Lowepro SS 300AW OR Mini-Trekker AW ????

[riyazi]

I have SS 200AW which I really like but need a bigger bag now. I had my heart set on a SS 300AW but I have seen a Mini-Trekker which is almost half the price.

Pros for SS 300AW
1) Slighshot action works great - it is a really useful function for me

Cons for SS 300AW
1) The one shoulder harness might tend to put a strain on the back on long hikes

Pros for Mini-Trekker
1) 60% of the SS cost
2) Bigger and store more stuff - important for future expansion
3) Tripod holder
4) Plenty of room

Cons for Mini Trekker
1) No Slingshot action - need to remove backpack to take out camera


Anyone has experience on both these types ? Is it possible to use the Mini Trekker in such a way that I can take out the camera without taking the bag off my back ?

Any thoughts much appreciated.

[LeeSC]

Where are you shopping at when comparing price? There are 2 Lowepro authorized sellers on EBay that offer the slingshots at about a 25-30% discount and free shipping.

I have personally used Prodigital and Sellnsend on EBay and have been very pleased. SellnSend is currently selling the 300 for $87.99 + free shipping.
Here is the link: http://cgi.ebay.com/Lowepro-SLINGSHOT-300AW-Digital-Camera-Bag-Sling-Shot_W0QQitemZ300232369545QQihZ020QQcategoryZ50504 QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

[riyazi]

Thanks - that is cheap !! But I am in the UK :( and with shipping it doesnt work out to much

[LeeSC]

Thanks - that is cheap !! But I am in the UK :( and with shipping it doesnt work out to much

Sorry, I looked to try to see where you were located before posting but couldn't find any reference:(

Looking at your gear list, it seems we carry similar quantity and sized gear. I just upgraded from the 100 to 200 and found the 200 is a perfect fit. Any specific reason for going to a larger bag (like upcoming upgrades?).

[riyazi]

Location - thanks - just added that in - sorry about that

The 200 is a perfect fit for me at the moment actually - but I want to stuff my S3 IS as well for which I dont have much space. Also, I feel the Sigma 80-400 might be a bit of a strain on the 200 and i think a 300 might make it better (I maybe wrong).

I have few more stuff than on my sig stored - like another flash, diffuser, remote, etc which takes up a lot of space.

Now thinking that I should get one so that I can put in my laptop as well - looking at the fastpack 250 :)

[sparksdjs]

I have both the Mini Trekker AW and the SS 200 AW. The SS works great for around town if I keep the load reasonable. With my 40D, 17-85IS, 70-300IS, 10-22, and 50mm f/1.8 in it, it can be a real strain on my shoulder after a while. But camera access is really great (why I bought it) and I make a lot of use of it. The AW carries all of the above plus more and is far more comfortable with a heavier load. Each has its strengths and weaknesses and I'm glad I have both. I use the SS the majority of the time but as I said, the SS bags can get uncomfortable with much weight. If they had been available at the time, I probably would have gone for a Fastpack bag instead of the SS:

http://products.lowepro.com/catalog/Camera,14.htm

Dave

[riyazi]

Thanks Dave. Each has its own strengths and weaknesses which is what I am wrestling with at the moment. Seems like the Fastpack combines both so I might go for that.

I really like the SS because of the access and even though I have not used it for long periods of time, I really dont see the strain as a problem as most of the time I will have the camera plus a lens out in my hand / swung over my shoulder, so the weight of the bag will be much less.

[Lester Wareham]

I have SS 200AW which I really like but need a bigger bag now. I had my heart set on a SS 300AW but I have seen a Mini-Trekker which is almost half the price.

Pros for SS 300AW
1) Slighshot action works great - it is a really useful function for me

Cons for SS 300AW
1) The one shoulder harness might tend to put a strain on the back on long hikes
Pros for Mini-Trekker
1) 60% of the SS cost
2) Bigger and store more stuff - important for future expansion
3) Tripod holder
4) Plenty of room

Cons for Mini Trekker
1) No Slingshot action - need to remove backpack to take out camera


Anyone has experience on both these types ? Is it possible to use the Mini Trekker in such a way that I can take out the camera without taking the bag off my back ?

Any thoughts much appreciated.

I have both the slingshots.

The big difference with the SS 300 is the load belt, as long as you have your sholder strap and belt adjusted right most of the weight is taken on the belt and so stright on to your hips.

This completly eliminates the problem of a full load in a SS 200.

If the SS action is important to you because of speed, you want to keep an eye on your gear or you just can't put a backpack down because the ground is swampy them the 300 is for you. You can put plenty in it with no problems.

