Canon 100-500 RF f 4.5 - 7.1 lens
p.1 #1Canon 100-500 RF f 4.5 - 7.1 lens
I just purchased a Canon 100-500 RF f 4.5 - 7.1 lens and the tripod mount ring has 2 holes on the bottom of it, I guess is for a mounting plate. One hole has a standard 1/4-20 thread on it but the other hole is...well, it is just a hole without a tread and can figure out what is this hole for. Any kind of plate you put on is going to rotate. It's like finding a tootsie roll in a septic tank.
Mar 06, 2026 at 09:52 AM
p.1 #2Canon 100-500 RF f 4.5 - 7.1 lens
Get the Kirk LP-71 plate. I have two of them for a pair of 100-500s. The fit is perfect and it has a QD socket.
EBH
EBH
Mar 06, 2026 at 10:15 AM
p.1 #3Canon 100-500 RF f 4.5 - 7.1 lens
That hole is for the spring mounted studs on the plates that insert into the hole to prevent swiveling
Mar 06, 2026 at 11:49 AM
p.1 #4Canon 100-500 RF f 4.5 - 7.1 lens
Second the recommendation for the Kirk plate.
Mar 06, 2026 at 12:28 PM
p.1 #5Canon 100-500 RF f 4.5 - 7.1 lens
artsupreme wrote:
That hole is for the spring mounted studs on the plates that insert into the hole to prevent swiveling
I have NO idea wha yu talkin bout
That hole is for the spring mounted studs on the plates that insert into the hole to prevent swiveling
I have NO idea wha yu talkin bout
Mar 06, 2026 at 01:38 PM
p.1 #6Canon 100-500 RF f 4.5 - 7.1 lens
That another hole is for video head quick release plate, those have the spring mounted studs that member artsupreme mentioned.
Mar 07, 2026 at 03:12 AM
p.1 #7Canon 100-500 RF f 4.5 - 7.1 lens
Google QD (quick disconnect) fitting
Mar 07, 2026 at 07:45 AM
p.1 #8Canon 100-500 RF f 4.5 - 7.1 lens
jaybird555 wrote:
I just purchased a Canon 100-500 RF f 4.5 - 7.1 lens and the tripod mount ring has 2 holes on the bottom of it, I guess is for a mounting plate. One hole has a standard 1/4-20 thread on it but the other hole is...well, it is just a hole without a tread and can figure out what is this hole for. Any kind of plate you put on is going to rotate. It's like finding a tootsie roll in a septic tank.
I wasn't particularly thrilled with the tripod mount ring either, and replaced it with a metal lens tripod mount ring from Shoot available on Amazon:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09NPMSHLS?ref_=ppx_hzsearch_conn_dt_b_fed_asin_title_5
Overall I think it is a superior product compared to the Canon supplied ring, and it has an Arca-Swiss compatible foot that is better balanced. I've been using it for over 2 years and haven't had any complaints.
I just purchased a Canon 100-500 RF f 4.5 - 7.1 lens and the tripod mount ring has 2 holes on the bottom of it, I guess is for a mounting plate. One hole has a standard 1/4-20 thread on it but the other hole is...well, it is just a hole without a tread and can figure out what is this hole for. Any kind of plate you put on is going to rotate. It's like finding a tootsie roll in a septic tank.
I wasn't particularly thrilled with the tripod mount ring either, and replaced it with a metal lens tripod mount ring from Shoot available on Amazon:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09NPMSHLS?ref_=ppx_hzsearch_conn_dt_b_fed_asin_title_5
Overall I think it is a superior product compared to the Canon supplied ring, and it has an Arca-Swiss compatible foot that is better balanced. I've been using it for over 2 years and haven't had any complaints.
Mar 07, 2026 at 10:01 AM
p.1 #9Canon 100-500 RF f 4.5 - 7.1 lens
gavin_emmons wrote:
I wasn't particularly thrilled with the tripod mount ring either, and replaced it with a metal lens tripod mount ring from Shoot available on Amazon:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09NPMSHLS?ref_=ppx_hzsearch_conn_dt_b_fed_asin_title_5
Overall I think it is a superior product compared to the Canon supplied ring, and it has an Arca-Swiss compatible foot that is better balanced. I've been using it for over 2 years and haven't had any complaints.
