Hi guys! I am sure there are some photography fans among you. I wonder, how do you carry cameras on road bikes?

On my weekend rides I often end up in very nice places and would like to take some photos to share and keep a record of where I have been. Now the thing is that photography as an hobby has always been rather important for me. I have a good DSLR camera and a bunch of lenses. I wonder whether carrying SLR with a small lens would work out fine, or would it slow me down too much when climbing. After all it is close to 1kg. How would you carry it? I was thinking of Osprey Talon 5.5 backpack, or smth similar from Deuter... I am not so sure though that I would be happy with the weight on my back. In addition I have my doubts about the ventilation of the bags.

On the other hand I thought of picking up a small compact camera. While I might struggle in the beginning to get used to the lower image quality, it obviously has advantages for cycling. May be a waist pack would be a good option to carry such smaller camera?

What's your take on bringing cameras along when going cycling?

I once carried a DSLR in a backpack up a 4 mile 7% avg climb and my back hurt for a week afterwards. I'd just go for something nice and small like a Canon Powershot or something. Got crappy pictures too because it was so foggy at the top.

I agree. I have three DSLR's that i use professionally and one we use for our family snapshot camera. Even though the family Rebel is pretty light, I would not want to carry it on a bike. I would buy a point and shoot and call it good. Some will deliver better color, contrast and detail than you would think.

Ideally it would be great if you had a padded bag that was pretty light and the camera could be accessed easily. I got one of these for $30 -
I cut off the padded belt which saved weight and increased internal space (I didn't need to carry the middle portion of the belt).

That being said, I must admit I stuff it with my wallet, cell phone, a bandanna, an extra sweat band, sun tan lotion, extra bags of my DIY sports drink powder, a power bar, and a PB&J sandwich, and now I don't have space for my camera. [I'm so fat I don't wear a cycling jersey - it seems to me like it would be an affront to sensibilities everywhere!]

I've played with a few things, none worked very well. Generally I just carry my little Cannon (SD800 IS, soon to be S95). It has a decent lens, OK optical zoom, and full manual control. The S95 has better optics and better manual (like a focus ring). I've actually been pretty happy and surprised with the SD800.

For SLR I have a small lowepro bag that'll hold 1 body w/ 18-200 zoom (or 50 prime or 85 prime or ...) that can go under my seat. I also have a twist up bounce that I can stuff in there. If I want lens options, strobes, etc then it's pannier time.

I have a compact Canon powershot in a small Lowpro soft case. The case has a pull-out waterproofcover. If I'm not doing a big ride I stick it in one of my bottle carriers and only take one water bottle. Otherwise I cable tie the case to the frame, putting the cable ties through the velcro belt loop on the case. seems to work okay, but can only be used when stopped.

First, I'm assuming you want to photograph the nice places, and not the people or the wildlife living there. If I'm right, then the weight of the camera and lens is an issue, but probably a smaller one than the weight and size of the tripod. And you certainly aren't getting the best image quality your system can deliver if you aren't using a good tripod.

Camera specific backpacks are a no-go. They're optimized for keeping everything you own in separate compartments, and sometimes for being accessible quickly. But not for comfort. I wouldn't use a photo backpack hiking, let alone cycling lots of miles. You want a way for the bike to carry the weight for you. I mean, if it's on your back, the weight is ultimately borne by your wheels anyway, but it's also on your back; it might as well not be on you. Look into panniers or something.

It's not impossible, though. I shot this photo along the Iron Horse Trail, on a 30 mile ride on a dirt path. Everything was in a backpack with an internal frame and mesh back panel, designed to hold the weight a bit off my back. I had the tripod on the back of the bag, which tends to make me pretty sore. We stopped for lunch by the side of the creek, and then I shot this before we left.

Thanks! It seems compact cam is the way to go then. I was calculating the whole day, whether the slr weight would be worth it and how many dinners should I skip to keep my bike's weight the same ;-)

..very nice photo btw.

I use a good quality point and shoot in a case velcroed to the stem. I leave the top of the case open like a pistol holster. I can shoot one handed while riding. Most of my photos are taken while moving. If the camera is easy to hold onto it's not difficult to do. I added some rubber shelf paper to the slippery areas on my camera. Having it easy to reach means I take more photos, and just delete the ones I don't want.



over my head backwards and upside down, just flip the image over later in the computer.

Powershot A530

IMO, get as compact and light a camera as you can with a 24mm equiv lens. Stick it in a jersey pocket. Use it to take photos.

A small digital camera is a must. I've found the ability to do panorama's really helpful with cycling photographs, as it tells a story and shows where you are. The Sony DSC-TX7 does pans really easily.

24 mm provides a really wonderful field of view ... as your first image shows.

