| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/08/2006 02:27:21 AM · #1 |
Finally sucked it up and bought the tripod-mounting collar for my 70-200mm f/4L, and now I can do stuff like this:
Before, in that kind of breeze there was too much vibration when mounting from the camera's plate; the whole lens/camera package was out of balance. Plus of course, now I can switch from horizontal to vertical without changing height or horizontal position. I've wanted this gadget for the longest time, but was balking at the $100.00 price, which IMO is a flagrant ripoff...
Robt.
|
|
|
|
04/08/2006 02:54:41 AM · #2 |
wow look at that image! so sharp. what is this you speak of.. this collar? ;0)
any pics? |
|
|
|
04/08/2006 03:00:45 AM · #3 |
What a beautiful photo. I know you've got talent pulling for you but I swear that you've got a headstart with surroundings like that. Even if I were to match your skills, the gray/yellow of spring in Alberta just wouldn't compare. *jealous*
Do you know if they offer these (name-brand or after-market) for Sigma lenses? I haven't had any luck finding something like this for my 70-300. |
|
|
|
04/08/2006 03:01:09 AM · #4 |
It looks like this one:
(although that's the f/2.8 version of the lens.) It's a collar that mounts at the balance point of the lens/body combination, and you can loosen it and rotate the lens within the collar so the tripod stays set the same as you reorient the camera. But the main thing is, mounting this collar on the tripod stabilizes the whole package dramatically, so there's much less vibration. Shooting without the collar in a strong wind is hopeless, the whole package sets up harminic vibrations, especially in the vertical orientation when the camera's not centered over the column of the tripod but hanging to one side.
R.
|
|
|
|
04/08/2006 03:11:08 AM · #5 |
I have that same lens and yeah the collar thing is a huge ripoff. I've seen online where there is a black collar version (Tripod Collar A) that fits the lens and is much cheaper than the white version and it's of the same build but I've never seen it sold anywhere.
Message edited by author 2006-04-08 03:11:40.
|
|
|
|
04/08/2006 03:12:07 AM · #6 |
| Can't disagree with you Robert concerning the ridiculous price of the thing, but that one shot alone was worth the price tag. That's your little bungalow on the water's edge there, right? (heh heh) Have fun with the new "essential equipment". |
|
|
|
04/08/2006 03:12:34 AM · #7 |
Originally posted by ShorterThanJesus:
What a beautiful photo. I know you've got talent pulling for you but I swear that you've got a headstart with surroundings like that. Even if I were to match your skills, the gray/yellow of spring in Alberta just wouldn't compare. *jealous*
Do you know if they offer these (name-brand or after-market) for Sigma lenses? I haven't had any luck finding something like this for my 70-300. |
No, they certainly don't. The lens has to be designed for it, with a blank, inset portion of the barrel to receive it. And anyway, your 70-300mm is a much smaller, lighter lens than the long, heavy whit Canon zooms, so it's not as much of an issue for you.
You CAN buy "L" brackets to mount on the camera body that allow you to set the camera on the tripod vertically or horizontally by removing it and glipping it 90 degrees. Those are very handy, but good ones are pricy. Some of the best are made by "Really Right Stuff" (they have great ballheads too):
Really Right Stuff can be browsed here.
R.
|
|
|
|
04/08/2006 03:13:43 AM · #8 |
Originally posted by yanko:
I have that same lens and yeah the collar thing is a huge ripoff. I've seen online where there is a black collar version (Tripod Collar A) that fits the lens and is much cheaper than the white version and it's of the same build but I've never seen it sold anywhere. |
It's cheaper, but not that much cheaper. 20 bucks I think... Both were on backorder, I told them to send me whichever came in first :-)
R.
|
|
|
|
04/08/2006 03:18:33 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by nova:
Can't disagree with you Robert concerning the ridiculous price of the thing, but that one shot alone was worth the price tag. That's your little bungalow on the water's edge there, right? (heh heh) Have fun with the new "essential equipment". |
Yah, right... That's almost 2 million dollars worth of "bungalow", and it's a fixer-upper. I've got just as much house, a quarter mile inland, and mine's worth maybe 375K... And I wouldn't live down there even IF I could afford the house and the taxes; that's right smack in the teeth of the hurricanes, it's a very vulnerable location. Uninsurable, really... Where I am is like 50-60 feet above sea level and protected by a slight ridge to the south of me, so we don't feel the storms anywhere near as bad.
Robt.
|
|
|
|
04/08/2006 03:19:34 AM · #10 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Really Right Stuff can be browsed here.
R. |
Actually, the Manfrotto elbow brackets are very reasonable and don't interfere with camera operations like some of the ones that hug the camera sides as shown in Bear's link.
Manfrotto Junior Elbow
|
|
|
|
04/08/2006 03:27:52 AM · #11 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Actually, the Manfrotto elbow brackets are very reasonable and don't interfere with camera operations like some of the ones that hug the camera sides as shown in Bear's link. |
The Manfrotto Junior Elbow is an "unstable link", it projects or cantilevers the camera up. It actually increases the severity of vibration, in mych the same way that extending your center column does. The RRS brackets hug the camera and are extremely stable, they are form-fitting. They are specifically designed for each camera, and allow full functionality. I've seen the one for the 10D, it's a work of art. I'm just saving up my pennies...
