Impressions of the LowePro Rover Pro
My search for the perfect camera backpack is not over, but it has taken a significant turn in the right direction with my recent acquisition of LowePro’s Rover Pro 45L AW. This article about my impressions of the new Rover Pro will not include much of the technical information about the pack. Those details are found easily enough on the LowePro website, and there are a couple of promotional videos (1 and 2) there as well. Instead, I’ll simply explain what it has been like to use the pack over the last few months. Objectively evaluating things that I have already purchased goes against the way I was raised to focus on positives and make the most of what is in hand, but I will do my best to paint an accurate picture of the Rover Pro.
The 45 liter version of the Rover Pro was certainly the right choice for me, in large part because of the second interior storage compartment dedicated to camera gear. This second compartment is not included with the slightly smaller Rover Pro 35L AW, and the reason this is a big deal for me is that the two compartments allow me to comfortably and safely carry every last bit of the camera gear I own. Now, my collection of lenses and accessories is not impressively large, but it does include: 1 mid-sized body, 2 zoom lenses, 2 standard prime lenses, 1 tilt-shift lens, 1 flash, and various other odds and ends. Like I said, all these things fit very easily in to the padded portions of the 45L (with other appropriate pockets for some of the odds and ends). The vary first job I assigned my Rover Pro was carrying delicate photographic equipment as a carry-on during a trip where my tripod was broken in checked baggage. I was seriously glad to have to option of keeping valuable lenses stored safely at my feet, and the bag was so comfortable to wear through the airports, I hardly gave it a second thought.
When I returned home from my vacation, I was ready to put the Rover Pro to the test, and I didn’t hold back. I loaded up the backpack with all my photographic equipment (even some lenses I had not intention of using that day), and then I added ice-climbing gear (including boots), clothes to keep warm inside the Mendenhall Glacier’s ice caves, and a mid-sized water bladder. Actually the water bladder was slightly too big for the Rover Pro’s dedicated sleeve, but I was able to make it work by only partially filling the bladder. The extent of the gear and the fully loaded pack are featured in the accompanying images. In the end, the bag tipped the scales at around 45lbs, which is more than I’ve carried since, even on an overnight trip.
The hike to the Mendenhall Glacier caves is somewhere between two and three miles, but what it lacks in length and net elevations gain, it makes up for with very taxing climbs and descents. The day resulted in some portfolio quality photos, and a seriously aching body. While both my shoulders and hips were quite sore, there was no bruising after wearing the pack for the better part of six hours. Honestly, though, I was worried. The Rover Pro had not been as comfortable as I had hoped.
Fortunately, I didn’t have to wait long for some good news. Just a couple days later (the importance of there being no bruising) I packed with a different strategy. Carrying just the essentials and halving the weight of the photographic equipment I was bringing, I set out on a hike that was more than double the length and elevation gain of my previous trip. The results were amazing! I can honestly say that I’ve never carried a backpack more comfortably for that length of time. I’m convinced that the ventilation provided by the Rover Pro is second to no other pack in its category, maybe no other pack that doesn’t share its design. Over several subsequent outings I’ve confirmed the findings of the first two test hikes. The Rover Pro carries loads of 30-45lbs about as comfortably as most small camping packs, which is neither exciting or disappointing, but it carries loads under 30lbs with an ease that you have to feel to really believe.
Other qualities of the pack are more of a trade off, and the first of those that comes to mind is the look. I would say that the style of the bag has a simplicity that borders on elegance, but that sleek nature comes at a price. There are plenty of pockets and sleeves on the camera compartments, but the exterior of the pack walks a fine line between having only the most strategic features and just not having enough places to put things. When I recently took the Rover Pro on an overnight trip, I packed pretty spartan supplies. Part of that was a result of needing to put camping gear inside the pack that I would have preferred to strap onto the outside. Still, if you make good use of what the backpack does provide in the way of pockets and straps, you look pretty smart on the way up the trail.
