View allAll Photos Tagged bug
From a Milk Weed that they say attracts Butterflies I spotted all this other and assuming there tiny bugs of some sort I just let them be.
so the dryer is our biggest weapon for fighting these buggers at home. this dryer has been doing overtime in a bed bug ridden house of nine. i ran my loads on high for three entire cycles and then put the loads directly into the trunk of my car, the only clean place. the fracking dryer is so old and worn out it isn't getting hot enough anymore. all the housemates were putting their buggy sheets in there and giving the bugs a fun little free magic mountain ride, and then they crawled onto my shit and then onto me. i discovered this when i put on a pair of shorts from the clean load in my trunk and was eaten alive by bugs immediately. i contaminated my goddamn car.
Near Shuri, in Okinawa, I saw this bug. The colors are simply amazing!
Too bad that the lighting conditions were a bit challenging for a macro picture, and I did not have a tripod with me.
After taking a quick shot of the rain on the new mini rose bush, I noticed a bug.....
The hole in the finger is because people do silly things, but the finger was placed to give an idea of the small size of bug this headshot belongs to.
Canon 40D
90mm Tamron w/ 50mm backwards
430EX using an S2 light chute.
Lots of light, lots of Aperture
Harlequin Cabbage Bug
Los Leones Canyon
Pacific Palisades, CA
These bugs are considered pests in gardens or to crops as they suck sap and chlorophyll from plants. The bugs were native to Central American and are believed to have spread to the U.S. from Mexico after the Civil War.
This is my first attempt at interval shooting of lightning bugs. An earlier attempt of mine was simply long exposure.
The green lights are the male bugs. I used a stack of layers in PhotoShop for time lapse photography. The purple light is the residue of the sun that set at least half an hour earlier.
I wish this photo were better.
I struggled with the interval settings of my camera for a long time in the dark. My camera's buttons are illuminated as its back LCD, so I could navigate the settings reasonably well in the dark. I thought I had set up the camera correctly during the day hours but here in the field at night it just wouldn't go on. Finally, I realized I had turned on my timer to photo the dim scenery at twilight and that the interval program could not be activated while the timer was on. Whew! Problem solved. But I think I knocked the focus of my lens slightly off in the process of fixing the interval shooting.
By my third attempt, I was better with my camera and its nighttime stack/interval settings but unfortunately the lightning bugs had faded out. I think for the season. They also were collecting in the trees, where they weren't moving much. The field I used on my first attempt was much better since the lightning bugs were on the move.
My first attempt above may be the lightning bugs' last big shindig this season. I see them still out but they just aren't in the numbers that they were. I also have a scenic location picked out, but apparently, the lightning bugs do not consider my location such a perfect place.
I'm posting this as a benchmark for myself. I know the perfect background that I want for a lightning bug shooting. Now if only the lightning bugs and my camera will cooperate.
The Thing from Another World 1951
Watch the skies, everywhere! Keep looking. Keep watching the skies!
—Ned “Scotty” Scott
www.youtube.com/v/T5xcVxkTZzM Trailer
This is one of the major classics of 50s sci fi movies. Released in April of 1951, it was the first full-length film to feature a flying saucer from outer space, which carried a hostile alien. The budget and the effects are typical B-grade stuff, but the acting and pacing are well above the usual B levels. Kenneth Toby and Margaret Sheriden star. James Arness (more known for his westerns) plays The Thing.
Howard Hawks' early foray into the science fiction genre took advantage of the anti-communist feelings of the time to help enhance the horror elements of the story. McCarthyism and the Korean War added fuel to the notion of Americans stalked by a force which was single of mind and "devoid of morality." But in the end, it is American soldiers and scientists who triumph over the evil force - or the monster in the case of this film. Even today, this is considered one of the best of the genre.
