Lowepro Nature Trekker and 300mm 2.8

Anyone tell me if the Lowepro Nature Trekker ll will take the Canon 300mm f2.8, with hood on.

The hood needs to be reversed to fit in this case. I don't think there's any backpack that can take the 300 with hood in shooting position.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Thank's for that.

Is that the 'Nature Trekker' backpack you have there?

I already have the 'Mini Trekker' and it fits with hood reversed but it's tight.

It will go in the 'Photo Trekker' I think, but that bag is a bit too heavy.

4x4rock wrote in post #6020025
The hood needs to be reversed to fit in this case. I don't think there's any backpack that can take the 300 with hood in shooting position.

Not entirely true. Specialty "long lens cases" with backpack harnesses exist, like those from Kinesis (see the L321 and L511) that can fit the lens, mounted, with hood ready to rock. The Glass Taxi from Think Tank Photo is an awesome bag, but too small to leave the hood extended unfortunately, or I'd have gone for that for sure... So I ended up picking up a Kinesis L321 as the smallest option possible to carry the entire rig ready to go. I think you can use a regular L311 as well if you don't need the extra protection of their "PolyCore" line (basically adds a sheet of semi-rigid plastic between the padding).

Of the manufacturers that make these bags, they include Think Tank Photo, LowePro, Kinesis, Lightware and Tenba.

Mick, yes that's the Nature Trekker.

Double Negative wrote in post #6020892
Of the manufacturers that make these bags, they include Think Tank Photo, LowePro, Kinesis, Lightware and Tenba.

You're right, all the long lens cases will fit but it's made for a specific lens, but I meant as a regular backpack, I don't think there's one that can fit a 300 with hood on shooting position while be able to take in more lenses, accessories, and such.

4x4rock wrote in post #6020933
You're right, all the long lens cases will fit but it's made for a specific lens, but I meant as a regular backpack, I don't think there's one that can fit a 300 with hood on shooting position while be able to take in more lenses, accessories, and such.

The LowePro "Pro" and "Super" Trekker bags probably can, but I didn't double-check the numbers. But you're right; your typical backpack can't do it. The aforementioned Trekkers also have the downside that they're HUGE. Were you to fill them to capacity they'd weigh a metric ass-load.

Thank's for the info.

I also have a 'LensTrekker 600' which will take the lens with hood and body but you can't get another lens in the bag if needed. I suppose I could get one of those lens cases to stick on the side.

mick johnson wrote in post #6021137
Thank's for the info.

I also have a 'LensTrekker 600' which will take the lens with hood and body but you can't get another lens in the bag if needed. I suppose I could get one of those lens cases to stick on the side.

I have the Trekker 600 too. I have a LC 4 attached on the side for the 70-200 or the 24-70. I may get another LC4 is I end up keeping the Trekker 600 as it's a bit too big. I like the look of the Kinesis L311.

4x4rock wrote in post #6020918
Mick, yes that's the Nature Trekker.

Looking at your bag I have to ask, if you take out the other lenses would the 300mm go in on it's own, with hood in shooting position of course?

I ask because it looks rounded with all those lenses on both sides and my 'Mini Trekker' does the same thing.

It will fit but not with the camera mounted. I can also fit a 70-200 f2.8 and a couple of smaller lenses, 50 1.4, 85 1.8, etc...

Pic, the 70-200 hood is on the left in the same slot as the 85 f1.8

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Thank's for going to the trouble of taking another pic of your bag, I really do appreciate it.

I think I am trying to talk myself into making it fit.

I've seen somewhere where one guy says he has the 500f4 with hood reversed + body attached in this bag....I think he must have another bag.

I'm going to have a look at the 'Lowepro Vertex' which seems the next size up and still a fairly light bag.

Thank's again...........

Wow, in the back of my mind I thought the Nature Trekker was a bigger bag - or maybe that the 300mm was smaller...

Double Negative wrote in post #6028213
Wow, in the back of my mind I thought the Nature Trekker was a bigger bag - or maybe that the 300mm was smaller...

It's not that big and I was surprise when I got it. I think the waist straps make it looks bigger than it is. But if you fill it up and put on the daypack, then it's pretty big.

Same with the 300 too. After hearing all the talk about its size and weight, I was expecting it's a bit bigger.

I was under the impression the AW II Backpacks were larger than the normal uns?