I'm looking for a good shoulder bag to carry my outfit (1 M6, 35 mm Summicron, 75 mm Summilux, 21 mm Elmarit, L-508 Sekonic Zoom meter, about 30-50 rolls of film, universal polarizer) in and I heard good things about Billingham. Particularily the 206 which I am currently interested in but I can't see one up close. Does anyone have any experience with the Billingham line of bags (particularily the 206, 225, 335, or Hadley???) and if not.... can you recommend some bags that are not so photo-obvious and are easy to use (not a chore with fasteners, layout, etc...)

Thanks.

John

-- John Chan (ouroboros_2001@yahoo.com), December 27, 2000

Answers

I use a small Photo-Hadley and am very happy with its design and construction. The strap and post fasteners for the main flap are easy to use and, best of all, quiet. However, one person's dream camera bag is another person's camera bag nightmare. The only thing I have found to be true is that big bags carry more stuff that I seldom, if ever, use.

Cheers

-- John Collier (jbcollier@home.com), December 28, 2000.

I've got a big-ish Billingham bag, either a 355 or a 455. It certainly takes two EOS bodies, 3 zooms, a big flashgun, various attachments, filters, manuals, etc, etc. I lugged it around a tour of the USA this summer, using it as my carry-on plane luggage, generally kicking it around on the aircraft floor, and there's not a scratch on it or the cameras. There are many pockets, flaps, carrying handles, buckles, etc, etc. It's very traditional in appearance - leather & brass. Some people think that it doesn't look much like a camera bag and therefore is possibly safer, but in my view a Billingham bag is very obviously what it is, and therefore marks out the owner as someone who's quite likely to have a lot of expensive camera kit, ie in my view it's possibly riskier.

Finally, be warned that it's a big, heavy beast on its own, let alone with cameras in it. I'm actively planning (see thread below) to switch from EOS to something smaller & lighter - the bag will go when that happens.

Oh, there are no tripod straps on it.

-- Tom Burke (tom@thbtotley.co.uk), December 28, 2000.

I have a 225 bag. It holds my M system well, and the bag is magnificently padded and waterproofed. It is heavy *empty*, quite stiff (does not conform to the hip)and there is no provision (short of using a scissors!) to remove the shoulder strap and replace it with an Op-Tech SOS strap which really makes a heavy bag feel lighter. The Billinghams are, IMO, beautiful camera luggage, but neither the most convenient nor well-executed bags around. There are bags costing a fraction of the price that are much nicer in use.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), December 28, 2000.

To answer a couple of points raised above: Most of the Billinghams do look like camera bags. The Hadley is an exception. It looks like a fishing bag. Billinghams are expensive (more so in the US, I believe), but they will last a lifetime. They are very well made.

Any camera bag is a compromise between security and ease of use. For most of the 225 etc series, they have gone for security, so getting lenses in and out is not as easy as other bags. I don't often carry much equipment nowadays, and use a backpack when I do, and I love my Hadley. I bought it years ago, it still looks like new and does everything I want of it. It will handle most of what you mention above, with the probable exception of the film.

Alan

-- Alan Ginman (atg35790@ggr.co.uk), January 03, 2001.