Film review by Jeff Flugel. June 2013
There's not a lot new or particularly insightful I can offer when it comes to discussing the seminal sci-fi flick, The Thing from Another World that hasn't been written about ad naseum elsewhere. One of the most famous and influential of all 1950s creature features, it kicked off more than a decade of alien invasion and bug-eyed monster movie mayhem, inspired a host of future filmmakers (one of whom, John Carpenter, would go on to direct his own version of the story in 1982), and remains one of the best-written and engaging films of its kind.
Loosely (and I do mean loosely) adapted from John W. Campbell's novella, "Who Goes There?," The Thing is legendary director Howard Hawks' lone foray into the science fiction/ horror genres, but it fits comfortably into his filmography, featuring as it does Hawks' favorite themes: a group of tough professionals doing their job with ease, good-humored banter and practiced finesse; a bit of romance with a gutsy dame who can easily hold her own with the boys; and lots of overlapping, razor-sharp dialogue. Featuring a script by Charles Lederer and an uncredited Ben Hecht, The Thing is easily the most spryly written and funniest of all 50s monster movies. In fact, it's this sharpness in the scripting, and the extremely likeable ensemble cast of characters, rather than the now-familiar story and somewhat unimaginative monster design, that makes the film still feel fresh and modern to this day.
There's likely few people out there reading this who don't know the story of The Thing like the back of their hand, but here goes...When an unidentified aircraft crashes close to a remote research station near the North Pole, Captain Pat Hendry (Kenneth Tobey, in the role of his career) and his squad are dispatched there to investigate. Dr. Carrington (Robert Cornthwaite) heads the scientific contingent there, and he informs Hendry that he thinks the downed craft is possibly "not of this earth." A joint team of soldiers and scientists head out to the crash site and find an actual, honest-to-goodness flying saucer lying buried under the ice.
The spaceship is destroyed while the men try to melt the ice around it with thermite bombs, but they find a lone, 8-foot-tall extraterrestrial occupant frozen nearby and bring the body back to the outpost in a block of ice. Dr. Carrington and his crew of eggheads want to study the thing, but Hendry is adamant that it should be kept as is until he gets word from his superior in Anchorage, General Fogerty. It wouldn't be a monster movie without something going pear-shaped, of course, and before you know it, a careless mistake results in the creature being thawed out of his iceberg coffin and going on a bit of a rampage, taking out a number of sled dogs and a few unsuspecting scientists along the way. The rest of the film details the tense battle between the surviving humans and the coldly intelligent, remorseless alien invader, which seems virtually unkillable, impregnable to cold, bullets and fire...
The set-up for the film, and how everything eventually plays out, might seem overly familiarly nowadays, but in 1951, this was cutting-edge stuff, at least in cinemas. The Thing plays as a veritable blueprint of how to make a compelling "alien monster-on-the-loose" movie. Howard Hawks not being particularly well-versed, or even interested in, science fiction per se likely worked to its benefit, as he ended up making, as he so often did in his other films, what is first-and-foremost a well-oiled entertainment, rather than simply a genre exercise.
Typical of a Hawks film, The Thing is meticulously designed, composed and shot, but in such a way as to appear offhand. Hawks almost never went in for showy camera angles or flashy effects. His technique was nearly invisible; he just got on with telling the story, in the most straightforward, unfussy way. But this easy, seemingly effortless style was very carefully considered, by a shrewd and knowing mind. As Bill Warren, author of one of the best (and certainly most encyclopedic) books about 1950s sci-fi filmmaking, Keep Watching the Skies, notes in his detailed analysis of the film:
As most good movies do, The Thing works in two areas: sight and sound. The locale is a cramped, tunnel-like base; the men are confined within, the Thing can move freely outdoors in the cold. Compositions are often crowded, with more people in the shot than seems comfortable, reinforcing the idea of confinement After the Thing escapes, only the alien itself is seen standing and moving alone.
This feeling of a cold, hostile environment outside the base is constantly reinforced throughout the film, and a real tension mounts when, towards the climax, the highly intelligent Thing, itself immune to the subzero arctic conditions, turns off the compound's heating, knowing the humans inside will quickly die without it. (The freaky, otherworldly theremin-flavored music by Dimitri Tiomkin adds a lot to the eerie atmosphere here.)