This might be of help http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photography/mybags.htm#300AW although I now store the lenses laying down in the bag with the dividers the other way round, this allows me to add the 17-40/f4L and stack of extension tubes now in main section to what else is listed allowin room for camo rain cover fingureless gloves TMA-A tripod ring added to top compartment.

Other loads not shown are:

a) nature, 24-105 and 17-40 swaped out and 300/4 IS added.
b) macro, 24-105, 17-40 and 10-22 swapped out (28/1.8 and 50/1.4 normally omited), add 300/4 IS, MP-E 65 and MT-24EX.

If going for a backpack I would suggest looking for models that open from the back for security and so you don't have to worry about transferring durt and damp to your clothing. Make sure it has a good load bearing belt to avoid back stress.

[riyazi]

Thanks for that Lester. That was very useful. Your side by side comparison was great. The mini trekker is totally out of my line up - its either going to be a SS 300AW or a Fastpack 250. I think I am leaning onto a 300AW but will need to rethink whether I need to carry a laptop around.

[I Like to Watch]

I currently have the Mini Trekker and stumbled across this thread while researching the Slingshot series.....so that should tell you something.

I want the Slingshot so I can leave the lens attached to the camera nd still have easy access. In particular, I want to have the 70-200mm f/2.8 mounted....so it looks like I'll need the Slingshot 300.

[Lester Wareham]

I currently have the Mini Trekker and stumbled across this thread while researching the Slingshot series.....so that should tell you something.

I want the Slingshot so I can leave the lens attached to the camera nd still have easy access. In particular, I want to have the 70-200mm f/2.8 mounted....so it looks like I'll need the Slingshot 300.

Yes I am fairly sure you can't get it into the 200 even sideways (I could,t get the similer sized 300/4 IS in), a 70-200/4 might squeeze in sideways. Shouldn't be a problem in the 300, in fact you can probably get it in with a 1.4X or 25mm tube attached.

The 300 is a much better bag for any amount of load because of the load belt.

[nutsnbolts]

Do yourself a favor, don't even consider the SS. Period.

[I Like to Watch]

Do yourself a favor, don't even consider the SS. Period.

Sorry mate, a pretty pointless response.....unless you can offer up some reasoning to validate your comment.

[nutsnbolts]

Sorry mate, a pretty pointless response.....unless you can offer up some reasoning to validate your comment.

I guess you have a point. I'm just tired repeating myself over and over regarding the slingshot. So I try to make it simple for people, look at something else versus the slingshot.

So here is my added comment.

1. Sling design is not worth it. The amount of gear you add to the 200/300 doesn't compensate or justify the weight that the sling will bear. Since the sling won't bear it, your shoulders will definitely feel it.

2. Pack lighter and you'll be fine... a common response from everyone. The sling was originally designed with the 100 in mind. The smallest version of the slingshots. Pack that to the brim, you will be fine. Lowepro then decided to release the 200. This allowed you to pack some more. WOW! More weight, more stuff, but still 1 sling. Shoulder starts to hurt but tolerable. Then they released the 300, more stuff, more weight, shoulder about to fall off, STILL one sling.

The point in all this is the following. The larger you go, the more stuff you can put in but more weight you will have to bear. Bearing the weight is fine, however, not on one sling. The fault here is by design. The 200/300 weight capacity (after some time) stresses the fabric and padding of the sling and at some point will begin to wear down (sooner than later). I won't even go into how much your shoulders and back will complain.

Optimally, if you were going to buy the 100 version, then ok...you can't over pack it. You won't meet the weight threshhold that the 200/300 where you can easily overpack it. You can of course buy those and pack less but what's the point in that.

The solution, Fast pack. That is if you are looking to entertain the idea of having the camera easily accessible like the slingshot does. This is Lowepro's way to fix it.

I love the feature of easily accessibility, but the slingshot is not the way to go...unless you are looking at the slingshot 100.

Take it from me, we do reviews of Lowepro and Thinktank products. I have all of their gear but I'm an exclusive ThinkTank user.

We test design, functionality and quality. I have domke, thinktank, lowepro and crumpler bags for personal use.

Post like this, if you had to decide between "X" over a slingshot, I make it simple for you, look at something else but not the slingshot. Or, if you are adamant on the features of fast access, fastpack it is then.

[Lester Wareham]

1. Sling design is not worth it. The amount of gear you add to the 200/300 doesn't compensate or justify the weight that the sling will bear. Since the sling won't bear it, your shoulders will definitely feel it.


As I have said before N&B old son, if you adjust the SS 300 correctly 90% of the weight is on the load belt just like it should be for a correctly adjusted backpack (to minimize the weight transferred on the spine) and you can carry plenty in it without strain.

.... this all assumes the user has enough waste line for the load belt to bear on. (not that I am suggesting you don't)

If the user is, lets say round, then they will just have to take the weight on the shoulders. Even with a two strap pack any significant load is likely to lead to back injury but a 2 strap will be better than a single.

