Tripod collar for Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by This Old Man, Oct 17, 2003.

  1. This Old Man

    This Old Man Guest

    Is there one?
     
    This Old Man, Oct 17, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. This Old Man

    Todd Walker Guest

    Todd Walker, Oct 17, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. This Old Man

    This Old Man Guest

    "Todd Walker" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <zFFjb.5274$>,
    > says...
    > > Is there one?

    >
    > Yep:
    >
    > http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?
    > O=details_accessories&A=details&Q=&sku=186247&is=REG
    >
    > $114 for a piece of plastic. Ridiculous but if you need it...
    >


    I'm wondering, will need it on a 300D/10D?
     
    This Old Man, Oct 17, 2003
    #3
  4. This Old Man wrote:
    >
    > "Todd Walker" <> wrote in message
    > > $114 for a piece of plastic. Ridiculous but if you need it...


    Its *not* plastic.

    > I'm wondering, will need it on a 300D/10D?


    The more reason to support a relatively heavy lens with a tripod collar.

    -Dave
     
    Dave Herzstein, Oct 17, 2003
    #4
  5. This Old Man

    Todd Walker Guest

    In article <>, says...
    > This Old Man wrote:
    > >
    > > "Todd Walker" <> wrote in message
    > > > $114 for a piece of plastic. Ridiculous but if you need it...

    >
    > Its *not* plastic.


    It isn't? I don't have one because I don't have my 70-200 yet but I
    thought I had heard many people referring to it as plastic. Sorry if I
    am wrong. Is it metal then?

    > > I'm wondering, will need it on a 300D/10D?

    >
    > The more reason to support a relatively heavy lens with a tripod collar.


    I wouldn't want that much pressure put on the camera's tripod mount. The
    70-200 f/4 isn't that heavy but I am going to buy the tripod collar for
    mine just to be safe.

    --
    ________________________________
    Todd Walker
    http://twalker.d2g.com
    Canon 10D:
    http://twalker.d2g.com/canon10d
    My Digital Photography Weblog:
    http://twalker.d2g.com/dpblog.htm
    _________________________________
     
    Todd Walker, Oct 17, 2003
    #5
  6. This Old Man

    Bill Hilton Guest

    >From: "This Old Man"

    >Is there one?


    It's a light lens so it doesn't really require one, but Canon sells one as an
    option.

    You can also use the collar from either the 300 f/4 L or the 400 f/5.6 L, these
    will fit the 70-200 f/4 (we have all three lenses so just make do with two
    collars).

    Bill
     
    Bill Hilton, Oct 17, 2003
    #6
  7. This Old Man

    Bill Hilton Guest

    >From: "This Old Man"

    >I'm wondering, will need it on a 300D/10D?


    It's a light lens so you don't *have* to use a collar.
     
    Bill Hilton, Oct 17, 2003
    #7
  8. This Old Man

    Alan Browne Guest

    Todd Walker wrote:


    >
    > I wouldn't want that much pressure put on the camera's tripod mount. The
    > 70-200 f/4 isn't that heavy but I am going to buy the tripod collar for
    > mine just to be safe.
    >


    What really needs to be protected against the weight of the lens is the
    camera side of the lens mount. A tripod collar is the right thing to
    do. I'm amazed that Canon don't make it part of the lens.
     
    Alan Browne, Oct 20, 2003
    #8
  9. This Old Man

    Bill Hilton Guest

    >From: "Alan Browne" "AlanBrowne"@videotron.canospam

    > A tripod collar is the right thing to
    >do. I'm amazed that Canon don't make it part of the lens.


    What's amazing to me is the number of people who say this without ever picking
    up the lens, or they'd know immediately why it's not included ... the lens is
    relatively short and light (at least it is if you're used to really long
    lenses), light enough that a collar is a luxury, not a necessity.

    For example the 75-300 IS doesn't come with a collar (or collar mount) and no
    one mentions that or whines about it. That lens weighs a whopping 23.5 ounces.
    The 70-200 f/4 weighs only 1.5 ounces more! Big honkin' deal.

    Had they included the tripod collar it would increase the price by about $100.
    Adding a collar mount but not including the collar was the smart move in a
    light lens that sells for only $540, why add 20% to the cost with something
    many people won't need?

    My wife has this lens and much of the time we use it without the collar
    (depending on which mount we have on the tripod). When we need a collar (like
    when shooting on a Wimberly pivot head) we just 'borrow' one from our 300 f/4 L
    or 400 f/5.6 L. If you want one then buy it as an accessory, but it's
    definitely NOT a requirement.

    Bill
     
    Bill Hilton, Oct 20, 2003
    #9
  10. This Old Man

    Alan Browne Guest

    Bill Hilton wrote:

    >>From: "Alan Browne" "AlanBrowne"@videotron.canospam

    >
    >
    >>A tripod collar is the right thing to
    >>do. I'm amazed that Canon don't make it part of the lens.

    >
    >
    > What's amazing to me is the number of people who say this without ever picking
    > up the lens, or they'd know immediately why it's not included ... the lens is
    > relatively short and light (at least it is if you're used to really long
    > lenses), light enough that a collar is a luxury, not a necessity.


    My mistake, whenever I see 70-200 I assume an f/2.8...
     
    Alan Browne, Oct 20, 2003
    #10
  11. This Old Man

    Bill Hilton Guest

    >From: "Alan Browne" "AlanBrowne"@videotron.canospam

    >My mistake, whenever I see 70-200 I assume an f/2.8...


    Yeah, THAT one (which I use) weighs 3.2 lbs (more than double the f/4 version)
    and it *definitely* needs the tripod collar, which is included in the original
    kit.

    Sorry if I jumped on you a bit there ... I think Canon made the right decision
    with the f/4, offering the collar only as an option.

    Bill
     
    Bill Hilton, Oct 20, 2003
    #11
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Jerry

    Canon EF 28-200mm f/3.5-5.6 USM

    Jerry, Sep 6, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    408
    incabloc
    Sep 7, 2003
  2. Frank Weston

    Stuck Tripod Collar

    Frank Weston, Dec 31, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    437
    Robertwgross
    Dec 31, 2003
  3. Rod Bruno

    FS : Canon 70-200mm 2.8 USM / Canon 2.X II Autofocus

    Rod Bruno, Feb 12, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    483
  4. Canon 200mm f2.8/L vs. 70-200mm f/4L

    , Sep 21, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    394
    JohnR66
    Sep 22, 2005
  5. Giuen
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,540
    Giuen
    Sep 12, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page