Tenba Small Messenger bag review

When you say the "depth" of the bag, do you mean the up/down dimension of the bag or the amount away from the body it protrudes?

If you mean the vertical dimension of the bag, the flap will accommodate some amount of bulge. For instance, even though the 70-200 mounted would be "above" the lip of the bag itself, the flap will bulge out to allow that pairing to be possible. If, however, you mean the thickness of the bag, the bottom of the bag is a rubbery material that doesn't scrunch down. Nevertheless, although the rubber bottom is of fixed dimensions (unlike, say, a bag with a cloth bottom), the bag itself does fold a bit when carrying few items -- if you're carrying just a laptop, for instance, the bag does seem thinner. Because the sides of the bag are still cloth, they allow the bag to take on different dimensions even though the bottom piece itself isn't compliant.

Does that help / make sense?

I'm feeling silly because I have their large messenger bag and don't know how to answer!
I carry it every day; my most frequent every-day-carry camera was my G11. That body is about the size of the smallest dslrs. It slips in vertically in my bag. It's fully protected that way. Think of sliding a g11 into the bag vertically, back pointed towards the rear of the bag, in other words behind me. lens pointed forward. Bag along my side, with the strap over my shoulder.
I haven't thought of carrying my dslr in the bag. My longest lens is a N 70-300VR. I would slide the camera in with the lens extended horizontally, not vertically. In other words, I would be looking at the end of the camera, not the camera back. I have a d300s with grip; haven't considered carrying the dslr in the tenba, though others would.


edit: I must have an early version of the bag. On the outside there are subtle changes. There's a row of "pen" slots on the bottom, front. I don't have that. There may be other differences too. The major difference? My insert is completely different and the reason I don't use the bag as a camera bag. Mine is lower--there is insufficient support for my dslr with or without the grip. The "new?" insert looks much better. Perhaps 1-1/2 inches higher? Sturdier too. I should look at the large version of this bag again.

This is a bag with capacity that is shared between components. Loading it up with laptop and camera gear can make it difficult to access one or the other given an overstuffed condition. Thus, it can get roly poly when set on the ground. I tend to use it for one or the other as needs dictate. If carrying both type of gear in considerable mass, then I consider it a transport bag, not a shooting bag.

tigerotor77w wrote in post #12151478
When you say the "depth" of the bag ... you mean the thickness of the bag, the bottom of the bag is a rubbery material that doesn't scrunch down. Nevertheless, although the rubber bottom is of fixed dimensions (unlike, say, a bag with a cloth bottom), the bag itself does fold a bit when carrying few items -- if you're carrying just a laptop, for instance, the bag does seem thinner. Because the sides of the bag are still cloth, they allow the bag to take on different dimensions even though the bottom piece itself isn't compliant.

Thx, that's exactly what I wanted to know

So it is unfair of me to compare my Kata 3n1-33 to the Tenba Messengers because the 3n1 is 22cm (8.6") throughout the entire height of the bag, be it completely empty or full (the entire thing is a rigid rectangle). When I wear it in close quarters I have to think twice before swinging around... But if the Tenba is thinner at the top of the bag, it at least won't hit anyone in the face like my Kata might

Height-wise, I'm convinced the small Messenger will hold my 50D+70-200 (hood reversed) so I don't see what the large Messenger brings to the table, other than a a couple more cm height / width-wise. They are both the same thickness (depth) of 14~22cm...


P.s. Although it's not always the case, most manufacturers list their bag sizes as WxHxD...which is why I used the term "depth".


***EDIT***
I ordered one (small, burnt orange) over the Domke F-804 mainly due to price* and a few of the added features of the Tenba. If for any reason the Tenba doesn't work out, I can use the insert in my regular Messenger, a very nice leather Strellson (40x30x13cm / 16x12x5"). The insert might end up being too thick in which case, I'll try the Domke FA-230 insert. If all else fails, I'll resort to the F-804...