The above does not apply to the SS100 or SS200 where the weight will all be on one shoulder, so those you do need to pack light.


The solution, Fast pack. That is if you are looking to entertain the idea of having the camera easily accessible like the slingshot does.


It looks like a good idea, not sure how secure it is in the access position, looks like it could slip of easily. No way you can grab the camera and start shooting with it in the slung position like you can with a SS.

Size wise the interior volume is 20% less for the FP350 compared to the SS300, not sure if some of that is wasted with the PC area.

No all weather cover, OK you can get around this by loosing more space but it is a lot less convenient.

Probably most problematical for me, there is no load bearing belt, just a light strap. This means all the weight going on two shoulders. For me this makes it a light load solution compared to the SS300, something I have already well addressed.

Simple truth is different people have different requirements and preferences, so although the FF may be better than the SS for you in particular this does just automatically translate to everyone.

[nutsnbolts]

As I have said before N&B old son, if you adjust the SS 300 correctly 90% of the weight is on the load belt just like it should be for a correctly adjusted backpack (to minimize the weight transferred on the spine) and you can carry plenty in it without strain.

.... this all assumes the user has enough waste line for the load belt to bear on. (not that I am suggesting you don't)

The problem with this statement is that you are one of the few to have this fit you. However, the majority have problems. No matter how much adjustments you make to the strap, unless you have the right body type can this be applicable. 8 out of 10, not.

As I have stated, this is by design. The concept was great in the beginning but once field tested, it comes back as a failure. As with anything there will be happy people and there will be disappointed people. With the slingshot case, it's a disappointment.

Of course, this can even go further with the size of the SS. 100 vs 200 vs 300. To blanket statement this, the safe route is the 100. Slightly larger body size, 200, and other than that, 300 is prone to overpacking which will lead to disappointment.

We look at what people usually want to pack and that is usually "alot". There are few who can carry very little. They want a one stop shop bag (which we all know is impossible) and in the end will shoot for a 200/300.

[Lester Wareham]

The problem with this statement is that you are one of the few to have this fit you. However, the majority have problems. No matter how much adjustments you make to the strap, unless you have the right body type can this be applicable. 8 out of 10, not.

As I have stated, this is by design. The concept was great in the beginning but once field tested, it comes back as a failure. As with anything there will be happy people and there will be disappointed people. With the slingshot case, it's a disappointment.

Of course, this can even go further with the size of the SS. 100 vs 200 vs 300. To blanket statement this, the safe route is the 100. Slightly larger body size, 200, and other than that, 300 is prone to overpacking which will lead to disappointment.

We look at what people usually want to pack and that is usually "alot". There are few who can carry very little. They want a one stop shop bag (which we all know is impossible) and in the end will shoot for a 200/300.

We would just have to agree to disagree I think.

The key is, for those who want to experiment, is fairly tight belt and slack strap. That way there is very little weight on the strap, the bag sits securely and the sling action is easier. The problems come when people adjust the sholder strap to take weight rather than just balance.

If the was a usable load belt on the FP I might consider it, but as it is I couldn't load it enough and carry it comfortably.

[nutsnbolts]

We would just have to agree to disagree I think.

The key is, for those who want to experiment, is fairly tight belt and slack strap. That way there is very little weight on the strap, the bag sits securely and the sling action is easier. The problems come when people adjust the sholder strap to take weight rather than just balance.

If the was a usable load belt on the FP I might consider it, but as it is I couldn't load it enough and carry it comfortably.

The good thing about the fast pack is that they limited the room that can be "stuffed" with equipment. Hence smaller than the slingshot versions. They made the laptop sit at the back to place it in the center of gravity. The non laptop versions, well, they took account smaller size, you can't overstuff it.

The lack of the waistbelt, on the other hand, the two shoulder straps would be sufficient. You can't overstuff these bags to a point that a waist belt is necessary. The waist belt on the slingshot WAS necessary (at least someone put into thinking that this can strain the shoulder) and that it was not enough support.

Nevertheless, a waist belt is always nice. Even if it is not necessary.

[I Like to Watch]

I guess you have a point. I'm just tired repeating myself over and over regarding the slingshot. So I try to make it simple for people, look at something else versus the slingshot.

So here is my added comment......



Thanks Nutsnbolts....that's a much more useful response.

I agree totally with the statement that the larger the bag, the more stuff you'll shove inside it, and therefore the larger the strain on the shoulder.

As noted, I currently have the Mini Trekker and I'm "accepting" that if I put the same kit in the Slingshot....then it won't be as comfortable. I'm looking for a bag that can fit the camera body with 70-200 f/2.8 mounted and has easy access without taking the bag off.

