70-200 F4 tripod collar

Discussion in 'Canon EOS' started by dangoldman, Aug 3, 2006.

  1. Im curious to know if there are any 3rd party tripod collars out there for the
    70-200, i dont like the idea of spending 120$ for it. Also, how bad is it to
    use the camera's tripod mount so long as i still support the lense? Should i
    not use a tripod at all with a lense this short under most conditions?

    thanks in advance for any help.
     
  2. I have never seen the necessity of using the collar for this light lens (certainly not for the 1Ds II or the 5D which are both substantial enough). It may be worth it if you are using a very light body like the 350D though.
     
  3. It could be a marketing gimmick but I guess that Canon "thinks" you don't have to use a tripod collar on light lenses (e.g. under 1 Kg). I agree. I had the 70-200/4 and 200/2.8. Both have the about same length and weight and both come without a tripod collar. When the camera is attached to my Bogen 682 self standing monopod it balances nicely without problems.
    On longer and heavier lenses (e.g. 300/4 IS) things change dramatically and the weight distribution is much better with the (supplied...) tripod collar.
    HTH.
    Happy shooting,
    Yakim.
     
  4. Ok, thanks a lot for the help. Yeah, i have seen the 300 2.8L before and i couldnt even think of hand holding that thing. its amazing the difference of 100mm isnt it?
     
  5. If you are concerned about the lens being too heavy for the lens mount (on any Canon body), don't be. Whether the camera's mount is plastic or metal, they can all support the lens.
    With the 70-200/4L, the tripod collar is most useful for quickly switching between tripod-mounted horizontal and vertical shooting.
    How about a cheaper (by $30 or $40) Canon alternative? The Canon tripod rings A(W) and A(B) are absolutely identical in every way except for color and price. Ignore any BS advertising claims that the A(B) "works ONLY with the EF 200mm f/2.8L "II" lens".
     
  6. I bought the black tripod collar which is meant for the 200 mm/f2.8 but fits just fine on my 70-200 f/4 and is cheaper than the white one. I found it made a huge improvement, but then I did not have the sturdiest of tripods and ballhead (Velbon 343E--camera is 20D). Now I have a much better tripod and ballhead (Kirk BH-3) and I tend to agree with other folks comments, that you may not need it. So in my opinion, it depends on how good a ballhead you have.
     
  7. My neighbor, a commercial photographer, uses a tripod for his main lens, the Canon f/2.8 70-200mm IS, whenever possible, and otherwise relies on the IS. For him, every blown shot costs time and money, so its worth it to him. And he's working with a full-sized sensor.

    So ultimately, you're the best person to answer your question: Do you find your keeper rate high enough at 200mm without support? If so, then you don't need it. Others might differ.

    I'd like to have a collar with that long a lens on an APS sensor just in case, but like you $120 seems steep to me. There is a consolation -- I think its the same as the one on f/4 300mm L if you ever get one of those, and I think it comes as part of that lens' bundle. Now there -- I've given you an "objective" reason to get the 300mm, solving two problems with one move, at least according to my way of reckoning accounts :)

    One possibility is to look for a collar on eBay, although you might have to keep looking for several months to find one divorced from its lens.

    Bruce
     
  8. Lots of good advice here -- hadn't heard about the Canon tripod rings before. But I do recall a real "handy" alternative I got from an old Pentax forum: Get a section of PVC pipe and cut "V"s in it to match your lens. Not nearly as elegant as tripod gear, but certainly solid and serviceable if you've got the gear to cut it. It could hold you over until you're able to see whether a full-blown tripod rig is what you want.

    Bruce
     
  9. After using my 70-200 F4 on a 350D for awhile, I bought a collar for it. The main
    advantage is for shooting vertical, especially if you're not using a very robust ball head as
    it eliminates creep and settling.

    It was a nice add but isn't a critical piece of equipment. From a structural standpoint, it's a
    non issue I think. The lens isn't very heavy.
     
  10. I should have added that my experience is based on using Arca type plates and clamps on
    all my equipment. If you're using the standard tripod socket it may effect your experience
    in that the camera / lens may want to twist when shooting vertical. This is where the collar
    will help balance the rig, especially with a light body like the 350D.
     
  11. The tripod collar from the older 300/4 non-IS is supposed to fit the 70-200/4; the 300/4 IS is significantly larger in diameter and its collar won't fit anything else that I know of.
     
  12. I do mainly portraits so, I have never felt I needed a collar for my 70-200 f/4L. Now, I have the IS version and still, never use the tripod for my work. It's up to you...
     
  13. you could buy mine, but it comes with a 70-200mm F4L ;)
     
  14. I don't use a tripod mount even when using the 70-200/4 + 1.4x TC. I do have a L-plate on the camera and use mirror lockup if the subject is static.
     
  15. I use the tripod collar all of the time in the field. As a nature photographer I hike or
    backpack to my subjects, so I prefer to use as light a tripod as I can get away with to
    lighten my pack weight; given my light tripod and my 350D body, I've found that the
    tripod collar on the 70-200 f/4L to be invaluable. The weight of the collar is less than a
    tripod of beefy-enough stature to obviate the need for a collar.

    Clearly other circumstances often don't at all warrant a collar for a lens of this size. Just
    wanted to share a circumstance where I found it pretty useful.
     
  16. Will Webster wrote:
    "...the 300/4 IS is significantly larger in diameter and its collar won't fit anything else that I know of"

    The tripod collar from 300/4IS fits 70-200IS. I use it this way - it saved me money for second Arca-Swiss plate.
     
  17. There is a third party tripod collar for this lens on ebay (fits the 300 and some other lens also). Anyway, I would like a favour from some of you, if you don't mind. What is the diameter (if you have a caliper) or the circumference of this lens at the area you're suppose to mount the tripod collar? I may get the 3rd party one for "other" lens. I need measurements in mm.

    Thanx.
     

Share This Page

1111