Other than the tripod mount on this lens, I'm very happy with the performance of this lens.
jaybird555 wrote
I just purchased a Canon 100-500 RF f 4.5 - 7.1 lens and the tripod mount ring has 2 holes on the bottom of it, I guess is for a mounting plate. One hole has a standard 1/4-20 thread on it but the other hole is...well, it is just a hole without a tread and can figure out what is this hole for. Any kind of plate you put on is going to rotate. It's like finding a tootsie roll in a septic tank.https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09NPMSHLS?ref_=ppx_hzsearch_conn_dt_b_fed_asin_title_5
Overall I think it is a superior product compared to the Canon supplied ring, and it has an Arca-Swiss compatible foot that is better balanced. I've been using it for over 2 years and haven't had any complaints.
Other than the tripod mount on this lens, I'm very happy with the performance of this lens.
Mar 07, 2026 at 02:34 PM
p.1 #10Canon 100-500 RF f 4.5 - 7.1 lens
jaybird555 wrote:
Other than the tripod mount on this lens, I'm very happy with the performance of this lens.
Agreed - great lens overall.
Other than the tripod mount on this lens, I'm very happy with the performance of this lens.
Agreed - great lens overall.
Mar 07, 2026 at 02:55 PM
|
p.1 #11Canon 100-500 RF f 4.5 - 7.1 lens
gavin_emmons wrote:
I wasn't particularly thrilled with the tripod mount ring either, and replaced it with a metal lens tripod mount ring from Shoot available on Amazon:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09NPMSHLS?ref_=ppx_hzsearch_conn_dt_b_fed_asin_title_5
Overall I think it is a superior product compared to the Canon supplied ring, and it has an Arca-Swiss compatible foot that is better balanced. I've been using it for over 2 years and haven't had any complaints.
I have that ishoot ring and found it to be mediocre. I'm not sure how you find it better balanced since the foot is too short. The ring clamp on mine does not move smoothly on the lens when partly loose. It might be good if everything is locked down for single shots, but it's like the machining is of low quality and everything is not squared up. I wish RRS or Krik made a high-grade version with A-S, but they are not interested.
EBH
jaybird555 wrote
I just purchased a Canon 100-500 RF f 4.5 - 7.1 lens and the tripod mount ring has 2 holes on the bottom of it, I guess is for a mounting plate. One hole has a standard 1/4-20 thread on it but the other hole is...well, it is just a hole without a tread and can figure out what is this hole for. Any kind of plate you put on is going to rotate. It's like finding a tootsie roll in a septic tank.https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09NPMSHLS?ref_=ppx_hzsearch_conn_dt_b_fed_asin_title_5
Overall I think it is a superior product compared to the Canon supplied ring, and it has an Arca-Swiss compatible foot that is better balanced. I've been using it for over 2 years and haven't had any complaints.
I have that ishoot ring and found it to be mediocre. I'm not sure how you find it better balanced since the foot is too short. The ring clamp on mine does not move smoothly on the lens when partly loose. It might be good if everything is locked down for single shots, but it's like the machining is of low quality and everything is not squared up. I wish RRS or Krik made a high-grade version with A-S, but they are not interested.
EBH
Mar 07, 2026 at 03:25 PM
p.1 #12Canon 100-500 RF f 4.5 - 7.1 lens
EB-1 wrote:
I have that ishoot ring and found it to be mediocre. I'm not sure how you find it better balanced since the foot is too short. The ring clamp on mine does not move smoothly on the lens when partly loose. It might be good if everything is locked down for single shots, but it's like the machining is of low quality and everything is not squared up. I wish RRS or Krik made a high-grade version with A-S, but they are not interested.
EBH
Everyone has different preferences, but I've liked the iShoot ring overall. I agree that the ring clamp partially loosened doesn't allow the lens to move as smoothly as the Canon version... I just don't loosen it that often and usually keep it locked down, so it's not as much of an issue for me. The foot is a bit short for sure, but despite that I feel it sits more at the center of gravity for the lens / camera combo, at least for me. It still works well for A-S clamp use, at least in my experience.
I agree that it would be great if RRS or Kirk made a version of the ring, but unfortunately no options there.
