Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3       end
  

600 II Footsies
  
 
PetKal
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · 600 II Footsies


Often times one has to try and do things themselves, otherwise the facts may remain hidden forever.

The new RRS replacement feet for the MkII supertelephoto lenses are fine, just that, because of their high profile, they cause a major lens twisting momentum (coaxial) in response to sidewise motion of the lens.

As it happens, my lens handhold is based on the lens foot resting on the palm of my left hand. When I swing the lens horizontally, the lens tends to "twist" in my hand in response to any change in swing speed, be it acceleration or deceleration. The force of twisting is proportional to the foot height: higher profile feet cause stronger twisting and v.v. That twisting effect often destabilizes the lens in the most critical moment of auto-focussing, i.e., at the initial AF acquisition.

Those people who suppport their lenses on the barrel directly do not have that problem.

Therefore, on my 600 f/4 IS MkII lens I have now installed the low profile 4th Generation Designs' foot CP-61B which was originally developed for the old 600 f/4 lens.

Observations:

(1) A reduction of the twisting momentum has been achieved nicely, and that has driven the change.
(2) The clearance between the foot and the barrel doesn't really allow the foot to be used as a lens carrying handle by "normally" built adult males. Probably many females neither.
(3) The clearance between the foot and reverse mounted hood is ample.
(4) The new foot mounts OK on the lens, without any size & fit issues.

No. (2) above is a bird in the ointment. The resulting handling awkwardness of a very long/bulky and fairly heavy lens does increase chances of an incident happening, such as dropping the lens.

Be that as it may, I'll use the 600 II with the low profile foot for a while and we'll see what happens. The RRS foot is ready to be mounted back on the lens, if required.

Petkal aka Supertelemaster



Jan 22, 2013 at 09:21 PM
sperraglia
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · 600 II Footsies


Peter - What about their new CRX-5? Did you think about that one? Wondering if it has a little bit more clearance. How is the weight balance with on a tripod with the CP-61B? It wasn't optimal with the CR-80.

It was tight but being a female with smaller hands I could carry the old 500mm with the 4th generation foot so I might be able to accomplish (2) - so maybe I finally have some small advantage over you strong, he-men!



Jan 22, 2013 at 09:46 PM
PetKal
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · 600 II Footsies


Sallie Jo, I might look into their new "modular" foot in the future, if I can get the exact clearance-to-barrel info from them.

The tripod balancing really hasn't been a concern to me because the lens is used largely hand-held and on a monopod here and there, so I don't know.
If your hands are real small even for a woman, you might indeed be able to make an OK hand-grip on the CP-61B on 600 II.




Jan 22, 2013 at 09:57 PM
sperraglia
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · 600 II Footsies


Peter - 4th generation is supposed to call me when the CRX-5s are back in stock so I will probably try it so will let you guys know what the clearance is. With my smaller woman hands I can handhold but still will probably use on a tripod more so the weight balancing issue is more of an issue for me.


Jan 22, 2013 at 10:01 PM
PetKal
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · 600 II Footsies


Thanx Sallie Jo....it would be good to get a scoop on that......there isn't much room for increasing the low profile foot height on 600 II, because the foot tip would start to interfere with the reverse lens mount. One way would be to notch the foot towards the barrel, in the foot section which actually enters into the hood.


Jan 22, 2013 at 10:06 PM
godfather
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · 600 II Footsies


When I talked to 4th gen (crx-5) a month ago they measured the height from mounting point to the bottom of the plate ~15/16's of an inch. Not sure how that compares to your cp-61b...


Jan 22, 2013 at 10:42 PM
godfather
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · 600 II Footsies


I posted this on NS a few weeks ago but I'll share it here...hopefully it helps...


I just wanted to update this thread with my solution and a few measurements I took along the way.

First off I did not want to use the stock foot and P40 plate that was recommended by some of the people I talked to. This was mainly because of the weight of the setup and height it would place the lens above the ball head. The weight of the stock foot and wimberley plate was:

Height from mounting point: Slightly <2.5 inches
Stock foot: 4.7 oz
Wimberley P40: 4.5oz
Total: 9.2 oz

The RRS lens foot solution looked like the ideal setup and I would have purchased it for the 400 or 600 because of the strength and lightweight design. However, I decided against it for the 500 mainly because of the height.

