For me personally, any bag made by Billingham is an outstanding choice. They are the best bags for the money in my experience. I have Hadley Pro that has stood the test of time (15 years). I also have a newer 225 that is a great bag for carrying more than the Hadley Pro can carry but is still a manageable load. I recently got a Hadley Digital which is my daily carry bag for one camera, one lens. It is perfect for that role.

If you have the extra cash and can survive the sticker shock, the Fogg Last Waltz is the gold standard (to be fair to Fogg, $250 of the price is a tariff that is levied on the bags by the Political Class in Washington). We can't blame bee & Nigel for that. I have a Last Waltz, but it is such a thing of beauty that I rarely carry it (silly, I know).

For me it would be -
Erdene Zuu monastery (Karakorum, Mongolia)
The old town of Kyoto, Japan
Katmandu, Nepal
Angkor Wat, Cambodia

I have been to Erdene Zuu monastery, but not to the other three. Not yet...

I had the original M240 and I now have the M-P 240. The most significant differences between the two are that the M-P 240 has: No Leica red dot logo; sapphire glass (the scratch proof glass Rolex uses for its watch crystals) rear LCD screen (the M240 has Gorilla Glass); and the buffer in the M-P 240 is 2 GB while the buffer in the M240 is 1 GB.

With my M240, the buffer would sometimes get a data logjam when shooting. I would have to turn it off, remove the battery, reinstall the battery and turn it back on. I never had this happen with the M-P 240. that alone is worth the extra $600 cost IMO.

The sapphire glass rear screen is said to cont nearly $1000 on its own, so getting that upgrade plus the 2 GB buffer is quite a good deal for $600.

My M240 was starting to show micro scratches on the Gorilla Glass rear screen - you would not see them unless the light reflected off it at the right angle, but it was annoying. Gorilla Glass is resistant to major scratches, but it would still show these micro scratches.

The more costly sapphire glass on my M-P 240 shows no scratches and I have been shooting with it for 7 years, 2 months.

The Q2 produces jpeg files when shooting in black and white. The Q2 Monochrom produces DNG files in black and white. Big difference if you want to make exhibit quality prints.

The other difference is ISO. The Q2 has a maximum ISO of 50,000. However: Noise starts to become problematic (for printing, that is) at ISO 3200.

The Q2 Monochrom has a maximum ISO of 100,000. Because there is no Bayer filter array, you have a higher maximum ISO as well as a higher usable ISO. The Q2 Monochrom's noise looks more like film grain than the color Q2's noise. Also, depending on who you ask, the Q2 Mono has a usable ISO of somewhere between 20,000 and 30,000.

With the Q2M if you want to make exhibit quality prints and stick with ISO 20,000 or even lower to err on the side of caution, you still have a blindingly fast usable ISO when compared to the color Q2.

If you are a black and white lover, the Q2 Monochrom is the obvious choice IMHO.

One of my cameras is 24 mp. With it, I can make exhibit quality 24x36 inch prints. I am using the full image area most of the time, and not doing significant cropping - only hairline crops to clean up the edges of the frame, if needed. With this 24 mp camera, my 16x24 inch prints look even better.

If you are making large prints, more megapixels is always better. Don't look down on 24 mp cameras - they are capable of a lot more than people give them credit for.

The need here is obvious -

1: A well thought out, reasonable policy that makes sense;
2: Written notification to hotel guests that is unambiguous and does not require translation, extrapolation or guesswork;
3: Notification of said policy on the hotel website, posted in plain sight in the lobby and given in writing to guests before they spend their money on a room.

If the hotel had taken the above measures, there would not have been a problem to begin with.

That I could live with - but that is not what the OP said he was told.

"No (supposed) professional cameras on hotel property." Right. Got it. So exactly what is a photographer supposed to do with his/her equipment after they have paid money to stay in this hotel? Put their thousands of dollars worth of camera gear in a cardboard box and set it on the sidewalk across the street so as to not offend the hotel's manager and arbitrary rules?

