Hard Cases

[paulsydaus]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Does anyone use a hard case to transport an M kit as check in?

What do you use and how did you cut the foam?

Any recommendations?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[erl]

On extreme events, I pack my gear into my normal Billingham which I then put straight into a 'naked' pelican case. I did this for my Antarctica venture. The main benefit was because I was forced (by the airline) to check my gear in the hold. At least I knew it was locked and secure. I reasoned that it would also float if it went overboard from the zodiac when on location, but in the end it was not needed for that part of the venture. The Billingham served particularly well when I was in control.

[Mute-on]

Pelican cases feature “pick and pluck” foam inserts that are pre-scored and only need to be torn out as required. Alternatively, you can buy the dark grey photo (or other) equipment foam. I just cut it with a very sharp kitchen knife in the exact shape I need. A layer of uncut foam above and below completes the protective cocoon.

 

Allow at least 25mm (1 inch) between items for adequate padding. Make sure you allow enough depth in the case to accommodate top and bottom layers. Again, 25mm minimum will absorb just about any vibrations that could interfere with your equipment mechanically or electronically.

 

Something like the Pelican 1450 Protector case should do the trick at 6 inches deep.

 

Cheers

 

J

[Narsuitus]

I use a hard case (18 x 13 x 6.5 inches) to store and transport my Leica M kit consisting of:

M6

M10 (not shown)

35mm f/1.4 Zeiss Distagon

90mm f/2 Summicron

21mm f/1.4 Summilux

 

However, if possible, I avoid checking my kit into a cargo hole when I fly. If I know in advance that I would be forced to check my Leica kit, I leave the Leica at home and take an expendable kit instead.

 

Thankfully, the foam in my Pelican-like case was pre-cut. All I had to do was remove small sections of foam.

 

Leica Travel Kit by Narsuitus, on Flickr

 

[wjdrijfhout]

You may want to have a look at this: http://www.hprc.it/en/tuning/leica/

 

The impression I have is that these pre-cut inserts are made from slightly tougher material than the plum foam inserts, so if the contents fits you it might be worth trying.

 

As for the hard case itself, I have several hprc cases and like them a lot and prefer them over pelican.

[Rob L]

An outfit in the USA called "caseclub.com" has an on line CAD system whereby you can design your own foam insert and they will laser cut it for you. They have 2 or 3 different foams as well. Very nice system. They also sell Pelican, SKB and other cased at a good price.

[enboe]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

One caution when checking camera gear - U.S. airlines have a limit of liability for lost baggage.  Last time I checked, it was $1500.00 U.S.  That's hardly enough to buy a Leica filter, let alone a camera and lens.

 

Eric

[pkwok]

I wouldn't suggest to check in any expensive camera gear. It just appears behind the Xray screen and everybody standing there knows what it is. Your hard case and camera gears will disappear altogether.

[erl]

Problem is, in my case, the airline insisted on checking the gear. I had no choice. That's what insurance is for. Of course in the worst case scenario, insurance does not help if you are boarding to fulfil an assignment, or go on holiday.

 

Ever since, I have kept my camera gear well within overhead locker requirements. What does annoy me is the number of 'tourists' with bags that are too large for carry on, but insist on trying to squeeze them into the lockers.

[schattenundlicht]

I prefer Peli-like cases with variable inserts like this: https://www.amazon.de/dp/B00H3QU40K/ref=pe_3044161_185740101_TE_item Huge one with trolley wheels for DSLR kit, mid-sized for Leica M kit.

 

Advantages imho:

- Can be flexibly reconfigured, if equipment changes

- Will not give off tiny pieces of debris (unlike ageing foams).

 

However, I do not use the very large cases for flying, because I never check in my cameras as a general rule. I am not so much concerned about theft but more so about increased temperature variations in the cargo hold and, even more importantly, rough handling by ground staff or drops from conveyor belts inside airport bowels (happens a lot). Insurance will not help with traumatic misalignments of RF and optical elements within a lens which may escape notice for some time.

 

A set of gear that does not fit into hand luggage is too big for travel, anyway (but that is just my personal opinion). I have traveled extensively in difficult climates and environments and have never felt the need to lug around all my lenses. A tripod will be checked in, of course

 

Kind regards

Mathias

[schattenundlicht]

On extreme events, I pack my gear into my normal Billingham which I then put straight into a 'naked' pelican case. I did this for my Antarctica venture. The main benefit was because I was forced (by the airline) to check my gear in the hold. At least I knew it was locked and secure. I reasoned that it would also float if it went overboard from the zodiac when on location, but in the end it was not needed for that part of the venture. The Billingham served particularly well when I was in control.