Savas K wrote in post #12153545
If carrying both type of gear in considerable mass, then I consider it a transport bag, not a shooting bag.

There may be alternatives to the Tenba as a travel bag, but I find that it's small size allows it to fit perfectly under most airplane seats. Of course, opinions vary.

Travelller wrote in post #12153639
So it is unfair of me to compare my Kata 3n1-33 to the Tenba Messengers....

Height-wise, I'm convinced the small Messenger will hold my 50D+70-200 (hood reversed) so I don't see what the large Messenger brings to the table, other than a a couple more cm height / width-wise. They are both the same thickness (depth) of 14~22cm...


P.s. Although it's not always the case, most manufacturers list their bag sizes as WxHxD...which is why I used the term "depth".


***EDIT***
I ordered one (small, burnt orange) over the Domke F-804 mainly due to price* and a few of the added features of the Tenba. If for any reason the Tenba doesn't work out, I can use the insert in my regular Messenger, a very nice leather Strellson (40x30x13cm / 16x12x5"). The insert might end up being too thick in which case, I'll try the Domke FA-230 insert. If all else fails, I'll resort to the F-804...

I have a 3N1-20, and you're right in saying that the two don't really share dimensions when empty. The bottom is still somewhat rigid on the Tenba and as a result won't follow your hip (it isn't a satchel), but when empty it doesn't seem quite as large. At least to me. If I led you astray, please post back here so others can have a sense of what we're on about.

Domkes are a little softer (especially with age), but they'll also bulge a *lot* more when full. This one holds its shape a little more but doesn't bulge -- percentage-wise -- as much.

The bag will hold a 50D + 70-200 if the lens is parallel to the floor. If it's vertical (parallel to you body), that might make for some issues...

The WxHxD nomenclature usually makes sense for me. Sometimes I confuse myself, so I just wanted to make sure we were both talking about the same dimension.

tigerotor77w wrote in post #12159184
The bag will hold a 50D + 70-200 if the lens is parallel to the floor. If it's vertical (parallel to you body), that might make for some issues...

I certainly hope not! I need it to fit "vertically" (parallel to my body)! I measured the setup and it is 25.5cm long. This bag's interior dimensions are documented at 28cm (interior). Even if that doesn't include the thickness of the insert, it should still fit!

This is VIP for me - otherwise I would have taken the large Messenger...

tigerotor77w wrote in post #7310393
Actually... I think it would hold the 5D and 100-400 mounted, but with a few caveats.
1) The body will stick up above the insert. With my 70-200 f4 IS mounted to the XSi, the rear panel is almost exactly flush with the top of the insert. There about another half inch before I clear the bag itself, before putting down the top flap, but you'd have to be willing to expose the 5D above the insert.
2) The divider next to the 5D would only be 6.5" high. I can't take a picture right now, but basically, there's four dividers in the insert. Two are just 6.5"x4.5" (I just remeasured to be sure) pads; there's also two 6.5"x4.5" pads with little flaps on top. When this flaps are straightened, the divider is the full height of the photo insert. However, if you put something on them, since they are flaps, they will bend.

tigerotor77w wrote in post #12159184
The bag will hold a 50D + 70-200 if the lens is parallel to the floor. If it's vertical (parallel to you body), that might make for some issues...

If those issues you are talking about is the limited height of the insert, I can live with that. What I hate is when the camera is higher than the lip of the bag, causing a buldge in the flap. As long as the insert is as long as the 70-200, I'm good with that

***EDIT***
Well, it's not going to be perfect (it never is, is it). The 70-200 f/4 or f/2.8 are both 21cm (8") tall so a 6.5" insert is doing to be a bit on the short side, agreed... But... if the removable inserts are adjustable vertically, then I will lift the insert up a couple of inches. The lens hoods, which will all be at the bottom can touch without any serious consequences.