R.
|
|
|
|
04/08/2006 03:30:17 AM · #12 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Actually, the Manfrotto elbow brackets are very reasonable and don't interfere with camera operations like some of the ones that hug the camera sides as shown in Bear's link. |
The Manfrotto Junior Elbow is an "unstable link", it projects or cantilevers the camera up. It actually increases the severity of vibration, in mych the same way that extending your center column does. The RRS brackets hug the camera and are extremely stable, they are form-fitting. They are specifically designed for each camera, and allow full functionality. I've seen the one for the 10D, it's a work of art. I'm just saving up my pennies...
R. |
Yes, but the ports where things are plugged in are blocked when mounted vertically.
I use the manfrotto bracket with all lenses except the 100-400 (it has a collar) and it is quite stable. The bracket is very solid. How tightly it's attached to the camera will make a difference though.
Message edited by author 2006-04-08 03:35:08.
|
|
|
|
04/08/2006 03:35:59 AM · #13 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Yes, but the ports where things are plugged in are blocked when mounted vertically. |
The USB port and the Video Out port are blocked, but not the cable release and the round connection, and those are the ones you need in the field anyway. It works for me; I used it on a 10D and I loved it. It's tight and compact and always on the camera, ready for use. It becomes a part of the camera, basically. I wouldn't be happy with a bracket I had to mount and unmount every time I got my camera out/stowed it away.
As far as stability goes, anytime you cantilever you are setting up a system that is susceptible to harmonic vibrations. I am sure the Manfrotto one worked well for you, I'm just disposed not to like it because I like my gear "snug and tight", low profile and solid.
Robt.
Message edited by author 2006-04-08 03:37:56.
|
|
|
|
04/08/2006 04:06:29 AM · #14 |
I only see a problem with the bigger heavier lenses for which a collar is more suitable anyway.
My only beef with the manfrotto bracket is it has to be removed to change the battery. (which the other one may not have to be)
|
|
|
|
08/23/2006 06:55:11 AM · #15 |
I found this thread because I was searching for info on the tripod collar. First, lovely image Bear Music. I'm just above the canal, myself. I just received the same lens and the question I have is whether or not I'm asking for trouble if I don't purchase the collar immediately. I understand what you mean by vibration in the wind. But, until I can get over the cost of the lens and justify shelling out another $100 for the collar (could buy enough duct tape to last me a lifetime), am I at risk of damaging my camera or lens by using the camera tripod plate with this lens? I have a middle-of-the-road tripod... not flimsy, but what you would expect in the $150 range.
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
08/23/2006 07:25:16 AM · #16 |
| Youd think for an 'L' glass lens, they would include the ring....even if they raised the price by $100. |
|
|
|
08/23/2006 07:41:03 AM · #17 |
Wow I didnt realize they never included the tripod collar with the lens. Both of my good telephotos that I have bought have come with them. One was a Zuiko 50-200 the other is my current 70-20 f2.8 Sigma.
MattO
|
|
|
|
08/23/2006 12:38:49 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by getnoutside:
I found this thread because I was searching for info on the tripod collar. First, lovely image Bear Music. I'm just above the canal, myself. I just received the same lens and the question I have is whether or not I'm asking for trouble if I don't purchase the collar immediately. I understand what you mean by vibration in the wind. But, until I can get over the cost of the lens and justify shelling out another $100 for the collar (could buy enough duct tape to last me a lifetime), am I at risk of damaging my camera or lens by using the camera tripod plate with this lens? I have a middle-of-the-road tripod... not flimsy, but what you would expect in the $150 range.
Thanks. |
As far as I can tell there's no "danger" involved. The 30D is a pretty robust body/mount, and the 70-200mm f/4L isn't THAT heavy a lens. I wouldn't worry about any damage at the lens/camera interface, if that's what you mean; especially not hand-holding, where you support the lens anyway, not the body. But, oddly enough, in practical terms the less sturdy your tripod the more important the collar is. My tripod is very decent (a Manfrotto) and even so I had issues with stability when I flopped the tripod head into vertical orientation with this combo mounted. Once you get the collar, you'll wonder how you managed without it.
|
|
|
|
08/23/2006 12:44:11 PM · #19 |
|
|
|
08/23/2006 01:14:46 PM · #20 |
| I recently splurged and bought a collar for my f/4L as well. You really can tell the difference... It's like night and day! |
|
|
|
08/23/2006 01:25:10 PM · #21 |
| My Tamron 2.8 came with the collar, it is nice. I haven't shot in heavy winds with it though, I just use it on the tripod for macros where I can't handhold it. |
|
|
|
08/23/2006 01:48:08 PM · #22 |
| the F4 version doesn't come with a collar? Isn't the collar like $80-100? |
|
|
|
08/23/2006 01:51:41 PM · #23 |
| No 70-200 F4L does not come with a collar, f**king Canon. |
|
|
|
08/23/2006 01:58:47 PM · #24 |
my tamron 200-500 came with a collar. I am surpised those expensive Canon's do not.
mine is stable for the most part. however I was up on top of one of those fire towers in a state park one day and I got alot of distortion from the wind in my shots. I think the hood had alot to do with it, the lens is nearly 2 feet long while fully extended. 5 stories high in the middle of nowhere it gets pretty breezy.
Message edited by author 2006-08-23 14:05:52.
|
|
|
|
08/23/2006 02:04:04 PM · #25 |
| The 2.8, with and without IS, comes with one. |
|
