dark cloth in the same part of the pack, with film holders, a loupe (actually, I use 6x magnifying reading glasses, which work great), light meter, and other bits and bobs in the other pockets on the front and sides. The whole thing weighs around 15-20 pounds when fully stocked, but this isn't exceptionally horrible for hiking, at least once you work up to it.

I think finding a solution for taking a monorail camera with you is worth the extra weight over a folding field camera for the sheer sturdiness of the beast, because it's much harder for wind to shake it around during long exposures, and the fact that it's usually all metal construction (aside from the bellows) makes it even more beneficial, since there's no worry about expansion/contraction/warping in super-dry or super-humid environments. It's also much easier to clean if/when it gets dirty, since it has fewer tiny nooks and crannies for crud to hide.

So, while some will recommend getting a folding field camera instead of a bigger backpack, the money saved by sticking with a monorail and just getting something bigger to carry it in will go a long way to picking up more more lenses, more film holders, and, of course, more film. And, monorail cameras are tanks, with a build-quality-to-weight ratio that's just about unmatched. If nothing else, the extra cardio and muscle-building that come with toting it around could provide even further savings on gym memberships.

I hope this helps!

gbroadbridge · Apr 29, 2024

lrfoto said:
Hi, Norm. I hope you're doing well.

I recently got a Calumet 540 4x5 camera with a 22" rail, and I found that I can fit it into a large, military-style expandable backpack. I think I got the backpack itself from Amazon for around $30 several years ago, and it's surprisingly well made. The camera just fits into the main part of the backpack, but it still leaves room for a dark cloth in the same part of the pack, with film holders, a loupe (actually, I use 6x magnifying reading glasses, which work great), light meter, and other bits and bobs in the other pockets on the front and sides. The whole thing weighs around 15-20 pounds when fully stocked, but this isn't exceptionally horrible for hiking, at least once you work up to it.

I think finding a solution for taking a monorail camera with you is worth the extra weight over a folding field camera for the sheer sturdiness of the beast, because it's much harder for wind to shake it around during long exposures, and the fact that it's usually all metal construction (aside from the bellows) makes it even more beneficial, since there's no worry about expansion/contraction/warping in super-dry or super-humid environments. It's also much easier to clean if/when it gets dirty, since it has fewer tiny nooks and crannies for crud to hide.

So, while some will recommend getting a folding field camera instead of a bigger backpack, the money saved by sticking with a monorail and just getting something bigger to carry it in will go a long way to picking up more more lenses, more film holders, and, of course, more film. And, monorail cameras are tanks, with a build-quality-to-weight ratio that's just about unmatched. If nothing else, the extra cardio and muscle-building that come with toting it around could provide even further savings on gym memberships.

I hope this helps!

I don't think norm has been around for about 12 years

neilt3 · Apr 29, 2024

lrfoto said:
Hi, Norm. I hope you're doing well.

I recently got a Calumet 540 4x5 camera with a 22" rail, and I found that I can fit it into a large, military-style expandable backpack. I think I got the backpack itself from Amazon for around $30 several years ago, and it's surprisingly well made. The camera just fits into the main part of the backpack, but it still leaves room for a dark cloth in the same part of the pack, with film holders, a loupe (actually, I use 6x magnifying reading glasses, which work great), light meter, and other bits and bobs in the other pockets on the front and sides. The whole thing weighs around 15-20 pounds when fully stocked, but this isn't exceptionally horrible for hiking, at least once you work up to it.

I think finding a solution for taking a monorail camera with you is worth the extra weight over a folding field camera for the sheer sturdiness of the beast, because it's much harder for wind to shake it around during long exposures, and the fact that it's usually all metal construction (aside from the bellows) makes it even more beneficial, since there's no worry about expansion/contraction/warping in super-dry or super-humid environments. It's also much easier to clean if/when it gets dirty, since it has fewer tiny nooks and crannies for crud to hide.

