>>3398358>$70>as much as a lensnigga are you retarded who tf buys $70 lenses, that's in the real of chink 50mm 1.8 clones, nothing else there except old murky vintage lenses.
Bags can be expensive, they deserve to be. My Lowepro Protactic 450 cost me 150€, and I'd buy it again and again. Why? Because it allows me to pack all the gear I need in one effortless way, it's the most comfortable bag I've ever owned and trust me, one cheap bag will cost you more in the long run: first on your back which will get fucked up, then on your gear if it rattles around and might get damaged, then ultimately in your inability to take the photos you want to take, depending on the gear you want to carry. Street photog? You want a bag that allows you to take your camera out on the fly. Landscape? You want a bag able to hold your tripod safely and in a way that doesn't weigh you down. Portraiture? You want a bag able to fit your lighting equipment. Etc.
Hell, if you work on location for events with a dress code, you will even want a bag that looks good.
Bags are extremely important. You can have the best gear in the world, but if it is stowed in a regular backpack, you'll be too slow, too uncomfortable and possibly too hurt to take the photos - I've had back pain because of bad bags, and you won't take any photos with that going on.
I'm not advertising overpaying for Manfrotto products, but after years of shooting I realized that a great bag is as important as a great camera.
Pic related: I love this bag because I can choose how to separate things, top part camera stuff, bottom regular things for hiking. Or top camera, bottom studio strobe, one chink speedlight and gels. Or top camera, bottom beers.