Depending on your camera, it's up to you and how much risk you think it is of being damaged. My camera gear would cost me $6k to replace at used prices so for me, skimping is not an option. I love the ThinkTank Streetwalker Pro for my 1D3 and lenses because it's only two rows wide (most backpacks hold a cam with long lens and a row on each side for a total of three) so I have full arm motion and the uber padded straps. There is a removable waist belt and a sternum strap as well. Fully loaded, the bag weighs a fair bit but comfort is top notch, even after a long day of carrying and shooting. The regular Streetwalker bag is shorter for a normal sized DSLR like a 5D or something.

If you want protection, I think Kata bags are about as good as you can get in a soft-sided case. A fall at 25mph will probably kill all but a hard case but it will do well against bumps and jolts.

Personally, I have a small Kata case and a G11 for my take-with camera unless I need some high-ISO or action shots. Both that and my 1D3 are around 10MP and at ISO 100 I cannot tell the difference unless I start pixel-peeping other than the bokeh that comes with fast lenses and a larger sensor. It really is a phenomenal point and shoot.

Lomo. Film is not dead...

I wasn't aware anyone was offering that. I checked it out at my favorite digital camera review site. That's very interesting. Thanks

Yeah but if you want film, why carry a camera with so little control? An old FM2 with a 24mm would be a far better choice IMO and they're still small. They're 100% mechanical too so you get all the shutter speeds even if the battery is dead. I love my little Canon GIII QL17 rangefinder as well and its barely larger than my G11 digital for under $50.

It seems to me that you have exactly the same issues as hikers do when toting cameras. You can either optimize for the hike, take a little P&S camera, and deal with the results, or you can take whatever lenses/bodies/tripods you need, and deal with the bulk and weight of it. I guess for me, the question is, "Am I riding and incidentally taking pictures while I do it? Or am I out riding specifically to take pictures?"

When I used to hike in CO, I would normally have my SLR and a single lens with me. I did discover one principle, though, and have also seen it discussed in photo forums. I would hike somewhere incredibly beautiful. I would take pictures of it. I would then show them to my wife, who was decidedly ho-hum about them. So what was the problem? I think the problem is that for me, the photos are reminders of the hike, and when i see them, I remember being there. Not so for my wife. And evidently, other people have noticed this, too. I remember reading where one pro said he'd done all the hiking, but when it was all said and done, his best shots (sales-wise) had always been taken within a half mile of the car.

If you're set on getting good shots along the way, look into a front or rear rack and decent bag for the camera and tripod. It may slow you down a mph or two, but won't keep you from going anywhere you want to go. Otherwise, a little P&S fits anywhere and is no problem to take.

Small. Compact. Auto exposure. Random photo effects. Control is relative. Sometimes overrated.

And I tend to shoot while on the bike.

To each their own I guess. My Canonet is smaller than any Lomo camera I've seen for what it's worth.

Although I own DSLRs and use them professionally, I wouldn't take one on bike ride. Not because of weight. Given my weight and the weight of the bike, I'm not concerned about a couple of extra pounds. I am concerned about how awkward using a DSLR would be, given I'd have to wrestle it in and out of a carrying bag of some sort. (The exception: the new 4/3 sensor-equipped cameras; they are small and so are the lenses; one with a small lens might fit in a jersey pocket.)

For my bike trips, I use a Panasonic Lumix ZS7. It's a little pricey; the ZS5 is almost as nice, and earlier versions like the TZ5 (which can be picked up on ebay) are also excellent.

What's nice about these Panasonic cameras are the long zooms, which allow experienced photographers to play around with near and far subjects in the same photo. Yet the camera easily slips into a jersey pocket (in a plastic bag; sweat can gum up the camera).

Like these:





The wide angle and close-up settings works well, too.

I recommend (if you have the cash) a nikon P5000, 5100 or 6000 or something in that line. they are digital point and shoots, with a full manual mode, so they can do a lot of the stuff DSLRs do, I have a P5000 (used on Ebay) and the autofocus takes forever, but it is small and I have taken plenty of great shots with it.

You might also do well looking at long zoom, or really high end point and shoots. Those would be the best for cycling.

Thanks! A lot of good suggestions.

As I don't have a PS camera, then I'd have to shell out some money for it now. Andrewluke, you had a good point though. If I'd crash with my DSLR and just one lens, then it might make a rather big hole in my credit card bill...

Icyclist, I like your photos. You have perfectly managed to emulate the classic film look (in case these were with the panasonic).

Btw, if someone is interested in hiking with SLRs, I have found a rather good solution. I was testing one bag after another and was not really satisfied, until I came to the Naneu models. It takes the comfort to a totally other level. Just check them out if you're shopping for your next hiking rucksack. Nevertheless, they are definitely not meant for cycling (with the exception of slow speed cycling on a MTB may be). Too large and wide.

The B ride? looks like Kings and Alpine