As groundbreaking and well-structured as the plot of The Thing was (and is), what makes the film play so well today is the great script and the interaction of a bunch of seasoned character actors, who toss off both exposition and pithy bon mots in such a low-key, believable manner. This is a truly ensemble movie, and the fact that it doesn't feature any big name stars really adds to the overall effect; no one really hogs all the limelight or gets the lion's share of good lines. Hawks was a director who usually worked with the biggest names in the business, but, much as in the earlier Air Force, he was equally at home working with a cast of rock-solid character actors.
All this talk of Howard Hawks as director, when it's actually Christian Nyby who is credited with the job, has long been a source of speculation with fans of the film. Todd McCarthy, in his bio Howard Hawks: The Grey Fox of Hollywood, seems to clear the issue up once and for all (though really, after viewing enough Hawks films, the results speak for themselves):
The perennial question surrounding The Thing From Another World has always been, Who actually directed it, Christian Nyby or Howard Hawks? The sum of participants' responses make the answer quite clear. Putting it most bluntly, (associate producer) Ed Lasker said "Chris Nyby didn't direct a thing. One day Howard was late and Chris said,'Why don't we get started? I know what the shot should be.' And I said, 'No, Chris, I think we'll wait until Howard gets here." Ken Tobey testified, "Chris Nyby directed one scene. Howard Hawks was there, but he let Chris direct one scene. We all rushed into a room, eight or ten of us, and we practically knocked each other over. No one knew what to do." Dewey Martin, Robert Cornthwaite and Richard Keinen all agreed that Hawks was the director, and Bill Self said, "Chris Nyby was a very nice, decent fellow, but he wasn't Howard Hawks."
Nyby had been Hawks' editor on a number of films, and Hawks apparently decided to help his collaborator establish a name for himself by allowing him directorial credit on the film. This seemingly altruistic gesture didn't mean that Hawks wasn't involved in virtually every aspect of the making of the film, however, and ultimately, The Thing did little for Nyby's directing career, at least on the big screen (he did go on to a long and busy career directing for numerous television programs, however.)
Bill Self was told at the time that Hawks didn't take directing credit on The Thing because it was planned as a low-budget film, one in which RKO didn't have much confidence. But, as critics have been saying ever since it was released, The Thing is a Howard Hawks film in everything but name. The opening scene of various members of the team bantering is so distilled as to be a virtual parody of Hawksian overlapping dialogue. Even more than Only Angels Have Wings, the picture presents a pristine example of a group operating resourcefully in a hermetically sealed environment in which everything in the outside world represents a grave threat. (3)
In addition to all the masculine camaraderie and spooky goings-on, one of the best aspects of The Thing is the fun, charming little tease of a romance between Capt. Hendry and Nikki (top-billed Margaret Sheridan). Nikki works as Prof. Carrington's assistant and is not merely the requisite "babe" in the film. True to the Hawksian norm, she's no pushover when it comes to trading insults with the men, nor a shrinking violet when up to her neck in perilous situations. Unlike most actresses in 50s monster movies, she doesn't utter a single scream in The Thing
and in fact, it's her practical suggestion which gives Bob, Hendry's ever-resourceful crew chief (Dewey Martin), the notion of how to finally kill the monster. Lederer and Hecht's screenplay hints at the backstory to Nikki and Pat's relationship in humorous and oblique ways, and their flirtation amidst all the chaos adds sparkle to the film but never gets in the way of the pace of the story. One nice little throwaway exchange near the finale encapsulates their verbal give-and-take, as Nikki playfully pokes the temporarily-befuddled Hendry, as his men scurry about, setting Bob's plan in motion.
Nikki: Looks as if the situation's well in hand.
Hendry: I've given all the orders I'm gonna give.
Nikki: If I thought that were true, I'd ask you to marry me.
