Canon Tripod Ring - DPChallenge Forums

07/28/2004 08:57:20 AM · #1

Someone at photo.net claims the tripod ring mount for the 200mm 2.8 will fit perfectly on the 70-200mm f4 lens. Does anyone know if this is true? It's 35 dollars cheaper.

Mfr # 2889A002

Mfr # 2888A002

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

07/28/2004 10:54:13 AM · #2

anyone? i'll accept a guess at this point :)

EddyG

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

07/28/2004 11:10:40 AM · #3

OK, I say this... the fact that that it says:

Works ONLY with the EF 200mm f/2.8L "II" lens.
(bolded uppercase copied as-is!)

would be enough to cause me doubt. (Plus, the other one is white and would look much cooler mounted on the lens than the black one. =])

Jacko

Canon EOS-20D

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

07/28/2004 11:15:41 AM · #4

Here's my take on it. You don't need a tripod color ring. The lens is light enough that you don't need that. I know, because I own one. My $.02. If you want it to look more badass, go for it. If it's for practical reasons, save your money and go see strippers.

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

07/28/2004 11:24:11 AM · #5

Originally posted by Jacko:

So Jacko, you use the 70-200mm f4 with the camera on the tripod and have no problems? I've never owned a lens this heavy before, perhaps I'm just being overly careful.

Gordon

RIM BlackBerry Curve

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

07/28/2004 11:26:45 AM · #6

Originally posted by hopper:

Originally posted by Jacko:
Here's my take on it. You don't need a tripod color ring. The lens is light enough that you don't need that. I know, because I own one. My $.02. If you want it to look more badass, go for it. If it's for practical reasons, save your money and go see strippers.

So Jacko, you use the 70-200mm f4 with the camera on the tripod and have no problems? I've never owned a lens this heavy before, perhaps I'm just being overly careful.

I use this lens quite a lot on a tripod - depending what you are shooting, and how you are using it, then no, you don't need it on a tripod collar, certainly not with the D60/10D bodies.

No idea how it'll balance in comparison to a 300D, though it also has a metal lens mount, which I'd assume is also connected to the tripod mount on the camera, so should be fine.

Certainly there is a lot more lens 'bounce' with a lens this length than say a 50mm lens when on the body, on a tripod, but I either brace the lens with my hand, or use a cable release/ mirror lock up, depending on the shutter range I'm shooting within.

The real advantage of having a tripod collar is the simplicity for switching between landscape and portrait shots, while keeping the center of balance over the tripod. Flopping a tripod head 90 degrees to the side is about the worst possible way to get a portrait shot - removing most of the value of using a tripod in the first place.

A collar helps you do this more easily. An L bracket for the camera body is also very useful to allow this, particularly when working with smaller lenses.

Message edited by author 2004-07-28 11:28:58.

EddyG

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

07/28/2004 11:41:01 AM · #7

Originally posted by hopper:

I've never owned a lens this heavy before, perhaps I'm just being overly careful.

I walk around with the 70-200/2.8L IS (which weighs twice as much as the Æ�/4!) hanging from the mount of my camera, slung over my shoulder by an Op/Tech ProStrap. I did the same thing when I had a 10D. When I first got the 70-200, I was also worried about the torque of the heavy lens somehow damaging the camera, but I was assured by multiple people that you really don't have anyting to worry about.

As Gordon mentioned, the biggest benefit of the tripod ring is balance and near-instant ability to switch orientation when shooting from something like a monopod (great for sports).