70-200 f4 tripod mount

[JohnBrew]

I'm headed to Moab next month and thought I might get a 70-200 f4 to play with while there but was wondering if any of the third-party people are making a tripod mount for this lens or if anyone here on the forum can comment on their experience? The Nikon version appears flimsy, but I actually haven't handled one and Nikon's reputation for usually crappy tripod mounts precedes them.

 

[Bob]

The 70-200 f/4 is not all that heavy compared to the 2.8, so I just let it hang off the lens mount without a collar.
It seems to work fairly well on a beefy tripod and cube.
This is a bit of 100% crop at 200mm 1/400sec and f/8 using that combination.

-bob

 

[bradhusick]

I have the third party lens collar for the 70-200/4 and it's just fine. I'd say 80% of Nikon's.

 

[Bob]

I have the third party lens collar for the 70-200/4 and it's just fine. I'd say 80% of Nikon's.

Are you using the RRS version?
-bob

 

[bradhusick]

nope, the Vello $50

http://smile.amazon.com/Vello-TC-N1...9527&sr=8-1&keywords=nikon+70-200+lens+collar

 

[Swissblad]

Kirk make a nice bracket for this lens - I have theirs for the 80-400mm and am satisfied with it.

 

[JohnBrew]

Kirk make a nice bracket for this lens - I have theirs for the 80-400mm and am satisfied with it.

Thanks. Yes, I have one for my 300 f4 and this one looks almost identical. Bob certainly makes a good case for going without.

 

[danielmoore]

I have no issues using that lens without a collar, while on a RRS TCV-34L tripod and 410 head. My apprehension at not using one wore off after a while. I'm sure there are situations that push the boundaries more than what I have shot, where it'll be better to have one, but I get by just fine it seems on the D800E.

 

[jlindstrom]

Tripod work is fairly new to me, so I'll humbly ask for your opinion..

Looking at Bob's crop above. It's said 1/400 shutter & f8 on a tripod. Considering the fast shutter & VR on the lens, how much of difference does the tripod actually make in that shot vs. handheld?

//Juha

 

[danielmoore]

I would suggest that it might not be noticeably different without the tripod in that particular case, but I would personally prefer to not find out the hard way.

If you only shot at such high shutter speeds it wouldn't be as important to use a tripod, but it could still be very beneficial due to wind, poor technique, unsteady hands, etc.

VR should be turned off while on a tripod as it introduces it's own blur by compensating for movement that isn't there, if you didn't know.

 

[jlindstrom]

Thanks Daniel. I guess your first paragraph answers what I was looking for. It's at times better to be safe than sorry. I was kind of looking for excuse not to use a tripod.

From a purely hobbyist point of view I suppose it would also come to being carefull with technique and use other means of support, like leaning against a rock or similar.

But if you need to print big or deliver to get paid, the story changes.

This purely for a good light / fast shutter situation.

//Juha

 

[k-hawinkler]

Tripod makes careful framing easier as well, no?

 

[jlindstrom]

KH: in a way true, but then that holds true to anything that slows you down. With that logic pinhole or copperplates would be the ultimate tools for careful framing.

I was thinking from purely technical image quality point of view with this particular shot. And that only because the shutterspeed was so fast. Wether at these focal lengths there's any meaningful difference.. ie shake regardless of speed when shooting handheld or similar.

I guess also megapixel count has an effect on that, meaning 36mp will show it far more easily that 12-16mp etc

But these should probably be in another thread..

//Juha