Actually, even the comfort of the pack comes with some downside. Lowepro has produced multiple other backpacks that provide access to the camera through the back pannel, which I (and many other photographers) see as a most useful feature. Unfortunately, you can’t have the Rover Pro’s superior suspension system and the Flipside Sport’s improved camera access at the same time. I anticipated camera access being a major hurdle for me to overcome in my appreciation of this pack, but as the summer rolled on, I realized it’s fairly well suited to my mode of photography. You have to take off the pack to access the camera, and you may have to pull one or both internal compartments from the bag to change lenses, but I think that’s reasonable. This particular bag was designed for camera transport, not to be a camera holster.
Durability is something I can’t comment too much on after only one summer, but the Rove Pro has held up admirably so far. I’ve put the bag though enough that it doesn’t look brand new anymore, and I’ve gotten a sense that the apparent quality of construction and materials is real. The Rover Pro is very well made, as people with previous experience with Lowepro products would expect.
The verdict for me is that I have no regrets in the purchase of this pack, and I would have no hesitation about recommending it to someone whose needs were similar to mine. You can get a second opinion here (you may even notice a handy discount code like the one from another of Dan’s excellent reviews that I used to purchase my Rover Pro). This recent post by another photographer whose opinions I respect stacks the Rover Pro (the smaller version) up against some of it’s competition. I hope I’ve provided you with some valuable information toward choosing the right bag for your photographic needs, now hopefully we can get back to seeing the worlds beauty and sharing it through our photographs!
How long is your torso?
I don’t have a torso measurement for you, but I’ll try to give you a general idea about the fit. I’m 6’1″ (about 186cm), but I don’t have a particularly long torso for my height. I use the Rover Pro adjusted to just a little more than it’s minimum torso length. I hope that info helps at least a little.
Hi,
Thanks for the write up on the 45L. I’m thinking of purchasing the bag for a trip up Mt. Kilimanjaro but had a question about the dimensions for the carry-on. LowePros website says the total dimensions are 47″ but carry-on restrictions are usually 45″. Did you have any issues with getting the pack on the plane as a carry-on?
I was thinking I would just make sure it wasn’t packed to the brim so that the depth of the bag was 2″ shorter than the stated dimensions from Lowepro.
Think that would work?
Would you say the 45L fits the camera gear and enough hiking gear (rain shells, med kits, food, etc) that I’d need between camps?
Thanks for any info you can provide!
Adam
Adam – I took the bag on a handful of commercial flights around the western US and Alaska shortly after purchasing it, and I never had any problem taking it onto the plane as a carry-on. I never had it packed excessively full, and it carries pretty small so that I don’t think anyone would ever question its size unless they were REALLY being particular. It is fairly rigid along the back, so it can’t really fold down into tight spaces, but the torso height is adjustable. For me, the bag fits all my camera gear with enough space and external bindings left over to carry enough supplies for a comfortable overnight trip. Depending on how much gear you’re planning to carry, your mileage will vary, but it sounds like you would have more than enough room in the bag based on your description. I hope you have a great trip! Peace. – Kent
Thanks Kent! Appreciate the reply! I ended up purchasing the bag and think it would do a great job for a lot of trips but since I only need to carry stuff between camps I think the 45L may be too big. So, I think I’ll return it and get the 35L.
Seems like there isn’t a one size fits all situations bag out there! So, I may end up re-purchasing the 45L for a future trip.
Thanks again!
