Bests & Worsts Reviews from Amazon

I have a large genuine-leather rucksack that I use as a weekender bag, but I was looking for something a bit smaller to serve as a carry-on “personal item” when flying. I took a chance in ordering this bag, and I’m pleasantly surprised by its construction and appearance. I thought it might be interesting to compare this backpack with my other much more expensive one, which is what I do below. First, though, let’s set the “leather” issue here to rest: Animal skin (like human skin) consists of several layers that are separated when it’s processed as leather. Not surprisingly, the top layer is the best, for it contains the full color and grain, but the next few layers are also useful. By the time you get down to the bottom layer, though, you’re dealing with dreck that by itself has essentially no value. “PU leather” is created by making this otherwise useless dreck into a kind of base layer to which a top layer of synthetic material, colored and artificially embossed to look like leather, is bonded. So, yes, there’s a smidgen of animal material in the invisible backing of PU leather, but everything you actually see and touch is synthetic fakery. This is not necessarily bad, however; while PU leather won’t develop the character and patina that real leather acquires as it ages, it also won’t stain and can be easily cleaned. Eventually, unlike real leather, it may begin to spit and crack, but by that time, if you’re lucky, you’ve gotten an appropriate amount of use from it. So how does this Zebella backpack (hereafter, the Z bag) stand up again my famous-maker real-leather backpack (hereafter, the FM bag), which sold at major stores for $300 before it was discontinued? I compared them in four categories (see attached pictures too): 1. Appearance (picture 1). Yes, the FM bag has the smoothness and suppleness of real leather, while the Z bag is slightly stiffer. But the appearance of the two bags is quite similar, and I doubt that someone would readily identify the Z bag as fake even when touching it (though it might be more evident if you put the two bags side by side and asked, “Which one is fake?”). The construction of the Z bag is also impressive, with only one small point where corners were cut: the Z bag flaps are simply scissor trimmed and then decorated with a line of stitching, whereas flap edges on the FM bag are turned under and “hemmed” with the stitching. The Z bag’s flaps are also a slightly different color from the rest of the bag. 2. Straps and comfort (picture 2). Surprisingly, the Z bag has padded straps, while the $300 FM bag has only fabric straps. And among all the backpacks I’ve ever owned, the Z bag is the most comfortable one when carried with just one of the straps looped over a shoulder; it doesn’t slip or slide and feels well balanced on your shoulder. On mine, at least. The Z bag wins this point. 3. Pockets: The interior lining of the Z bag includes a single large pocket on one side and three smaller pockets on the other; none have closures or zippers. Inside the FM bag are two pockets, one with a magnetic catch and one with a zipper. Both seem more substantial that the Z bag’s pockets in the fabric lining. Exterior: the Z bag has two exterior pockets (one magnetic catch, one zippered) that you can access without undoing the straps; the FM bag does have two large external pockets, but you have to open the flap to get at them. (As others have noted, the side “pockets” on the Z bag are too small and tight to hold anything other than a pen or two.) This point is a draw. 4. Closure (picture 3). One of the features that appealed to me in the description of the Z bag is the top zipper under the flap, and it’s great protection against contents falling out. The FM bag has a leather drawstring that reduces the opening under the flap significantly, but as the picture shows, it’s still an opening. The Z bag’s design wins this point too. I’ve been using my Z bag for two weeks and have already gotten compliments on it. I suspect that my FM bag will ultimately outlast the Z bag, but for a backpack that cost one-tenth as much, it’s hard to see how you could go wrong with the Z.