For dinghy landfalls on sailing trips, I put my regular camera bag inside a truly waterproof backpack (not one with those unreliable ‚waterproof‘ zips, but one with a folding/rolling closing device like those of the Ortlieb brand - no affiliation). Then, even in case of capsizing, I will not lose my equipment, it will not be carried away in waves/ current.

 

If you want to check a waterproof backpack in the shop, leave it full of air, close it properly and use it as a seat cushion for a few minutes. If air does not escape, water will never get in

Edited April 16, 2018 by schattenundlicht

[erl]

My main concern would be, in the case of a capsize, I would not want to be caught with a heavy backpack strapped to my back. I would rather float with my head at the top!

[schattenundlicht]

My main concern would be, in the case of a capsize, I would not want to be caught with a heavy backpack strapped to my back. I would rather float with my head at the top!

In truly rough seas I would skip taking the camera into the dinghy and opt for the life vest

[schattenundlicht]

My main concern would be, in the case of a capsize, I would not want to be caught with a heavy backpack strapped to my back. I would rather float with my head at the top!

[Afterthought; missed the „edit“ timeline of the forum software with regard to my previous post]

 

+1

In principle, of course, I fully agree with you, that tethering heavy loads to your body aboard physically unstable marine vessels is not a good idea. However with a Leica M and two or thee lenses plus some air, a waterproof backpack should not be a serious threat to overall boyancy. Backpack boyancy, on the other hand, should never ever be so prominent as to forcefully turn you face down in the water once immersed. In Antarctica, nobody would wish to make any immersion experience at all, I guess.

 

Kind regards

Mathias

Edited April 16, 2018 by schattenundlicht

[Gobert]

Problem is, in my case, the airline insisted on checking the gear. I had no choice. That's what insurance is for. Of course in the worst case scenario, insurance does not help if you are boarding to fulfil an assignment, or go on holiday.

 

Ever since, I have kept my camera gear well within overhead locker requirements. What does annoy me is the number of 'tourists' with bags that are too large for carry on, but insist on trying to squeeze them into the lockers.

Why are holidays excluded from insurance.

[Gobert]

I prefer Peli-like cases with variable inserts like this: https://www.amazon.de/dp/B00H3QU40K/ref=pe_3044161_185740101_TE_item Huge one with trolley wheels for DSLR kit, mid-sized for Leica M kit.

Advantages imho:

- Can be flexibly reconfigured, if equipment changes

- Will not give off tiny pieces of debris (unlike ageing foams).

However, I do not use the very large cases for flying, because I never check in my cameras as a general rule. I am not so much concerned about theft but more so about increased temperature variations in the cargo hold and, even more importantly, rough handling by ground staff or drops from conveyor belts inside airport bowels (happens a lot). Insurance will not help with traumatic misalignments of RF and optical elements within a lens which may escape notice for some time.

A set of gear that does not fit into hand luggage is too big for travel, anyway (but that is just my personal opinion). I have traveled extensively in difficult climates and environments and have never felt the need to lug around all my lenses. A tripod will be checked in, of course

Kind regards

Mathias

I use a small mid size B&W, type 3000, for a M10, 5 lenses, small flash, light meter, batteries, Novoflex macro rings, spare batteries, Leica tripod etc. And still having place for one lens more...

[pico]

A quick and accurate way to cut spongy foam is with an inexpensive electric carving knife.

 

I recommend that the case has an atmospheric release valve.  I once packed a case in a private plane at altitude and after we landed it was very hard to open.

Edited April 16, 2018 by pico

[erl]

Why are holidays excluded from insurance.

They are not. My reference to holidays was to imply that loss of cameras, on a holiday, was not helped by insurance because the holiday is completed without cameras. Insurance cover and replacement always takes effect after the holiday. Sorry if I gave the wrong impression in my previous post.

[jkcampbell2]

TrekPack makes a nice insert system for a lot if different case brands.

 

 

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[paulsydaus]

Thanks for all the replies.

I'll post back my completed solution when available.

Paul