« Open Mike: The Death of Newspapers (and of the Paper 'Shutterbug') | Main | Yellow Crack »

Thursday, 24 May 2018


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Like I need to add another five pounds to my carry kit!

I think the Canon bag is sharper.

I had to settle for the anniversary tshirt.

I avoid leather at all costs. When I did photography for a living, all my (extremely expensive) leather bags essentially rotted and got mildewed, just from getting a little wet occasionally, which was unavoidable when used by a photojournalist. Synthetic bags were lighter, lasted longer, and had no problem with a little dampness.


It just had to be commemorative GEAR for Nikon. And not a few nice prints made with Nikon gear. Where can I get the poster size photo of planet earth made with a Nikon?

This just reinforces the Nikon is for gearheads-meme.

Remarkably, I just googled David Douglas Duncan and according his Wikipedia page he's from 1916 and still lives. The man is older than Nikon! Ah, wait Joe McNally has a nice blog post on David and his work with Nikon:

And this video from Nikon Asia with David

the photo at B&H shows a DSLR with no lens attached and a couple of lenses peeking out. If this thing doesn't fit a body with a lens attached, it's worthless. Looks lovely though. Maybe just a poor choice of product photo.

At least it's not available in elephant skin, unlike that other bag.


Looks like the bag I used for primary school between 1972 and 1975... mine was cheaper too!

Agree with Mike R. The Nikon bag is beautiful but cramped inside. Give me an unassuming Domke canvas bag I can actually work with. Oh wait, I already have one.

The comments to this entry are closed.



Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 06/2007