Sheridan, a former model signed to a 5-year contract by Hawks, is quite good here, but after The Thing her career never really caught fire and she retired from acting a few years later. The closest thing to a star turn in the film is Kenneth Tobey as Capt. Hendry. Tobey racked up an impressive number of credits throughout his nearly 50-year-long career, generally as gruff, competent military men or similar types, and he was always good value, though it's as Capt. Hendry in The Thing that he truly shines. He consistently humanizes the no-nonsense, take charge man of action Hendry by displaying an easygoing approach to command. Most of Hendry's men call him by his first name, and delight in ribbing him about his budding romance with Nikki, and he responds to all this joshing in kind. When things get hairy, Tobey's Hendry doesn't have to bark his orders; it's clear that, despite the friendly banter, his men hold him in high esteem and leap to do his bidding at a moment's notice.
Many of the other members of the cast, while none of them ever became household names, will likely be recognizable from countless other roles in both film and television. Hawks gave Dewey Martin co-star billing in The Big Sky a few years later. Robert Cornthwaite kept busy for decades on stage and television, as well as in supporting roles in films such as Monkey Business, Kiss Me Deadly and Whatever Happened to Baby Jane? John Dierkes (Dr. Chapman) and Douglas Spencer (Scotty) both had juicy roles in the western classic Shane, as well as many other movies too numerous to name. Sharp-eyed viewers will also recognize Eduard Franz, Paul Frees (he of the famous voice) and Groucho Marx's right-hand man on You Bet Your Life, George Fenneman, in pivotal roles. And of course we mustn't forget 6' 7" James Arness (years before becoming renowned as Marshall Matt Dillon on Gunsmoke) as the hulking Thing.
A quick note on the "remake": John Carpenter's The Thing (1982), a bleak, grisly and brilliant take on the story, was a box-office dud when first released, but has since attained well-deserved status as a modern classic. While most fans seem divided into two camps - those who love the more restrained, old-fashioned thrills of the original, and those who prefer the more visceral, paranoiac Carpenter version - I happen to treasure both films equally and revisit each of them often. The Carpenter version is by far the gutsier, unsettling one, emphasizing as it does the "trust no one," shape-shifting "the alien is one of us" scenario imagined by John W. Campbell, but the Hawks' film is the most fun, with a far more likeable array of characters, working together to defeat an implacable menace. Each has its own clear merits. I wouldn't want to do without either film, and frankly see no need to choose one over the other.
"Every one of you listening to my voice...tell the world. Tell this to everybody, wherever they are: Watch the skies. Everywhere. Keep looking. Keep watching the skies.”
Acting Credits
Margaret Sheridan - Nikki Nicholson
Kenneth Tobey - Captain Patrick Hendrey
Robert Cornthwaite - Professor Carrington
Dewey Martin - Crew Chief
Douglas Spencer - Ned "Scotty" Scott
Eduard Franz - Dr Stern
Robert Nichols - Lieutenant Ken Erickson
William Self - Colonel Barnes
Sally Creighton - Mrs Chapman
John Dierkes - Dr. Chapman
James R. Young - Lieutenant Eddie Dykes
Norbert Schiller - Dr. Laurenz
William Neff - Olson
Allan Ray - Officer
Lee Tung Foo - Cook
Edmund Breon - Dr. Ambrose
George Fenneman - Dr. Redding
Tom Steele - Stuntman
James Arness - The Thing
Billy Curtis - The Thing While Shrinking
Bugger .. look at the camber on those back wheels .
A fine pair of VW Bugs , and there were more ..
Cooly Rocks On
Coolangatta . Gold Coast
I shoot insects and bugs sometimes daily, but it's only once a year that I get to shoot Volkswagen "Bugs" :-) This is a great little car show with great cars, friendly people and a very chill vibe. Some really nice VW's show up at this one. Makes me want to get back in the garage and get back to work on my Karmann Ghia! Had Fun!! Shot all of these with a Fuji X-E3 with a 7Artisans 35mm f/1.2 lens. Acros "Ye" color profile, and I think the regular Monochrome setting for a few shots at the end. Only shot a couple photos in color. They're included in this album. So far fairly impressed with this little setup.
