I am looking for a backpack to fit....

Canon 40Ds gripped
17-40mm L
24-105mm L
28mm 1.8
50mm 1.4
85mm 1.8
150 2.8 macro
200mm 2.8 L II
300mm 4 L IS
2 430 ex
2 sets of tubes
1.4x tc

I am in the process of getting the above mentioned gear and I know it is not going to fit in me current bag ( lowepro flipside 300). It is a shame I really like the bag.

All I've got to say is good luck.

Would you really want to carry around a 150, 200 and 300 mm lens at the same time... in a back pack? I bet you could split it into a pelican and backpack... but that's not what you want.

possibly this?

http://www.tamrac.com/​5577.htm

except for a couple of your longer lenses..

I'd say Tamrac Expedition 8 would be better. I can fit all gear in my sig line with a little room to spare. Let me emphasis LITTLE.

Have a look at this picture from the Tamrac site of the Expedition 8. You'd have to play some lens tetris, but I think it could be done.

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

Perhaps there should be a sticky for recommendations of back clinics.

nothing wrong with big meaty bags, for leaving in the back of the car.

Thank goodness they make such bags, because I'd never be able to fit all my hoods in the smaller ones.

IF it is for travel/storage only get a pelican case, if for travel and general use a thinktank bag would probably be perfect

With some creative packing you can fit this kit into a Mountainsmith Parallax, and certainly inside a Mountainsmith Odyssey.

Are you packing a single 40D or a set of 40D bodies?

I discuss the Mountainsmith Parallax on my site for traveling photogs at www.flyingwithfish.com

zod wrote in post #6427949
Would you really want to carry around a 150, 200 and 300 mm lens at the same time... in a back pack? I bet you could split it into a pelican and backpack... but that's not what you want.

The 150 is a macro and the 200 is a 2.8 I can not see either one doing the others job. I also believe it is better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it.

That tamrac looks perfect. I can always use the Canon zip case and attach the 300 on the outside. I could also use the lowepro cases to attach a couple more lenses outside.

I sure hope that you don't plan on walking/hiking very far with all that gear. The Tamrac alone weighs close to 8 pounds by itself. Seriously, that's an awful lot of gear to have strapped to your back, and that's not including accessories such as filters, remote releases, etc. Not to mention a tripod. I'm not sure why anyone would need all that stuff at the same time, especially in a backpack.

Edgar in ATL wrote in post #6429502
Perhaps there should be a sticky for recommendations of back clinics.

LOL

Okay, get yourself 2 roller bags and we'll talk. The 300 is already too big for a backpack! Really, this request is unrealistic. You need 2 bags, at least and you cannot imagine lifting that on to your back.

For all of those saying that there is no way that this will fit in a bag and even if it did it would be to heavy.
Please refer to the photo of the tamrac. It has 3 bodies 2 flashes and 8 lenses, one of which looks to be the 400 5.6 (I may be wrong). Granted the 150, 200, and 300 are not that small I have a solution to that. I can clip cases to the exterior and house the larger lenses.
I already wear a 30-40 pound tool pouch almost all day carrying this on my back is not a problem. Carrying more than one bag is. ( especially ones with wheels on a trail ). I am asking this as an honest question and although I enjoy humor just as much as the next person This is not an unrealistic request.
Thank you all for your responses.

Think Tank Airport Acceleration is what I have and I have more or less like the junks you have. It will fit.