Lowepro Stealth Reporter D200AW - Difficult to fit 70-200 2.8IS hood reversed

[Headshotzx]

Hi guys, just a quick question.

I own a lowepro stealth reporter d200aw which has served me quite well. However, since I've gotten the 70-200 2.8IS, I've had difficulties storing it with a hood inside the D200AW bag on the inner-side of the bag. It's just too fat to put the lens face-down, and if I were to put the lens face up, the hood gets in the way of me taking out my flash. My 70-200 2.8IS does not have a filter on it, not since new year's day this year. I'm going to buy one soon, though.

Here's my question. Should I sell the D200AW and get something bigger to accommodate the 70-200 with hood reversed (if I want to just bring the 70-200 mounted onto a camera hood reversed, I have a toploader 75AW), or should I just not use a hood? The thing I know is that hoods only inconvenience me with bulk, but might save the lens some day.

If I were to get a slightly bigger bag, would the D300AW do? Just 5cm increase in space at the sides. The reason why I'm actually keeping the D200aw is because I found a medium sized shoulder bag like it is a good size for me to carry around during events when I shoot with only one camera (I often shoot with two cameras, with a lens pouch on the belt). Anything way bigger than that like the D400AW would be slightly too large imo.

I'm not going to consider think-tank this time because I don't like their shoulder bags that don't allow gripped cameras to be stored lens down..

Cheers,
Zexun

[tvphotog]

My Stealth Reporter 300AW allows me to store a 100-400L with hood reversed in one of the corners with ease; it's larger I think than your 70-200 if I'm not mistaken. The adjacent corner on the same side is a little cramped, but good for a 580 EX completely upright. In the center I have an ungripped 5D2 with a 24-105L with hood reversed. There's still room left for another lens or two.

I looked at the 200AW and for me it was too small. The 400 was too big,Very boxey.

[Headshotzx]

Good to hear. Can some others confirm this? If it is true, I will sell the bag to a potential buyer in a week or two and head off to purchase the D300aw.

[SpiltPickle]

The 70-200 is longer than the 100-400. The 100-400 is wider.
The lowepro site says that the height of the interior is 7.7", so it may be a bit tight.

100-400: 3.6" x 7.4"
70-200: 3.4" x 7.8"

[eelnoraa]

I have Stealth reporter 300AW, NOT the newer D300AW. I can fit 70-200F2.8IS in facing down. The lens is still a little taller than the bag, but since the bag has soft cover, it is still quite a comfortable fit in terms of heights. I know 100-400 is shorter than 70-200F2.8IS, so it should fit OK. Though with hood reversed attached, it will probably take up the whole side left little room for anything else.

[tvphotog]

The 70-200 is longer than the 100-400. The 100-400 is wider.
The lowepro site says that the height of the interior is 7.7", so it may be a bit tight.

100-400: 3.6" x 7.4"
70-200: 3.4" x 7.8"

Yes, the 300 is the perfect height for the 100-400. The rear lens dust cover already sticks up above the level of the lower back egde by a few mm, but not by much, and when closed, the bag is fine.

If you don't have a UV filter on the 77mm end of the lens and use a standard Canon lens cover, the 70-200 will fit. If you use a UV filter and have an aftermarket thicker lens cover on it as I do, the lens may be just a little high.