Although this picture is not really sharp I nevertheless like it.
I'm afraid I will be IMacless for a while... as this memory card doesn't want to get out of the CD slot...
Have a great week my Flickr friends!
© All rights reserved. Please don't use any of my images on websites, blogs or other media without my explicit permission.
Can you believe they made a sporty three-wheeler? Well they did, and here it is, the Bong Bug!
The Bond Bug is a small British two-seat, three-wheeled automobile which was built from 1970 to 1974, initially by Bond Cars Ltd and subsequently by the Reliant Motor Company. It is a wedge-shaped microcar, with a lift-up canopy and side screens instead of conventional doors.
Following the purchase of Bond Cars Ltd., Reliant commissioned Tom Karen of Ogle Design to design a fun car. The Bond Bug was based on Chief Engineer John Crosthwaite's newly designed chassis and some Reliant Regal running gear. The original concept was explored by chopping down a production Regal vehicle, the rear of the car being shortened to end over the rear axle. This prototype could be seen for many years later, languishing in the yard at the rear of the factory, by anyone who cared to look through the chain-link fence from the canal towpath.
The engine is the front-mounted 700 cc (later uprated to 750 cc) Reliant light-alloy four-cylinder unit, developed from the Austin 7, and which protruded into the passenger cabin. At launch 29hp was claimed for the less expensive 700 and 700E models. The more up-market 700ES incorporates a redesigned cylinder head which permitted the compression ratio to be increased from 7.35:1 to 8.4:1. This provided a power increase to 31hp as well as improved torque for the then range topping 700ES.
The Bond Bug 700ES also offers more supportive seats as well as more padding over the engine cowl, twin mudflaps, an ashtray, a rubber front bumper and a spare wheel.
The car enjoyed an upbeat launch, at which Reliant's Ray Wiggin stated: "The fact it has three wheels is quite incidental. It's a new form of transport. So now, in fact, we think it's going to appeal to a much wider section of the market than we originally envisaged."
The Bug was available in a bright orange tangerine colour, although six white Bugs were produced for a Rothmans cigarette promotion - one of which was also used in an advertisement for Cape fruit and at the moment a Dulux Bond Bug is said to be under commission. Its fame was helped along by a distinctive Corgi Toys die-cast toy car. Although it had a fairly short production run (1970–1974), it has a dedicated following today.
In contrast to the image of three-wheeled Reliants as being slow, the Bond Bug was capable of 76mph, in excess of the UK national speed limit, and comparable to small saloon cars such as the basic 850 cc Mini (72mph) and the Hillman Imp (80mph). However, it could not match the speed of the Mini Cooper S (96mph) or larger saloons such as the Ford Cortina Mark III (104mph in the highest-powered variant), or even ageing models of two-seater sports cars, such as the MG MGB (103mph) or the Lotus Seven, where by 1970 even the lowest-powered version of the S4 could reach 108mph.
The Bond Bug was sold as being fun to drive, with the low seating position giving a similar exaggerated impression of speed as in a go-kart, while the actual speed was similar to that reached by high performance cars only a few years earlier (indeed, earlier versions of the Lotus 7 had a top speed of 76 mph right up until 1968, and their trim level, e.g. side curtains instead of windows, was also similar).
The Bug was, however, no cheaper than more practical cars. It cost £629, while a basic 850 cc Mini, a four-seater much faster round corners but with considerably inferior acceleration, cost £620. Also, while a basic Lotus Seven (with much faster acceleration and good cornering) cost £945 in 1970, it was also available as a complete knocked down kit much more cheaply, partly because of more favourable tax treatment.