Height from mounting point: ~2.1 inches
Weight: 4.4 oz

4th Gen Design CRX-5 is probably the top contender for a replacement foot right now. Perfect height and weight and is adjustable for any combination.

Height from mounting point: ~15/16 of an inch
Weight: ~3.4 oz

I have not heard anything from NS about the new foot...

Currently I'm using the monopod foot with a wimberley P20 plate and it is working very well! Just slightly too tall but the combo weight is not too bad. Easy to take the plate off when I'm planning on handholding the lens or using a monopod.

Height from mounting point for the combo: 1 5/8 inch
Weight of monopod foot: 2.3 oz
Weight of wimberley p20: 2.7 oz
Total: 5 oz




Jan 22, 2013 at 10:45 PM
dolina
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · 600 II Footsies


I'm not all that crazy with the two piece design of the CRX-5 for two reasons. The monopod screw in hole and the two piece design rather than a single piece.

So Peter you really dislike the RRS foot shared? Something for me to consider before ordering.

Any chance you will try the Jobu foot?



Jan 23, 2013 at 01:27 AM
traveller
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · 600 II Footsies


I too have experienced the twisting motion that Petkal describes when hand holding either the 500 or 600 Ver, II lens and I don't like it
I often carry my lens with a camera mounted and the new RRS foot is uncomfortable and does not balance very well with a 1DX on the end
Liked the old RRS replacement foot on the 500 expecially.
Have not found a solution to the twisting yet, but presently in Costa Rica so cannot explore

Lloyd ................



Jan 23, 2013 at 01:56 AM
PetKal
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · 600 II Footsies


dolina wrote:
So Peter you really dislike the RRS foot shared? Something for me to consider before ordering.

Any chance you will try the Jobu foot?


Paolo, on the contrary, I like the new RRS foot, and I am keeping it on 500 II because the sidewise twist effect on that lens is moderate (lower weight/smaller size lens) and I can control it OK.

I have a Kirk high profile foot on the 400 II, and it's OK for now, although I might also go for low profile on that one eventually.

As mentioned in my original post above, on my 600 II the RRS foot has just been replaced by CP-61b, so it's a bit early to tell....it is the lens use effectiveness vs. awkward/impractical handgrip.

As far as Jobu foot is concerned, I need to look into it



Jan 23, 2013 at 02:01 AM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



PetKal
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · 600 II Footsies


traveller wrote:
I too have experienced the twisting motion that Petkal describes when hand holding either the 500 or 600 Ver, II lens and I don't like it
I often carry my lens with a camera mounted and the new RRS foot is uncomfortable and does not balance very well with a 1DX on the end
Liked the old RRS replacement foot on the 500 expecially.
Have not found a solution to the twisting yet, but presently in Costa Rica so cannot explore

Lloyd ................


Well, Lloyd, I am glad you have isolated that effect too.
An animal shows up suddenly, typically a bird bursts into flight. You swing the lens towards it as fast as possible, and then stop it on the target in a very abrupt way in order to start AF-ing.

At that moment, the lens twist torque is at its very highest value.
The torque magnitude is proportional to lens deceleration ( a "sudden stop from high swing speed means very high decel"), lens weight and the distance from the lens support/grip point to its axis (center of gravity). The only practical way to diminish such twist torque is to grip/support the lens as close as possible to its axis, which in my case means a low profile foot.

For example, my handholding effort and AF effectiveness with 800L has noticeably improved since I've switched to a low profile foot. The dedicated 800L foot by 4th Gen. Design works great for me here, and it's fully functional as a handle too.



Jan 23, 2013 at 02:17 AM
traveller
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · 600 II Footsies


traveller wrote:
I too have experienced the twisting motion that Petkal describes when hand holding either the 500 or 600 Ver, II lens and I don't like it
I often carry my lens with a camera mounted and the new RRS foot is uncomfortable and does not balance very well with a 1DX on the end
Liked the old RRS replacement foot on the 500 expecially.
Have not found a solution to the twisting yet, but presently in Costa Rica so cannot explore

Lloyd ................

PetKal wrote:
Well, Lloyd, I am glad you have isolated that effect too.
An animal shows up suddenly, typically a bird bursts into flight. You swing the lens towards it as fast as possible, and then stop it on the target in a very abrupt way in order to start AF-ing.