Cheers,
Adam
Adam – Just a heads-up, the interior compartments for storing camera gear differ between the two sizes. Make sure the compartment in the 35L is going to meet your camera/lens needs. If I remember correctly, it definitely wouldn’t work for my gear. Also, for what it’s worth, I use my bag under-packed on a consistent basis, and it still carries very well. – Kent
Thanks for the heads up. I tried fitting my gear into the main camera pouch in the 45L to simulate what would fit in the one pouch of the 35L. I have the following:
Canon T2i
Canon F4 70-200mmL
Canon EFS 17-85mm
Canon F1.4 50mm
Battery grip
I attached the telephoto to the camera body and placed that on the bottom. That took up most of the length of the pouch. I then placed one of the dividers horizontal and laid the Canon EFS 17-85mm on top. I can still pull the camera/with telephoto out from the bottom. A little tight. I’d also like to get another divider so the 17-85 doesn’t roll around. For now, I’m using the blue battery/card case on top of the camera to prevent the 17-85 from rolling around. I then placed the 50mm and battery grip where the blue pouch was supposed to go.Not ideal but it all fits.
I’m still torn whether to get the 35L or 45L. Most sites seem to recommend a 30-35L day pack for Mt. Kilimanjaro but I don’t think sites factor in the space for camera gear. I did a light load test (minimal stuff i’ll need) and the 45L does look to pack down well.
I’ll take another look at the 35L in store and decide! I can post here with my decision in case others have the same issue as I.
Thanks again!
Adam
Adam – Thanks so much for posting so much of your thought process, in the decision about what size pack best suits your needs, here in the comments. You’ve made this post that much more valuable to people who are considering purchasing the RoverPro. Awesome! – Kent
Hey Kent,
I’ve returned from Mt. Kilimanjaro (made it to Uhuru via Machame Route!) using the Rover Pro 45L. I said I’d give my impressions and here they are:
The Rover Pro 45L was, for me, the right size bag to go with but I think another bag would have been better for me on this climb.
-The 6lbs weight of the bag was pretty significant when 4L of water added 10lbs plus daypack stuff. I was carrying around more weight than most people. A lighter bag would have helped.
-Camera compartments – I didn’t use either of them on the climb. They are too bulky for the gear I brought – my T2i and standard lens. On day 1 I kept the camera in the Rover pro but it was a real pain to stop, take off the pack, get the camera, shoot, put away, repeat. Fortunately, I brought a smaller lowe pro shoulder bag that I carried outside of my daypack. This made it much easier to access and shoot through the rest of the climb.
-The lack of a pocket or compartment on the tripod holder side of the bag was wasted space. Would be nice if there was something under the tripod straps that could be used if the tripod isn’t attached.
-A few more compartments would have helped keep things organized.
So, since it was 3lbs heavier than most day packs, and I didn’t use the camera compartments, a regular hiking day pack would have been better and cheaper.
What did work well:
-No back pain despite the weight. A point near my shoulder blade did hurt a bit but that likely have happened with any bag.
-Trekking pole holders worked
-Camelbak compartment worked well. I bought a Platypus bladder but it was too wide, so looks like it is designed for Camelbak specifically.
-It did hold the stuff I brought and held up to the summit and back of Mt. Kilimanjaro.
The main camera compartment did come in handy while on safari. Since I was just sitting in a jeep for 5 days I could keep the compartment with my gear near my feet and access stuff from that while keeping the daypack in the back of the jeep.
Also, there was no issues with airlines and using the 45L as a carry-on. I didn’t over pack it, though. I carried the main camera compartment outside of the bag as my “personal item”. That way I could fit more key clothing for the trip. I just attached a shoulder strap to the compartment handles. Wasn’t that comfortable but it got the job done.
I’m sure the bag will still come in handy on future trips but wasn’t ideal for Kilimanjaro.
Hope this info helps someone in the future!
Cheers,
Adam
Thank you and a couple commenters for such a wonderful write up! I’ve been looking for a pack that would allow me to only carry one bag. Currently I use a medium size day pack and my satchel camera back, but it really wears on my neck by the end of a long trip. Looking forward to this arriving next week, to use next weekend!
Nice review. Thank you for writing it.
One aspect is not very clear to me. Is there a physical separation (a barrier) between the upper compartment and the lower one (the one with the camera equipment bags)?
Thank you,
Daniele