Assassin bug sculpture by David Rogers at Cape Fear Botanical Gardens in Fayetteville, North Carolina
Awesome set of mandibles you've got there, Mr Cottonwood Borer. But you're still kind of creepy. BUG! (This is the giant crawly thing I found in the front yard after shooing the giant slithery thing out of the back yard. I thought we lived in a CITY ... where are my drivebys?)
Detail of the outer pocket in the Vaude Cycle 25. Note the mesh zipped pocket for keys, coins, etc; as well as the pen holders.
---
A much anticipated comparison between two pannier/rucksac products from two of the leading brands (a pity Ortlieb hasn’t come out with a good solution yet).
So I got the Arkel Bug a couple of years ago, and was extremely disappointed with the result. The fitting hooks did not fit my Zefal rack (one of the most widely available brands in France and Spain), so I had to replace the rack. Then I discovered that the aluminium hooks were so sharp that they literally destroyed the metal part of the rack on the contact point.
As a rucksack is not very comfortable either, the metal hook that attaches the bag to the bottom part of the bike rack is always on the way (that’s on your back); you got two clunky bits of aluminium up your neck (the bag is really tall), there’s no chest strap, and to make things worse, the bottom of the bag is shaped as a wedge, so the bag is never ever going to stand, it just falls (ok for a pannier that you are not going to be putting anywhere but on your bike rack…but not very clever for a rucksack that you are to take with you anywhere, librarly, class, office, sports centre, etc).
On the fabric/material side comes the only plus of the bag. The entire product oozes quality (at 179 $ / 100 GBP is the least you can get); for the ridiculously high price you don’t even get a rain cover. Result: I haven’t used the bag for 2 years. The inside of the bag is “Spartan” to say the least. The back is not padded and there is no pocket/keyring/pen holder of any kind.
Same goes for the outer pocket (there is an extra hidden pocket that is supposed to house the raincover). So it seems that they took a pannier and tried to double it as a rucksack adding some features; a complete fail (since it simply doesn’t work), obviously in my opinion.
So last month I bought a Vaude Cycle 25, another pannier/rucksack combo I had been looking at for years (after wasting a lot of cash on the Arkel Bug, I didn’t exactly felt like spending more on another bag, so I stuck to my Ortlieb panniers until now). So I got the Vaude. What a nice surprise.
The bag is almost 400 gram lighter that it’s Canadian counterpart (which is nearly 50% of its weight). The bag comes with plastic hooks that fit into my Tubus rack AND it comes with an extra pair of hooks for thicker tubed racks (say a Zefal or a German/Dutch bike). The fitting on the bike is fast with a black adjustable rubber band. The fabric not the Vaude is not as sturdy as the Arkel’s Cordura, but it’s tons lighter AND comes with a raincover, that it’s neatly stowed on a lower compartment. This same compartment houses the “pannier system” ; you simply undo the zip, and the pannier hooks disappear of sight under the bag leaving you with a proper rucksack (way more comfortable than the Arkel), a bag that no one would actually suspects is a pannier.
The inside of the bag looks also like a proper rucksack, there is a padded compartment for a laptop/books, a keyring hanger, and the outer pocket has lots of little pockets for coins, mobile phone, etc.
The Vaude comes with an extra flexible attachment to carry a helmet. All in all, a really well made bag, light, comfortable and nice. But most of all, a product that delivers (at a reasonable price, you could actually buy more than 2 Vaude for the price of the Arkel).
Arkel Bug: 1365 gr (3 Lb): 179 $ (100 GBP)
Vaude Cycle 25: 980 gr (2 Lb 2 Oz): 45 GBP
A review of someone who likes the Arkel Bug: EcoVelo
A review of someone who does not like the Arkel Bug: Why I hate my Arkel Bug
Grey Fan-tail enjoying a feast of flying bugs.... Seen at Bodalla in New South Wales.... Short-listed by the Australian Geographic Nature Photographer of The Year Competition 2022. This photo appeared in their exhibition and the book of the exhibition yet it has drawn few likes on Flicker or on Instagram... Curious isn't it?
