Think Tank Retrospective 10

Can I fit the following in this bag?

Cano EOS 1D Mark III with 24-70 attachedd
70-200 2.8
100 2.8L Macro

possibly a flash?

I can't tell you 100% yes, but I do own the Retrospective 30, which is the same exact dimensions as the 10, only 3 inches wider, the height & depth are the same. In my Retro 30 I fit 2 gripped bodies with lenses attached, and am able to fit another lens or flash in that main compartment too.

So in my guestimate If you want all that in the main compartment I would say probebly it would fit. if you were willing to put that flash or 100mm in one of those front pockets I would say 100% yes

You can fit that, but only barely, and not if you want to add a flash. I was trying to decide between the 10 and the 20 in store the other day and while I could fit my 1d4, 24-70, 70-200/2.8 and 580 in, it was really really tight and the extra depth of the 20 makes a huge difference.

70-200 2.8 will just fit, but it's a height issue. As Jack said, the 20 is TALLER which will help with that lens specifically. The 30 is WIDER but the same height as the 10, so that wouldn't help.

Thanks for the replies everyone. I might just go with the urban disguise 40 instead. Does anyone know about fit in that bag?

I have an Urban Disguise 40 and Retro 10. But I put N.... gear in it. I wish I had bought an UD 35--I would be able to put my iPad in it.
The iPad fits in the Retro 10 very well. Fits in my Maxpedition Colossus too.

2mnycars wrote in post #12877502
I have an Urban Disguise 40 and Retro 10. But I put N.... gear in it. I wish I had bought an UD 35--I would be able to put my iPad in it.
The iPad fits in the Retro 10 very well. Fits in my Maxpedition Colossus too.

What all can you fit in both? What is the size difference?

entrefoto wrote in post #12875243
Can I fit the following in this bag?

Cano EOS 1D Mark III with 24-70 attachedd
70-200 2.8
100 2.8L Macro

possibly a flash?

You can fit that in the bag. It will be tight, but it can fit.

entrefoto wrote in post #12877531
What all can you fit in both? What is the size difference?

I carry a gripped d300s, 18-200VR and 70-300VR lens in the bag. Sometimes an SB600 flash.

I like the UD40 bag's size. It's slightly smaller than the Retro10. I have a small car, and when I'm passenger the bag lies on the floor between my feet; there's not a lot of room. The UD40 is a little harder to shoot out of; I bought my grip after I bought the bag.

I'm actually disappointed that I selected the Retro10. It's quite big for what it does. I don't like the raincover on the Retro10 either. I didn't check that before I bought. Just my 2 cents worth YMMV> I have a LowePro Stealth Reporter bag, and to me it makes more sense. My Domke F3/X is a better shooter's bag.

In the past I would buy a bag with enough room to hold more gear, or larger gear. Lately I've been buying bags that are just the right size. Then I buy more gear....and need a new bag.

2mnycars wrote in post #12877915
I carry a gripped d300s, 18-200VR and 70-300VR lens in the bag. Sometimes an SB600 flash.

I like the UD40 bag's size. It's slightly smaller than the Retro10. I have a small car, and when I'm passenger the bag lies on the floor between my feet; there's not a lot of room. The UD40 is a little harder to shoot out of; I bought my grip after I bought the bag.

I'm actually disappointed that I selected the Retro10. It's quite big for what it does. I don't like the raincover on the Retro10 either. I didn't check that before I bought. Just my 2 cents worth YMMV> I have a LowePro Stealth Reporter bag, and to me it makes more sense. My Domke F3/X is a better shooter's bag.

In the past I would buy a bag with enough room to hold more gear, or larger gear. Lately I've been buying bags that are just the right size. Then I buy more gear....and need a new bag.

According to the think tank website the UD40 is .25" wider than the Retro 10 but not as deep but will still fit a pro size body if you unzip the extension for the main compartment. The pictures on the website show the Retro 10 fitting a 17-40 with hood, 24-105 with hood, and 70-200 with hood and it shows the UD40 with 100mm with hood, 17-40 with hood, and 70-200 with hood. I just want to make sure it will actually fit nicely because I ordered a 6MDH based on reviews I read on here and the stuff doesn't fit well at all inside that bag.

entrefoto wrote in post #12881165
According to the think tank website the UD40 is .25" wider than the Retro 10 but not as deep but will still fit a pro size body if you unzip the extension for the main compartment. The pictures on the website show the Retro 10 fitting a 17-40 with hood, 24-105 with hood, and 70-200 with hood and it shows the UD40 with 100mm with hood, 17-40 with hood, and 70-200 with hood. I just want to make sure it will actually fit nicely because I ordered a 6MDH based on reviews I read on here and the stuff doesn't fit well at all inside that bag.

The guy in this video uses the Retro 10 for a similar amount of gear. You might find this useful: http://www.youtube.com​/watch?v=ZVDOnx9aiqA

thenextguy wrote in post #12881187
The guy in this video uses the Retro 10 for a similar amount of gear. You might find this useful: http://www.youtube.com​/watch?v=ZVDOnx9aiqA

Yes, that is a good look st the bag but he doesn't have lens hoods on. I don't go anywhere without them.

entrefoto wrote in post #12881165
According to the think tank website the UD40 is .25" wider than the Retro 10 but not as deep but will still fit a pro size body if you unzip the extension for the main compartment. The pictures on the website show the Retro 10 fitting a 17-40 with hood, 24-105 with hood, and 70-200 with hood and it shows the UD40 with 100mm with hood, 17-40 with hood, and 70-200 with hood. I just want to make sure it will actually fit nicely because I ordered a 6MDH based on reviews I read on here and the stuff doesn't fit well at all inside that bag.

my bag is version 1 of the ud40. Mine doesn't have a zippered extension. afaik vendors here in Canada are still selling the first bag.

I have been diappointed with bags I have bought when I haven't taken all my gear to the store to try it out. For instance, I didn't like the strap on my ud40 with the bag loaded. Think Tank helped out. They replaced my strap and it is better.

This site is incredible and posters are so very helpful. The reviews I like are the ones written after a bag has been used a while.

2mnycars wrote in post #12881599
my bag is version 1 of the ud40. Mine doesn't have a zippered extension. afaik vendors here in Canada are still selling the first bag.

I have been diappointed with bags I have bought when I haven't taken all my gear to the store to try it out. For instance, I didn't like the strap on my ud40 with the bag loaded. Think Tank helped out. They replaced my strap and it is better.

This site is incredible and posters are so very helpful. The reviews I like are the ones written after a bag has been used a while.

Unfortunately I live to far from any god camera store that would actually carry good bags so I have to go off of what I read online and return it if it doesn't work out. I would actually prefer the ud 40 v2.0 if it will on fact fit everything I want comfortably.

Both are very good bags, I just tried a UD 40v2 and its very nice. The UD bags have firm dividers where the Retro bags are a bit more floppy but IMO a little better to shoot out of and a little more versatile. After about 6 months with the Retro 10 I still really love the bag.


I have since upgraded some of my gear but the extra depth ( which at first I did not really like ) can be very useful at times. I would suggest an external pouch as show so when I want to carry more I put my flash on the outside. ( sort of a poor mans retro 30 )