arbitrage wrote:
The RRS has access to the eye loop which is the only real difference I can see between these plates.
FWIW, there is one other important distinction. The Kirk allows you to slide the bracket farther away from the body to make way for tethered shooting cords in portrait orientation, if that is important to you.
arbitrage wrote:
Thanks for the pics of the Kirk plate. Weird that both the Kirk and RRS have to have the vertical portion sit so far off the camera. On my 5D2 and 7D it fits much closer to the body on the vertical portion so basically the 5D3 L-plates make the camera physical dimension much wider than the L-plates do on the other cameras. The RRS has access to the eye loop which is the only real difference I can see between these plates.
Might have something to do with how cables fit and feed...and the clearance they need.
Dan
cheem wrote:
FWIW, there is one other important distinction. The Kirk allows you to slide the bracket farther away from the body to make way for tethered shooting cords in portrait orientation, if that is important to you.
Yes that is true, that is a good feature for those who need it.
The connector for the Canon remote control sticks out far enough that the plate must be stood off for clearance. The right angle connector sends the cable toward the front of the camera, and the connector or the cable can hit the clamp on the ball head. Some Really Right Stuff L brackets for other cameras have had a slot that allows the user to mount the bracket close to the body or mount it extend out if you need to use a remote.
This whole discussion reminds me why I don't have a Arca Swiss style quick release system. At the moment, I'm top heavy in bodies, with six Canon, two Nikon and one Contax. I'm certainly not interested in buying a bunch of expensive plates/L-brackets for the various body designs. I'll just limp along with the old Bogen/Manfrotto hex-plates.
This isn't to say that I'm not attracted to the L-bracket designs, but I'll wait until if and when I settle on one or two camera designs. Nikon will soon be off my list, and the Contax N1 is a temporary need. So, maybe. . .
arbitrage wrote:
Yes that is true, that is a good feature for those who need it.
My 40D RRS plate had this feature and it helps while doing tethered studio shots. I will lossen the L-Bracket and move it as far away from the body as the bracket allows. I thought (incorrectly) that this would be a standard feature in all RRS brackets.
I've had the revised RRS L-plate for over a week. Solid fit. Has left no marks on the body. I'm very happy, especially since I thought I'd have to return it based on previous comments posted here.
wlpelzmann wrote:
I've had the revised RRS L-plate for over a week. Solid fit. Has left no marks on the body. I'm very happy, especially since I thought I'd have to return it based on previous comments posted here.
Thanks that's great! I'll just wait for my order then.
Stunnaz wrote:
So did anybody receive their RRS rev A L-Plate yet? Are you happy with the fit? I ordered mine weeks ago and it's still not here yet.
I've never had problems with RRS before so I'm sticking with them. Used the 5D2 L-plate for 3 years and it was fine.
I also have had the Rev A for about a week now, I also still have Rev 0 as I haven't mailed it back yet. Personally, I thought even Rev 0 L-plate was a good fit but if you hold it up to a window and stare at the gap between plate and camera there is a small asymmetry with the Rev 0. Rev A is much better and looks as good as any previous L-plates I've had (5D2 and 7D).
I used my Rev 0 for a couple weeks while waiting on the Rev A and never had any marks on my camera from it. I think the bigger problem was with the non-L-plate version.
I'm thinking about getting the Acratech universal L bracket. Seems like it might work pretty well (and if judging by their excellent ballheads) http://acratech.net/product.php?productid=71
toddlambert wrote:
I'm thinking about getting the Acratech universal L bracket. Seems like it might work pretty well (and if judging by their excellent ballheads) http://acratech.net/product.php?productid=71
I tried the Acratech GV2 ballhead and there was movement after tightening (I remember it wasn't just me, at the time all Acratech heads had this issue). This was many years ago though, when it first came out. The owner was extremely nice and the return process wasn't an issue at all. I ended up going with Markins Q3 and it's been working fine the past few years.
toddlambert wrote:
I'm thinking about getting the Acratech universal L bracket. Seems like it might work pretty well (and if judging by their excellent ballheads) http://acratech.net/product.php?productid=71
Interesting product and certainly gets around the need to upgrade for every camera body that gets released. Do you know if you need to purchase a body plate too - it does not seem to say.
I would imagine it works fine with any AS compatible plates. I have an Acratech GV2 head (never once seen an issue with drooping, but the largest lens I've ever used on it, is a 70-200 2.8 IS) and I have RRS L Brackets that fit into it just fine. I imagine this would be the same.
I've been very happy with Acratech's stuff (I have a variety of their plates and the ballhead) so I am leaning towards using them for the L bracket as well.
Thanks Don. I already have the Wimberly you mention - nice plate indeed.
I called ProMediaGear today and spoke to Betty. I had a question as to whether or not their L-Brackets are one piece or two and they are in fact two pieces screwed together.
She said they have been considering a unibody design like the Kirk and RRS and asked what I thought. I mentioned the two pieces screwing together is a nice design as you get the body plate in addition to the L-bracket. Some may argue the strength merits of a unibody construction though. If you have any thoughts on their plate design, chime in and I will pass it along to them.
She also said they are working on a generic L-bracket design in the coming months.