I have a Think Tank UD35 and it is organized (vertically):

-- Left side -- middle -- Right side
-- 17-55mm/rev. hood "above" EF-S 60mm -- 50D+70-200 f/4 / rev. hood -- 580EX Flash

I would like to set up the Tenba in the same way...

I just took my insert out (Tenba Messenger Large) and it's 195 mm high. I'm mathematically challenged this morning. 25.4 mm to the inch. 7 5/8 inches high. The dividers are lower; mine are 110 mm high; approximately 4 inches.
I've had my bag for 1-1/2 years. They could have changed.
As a Domke owner too, I wouldn't hesitate to carry your lens in it, but not mounted on a camera body. (Domke F3x has no padding, except in the bottom.)
edit: I see differences between my bag and the ones shown here. Mine could be an early version? My insert cannot carry my dslr effectively. It looks to be 1-1/2 inch lower than the inserts shown here. There are other differences in the bag body. I should look at this bag again.
Best,

2mnycars wrote in post #12161403
I just took my insert out (Tenba Messenger Large) and it's 195 mm ... (7 5/8 inches) high. The dividers are lower; mine are 110 mm (4") high. I've had my bag for 1-1/2 years. They could have changed.

4" high...? Wow, that's one small divider... Assuming the walls of the insert are felt, then you can place that divder as low or as high as you like. If the insert however uses male/female paired Velcro and the strips are short (or too high or too low vertically), then there might be a problem...

The insert "body" construction is the most important; Just like the rest of you, I have dividers galore at home, all of them with their own male Velcro strips, so the dividers alone can't be show-stoppers.

Insert-wise, I came across some info here:
https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?p=4863374
and the "official2 repecement insert here:
http://www.bhphotovide​o.com …ro_Digital_2_0_​Photo.html
"Dimensions are 13 x 8.0 x 5.0-8.0" (33 x 20 x 13-20cm) (WxHxD)"

I'm assuming that the replacement insert has the same measurements as the original (or the newest version of the Messenger...) *and* that there is only one size insert for both the small and large Tenbas.

Finally, the "current" specs directly form Tenba's site (for the small Messenger):
Outside Dimensions:
16.5W x 11.5H x 5.5-8.5 in.
42W x 29H x 14-22D cm
Inside Dimensions:
16W x 11H x 5-8 in.
41W x 28H x 13-20D cm
Laptop Compartment:
15.5W x 10.5H x 1.5-2 in.
39W x 27H x 4-5D cm
Fits most laptops up to 15-inches
Weight:
2 lb.
0.9 kg
Includes:
638-251 Messenger Removable Photo Insert

*** EDIT ***
And here's the official Insert specs:
Catalog #:
638-251 Gray
Inside Dimensions:
13W x 8H x 5-8 in.
33W x 20H x 13-20D cm
Weight:
1 lb.
0.2 kg

edit: my bag could be an early verson of the Tenba Messenger. Looking at photos here, there are differences. My insert is smaller (not as high) So take my comments with a grain of salt and check the bag out. Good luck!I used to own an N 80-200/2.8. I would hesitate to carry it in this bag. Others might choose to carry heavier/pro gear. My dslr is a N d300s. I would happily carry the camera, without the grip, and with the 18-200VR I use as a go everywhere lens. I've never considered carrying the body, with grip and lens mounted. But that's just me.


Hope this helps

edit: When I looked at the small and large messenger bags on the rack, there was so little difference in size; I bought the large. Figured the extra space would keep me happier longer. I've regularly carried my G11 as my every-day-carry camera in this bag. Simply have never had the need to carry my dslr.

I now use a Pany LX5 as an every-day-carry camera. It fits (barely) in my scottevest pocket. One of them anyway. When I had issues with my first G11 (they took a while to resolve), I bought my first Pany out of spite. It's a ZS3. 25-300 lens. It's a delight! It's so small it fits in a shirt pocket. Barely.

