Greg;
GPaul64@xxxxxxx wrote:
>
> In a message dated 8/21/99 5:30:26 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> george@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
>
>
> >> I've not made up my mind how I'll carry the 350. Option 1 is to put it
> in it's hard case with a body and MD and 1.4x mounted. Then put that in
> my large hard sided suitcase and lock it and check it!
>
> Wow - that sounds risky. Has this worked for you in the past?
No, never done it this way. Why do **you** think is risky?
>
> Option B is to put the lens in the backpack, leave it's hard case at
> home and carry-on the backpack. Yes it actually fits quite well, with
> the body and MD and 1.4x attached, in the longish center compartment of
> the big backpack. (Fits also in my smaller 35mm pack & is actually
> quite a (relatively) comfortable way to carry it around in the field.)
> Option B requires only that I stuff the film, filters and ready-load
> holder that would normally be in the center, in another carry-on.
> Option 1 is probably easier, but I just say a TV exposee showing baggage
> handlers rummaging through passengers checked bags. I hate it when that
> happens.
>
> That's great info on how one can carry around a beast like that - thanks!
> Maybe there's yet another Zuiko to put on my acquisition list....
I have done this. The lens w/body attached fits like I said quite
nicely in the long ceter compartment. I face the lens down. I carried
it this way in my 'small' backpack, the Lowepro Photo Trekker, last
summer. It worked great. I was thinking of doing it a little different
this year to lighten the carryon load a little bit - the trekker with
the 350 inside was a little heavy for my 11 yr old girl (**just
kidding**). I've already cut down a bit by leaving the photo trekker and
taking instead a Tamrac shoulder bag 1/2 its size.
>
> I remember reading a story in Outdoor Photographer where George Lepp happened
> to be looking out the window of his plane and actually saw a member from the
> baggage crew walking away on the tarmac with his checked 400/2.8,
> illustrating why he never checks expensive lenses. Disguising it inside
> other luggage may help, but I would hate to take chances with a coveted and
> rare lens like that 350.
I guess the only way anyone would know it's in there is via x-ray. I'd
never check anything that looks like expensive photo gear - if the
baggage handlers didn't get it, the rats hangin around the baggage
carousel would.
As I think about what else might be a problem if it's in my hard
suitcase, the only possible problem I see is the tossing and banging etc
may jar glass around a bit? I dunno.
>
> One more question - is the Super-Trekker small enough to be carry-on?
It barely makes the cut. I've never been asked to shove it in the
carryon size checker box. If I were, I may have to stand on it and jump
up and down, but I think it would fit!
>
> Thanks!
Thank you
george
>
> Regards,
>
> Greg L.
>
> George
> >>
>
> < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
> < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
> < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|