DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> General Discussion >> How much fits in a mini trecker... if your a fool
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 41, (reverse)
AuthorThread
09/15/2005 08:14:41 AM · #1
//www.mackstyle.net/minitrekker.mov

this guy has way to much money or they are not his cameras
09/15/2005 08:23:46 AM · #2
I'd like to kick his arse just for throwing all that expensive equipment around like that!
09/15/2005 08:54:39 AM · #3
That is amazing I have that bag and all I have in mine is a 20D,70-200mm, 50mm and a spare battery.

The term "more money then sense comes to mind".
09/15/2005 09:03:21 AM · #4
Originally posted by madison461:

I'd like to kick his arse just for throwing all that expensive equipment around like that!

yup.. You don't throw expensive stuff around like that..
09/15/2005 09:23:46 AM · #5
Yeah, I love how gentle he is with his stuff! Type of guy who sends stuff for repairs with a note: "Man, you sh*t is so fragile! It breaks just from handling it normally.

Christ, half of his stuff isn't even padded. I don't pack anything away unless it doesn't touch anything else, especially the lenses. Sometimes I'll stack lenses end to end in my Stealth Reporter 400 AW, but I usually place foam between lenses
09/15/2005 09:31:06 AM · #6
The satisfaction I take from his cavalier attitude to his disgustingly expensive bag of gear is that he's probably got a similar atitude to his photography...

...that is, it's crap!

A little analogy; I remember when I was a kid seeing awful guitarists trashing their equiptment at the end of a gig, since their talent was blatantly uninspiring. But you never see the likes of Hendrix trying to push a Fender through an amp stack, do you? It's all about respect.
09/15/2005 09:34:50 AM · #7
Originally posted by Caine:

The satisfaction I take from his cavalier attitude to his disgustingly expensive bag of gear is that he's probably got a similar atitude to his photography...

...that is, it's crap!

A little analogy; I remember when I was a kid seeing awful guitarists trashing their equiptment at the end of a gig, since their talent was blatantly uninspiring. But you never see the likes of Hendrix trying to push a Fender through an amp stack, do you? It's all about respect.

Bad analogy ...
//donmarko99.free.fr/Hendrix/HendrixFire.jpg
:D
09/15/2005 09:35:15 AM · #8
Originally posted by Caine:

The satisfaction I take from his cavalier attitude to his disgustingly expensive bag of gear is that he's probably got a similar atitude to his photography...

...that is, it's crap!

A little analogy; I remember when I was a kid seeing awful guitarists trashing their equiptment at the end of a gig, since their talent was blatantly uninspiring. But you never see the likes of Hendrix trying to push a Fender through an amp stack, do you? It's all about respect.


Actually, he did set one of his guitars on fire on stage during a set I saw on TV. But you're right, I can't see Clapton or the Edge smashing their instruments.

EDIT:
Dammit! Beat me to it!

Message edited by author 2005-09-15 09:35:56.
09/15/2005 09:35:42 AM · #9
Originally posted by Caine:

A little analogy; I remember when I was a kid seeing awful guitarists trashing their equiptment at the end of a gig, since their talent was blatantly uninspiring. But you never see the likes of Hendrix trying to push a Fender through an amp stack, do you? It's all about respect.


No, but he did burn it.
09/15/2005 09:49:26 AM · #10
Originally posted by Uusilehto:

yup.. You don't throw expensive stuff around like that..

I think you guys really need to throw around your equipment a bit more. :) Really. Canon makes some pretty damn rugged stuff. I've personally seen a 70-200 L-lens dropped from 3 feet onto concrete and it still worked great. Maybe their consumer gear isn't quite as ruggedized, but 1-series bodies and L lenses are definitely meant to take some abuse.

That really is how a lot of pros handle their equipment. They don't have time to be wrapping things in cute little compartmentalized padded cases. They need to be able to grab their gear and get the shot.

Here is a pic I took at a Tigers game. This was what one of the sports photographers covering the game was using for his telephoto shots:


Message edited by author 2005-09-15 09:50:47.
09/15/2005 09:55:12 AM · #11
Originally posted by EddyG:



ROFL! Man, he didn't even bother straightening out that big dent on the rim!
09/15/2005 11:32:09 AM · #12
Originally posted by EddyG:

Originally posted by Uusilehto:

yup.. You don't throw expensive stuff around like that..

I think you guys really need to throw around your equipment a bit more. :) Really. Canon makes some pretty damn rugged stuff. I've personally seen a 70-200 L-lens dropped from 3 feet onto concrete and it still worked great. Maybe their consumer gear isn't quite as ruggedized, but 1-series bodies and L lenses are definitely meant to take some abuse.

That really is how a lot of pros handle their equipment. They don't have time to be wrapping things in cute little compartmentalized padded cases. They need to be able to grab their gear and get the shot.

Here is a pic I took at a Tigers game. This was what one of the sports photographers covering the game was using for his telephoto shots:


The lens probably belongs to his paper/magazine anyway.
09/15/2005 11:35:21 AM · #13
Honestly, it doesn't look that bad. Of course, I'd like to see him switch lenses in a hurry.
09/15/2005 11:37:51 AM · #14
That's disgusting. Really is. I hate capitalizm.
09/15/2005 11:49:19 AM · #15
Originally posted by Ennil:

That's disgusting. Really is. I hate capitalizm.


Huh?

Right, because owning things makes you take care of them less...hmmm...
09/15/2005 11:59:39 AM · #16
Whereas communalism , the sort of thing where a press pool share a lens, is a much better idea. I had a guy who works for a local paper tell me he never uses lens caps because he might miss a shot, and kept two top of the line camera and lens setups in a slouch bag with no internal padding, so he could get at them faster. With the exception if fools like the fellow in the video, if you have to pay to maintain the cameras, you might make the effort to care for them a bit better.
09/15/2005 12:04:06 PM · #17
Capitalsm inforces the fact that owning more will make you better, free economic state just allows you to buy every useless thing you don't need while the person next to you who would like to create art as well starves to death.

But this is a photography site, let us not get into that. It will take too long.

I still haven't understood what the guy is meaning to show us, the capacity of a mini trecker or his equipment?
09/15/2005 12:12:22 PM · #18
Originally posted by Firsty:

//www.mackstyle.net/minitrekker.mov

this guy has way to much money or they are not his cameras


Hmpf. I have the MiniTrekker bag as well and obviously I am completely underutilizing it. Using this guy's technique, I'm sure I could have fit my 20D, 70-200, kit lens and 580ex into this much less costly Lowepro bag:

09/15/2005 12:33:26 PM · #19
Originally posted by BrennanOB:

Whereas communalism , the sort of thing where a press pool share a lens, is a much better idea. I had a guy who works for a local paper tell me he never uses lens caps because he might miss a shot, and kept two top of the line camera and lens setups in a slouch bag with no internal padding, so he could get at them faster. With the exception if fools like the fellow in the video, if you have to pay to maintain the cameras, you might make the effort to care for them a bit better.


Ummm maybe, but most of the pros I've worked with that own their cameras treat them simply as tools, they do not treat them with particular care, the way most would think. Especially if they do a lot of location work, cameras get shoved here, there and everywhere, dropped, bumped and treated in ways that would make the average DPC'er weep. Obviously, they don't intentionally abuse their equipment, but they don't exactly treat it with kid gloves either. Go to a camera store that sells used equipment, take a look at some of the used pro bodies, the ones that were really used by pros typically look terrible, dented, brassing and terminal covers missing.

Now, a pro body is much more rugged than a more amateur level camera. Before I got into digital, I was used to shooting with Nikon F3's. When I held the 10D for the first time, I was shocked at how flimsy it felt. Pro equipment is just designed to be handled more roughly. That's partially why a 1D is so much bigger and heavier than a 20D.

Message edited by author 2005-09-15 12:34:24.
09/15/2005 12:37:25 PM · #20
Well I thought he was funny.

I love how some people went from that video to "he must take crappy pictures." It's his stuff, let him do what he wants with it.

You know most of us, at least in the US, could afford a lot more stuff if we spent our money differently. Here's how:

Don't drink or smoke
Don't eat out more than once every other month.
Don't buy makeup (ladies....or guys if you're into that)
Buy your clothes at thrift stores or Wal Mart, etc.
Get rid of cable tv.
Get rid of your cell phone unless you need it for your work. Don't use it for personal calls and get a cheap plan.
Don't go to movies more than twice a year.
Walk, don't drive.
Live in house/apartment that's less than you can afford.
Have a roommate or two.
Don't take vacations.
Bundle up in the winter.
Avoid A/C in the summer as much as possible.
Go to the library not Barnes and Noble
No Starbucks
etc.

I lived from 1987-1999 on less than $5000 a year by living very simply. Now I don't recommend that, heh, but if photography is important enough to you, you can get the equipment you want (or any other hobby) by giving up the luxuries listed above.

I realize that some people are already doing much of that just to survive but I'd be surprised if it was the majority of people here.
09/15/2005 12:44:46 PM · #21
i wouldn't be surprised if all that gear crammed in that bag - just sat right there in the bag, on the desk.


09/15/2005 12:50:42 PM · #22
people who use gear every day for their jobs will treat it like that, if it breaks theyll get a new one...but pro gear is supposed to take some abuse....more power to that dude if i can fit all that in a small place.... I have a medium format, a d70, 3 lenses, 2 flashes, film, cords, slaves, chargers all in a micro trekker (smaller than that dudes) and it all works fine and everything is good.
09/15/2005 01:14:07 PM · #23
holy cow...
how do you move around with that much stuff in your bag?

and why not just get a bigger bag if you need to carry all that gear to a site...
cuz the trekker ain't the best bag for shooting quickly and repacking your gear...

-g-
09/15/2005 01:18:17 PM · #24
I know it's not digital but here is what my old Pentax K2 looks like:



And an old lens. It got bumped and all I had was masking tape to keep it together:



Yes, I threw 'am around and tossed them into my bag, my trunk, even the ground. Both work perfectly, but due to the abuse I gave them, I can't sell them.
09/15/2005 08:19:05 PM · #25
Originally posted by ttreit:



I lived from 1987-1999 on less than $5000 a year by living very simply. Now I don't recommend that, heh, but if photography is important enough to you, you can get the equipment you want (or any other hobby) by giving up the luxuries listed above.

I realize that some people are already doing much of that just to survive but I'd be surprised if it was the majority of people here.


I do most of that just to get by, and I make much more than $5000 a year. Of course, I have a single income family of 5 with two cars....

I'd love (or maybe hate) to be able to be that careless with my stuff. If he's a real pro though, he's probably got insurance on that stuff (?right?). But I guess it's like a painter with a $15 brush. Get a new one when it wears out.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 06:27:31 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 06:27:31 AM EDT.