I'm actually using my Messenger bag as a briefcase. no camera inside now. It makes a great briefcase! I have an android slablet, but don't carry that either. So no laptop within for me...
Best,

Well guys, I got mine today (small) and now things are a bit clearer:

• Bag size is exactly what I was looking for
  
• Bag is more flexible than I expected
  
• Bag looks much "leaner" than I expected
  
• Shoulder strap is comfortable (even more so than my TT UD35's)
  
• Insert size is perfect
  
• Insert padding is too thin (50% of std) for comfort
  
• Insert velcro concept is silly
  
• Dividers are all but uselsess
  
• Yes, the 50D + 70-200 sticks way out of the insert... :-/
  
• ...But fits perfectly in the bag
  
• "Burnt Orange" s/b labeled "Terracotta" or even "Rust"...

IMAGE LINK: http://farm6.static.fl​ickr.com …99245928_c2b35d​9e3f_o.jpg

IMAGE LINK: http://farm6.static.fl​ickr.com …99246252_5d0dee​e9f7_o.jpg

IMAGE LINK: http://farm6.static.fl​ickr.com …98666287_bcce06​0b9f_o.jpg

IMAGE LINK: http://farm6.static.fl​ickr.com …99246366_a81f29​5a38_o.jpg

IMAGE LINK: http://farm6.static.fl​ickr.com …98665811_022929​c91c_o.jpg

IMAGE LINK: http://farm6.static.fl​ickr.com …98665899_a42ef8​146a_o.jpg

IMAGE LINK: http://farm6.static.fl​ickr.com …99246946_24860d​1e7b_o.jpg

IMAGE LINK: http://farm6.static.fl​ickr.com …98665987_c020a5​2c34_o.jpg

edit: Mine must be an early bag. The bag shell has changed/evolved. The new insert appears better/deeper and more capable of supporting a dslr. Take a look! May work better for you than mine does for me.Hope it works for you. As I said above, mine makes a great briefcase.
I do carry a P&S within it, and the dividers are great for that. Others on another forum I post at use theirs for dslr storage, and review it highly. YMMV.

edit: Thanks Vistek! they had the insert in stock. I bought one. It transforms the bag. It does a better job of storing photo gear; the bag is more bulky with it in place. Frankly it's not as good a briefcase. The insert was inexpensive. $24.
So if you have an early bag and wonder what all the talk is about, it's the insert! The new one makes this an acceptable photo bag for me.


Best,
DaveL

traveller -- glad it turned out well for you! I was worried for a second that I had led you astray.

I also apologize for the lapse in responding... I realize now that I had contradicted myself in a few of my posts. Hopefully with your post #41 above, this solidifies the issue for anyone looking at this bag in the future. I'm about to edit a link to your post in my original post. It's about time someone posted bag thicknesses with various stuff in it, and I'm thrilled your pictures are so much less haphazard than mine are!

The dividers do look different from mine.

tigerotor77w wrote in post #12186884
..glad it turned out well for you ... time someone posted bag thicknesses with various stuff in it...

The dividers do look different from mine.

Thx, I'm glad too I also wanted to add a few additional details to supplimant your excellent review, glad you also think it's of use to the community!

I'm really happy with the bag, just hoping to improve the insert option somewhat. I posted my concerns in this thread and someone already suggested this interesting alternative, bbp's DRSL Camera Paddy I did the math and it should fit, so I'm giving it some thought...

At 33x23x11cm (13x9x4.5") it's the same length as the Tenba insert, a bit higher (a good thing) but still (I *think*) not too high and just a tad thinner (11 vs. 13cm). Consdering the Domke's insert is ultra-thin and some (like our dear Jon) still manage to use it with 70-200 f/8s w/hoods, etc. this should not be a show stopper

Bringing this thread back to life. Saw this bag today. Loved it. The strap concerns me though. For EDC I tend to sling bags across my back and this padded non-movable strap seemed uncomfortable when I did this in the store. Thoughts from real world users would be great! Seems comfy at my side but in busy areas across the back so give the most hand/arm movement is ideal.

Thanks

Jordan