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.
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:
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.
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:
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.
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:
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.
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 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.
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.
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.
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.