I've been looking at the SS200 but have since noted that it won't be big enough for the 70-200....so will probably go with the SS300 (but not fully loaded :D )

[dzine808]

i have a Mini Trekker AW and a Stealth 400 and i prefer the Stealth when I'm shooting.

[mikediamo]

I am currently on a US Navy public relations tour visiting 21 different countries. So trust me i do alot of sight seing. I will give you my input on the aw300 since im using it. Yesterday i hiked 17 miles through Split Croatia. In my bag was my 40d with grip the kit lens. 430ex flash 70-200mm f/4 l lens with hood attached chargers and about 12 aa batteries. By the end of the day i had zero back problems. Im also 34 yrs old 6'1 and 315 lbs. However my right shoulder was a little sore. I will admit the bag will make the back of your shirt wet from perspiartion. but my back was fine. I just wish you could adjust the sling for right or left shoulder use that is the only shortcoming of this bag in my opinion and maybe a water bottle holder mesh style on the side. Also an added note i didn't use the waist belt till close to the end of the day

[HyperYagami]

IIn my bag was my 40d with grip the kit lens. 430ex flash 70-200mm f/4 l lens with hood attached chargers and about 12 aa batteries.

correct me if i'm wrong, but that doesn't sound anything rear the full capacity of the 300...?

[mikediamo]

its not i did forget to list my nifty fifty and a few cables but yes there is plenty of room for more stuff

[HyperYagami]

its not i did forget to list my nifty fifty and a few cables but yes there is plenty of room for more stuff

that's exactly the thing...nutsnbolts's point was that if you fully loaded your 300 you'd probably get more serious shoulder pain, and with the gear that you loaded in a 300 (which even a 200 would do) you got a little shoulder pain already.

[nutsnbolts]

that's exactly the thing...nutsnbolts's point was that if you fully loaded your 300 you'd probably get more serious shoulder pain, and with the gear that you loaded in a 300 (which even a 200 would do) you got a little shoulder pain already.

This is usually what happens to "new" people who buys the bag. There is room so that means, they can bring more stuff. If you do go with the 300AW just make sure you don't overpack it or if you do, well, know that you shouldn't be taking it for a long period of time. Any bag is manageable....

[I Like to Watch]

Took both the SS200 & SS300 for a test drive yesterday. In the "normal" position, the Canon 400D with 70-300mm fits in the SS200, but definitely require the SS300 if mounting the 70-200 f/2.8 on the same body.

Because I already have the Mini-Trekker, I decided the SS300 would be doubling up. So I purchased the SS200 and when the 70-200 isn't needed, then the SS200 will come along for the journey :)

[Bob_A]

I have a 200 and can't stand it for most of the reasons N&B pointed out. On top of that, living in Alberta, I wear a parka for half the year, and over top of a parka I find it almost impossible to use the quick access ability of the bag.

I also dislike the default layout of the bag, but when I changed to the alternate layout I managed to scuff up the finish on my 70-200 f/4L with my camera body hotshoe because the padding isn't high enough.

[dlleno]

Hello everyone, first post; been reading for a long time here, esp. this thread. I have the slingshot 200 and find that it works great for me; airline travel, on-location shoots, etc. My problem is that the 200 is not big enough for me. I'm thinking of the 300 but (as expressed by others here) my concern is that the waist belt might not compensate for the additional weight that the 300 invites you to load up. Here's what I currently carry in the 200:

*40D wiith any of the below lenses attached
*17-55 f2.8
*100mm macro
*28-135
*580EX
* gary fong tupperware
* hoods for 17-55 and 28-135
* charger, batteries, filters, cables, etc.

I'm out to add a 10-22, 70-200 f2.8, hoods for the same, and 1.4x which the slingshot 300AW would accomodate. yes there are situtations where I need all of that equipment with me. I'd like to be able to carry the 40D with the 70-200 attached.

for those who recommend against the 300AW, what do you recommend instead? What I'm hearing is that with this much equipment in the same bag, one may have to give up the sling concept in favor of better weight distribution for shoulder and back. In case it matters I'm 6'4" 220 lbs.

[Lester Wareham]

Hello everyone, first post; been reading for a long time here, esp. this thread. I have the slingshot 200 and find that it works great for me; airline travel, on-location shoots, etc. My problem is that the 200 is not big enough for me. I'm thinking of the 300 but (as expressed by others here) my concern is that the waist belt might not compensate for the additional weight that the 300 invites you to load up.

My experience is it more than compensates, I can load more in the 300 than the 200 but have a lot less weight on the strap.

You do have to adjust it correctly for this, and it helps to have a waist. I lost a couple of stone since Easter and I now find the belt even more effective.