p.5 #2 · Wimberly vs Really Right Stuff replacement lens foot for 200-600?
Mine was delivered yesterday. The Kirk feels lighter in the hand than the original Sony. So, I got the scale out and I will let the images do the talking
p.5 #4 · Wimberly vs Really Right Stuff replacement lens foot for 200-600?
AZSteve wrote:
The Kirk foot does make a better handle than the Sony. As to the supplementary support bracket, OMG, totally decadent!
Let's hope it is decadent, and not "needed" like the support for the Nikon 300mm f4 AFS or 100-400 VR was needed. I haven't seen any vibration issues with my 200-600mm yet but I have been shooting at pretty high shutter speed.
p.5 #5 · Wimberly vs Really Right Stuff replacement lens foot for 200-600?
MikeEvangelist wrote:
Mine arrived as well. As you said, it's very well made, and the integrated QD socket is positioned so the lens hangs nicely balanced from my sling strap (with a gripped-body mounted).
I do have a question about the purpose of a small screw that protrudes from the top side of the foot. Anyone know what this is for?
p.5 #6 · Wimberly vs Really Right Stuff replacement lens foot for 200-600?
sfurr wrote:
Does anyone use the lens support bracket?
I doubt many of us were really even aware of the accessory and only a small number of us just received the new foot including myself on Monday.
I haven't noted much or any vibration issues, but I have tried to use the silent shutter with the original Canon Foot and my mounted Arca Swiss QR plate. I haven't had a chance to take any images using the Kirk replacement foot yet. But, below are images taken with the lens naked and also with the 2X TC with the original foot with the Arca Swiss QR plate mounted on my RRS tripod and Markins Q20i ball alone and with the Bird BV attachment.
If someone purchases the accessory, I would be interested in seeing a comparison with and without the accessory.
Rich
200-600mm G set to 303mm and A7rIII, silent shutter. ISO 400, f16, 1/4 second
200-600mm G set to 300mm and A7rIII, silent shutter. ISO 400, f16, 1/4 second
200-600mm G set to 600mm and A7rIII, silent shutter. ISO 200, f11, 0.6 second
200-600mm G with 2X Teleconverter set to 600mm (total of 1200mm) and A7rIII, silent shutter. ISO 200, f13, 1/125 second
Fairly cropped 200-600mm G with 2X Teleconverter set to 600mm (total of 1200mm) and A7rIII, silent shutter. ISO 400, f13, 1/125 second
200-600mm f5.6-6.3 G set to 200mm and A7rIII, silent shutter. ISO 800, f20, 1/6 second
p.5 #8 · Wimberly vs Really Right Stuff replacement lens foot for 200-600?
billsnature wrote:
Let's hope it is decadent, and not "needed" like the support for the Nikon 300mm f4 AFS or 100-400 VR was needed. I haven't seen any vibration issues with my 200-600mm yet but I have been shooting at pretty high shutter speed.
The Kirk site says the support is to ease rotation of the lens when the collar is loosened while changing from horizontal to vertical format, so (as you say, one hopes) not so much for general support when the collar is tight. (Speaking of the 80-400 VR, the collar was the least of my complaints. . .)
p.5 #9 · Wimberly vs Really Right Stuff replacement lens foot for 200-600?
So now I have the Wimberley, RRS and the Kirk foot. Started with the Wimberley and then finally B&H and RRS started shipping so that came along. The RRS worked as expected but I still wanted to see the Kirk. I had email exchanges with Kirk and knew the new foot would have a Quick Detach (QD) socket, like RRS had been including, so I wanted to see how their's compared to RRS at $50 less. $80 vs $130. Even after the increase from the introductory price its still $40 less than the RRS one. The Kirk is definately the best deal IMHO since its toolless attach and detach and only $10 more than the Wimberley. The Wimberley is a very good product as well and few will ever remove the foot once its attached. It also has a nice look I have to admit.
p.5 #10 · Wimberly vs Really Right Stuff replacement lens foot for 200-600?
mitesh wrote:
I really like the Wimberley foot, but wish it had the QD socket. It’s the perfect length and works very well as a handle. At $79, it’s relatively well-priced compared to other replacement feet. I might take it to a machine shop and ask them if they can drill a QD socket for me.
FYI. A QD socket is not a simple hole to drill. It must be machined to have and internal "rim" that the connector's ball bearings can use to hold it in place.
p.5 #11 · Wimberly vs Really Right Stuff replacement lens foot for 200-600?
swldstn wrote:
So now I have the Wimberley, RRS and the Kirk foot.
Nice to be able to hear from someone who has all three. I imagine that they're all longer than the stock Sony foot?
As I use mine quite a bit as a handle to carry the lens (on a sling-strap, and sometimes without SS) so my main concern is which one is the most comfortable. I bought the Hejnar for my Canon 100-400 II, and it had very square edges and was uncomfortable to hold, so I had to make a modification to it (won't go into that here). I remember the foot on the Tamron 150-600 G2, it was super rounded and comfortable, something these aftermarket manufacturers need to keep in mind.
Which one would you say is most comfortable in the hand?
p.5 #12 · Wimberly vs Really Right Stuff replacement lens foot for 200-600?
All three have similar finishing IMHO with the edges properly rounded slightly since all have to support the Arca-swiss dove tail at the bottom. The RRS probably has the most height to allow you space between the lens barrel and the top of the foot to hold but only by a small amount, maybe 0.05" (1.40" vs 1.35"). Since the Wimberley does not have the latch like the Sony foot that both the RRS and KirkPhoto have it is a little smoother in the hand but needs a tool to detach it. So consider the toolless attachment and the support of QD socket in both RRS and Kirk.
p.5 #16 · Wimberly vs Really Right Stuff replacement lens foot for 200-600?
armd wrote:
So, what's the consensus? Kirk - best performance/features for the $?
Many of us including myself really like the Kirk replacement foot for my 200-600mm G and my Kirk replacement foot for my 100-400mm GM lenses. Both work quite well, are extremely easy to install and remove, provide a lot of flexibility for postioning the lens on my Arca QR clamp, and work quite well as a handle.
p.5 #19 · Wimberly vs Really Right Stuff replacement lens foot for 200-600?
ok that was the one I saw, I just wondered if any other reason (like, if I remember correctly, Nikon foot on many of its supertelephoto lenses, as useless as depicted in deep by Bjørn Rørslett - when I was a Nikon user...)