At that moment, the lens twist torque is at its very highest value.
The torque magnitude is proportional to lens deceleration ( a "sudden stop from high swing speed means very high decel"), lens weight and the distance from the lens support/grip point to its axis (center of gravity). The only practical
...Show more

PetKal
I handhold my teles exactly as you do, an really noticed this twist today photographing fast monkeys
Lloyd ,,,,,,,,,,,,




Jan 23, 2013 at 02:44 AM
PetKal
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · 600 II Footsies


Well, shooting slow monkeys instead of fast ones might help too.


Jan 23, 2013 at 03:13 AM
PetKal
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · 600 II Footsies


dolina wrote:
Any chance you will try the Jobu foot?


Not really, guapo.
What I see on the Jobu Design website is a high profile foot (see the picture below), which I am trying to switch away from.


Edited on Jan 25, 2013 at 01:04 PM · View previous versions



Jan 23, 2013 at 03:45 AM
StillFingerz
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · 600 II Footsies


Cripple joins the convo with an idear...as you know Peter I have little to no grip in these still fingers, but that doesn't mean I can't hand hold a lens with a foot. My 70-200 and 300 have the standard feet/tripod collars, but my chunky paws/fingers can't wedge in between barrel and foot for a good hold.

So I picked up a velcro straped phone holder and affix the holder to the bottom of the foot, also added a 1/4" thick piece of grippy foam core tubing. The tubing wedges quite tightly over the foot, then the velcro strap of the phone holder is wrapped around the foot/foam, an cinched down as firm as possible.

I added the grippy foam because the velcro tends to slip if not tightened enough and the extra bulk of the foam fits my mitts just right; wedges between palm n fingers quite well. Also, the grippy foam is just a bit longer than the entire foot/collar, a small slit was cut in the top of the foam to allow it to slip fully over the foot; front to back. I bought black but there are other colours as well.

Here's the type of holder I use, couldn't find my last ordered one to get the manufacture, but I'll continue looking through receipts if anyone's interested...don't know if it might help, it's one of the DIY projects discovered long ago...Jerry

Quad Phone Holder
http://www.mobilitysmart.cc/daily-living-aids-c-30/hand-turning-aids/quad-phone-holder.html




Jan 23, 2013 at 04:27 AM
PetKal
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · 600 II Footsies


That sounds like a clever adaptation, Jerry. All too often we keep looking for a finished partial solution, instead of jurry-rigging something ourselves that would work fully.


Jan 23, 2013 at 04:36 AM
StillFingerz
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · 600 II Footsies


PetKal wrote:
That sounds like a clever adaptation, Jerry. All too often we keep looking for a finished partial solution, instead of jurry-rigging something ourselves that would work fully.


Peter, I found my order for the grip piece, they are replacement grips for canes, got mine from amazon, see link below. I forgot, these have a wrist strap attached to them, makes it handy when my balance isn't great, the lens stays put even when body/lens might fall to my lap or before I get a grip

For one with grip/working fingers the extra grip might be enough, they're pretty cheep and there are tons of colours n styles...not sure if the strap would do much good with the weight of a supertele tho...

Cane Replacement Offset Hand Grip
http://www.amazon.com/SkyMed-Cane-Replacement-Offset-Color/dp/B003YR9OTY/ref=pd_sim_sbs_hpc_3



Jan 23, 2013 at 04:53 AM
dolina
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · 600 II Footsies


Pogi, as you have different foots on your lenses perhaps you can take photos of them at angles not photographed by the manufacturer. It would give us a better appreciation of how these parts interact with the lens.


Jan 23, 2013 at 08:05 AM
PetKal
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · 600 II Footsies


dolina wrote:
Pogi, as you have different foots on your lenses perhaps you can take photos of them at angles not photographed by the manufacturer. It would give us a better appreciation of how these parts interact with the lens.


Guapo, what kind of an operation do you think I run here ? Ducks as Art ? OntarioScapes Net ? Except on a free-for-all basis.



Jan 23, 2013 at 11:40 AM
3iron
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · 600 II Footsies


Perhaps you could get RRS or someone to make a foot that turns out at about a 45 degree angle. As you know, when you raise the arm in the position a lens would be, the hand actually wants to turn out. This angle would give the support and comfort we really want when handholding.
Handholding these large lenses is pretty new compared to how they were thought to be used when developed.
A foot with an adjustable angle might allow for handholding and also use with a gimbal or other kind of mount.



Jan 23, 2013 at 02:45 PM
1
       2       3       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Reset password