I have that ishoot ring and found it to be mediocre. I'm not sure how you find it better balanced since the foot is too short. The ring clamp on mine does not move smoothly on the lens when partly loose. It might be good if everything is locked down for single shots, but it's like the machining is of low quality and everything is not squared up. I wish RRS or Krik made a high-grade version with A-S, but they are not interested.
EBH
Everyone has different preferences, but I've liked the iShoot ring overall. I agree that the ring clamp partially loosened doesn't allow the lens to move as smoothly as the Canon version... I just don't loosen it that often and usually keep it locked down, so it's not as much of an issue for me. The foot is a bit short for sure, but despite that I feel it sits more at the center of gravity for the lens / camera combo, at least for me. It still works well for A-S clamp use, at least in my experience.
I agree that it would be great if RRS or Kirk made a version of the ring, but unfortunately no options there.
Mar 07, 2026 at 07:23 PM
p.1 #13Canon 100-500 RF f 4.5 - 7.1 lens
EB-1 wrote:
Get the Kirk LP-71 plate. I have two of them for a pair of 100-500s. The fit is perfect and it has a QD socket.
EBH
Thanks for the tip, I just ordered the plate.
Get the Kirk LP-71 plate. I have two of them for a pair of 100-500s. The fit is perfect and it has a QD socket.
EBH
Thanks for the tip, I just ordered the plate.
Mar 08, 2026 at 02:25 AM
p.1 #14Canon 100-500 RF f 4.5 - 7.1 lens
I got the Leofoto CFC-01 Replacement Foot for Canon RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM - CFC-01. Its been working great as a replacement. Has a built in arca swiss and also qd release point.
Mar 16, 2026 at 05:08 PM
p.1 #15Canon 100-500 RF f 4.5 - 7.1 lens
Not related to this post, just a picture of Jeremy Clarkson with a RF 100-500.
 |
||
 |
||
|
Jul 02, 2026 at 03:26 PM
p.1 #16Canon 100-500 RF f 4.5 - 7.1 lens
I have no idea who is that Clarkson, but your linked image is not showing.
EBH
EBH
Jul 02, 2026 at 03:47 PM
p.1 #17Canon 100-500 RF f 4.5 - 7.1 lens
He is a British "actor" who did car shows, Top Gear for BBC, then Grand Tour for Amazon. He made millions, bought a farm in the Cotswolds, and now keeps it going by doing another Amazon series Clarkson's Farm.
Jul 02, 2026 at 10:29 PM
p.1 #18Canon 100-500 RF f 4.5 - 7.1 lens
gwaww wrote:
Google QD (quick disconnect) fitting
That's not what the hole is for. If you jam a QD stud in there you won't get the results you envisioned.
Google QD (quick disconnect) fitting
That's not what the hole is for. If you jam a QD stud in there you won't get the results you envisioned.
Jul 02, 2026 at 10:33 PM
p.1 #19Canon 100-500 RF f 4.5 - 7.1 lens
Are you saying the LeoPhoto is not containing a QD socket as they claim?
I've had to replace the expensive Canon collar twice so would like an alternative if it moves well. The hieght does look excessive though.
EBH
I've had to replace the expensive Canon collar twice so would like an alternative if it moves well. The hieght does look excessive though.
EBH
Jul 03, 2026 at 09:26 AM
p.1 #20Canon 100-500 RF f 4.5 - 7.1 lens
EB-1 wrote:
Are you saying the LeoPhoto is not containing a QD socket as they claim?
I've had to replace the expensive Canon collar twice so would like an alternative if it moves well. The hieght does look excessive though.
EBH
I'm not saying anything about the LeoPhoto. Don't have it. The post that I replied to had no quotation, it wasn't obvious who it was replying to, so I inferred it was to the OP, who's talking about the bigger hole on the 100-500 foot.
Are you saying the LeoPhoto is not containing a QD socket as they claim?
I've had to replace the expensive Canon collar twice so would like an alternative if it moves well. The hieght does look excessive though.
EBH
I'm not saying anything about the LeoPhoto. Don't have it. The post that I replied to had no quotation, it wasn't obvious who it was replying to, so I inferred it was to the OP, who's talking about the bigger hole on the 100-500 foot.
Jul 03, 2026 at 12:28 PM