So, while some will recommend getting a folding field camera instead of a bigger backpack, the money saved by sticking with a monorail and just getting something bigger to carry it in will go a long way to picking up more more lenses, more film holders, and, of course, more film. And, monorail cameras are tanks, with a build-quality-to-weight ratio that's just about unmatched. If nothing else, the extra cardio and muscle-building that come with toting it around could provide even further savings on gym memberships.

I hope this helps!

As the OP asked this question almost 20 years ago , I feel confident they got a solution already .

As noted , the OP hasn't been on the website for nearly 12 years , so are unlikely to see your reply.

When looking through the archives it's worth noting how old a thread is before replying as filling the sub forum up with zombie threads just pushes current topics and requests to the bottom of the page where they don't get seen or replied to .

P.S , welcome to the forum .

lrfoto · Apr 29, 2024

neilt3 said:
As the OP asked this question almost 20 years ago , I feel confident they got a solution already .

As noted , the OP hasn't been on the website for nearly 12 years , so are unlikely to see your reply.

When looking through the archives it's worth noting how old a thread is before replying as filling the sub forum up with zombie threads just pushes current topics and requests to the bottom of the page where they don't get seen or replied to .

P.S , welcome to the forum .

Hi, Neil and gbroadbridge. I hope you're doing well, and thank you for your replies. I appreciate your taking the time to post them.

I stumbled on this thread when it came up in the results of a Google search for what others use for large format camera transport. The great thing about forums is that, at least when they're visible to the public, while a thread might go dormant, it can still hold a wealth of relevant information even years later. I see forum discussions as living, breathing conversations that can still help people long after the original post was made. So, when I come across discussions that are still relevant to the needs of people who might be searching the internet for the same information as the original poster, I read through the replies and, if I believe I can contribute to the "wisdom of the crowd," I like to try. Journalistic/editorial websites are all well and good, but they provide information from single sources (the authors of the articles), while forums offer a collection of input from numerous people who, together, provide a level of expertise no single journalist can.

This is why I still comment even on old forum threads that haven't seen activity in years. The people who engaged in the conversation back when might have moved on, but what they left behind can still be relevant far into the future. This is perhaps most evident in the fact that this particular thread showed up in a Google search just last night, and new posts to it have the potential to help the next Google searcher even more.

MattKing · Apr 29, 2024

Agreed about the value of old threads.
We just like people to understand that they may be disappointed if they ask for a response from particular individual members!
Welcome to Photrio. We look forward to your participation here.

neilt3 · Apr 29, 2024

lrfoto said:
Hi, Neil and gbroadbridge. I hope you're doing well, and thank you for your replies. I appreciate your taking the time to post them.

I stumbled on this thread when it came up in the results of a Google search for what others use for large format camera transport. The great thing about forums is that, at least when they're visible to the public, while a thread might go dormant, it can still hold a wealth of relevant information even years later. I see forum discussions as living, breathing conversations that can still help people long after the original post was made. So, when I come across discussions that are still relevant to the needs of people who might be searching the internet for the same information as the original poster, I read through the replies and, if I believe I can contribute to the "wisdom of the crowd," I like to try. Journalistic/editorial websites are all well and good, but they provide information from single sources (the authors of the articles), while forums offer a collection of input from numerous people who, together, provide a level of expertise no single journalist can.

This is why I still comment even on old forum threads that haven't seen activity in years. The people who engaged in the conversation back when might have moved on, but what they left behind can still be relevant far into the future. This is perhaps most evident in the fact that this particular thread showed up in a Google search just last night, and new posts to it have the potential to help the next Google searcher even more.

I've spent many hours browsing through the old threads on these forums , there's lots of interesting reads .
If there's anything your practically interested in , use the search function at the top right of the page .
Or just work your way back on the pages of the sub-forums , like I've done at times .

I typically use that when there's something I want to know/ask , as when your using gear that's often fifty years old , pretty much everything has already been asked here at least once and the answers don't change .

It's very rare I've wanted to know something that's not already been asked here before ( or I couldn't find the answer if it had ) , so when I do ask it gets answered very quickly ( typically) .

backpack for 4x5" monorail - does it exist?

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency