Comparison?Review of Flipside 300 and 400

[BurBunny]

In the never-ending search for the perfect bag, especially when shooting with a long, heavy tele zoom, I investigated the Flipside 300 and the brand new Flipside 400. I was looking for an easy access/change bag which didn't necessitate me putting the bag down to do the lens changes, and it pretty much came down to these two bags and the Primus (which I also purchased, but which was just plain too large for my body, and didn't function as well with the rear access "table" since the zipper went all the way down the back).

This isn't a full review, with pics of all the features (slip lock attachment or tripod holders, for example), more just a comparison of the two for those going through the same questions I had.

The Flipside 300 was announced this last winter, and is quickly gaining popularity. It's a fairly streamlined bag which allows the user to take off the shoulder straps and "flip" around the bag on its waist belt to the front then open for access through the back of the bag. The bag almost acts like a table, supported by the waist belt and the bag itself, and allows for access to everything in the bag.

Here's the bag empty - the default configuration would allow for easy access to a mounted zoom, 2-3 lenses, and filters and accessories or flash: (forgive the quality of the pics taken with a P&S with onboard flash)

http://www.biddingfun.com/DDNPics/DSCF1056-Edit.jpg

Do note that the velcro doesn't extend all the way down the sides of the bag, only in strips where you see it, so it's not fully customizable. However, because of the smaller size, there aren't many other ways, other than taking out dividers, you'd probably reconfigure it (famous last words in this group, I know).

Since the main reason for me purchasing a new bag was to be able to have my Sigma 150-500 "Bigmos" monster mounted and easily accessible, here's the bag fully loaded:

http://www.biddingfun.com/DDNPics/DSCF1052-Edit.jpg

As you can see, pretty good configuration for an easy day's shooting with the Bigmos and a couple other lenses. Technically, I should be able to put three lenses in here, with a lens or flash in the space where I put my lens papers, but because the zipper doesn't go all the way to the bottom of the bag, to better ensure the bag stays at a 90 degree angle on your waist when in the open position, it's tough to get back to that last compartment. However, a smaller lens or flash could probably fit back there and be accessible when the large compartment isn't filled with the Bigmos.

In the accessories pocket at the top of the bag, I have 2 77mm filters in their cases, cleaning cloths, and two batteries in their boxes, along with one memory card. There's plenty of room to stuff more in, but I honestly ran out of things to put in here, which surprised me because of the small size of this bag. The compartment was a bit "squished" because of the Bigmos, but there's nice padding there for the body, so I felt comfortable with it in this configuration. Everything I eventually put in the 400, with the exception of the three "extra" lenses, fit into this much more streamlined bag.

In addition, there's a side-access compartment which can be accessed by removing the left shoulder strap and swinging the bag around, a la Slingshot or Fastpack:

http://www.biddingfun.com/DDNPics/DSCF1048-Edit.jpg

As you can see, this has pouches for 2 memory cards, lens pen, and other accessories. It is easy accessible without taking off the bag and pretty handy, though not very large.

The Flipside 400 is brand spanking new, being announced only about 10 days ago. Amazon got in two I think, one in each color, and since I was actively on the hunt for a bag, I jumped and ordered one of them. It's a larger, heaftier and a bit redesigned version of the Flipside 300, and definitely designed as a more heavy-duty and heavy-use bag.

As compared to the 300, the 400's ergonomics are a bit better. The shoulder straps seem a bit better fitting with more padding, the waist belt is now padded on the sides, making it sturdier on the body, and the back padding is split into two sections, which would allow a bit of air flow on the back. In addition, there's now a large accessories compartment on the front. While this isn't quite as convenient as the side-access compartment on the 300, it does have a LOT more space.

It's definitely a bit longer, but even on my 5' frame, didn't hit me on the back of the head or too low on the torso. It feels very secure on, and still a streamlined form for such a relatively large bag.

Here's the default configuration when you first get the bag:

http://www.biddingfun.com/DDNPics/DSCF1037-Edit.jpg

It's extremely adjustable, as there's velcro all along the sides of the bag. Gotta love that in a bag! Also note three very handy card pockets on this lid.

Here's the bag fully loaded. I actually loaded it up with everything I currently have, which in reality would probably never all come with me on the same trip. But I wanted to see what it could do and how it would feel with all it on:

http://www.biddingfun.com/DDNPics/DSCF1040-Edit-2.jpg

I felt like I still could have loaded it with more doing some "tetra" packing, but it truly wasn't needed here.

Here's the accessory pocket on the front:

http://www.biddingfun.com/DDNPics/DSCF1042-Edit.jpg

On the body, it was very well supported by the shoulder straps and waist belt. Fully loaded, it was very stable as well when it was flipped around and opened on my waist.

However, when I took out my "extra" lenses, leaving only the mounted Bigmos, 10-20 and 18-200 in the bag (with the lenses in their positions above as they don't fit easily farther down next to the Bigmos' hood), the bag was a bit tipsy when flipped around and opened - just a bit too much weight forward and nothing counter-balancing it back at the bottom. Nothing that cocking my knee up a little to support it wouldn't solve, and in reality the only time it would be like that would be at the beginning or end of the day when I'm taking out and putting in my camera (otherwise, at least the camera and one lens would be out), so it's not a deal killer. But it is something to note.

Also to note, sometimes, especially when not fully loaded, the bag is a bit difficult to zip back up from the fully open position. However, there's a nice handle at the top of the bag which, if you hold the bag by that with one hand, you can then use the other to zip the two zippers up. It's just a matter of physics and taking a bit of the pressure off the bag and zipper at the bottom.

At this point, I'm still debating what I'm going to do. For 90% of what I photograph topside (underwater is another matter and that kit has its own rollaboard), the 300 will be sufficient. However, there are a few times I'd like to bring at least one more lens, and of course since I'm a POTN member, my lens collection will of course grow over time. I've not found any larger bag I like better than the 400, so likely it will stay with me as well. A girl's gotta have choices, you know!

Hope this helps, and let me know if you have any questions!

[ben_r_]

EXCELLENT Comparison!!!! Good job! Dont forget to have this added to the Bags/Cases sticky!

[BurBunny]

EXCELLENT Comparison!!!! Good job! Dont forget to have this added to the Bags/Cases sticky!

Thanks, Ben! It's because of you that I knew this bag had been released. I appreciate your head's up and initial information :)

[BurBunny]

Thought I'd add side-by-side shots for those thinking about these bags and wanting to know the difference, especially since it will probably be awhile before the 400 filters into local stores:

http://www.biddingfun.com/DDNPics/DSCF1072.jpg

http://www.biddingfun.com/DDNPics/DSCF1075.jpg

[ben_r_]

Thanks, Ben! It's because of you that I knew this bag had been released. I appreciate your head's up and initial information :)
My pleasure.

Just as a side note, you may have inspired me to get my next bag in an actual color instead of the usual black that I always get. Your green and blue look very tempting. I have been thinking I need a little color in my life! ;)

[BurBunny]

I love the Arctic Blue of the 300 - I think it's a really pretty bag. The green of the 400 is even growing on me, as it looks good with the 300. It also doesn't scream "expensive photo gear" and looks more like a hiking bag.

[ben_r_]

I love the Arctic Blue of the 300 - I think it's a really pretty bag. The green of the 400 is even growing on me, as it looks good with the 300. It also doesn't scream "expensive photo gear" and looks more like a hiking bag.
Are you intending to keep both? Im kinda kicking around the idea myself since I got a really good deal on the 300...

[BurBunny]

Are you intending to keep both? Im kinda kicking around the idea myself since I got a really good deal on the 300...

I think so. While I think that most of the time, the 300 will be enough for my needs, for the times when I might want just a slightly larger bag, the 400 is perfect. The 400 is also just more comfy overall.

If I may be so crass as to ask, from where and for how much did you get the 300? I didn't find a particularly good deal on it (though compared to the 400, it was a steal). (Feel free to PM).

[mson]

Thanks for the comparison. I'm not a big fan of Lowepro bags but these flipside bags look very tempting... Does the 300 have a waist belt? Do they both have a chest strap?

[BurBunny]

Thanks for the comparison. I'm not a big fan of Lowepro bags but these flipside bags look very tempting... Does the 300 have a waist belt? Do they both have a chest strap?

Yes and yes. The Flipside design is dependant on you using a waist belt so you can support the bag in the "flipped" position in front of you. Both models have a chest strap.

However, only the 400 has the all-weather cover.

I do think the design of these bags is something you'll see other makers imitating and modifying for their own lines. It makes a LOT of sense for a variety of reasons - security, ease of access, comfort. The overall proliferation of easy-access bags (Fastpack, Rotation 360, various sling bags, etc.) shows this is a growing demand in the marketplace. I think Lowepro got it right with these bags.

[ben_r_]

I think so. While I think that most of the time, the 300 will be enough for my needs, for the times when I might want just a slightly larger bag, the 400 is perfect. The 400 is also just more comfy overall.

If I may be so crass as to ask, from where and for how much did you get the 300? I didn't find a particularly good deal on it (though compared to the 400, it was a steal). (Feel free to PM).
Sorry I should have specified. I realize now that sounded like I wasnt willing to share in the good savings. It was a "good deal" because it was a gift and I didnt have to pay for it! lol But being that the 400 AW was $155, I was thinking I could get about $60 - $65 back on my nearly brand new 300 and knock off a bit from the IMO slightly over priced 400 AW. Personally I think the 400 AW should be no more than a $129 bag.

[Modboyzz]

Great review! Thanks for sharing.

[LostInInaka]

great review...thanks so much for the pics! they have helped to make a difficult decision less so...

quick question for you though, would you say a smallish laptop, such as a 13" macbook, would fit in that front pocket? might be the one thing that sends me to the slingshot 350

[_aravena]

300 is definitely perfect. 400 is too much...

[BurBunny]

It might fit a small laptop. At the widest, the front pocket is approximately 10" (interior), though at the top it tapers a bit to 8". The depth is 13".

If you're thinking of a Slingshot 350, I'd recommend the Fastpack 250 or 350 instead. You still have the sling access just like the Slingshot, but the better weight distribution of a backpack. I'm not wild about its allocation of space between the "camera" compartment and the "general" upper pocket, but you can figure out if it would work for you.

[Sfordphoto]

thank you so much for your review! i was looking at the flipside 300 vs fastpack 350 for awhile...and i really wanted something with AW, since I have a nova 4AW from lowepro. i had NO clue about the flipside 400AW until i went to their site. this looks like the perfect bag for me, since i thought the 300 might be a little too small and also since it is AW.

this review was very helpful for my decision, i was really looking to see how much bigger the 400 was, and your pictures helped TONS.

[devil350]

Hi,

Thanks for that great review, now I know the name of my next backpack ;-)
I was just looking for one, for weeks, and this one seems to be designed for my needs/gear...

Ciao,
Laurent.

[Sfordphoto]

laurent, you going for the flipside 300 or 400AW? :D

[Methodical]

I purchased the 400 because of this review and it fits all of my gear. I am one of those person that can not leave anything at home because I don't know what I may run into. My motto is "better to have and not need than to need and not have". I easily fit all my gear listed in my sig in there plus my P&S camera and some lens hoods and covers on the opposide of my other lens. I plan to see if the Sigam 50-500mm will slide on one side of the bag.

Thanks for the review.

One thing to mention is the bag has a hidden mono/tripod pocket on the back of the bag. It works flawlessly to me.

[mep42]

Thanks for the great Review! Can you post more picks about that second pocket not the one the holds the camera gear. Maybe one straight down inside of it. Thanks again!

-Mark

[andrew748]

good job thanks

i'm seriously considering the 400 too

[S-Man]

I have the 400 and I kind of like it so far. What I DO NOT like about the flipside series, is that the bag gets real dirty, real fast. If you want to open it on the ground, you have to set it on it's back, the most visible part, and grind it into the dirt and dust and muck to get to your gear, which really kills resale value... That is unless you want to wrestle with it while its on you. Not only that, I have a hard time holding open the flap to access my gear. It wants to clam shut in a hurry.
I haven't had much time to use it, so we'll see how it turns out.
I plan on taking some pictures soon of my config and layout.

[quest31]

I have a some questions about the Flipside 400. My intended purpose is long day hikes while carrying a tripod, Canon 5D2, 70-200L F2.8, 24-105L, 2 other small lenses, 2 flashed, and hiking gear. I currently use a Lowpro Rover and am restricted in what I can carry. Usually no 70-200 lens, no tripod (monopod instead), one flash, etc.

a) The Flipside has a tripod holder that look quite small. Will it hold an Arca Swiss B1 ball head with quick release clamp? I have definite preference for carrying my tripod upside down.

b) My tripod is a Gitzo Series 3 carbon fiber (no center column). Anyone use this size tripod in a Flipside that cares to comment about how well it carries? I suspect that the combination will be quite top heavy and awkward while hiking.

c) What outside pockets does it have? From what I have been able to see it has two water bottle mesh pockets on the sides and the back pocket. Anything else?

d) How much can I stuff into the front (back?) pocket? Anything I need while hiking that can not fit in this pocket will likely end up in the main compartment. The Rover's top compartment plus the bungee cord for a jacket is about right.

e) Any slipLock attachments?

f) The only outside lash points I see are two across the top with short straps installed. Anything more? Can the two straps be replaced or removed?

g) Should I just get a Lowepro Photo Trekker AW II backpack instead? If I can comfortably carry all my gear in the Flipside I would greatly prefer it. Main reason is weight. Secondary is the back entry. I hate laying a pack down in the mud and then getting it all over me.

[mullhawk]

Do you think I could carry my XT with kit lens attached, S5is, and maybe another lens or even two in the 300?
I want a bag that I can carry this in, and be comfortable and have easy access to while wearing the bag, so I don't have to take the bag off, and set it down just to get a camera out.
By the pictures I am having a hard time understanding how this is done with these two bags, but am going to look into that a little more, if you think that will all fit. I have been looking at bags for days on the internet and it is just so hard to tell the actual sizes of these things from pictures...

[S-Man]

Stand by for pictures...

[S-Man]

I'll do My best to answer some of these. I can't completely answer all of them as I do not have the aforementioned tripod/gear. My bag is tight, and I mean tight carrying everything in my sig.

I don't know if I can arrange it differently/more efficiently so that I have more room, but here is what I carry in my 400 and how it's arranged:
http://slickpix.smugmug.com/photos/440216360_xFfJH-XXL.jpg
http://slickpix.smugmug.com/photos/440216255_FTgcQ-XXL.jpg

Here is the Tripod Pocket with my 50mm 1.8 inside it, fits just right, so it's about the diameter and depth of this lens:
http://slickpix.smugmug.com/photos/440216623_8gGcf-XXL.jpg

http://slickpix.smugmug.com/photos/440216333_S4ReH-XXL.jpg

The only Outside Pocket other than side pouches:
http://slickpix.smugmug.com/photos/440216588_D5vtj-L.jpg

Slip-Locks on both sides above water bottle pouches (Top straps cannot be removed or replaced. They can be extended a bit):
http://slickpix.smugmug.com/photos/440216302_s9mgj-XXL.jpg

Slip-Locks on straps:
http://slickpix.smugmug.com/photos/440216292_YAtde-XXL.jpg

Another view inside:
http://slickpix.smugmug.com/photos/440216277_ZT2WU-L.jpg

The back entry is great if you don't want to set the bag down. It swings around nicely but takes some getting used to.
The back padding is very comfortable, as are the straps, and with all the connector buckles, it stays nice and tight without sloshing around if you don't want it to move.

I plan on taking better pictures soon with umbrellas and all, but I snapped these just tonight after reading your questions.
Hope it helps.



I have a some questions about the Flipside 400. My intended purpose is long day hikes while carrying a tripod, Canon 5D2, 70-200L F2.8, 24-105L, 2 other small lenses, 2 flashed, and hiking gear. I currently use a Lowpro Rover and am restricted in what I can carry. Usually no 70-200 lens, no tripod (monopod instead), one flash, etc.

a) The Flipside has a tripod holder that look quite small. Will it hold an Arca Swiss B1 ball head with quick release clamp? I have definite preference for carrying my tripod upside down.

b) My tripod is a Gitzo Series 3 carbon fiber (no center column). Anyone use this size tripod in a Flipside that cares to comment about how well it carries? I suspect that the combination will be quite top heavy and awkward while hiking.

c) What outside pockets does it have? From what I have been able to see it has two water bottle mesh pockets on the sides and the back pocket. Anything else?

d) How much can I stuff into the front (back?) pocket? Anything I need while hiking that can not fit in this pocket will likely end up in the main compartment. The Rover's top compartment plus the bungee cord for a jacket is about right.

e) Any slipLock attachments?

f) The only outside lash points I see are two across the top with short straps installed. Anything more? Can the two straps be replaced or removed?

g) Should I just get a Lowepro Photo Trekker AW II backpack instead? If I can comfortably carry all my gear in the Flipside I would greatly prefer it. Main reason is weight. Secondary is the back entry. I hate laying a pack down in the mud and then getting it all over me.

[S-Man]

Do you think I could carry my XT with kit lens attached, S5is, and maybe another lens or even two in the 300?
I want a bag that I can carry this in, and be comfortable and have easy access to while wearing the bag, so I don't have to take the bag off, and set it down just to get a camera out.
By the pictures I am having a hard time understanding how this is done with these two bags, but am going to look into that a little more, if you think that will all fit. I have been looking at bags for days on the internet and it is just so hard to tell the actual sizes of these things from pictures...

The 300 seems to be much more sleek and close-fitting from what I've seen in pictures/reviews. I think you can carry what you stated in the 300. If I were you, I'd get the 400 just to be safe, as well as make room for any upgrades you do in the future. (You may say you don't plan on upgrading/buying more gear, but trust me, I said the same thing)
The back access takes some getting used to, and the belt strap works well to swing it around and access it. It's not as graceful as they make it look on the website video, but it can be done with practice. A table or even a tree makes for a good steadying brace for rummaging/switching gear. It will not act as a table without something under it. It will fall down to a 45 degree angle at least.

edit: Oh my, this was my 666th post. :confused:

[mep42]

Thanks for the pictures!

[quest31]

>> Here is the Tripod Pocket with my 50mm 1.8 inside it, fits just right, so it's about the diameter and depth of this lens:

Looks like it is too small to fit a tripod head with a quick release clamp on top. If I were to get this pack it looks like I would have to sew my own bag onto the flap to hold the ball head.

>> The only Outside Pocket other than side pouches:

Not much room for extras. The video shows them slipping a jacket into the pocket, but it must be a very thin windbreaker. Rhis may very well keep me from getting this pack.

>> Slip-Locks on both sides above water bottle pouches
>> Slip-Locks on straps:

The SlipLock loops are mentioned in the Lowepro description and the shoulder loops are shown on the video. It was not evident from anything else I have seen that the pack has the loops on the side of the pack. Thanks!

>> (Top straps cannot be removed or replaced. They can be extended a bit):

I am surprised that it is not removable.

All-in-all I think I better skip this bag and move on to my second choice, the Lowepro Photo Trekker. It has tons of room inside, some of which I can use for my hiking gear. The pack, with a large tripod attached, looks much better balanced. The harness looks much better for carrying around all day. BUT it weighs 5 pounds more! That almost as much as the 300 F/2.8L I plan on getting next year.

I have not seen any other camera backpacks that seem as good for what I want to do. The ones that have a separate compartment for carrying hiking gear are either too small or can't carry a large tripod. Any suggestions before I buy?

[S-Man]

The Photo Trekker looks like a nice pack indeed. But holy Moses! It's like 3-times as expensive as the Flipside!
It's probably better built and holds a lot more though. I wouldn't be spending $340 on a backpack however.

[mullhawk]

Thank you for all of the pictures and answers. It looks like either one of these packs would be perfect for me, I am going to go to the one camera shop here and see what they have just to check them out, then will probably order one up this week or next, I need to get my cameras out of my camcorder bag...

[Helena]

Do you think I could carry my XT with kit lens attached, S5is, and maybe another lens or even two in the 300?
I want a bag that I can carry this in, and be comfortable and have easy access to while wearing the bag, so I don't have to take the bag off, and set it down just to get a camera out.
By the pictures I am having a hard time understanding how this is done with these two bags, but am going to look into that a little more, if you think that will all fit. I have been looking at bags for days on the internet and it is just so hard to tell the actual sizes of these things from pictures...

I have the Flipside 300 and am pretty sure that you can fit your gear in it. This is my set-up:

http://www.graphicgarden.com/keep/POTN/flipside300a.jpg

There used to be a poach, but since I don't need it I have removed it and use that space for a sweater or something. The empty space is larger than it looks like in the photograph.

35L and 135L are mounted on the cameras.

In the pocket with the cell phone etc. I can also fit in tickets and passport when we're out traveling.

The outside side pocket on the left side of the image (not seen here) is too small and narrow to be very useful for me, unfortunately. I only keep a pen and some other really small items in there.

I'm very pleased with this bag. It looks neat and small even though it can fit quite a lot, and I love that it opens from the backside. It feels very safe when you're in a crowd. The "swinging around" thing doesn't really work for me yet, but maybe I need to practise. :)

[Methodical]

Do you think I could carry my XT with kit lens attached, S5is, and maybe another lens or even two in the 300?
I want a bag that I can carry this in, and be comfortable and have easy access to while wearing the bag, so I don't have to take the bag off, and set it down just to get a camera out.
By the pictures I am having a hard time understanding how this is done with these two bags, but am going to look into that a little more, if you think that will all fit. I have been looking at bags for days on the internet and it is just so hard to tell the actual sizes of these things from pictures...


Quest31 and Mullhawk here are some pics I took with my gear (see below in addition I carried the Sigma 50-500mm in the bag) in the Flipside 400. Go to the bottom of the thread.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=597303

[mullhawk]

thanks again
I went to a shop today, the only one in town, and all they had in the flipsides were the 200s, but I think the 300 woudl be perfect assuming it is a bit bigger, which it must be.
I also saw the lowepro elite aw, which seemed like a decent bag with just enough room for my two cameras, wit lens attached, and 3 more lenses.
Has anybody used the elite and flipside 300/400 that could compare the two size wise?
I can get the flipside 300 for 60 on ebay, or 75 at adorama, or the elite for 80 on ebay, can't find the elite at the photo sites anymore.
This has become the hardest decision I have ever had to make on buying a bag...

[Methodical]

thanks again
I went to a shop today, the only one in town, and all they had in the flipsides were the 200s, but I think the 300 woudl be perfect assuming it is a bit bigger, which it must be.
I also saw the lowepro elite aw, which seemed like a decent bag with just enough room for my two cameras, wit lens attached, and 3 more lenses.
Has anybody used the elite and flipside 300/400 that could compare the two size wise?
I can get the flipside 300 for 60 on ebay, or 75 at adorama, or the elite for 80 on ebay, can't find the elite at the photo sites anymore.
This has become the hardest decision I have ever had to make on buying a bag...

Here you go:http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=553559

[quest31]

I went ahead and got a Dakine Sequence <http://dakine.com/sport-packs/photo/sequence/>. It appears to have the camera room I want, tripod support, extra room for hiking gear, and weighs 3 pounds less than the Photo Trekker. Every report I have seen says its a great backpack for hiking. In a month or so I will report how I like it.

[S-Man]

Be sure to take plenty of well-lit photos!

[mullhawk]

Here you go:http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=553559

you linked me to this thread, I didn't see anything about the elite in here before, maybe I just missed it. I will go back and read through it again, but thanks.
Hopefully I can find some better camera stores this week while I am in Pittsburgh, then what I have here in town. So I can actually see the 300 and 400...

[Methodical]

you linked me to this thread, I didn't see anything about the elite in here before, maybe I just missed it. I will go back and read through it again, but thanks.
Hopefully I can find some better camera stores this week while I am in Pittsburgh, then what I have here in town. So I can actually see the 300 and 400...

Yeah it's just about the flipside 300/400. Do they have the elite in the sticky above. If so you can then do some comparison of the 3.

[mullhawk]

I hoped more that somebody had used them both and could compare. Thats all...

[Methodical]

300 is definitely perfect. 400 is too much...

Just think of the 400 bag as futurizing

[bwilking]

How DEEP are is the bag?


Specifically, could I put a 17-40 L in one of those pouches? Or would it be too tall?


thanks!

[Methodical]

How DEEP are is the bag?


Specifically, could I put a 17-40 L in one of those pouches? Or would it be too tall?


thanks!

My 24-105 fits in the pouch sitting up if that helps.

[TsPoet]

Got the Flipside 300. Great bag. With my 100-400 L, I needed to remove the small side divider, though, so my flipside has 2 vertical groups instead of the 3 everyone else are posting pictures of. This lens must be much wider than the 70-200 L.
very very nice compact bag.

[javylsu]

Got the Flipside 300. Great bag. With my 100-400 L, I needed to remove the small side divider, though, so my flipside has 2 vertical groups instead of the 3 everyone else are posting pictures of. This lens must be much wider than the 70-200 L.
very very nice compact bag.+1. I have the 300 and mine is using the exact configuration as TsPoet. Overall I really like the bag - it's the perfect compromise of size and portability. One small niggle I have though is that the zipper catches a lot at the 10 o'clock position when zipping or unzipping. Not sure if it's just my bag or a common problem.

Javier

[livefats]

I know this is an old thread, but I thought my experiences of the Flipside 400AW this summer might add something. I bought it on the strength of this thread, so thank you, OP!

I spent the summer (well, four weeks!) day-walking in the French Alps from a base at about 1000 metres, each day walking up to 20 miles and gaining up to 2000 metres of ascent. I used the Flipside as my daypack, carrying (always) Canon 60D with 17-55 EF-S fitted, and Canon 10-22 EF-S and a pair of Canon IS bins, and (often) Canon 400L 5.6 and monopod.

The Flipside was a very comfortable carry: I used the spare space (there was often a lot!) for waterproof, jumper and food, with a couple of waterbottles in the side pockets (even at 2000 metres we hit 30 degrees C at times.) When it rained (three major downpours, and a couple of light showers) the AW cover proved its worth (although I had to be inventive with the monopod!)

So, in short, I'm very pleased with the Flipside. What I was carrying gear-wise would have fitted into my normal rucksack, but without the security of the padding - or into the 300 AW, but no room for the extra stuff. And the wide shoulder straps and padded waist belt are brilliant, and meant that I didn't feel I was compromising too much on anything.

According to other threads, it also fits cabin luggage regs, so I hope to take it with me to next year's Alaskan adventure!

[livefats]

Sorry - I should have made a link to some of the photos I took when carrying the Flipside here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/chrishawkes/sets/72157627304152979/

I know the bag cannot be held responsible for my deficiencies, BTW!