As the original poster stated, there was no notice on the hotel's website or in the hotel lobby or room that "professional" cameras are forbidden. Why? Because it would drive business away.

There are reasonable hotel rules and then there are arbitrary, asinine rules. Guess which category this "No professional cameras" rule is in.

I have always done my own sensor cleaning and have always had good results. Over the past 5+ years, I have needed to clean my sensor 2-3 times per year. I have always used the following products -
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/259157-REG/Giottos_AA1900_Rocket_Air_Blower.html
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1165567-REG/photographic_solutions_us3box_ultra_swab_type_3.html
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/127525-REG/Photographic_Solutions_EC_Eclipse_Optic_Lens_Cleaning.html

The key to sensor cleaning is to follow the instructions in your camera manual to the letter. The same goes for the blower, fluid and sensor cleaning swabs.

If you will put 4 or 5 drops of sensor cleaning solution on the swab - 2 on one side, 3 on the other side, at the cleaning edge - then wait 15-20 seconds for the fluid to wick into the swab and distribute itself uniformly, you won't have any problems.

Using too much fluid can result in cleaning problems and in extreme cases, electrical damage to the camera. This happened to a friend of mine who had his sensor cleaned by a "professional" camera shop. The repair cost was $250.00 and Canon told my friend that the problem was caused by liquid damage to the electronics of the camera.

Mongolia (would be my third trip there).
Vietnam (first time).
Japan (first time).
Thailand (first time).

I am using the Pelican 1510 case with Pelican's divider insert. This case is extremely sturdy and protective of my camera gear and it can be locked securely by using standard Master padlocks that are available at Lowes, Meinard, etc.

Here is a look at the 1510; https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1347953-REG/pelican_015100_0040_190_1510_case_with_dividers.html

I live an hour south of Indianapolis and have sold several cameras/lenses to Roberts/Used Photo Pro over the years. IMHO they have always offered a fair price for my used gear.

A person might be able to get a little more cash out of their used cameras/lenses if you were to sell them on ebay, but not enough to make it worth the effort of listing, selling, shipping and paying ebay and paypal their commissions.

With Roberts/Used Photo Pro, selling is quick and easy and you avoid the potential pitfalls of ebay such as buyers trying to scam you in one way or another. When you deal with Roberts, there are no after the sale headaches.

In my experience, it is the lens and the sensor that determine image quality.

All camera manufacturers have capable image processors in their cameras these days; that is pretty much a given. Camera makers extol the performance of their lenses and sensors, not their processors.

Sensor technology has advanced exponentially over the years; that has had a positive effect on image quality.

I have a camera (Leica M-P 240) that is 5 years, 7 months old; its 24 mp sensor's maximum ISO is 6400 which means that for making exhibit quality prints at larger sizes, ISO 800 is fairly safe. ISO 1250 may be usable, depending on the lighting circumstances (shadows, overall contrast, type of light and reflections). Higher ISOs are usable with this camera, if you want to share the image digitally - but for making 16x24 inches or larger prints that I can hang in a gallery, I stick to using 15-20% of the camera's maximum ISO.

I was able to acquire a new camera (Leica Q2) in November of 2019. It has a maximum ISO of 50,000 and a a much newer 47.3 mp sensor with improved sensor technology. If I stick to my 15-20% of maximum ISO guideline, I can now go as high as ISO 7500 to 10,000 and still have the image quality I need for print making. That is a huge increase in usable ISO.

The higher usable ISO range of my Q2 means that I have greatly extended low light shooting capability where I can hand hold the camera or get away with using a monopod rather than needing to go to a tripod to get the images I want.

My M-P 240 is still capable of producing high quality images and prints, but not hand held in the low light environments that my Q2 can. With the 240, I need a tripod or at bare minimum, a monopod for low light shooting.

STUNNING IMAGES!

Now I want my XPAN back. :-(

VERY nice images, congratulations!

I am not a wildlife photographer but several people in my photography club are. I understand the difficulty in capturing a high quality, well composed image of a Heron or a raptor. My hat is off for anyone who can do that.