Does anyone know of other sources for a long lens support. Below is the link to the one from Really Right Stuff?
When in Yellowstone last year I met a photographer that had one for his Canon 500 that was made in Holland and it had the roller type supports for both ends of the lens. The one from RRS mounts to the foot and the roller assembly is towards the front of the lens.
The Really Right Stuff long lens support is the only one I know of that allows you to rotate the camera and lens in the tripod collar to change orientation. That feature is required for anything I would want to use. Their solution looks functional, but is kind of big and awkward, and of course is expensive. I would much prefer something that is more custom to the particular lens I have, and could easily stay on the collar and become an integral lens plate and support system. I have had ideas to try to build something, but never have followed through.
It depends some on which super telephoto you have, but I always have thought that the weakest and least rigid part of the whole system is the lens collar and its somewhat poor grip on the lens.
My wife and I are using Dutch Hill Tripods, Wimberley II Gimbals with the RRS Lever Clamps (just got the clamps) Canon 500 and 800 lens with 1 Series cameras. Interested in anything that will give more stability.
Feb 25, 2011 at 09:23 PM
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
Roland W wrote:
The Really Right Stuff long lens support is the only one I know of that allows you to rotate the camera and lens in the tripod collar to change orientation. That feature is required for anything I would want to use. Their solution looks functional, but is kind of big and awkward, and of course is expensive. I would much prefer something that is more custom to the particular lens I have, and could easily stay on the collar and become an integral lens plate and support system. I have had ideas to try to build something, but never have followed through.
It depends some on which super telephoto you have, but I always have thought that the weakest and least rigid part of the whole system is the lens collar and its somewhat poor grip on the lens. ...Show more →
I think the RRS long lens support looks rather weak/flimsy compared to a full Gimbal Head. And the lens collar and grip are very strong on every long lens that I have owned. Especially compared to the quick release and ballhead on this RRS setup
Lars Johnsson wrote:
I think the RRS long lens support looks rather weak/flimsy compared to a full Gimbal Head. And the lens collar and grip are very strong on every long lens that I have owned. Especially compared to the quick release and ballhead on this RRS setup
The RRS long lens support is a pretty stiff unit. I use it along with my full gimbal head and I am very happy with it. It prevents the lens from flexing in the area where the foot connects to the collar.
Is there any evidence that the lens flexes where the foot connects to the collar? I didn't know it did that. We're not talking about a whole lot of weight. I would think the lens would be strong enough to support it's own weight.
It seems like this is a solution in search of a problem.
Feb 25, 2011 at 11:30 PM
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
There is absolutely no flex where the foot connects to the collar. At least not with good lenses and support. Most people also carry the whole combo with that connection over their shoulder on a tripod/monopod.
If you have a flex, there is something wrong with your equipment
rprouty wrote:
Bunch of experts here
Is there anything wrong with just answering the question asked? I didn't ask for any other discussion on the subject.
You got 4 or 5 links to other lens support solutions
This whole thread is directly related to the original issue...not following the complaint..? Yes, kind of nice to have a bunch of people here on FM that actually own and extensively use superteles...have to agree with that point.
I have never noticed any flex from the feet on the superteles, the only movement I have had has been with a tripod. I guess I just don't see how that set up is lacking support. With the lens sitting on the gimble it feels completely weightless, and there should be no movement of any sort. So too answer your question, I would say the gimble and a good set of tripod legs is the best support you can get, since you have that, no reason to complicate or add anything to your rig. (at least in my view)
I think you guys are misunderstanding “flex.” I don’t use this kind of device, so I’m not defending it, but there is a sound theoretical basis.
You can hold an iron bar in your hands and stick it out the window of a car going 70 mph and you will get vibrations, or flex, in the system. Sure, the iron bar might not be flexing but there is flex in the system. Hold one foot of that bar out the window and you will have less flex than if you put three feet out the window.
Put your 800mm on the sturdiest tripod and head you can find and expose it to wind and you will have movement. Call it harmonic resonance if you want, but it is flex in the system. Now, rest your hand on the lens hood and you will find the vibration reduced. The more points of contact you have the less vibration.
This type of device adds more points of contact to the head/lens subsystem. It reduces the effective leverage the wind has on the lens. A small thing? Yes, but so is worrying about mirror slap…
My bad. Guess I just assumend that when folks said "no flex" they meant "no flex" rather than not enough to worry about. What grade of english class would that...
Not me! I don't think it would make any measurable difference. I just didn't much like folks jumping on hiker99 as if there were no basis to his statement.