He was climbing around on my blinds. Only about an inch long but moving very slowly like a stick bug (if that is even a correct term) so I thought he might just be a youngster. Anyway, he is still in the house somewhere. I guess I should have captured him and released him outside.
Hand held macro
Many of you know about the ambush bug. I love this shot because it shows the legs and how they are adapted for holding prey (front) and anchoring while capturing prey (hind legs.) I also like this shot because it shows the groove the antenna fit into for protection during combat. Note too the poisonous beak tucked in behind the face plate. Also admire the serrated crab like claws used for grasping prey. All in all it is a worthy opponent.
Detail of one of the two outer zipped pockets in the Arkel Bug. The zip in this one is water resistant. The pocket does not have any special inside diveder/pocket/mesh
---
A much anticipated comparison between two pannier/rucksac products from two of the leading brands (a pity Ortlieb hasn’t come out with a good solution yet).
So I got the Arkel Bug a couple of years ago, and was extremely disappointed with the result. The fitting hooks did not fit my Zefal rack (one of the most widely available brands in France and Spain), so I had to replace the rack. Then I discovered that the aluminium hooks were so sharp that they literally destroyed the metal part of the rack on the contact point.
As a rucksack is not very comfortable either, the metal hook that attaches the bag to the bottom part of the bike rack is always on the way (that’s on your back); you got two clunky bits of aluminium up your neck (the bag is really tall), there’s no chest strap, and to make things worse, the bottom of the bag is shaped as a wedge, so the bag is never ever going to stand, it just falls (ok for a pannier that you are not going to be putting anywhere but on your bike rack…but not very clever for a rucksack that you are to take with you anywhere, librarly, class, office, sports centre, etc).
On the fabric/material side comes the only plus of the bag. The entire product oozes quality (at 179 $ / 100 GBP is the least you can get); for the ridiculously high price you don’t even get a rain cover. Result: I haven’t used the bag for 2 years. The inside of the bag is “Spartan” to say the least. The back is not padded and there is no pocket/keyring/pen holder of any kind.
Same goes for the outer pocket (there is an extra hidden pocket that is supposed to house the raincover). So it seems that they took a pannier and tried to double it as a rucksack adding some features; a complete fail (since it simply doesn’t work), obviously in my opinion.
So last month I bought a Vaude Cycle 25, another pannier/rucksack combo I had been looking at for years (after wasting a lot of cash on the Arkel Bug, I didn’t exactly felt like spending more on another bag, so I stuck to my Ortlieb panniers until now). So I got the Vaude. What a nice surprise.
The bag is almost 400 gram lighter that it’s Canadian counterpart (which is nearly 50% of its weight). The bag comes with plastic hooks that fit into my Tubus rack AND it comes with an extra pair of hooks for thicker tubed racks (say a Zefal or a German/Dutch bike). The fitting on the bike is fast with a black adjustable rubber band. The fabric not the Vaude is not as sturdy as the Arkel’s Cordura, but it’s tons lighter AND comes with a raincover, that it’s neatly stowed on a lower compartment. This same compartment houses the “pannier system” ; you simply undo the zip, and the pannier hooks disappear of sight under the bag leaving you with a proper rucksack (way more comfortable than the Arkel), a bag that no one would actually suspects is a pannier.
The inside of the bag looks also like a proper rucksack, there is a padded compartment for a laptop/books, a keyring hanger, and the outer pocket has lots of little pockets for coins, mobile phone, etc.
The Vaude comes with an extra flexible attachment to carry a helmet. All in all, a really well made bag, light, comfortable and nice. But most of all, a product that delivers (at a reasonable price, you could actually buy more than 2 Vaude for the price of the Arkel).
Arkel Bug: 1365 gr (3 Lb): 179 $ (100 GBP)
Vaude Cycle 25: 980 gr (2 Lb 2 Oz): 45 GBP
A review of someone who likes the Arkel Bug: EcoVelo
A review of someone who does not like the Arkel Bug: Why I hate my Arkel Bug