Nikon 500mm/f5.6 PF Tripod Foot

For the those long teles that I hand hold, such as the 80-400, 200-500, and now the 500mm/f5.6 PF, my preference is to fasten a shoulder strap onto the tripod collar to suspend both the large lens and the camera body. For example, I have a couple of Kirk SS-1 shoulder straps:

KES Security Strap | Kirk Photo

 

A week ago, I was standing on a sidewalk with that strap over my shoulder talking to a friend who was in his car. Suddenly the tripod collar foot for the 500 PF came off the collar. The entire setup fell onto the ground from about 3 feet, perhaps just less than a meter.

Apparently the camera prism hit the ground first. There is a small crack on the prism to the left of the hot shoe. The viewfinder is now very dim and blurry. I had the electronic gridlines switched on inside the viewfinder, but those grids are gone. Clearly the power supply into the viewfinder is knocked off as it needs battery power to stay bright and sharp. Otherwise, the camera can still AF and take pictures normally. I mounted a flash onto the hot shoe and it works as usual.

 

The 500mm PF lens seems to be totally fine after the fall. There is some very minor scratch around the rim of the lens hood, really glad I had that on. I guess the body took the blunt of the impact. It is back to Nikon for repair.

 

The 500 PF and 70-200mm/f2.8 AF-S VR use the same tripod foot. It looks like a few brands such as Wimberley and Hejnar take advantage of the thread on the collar and make a replacement foot that is screwed onto the collar. That seems to be a much more secure design.

 

Sorry about your mishap - freak accident. Though I've always been leery carrying a camera/lens combo via a shoulder strap that provides a single attachment point only - the reason why I have only used my Carryspeed a handful of times before abandoning it. IF I use a shoulder strap at all, then it's a PeakDesign one with two attachment points of my choosing. But the issue here isn't the single-point strap (though it certainly is partially to blame) but the way Nikon chooses to attach the tripod foot to the collar. Unless one is diligent in tightening that locking screw only every five minutes or so, the only thing holding everything together is a release lever that let's go with the slightest touch. There are times I appreciate being able to take the foot of the lens without the need for a tool - but Nikon is making it way to easy and thus accident-prone. The Kirk and RRS replacement options unfortunately copy the same poor design.

Personally I don't like having two straps, e.g. one on the body and one on the lens tripod collar. The extra strap could catch onto something and bring your entire setup down. Apparently the 500 PF foot is known to have issues. Steve Perry mentioned this very issue in his video review:

 

Nikon 500 PF Review - Backcountry Gallery

 

at about the 5:30 mark of the video.

 

I'll need a better replacement foot.

A week ago, I was standing on a sidewalk with that strap over my shoulder...

So sorry to hear this. Those tripod feet and tripod collars are not always dependable. After a few precarious experiences now I always hold the lens body instead trusting the foot or collar.

 

I'll need a better replacement foot.

Not sure which is the best though. I have had RRS and cheap knock-offs and it was the RRS that flew my 70-200 to the air. Perhaps some have improved now. But still, better not to trust it completely as the design may not be fully tested for every condition and handling. ;)

Edited August 5, 2019 by Mary Doo

I'm not all that blown away by the 70-200 foot design (the nearest to relevance I can come to this discussion), but unless I'm confusing them, I thought there's both a screw-tightening arrangement and a button you have to press before it will release? I could believe that if it were loose then something could force past the lever, but is it not already a two-stage process (you should feel it loose before it falls off)? Admittedly I tend to carry the 70-200 directly by the foot, so I'd feel a wobble which you might not on the end of a strap, and the push lever has always worried me about accidental pressing - screwing into the collar as well would be more secure. I usually keep a pinkie hooked around part of the lens when I'm carrying by the foot to ensure nothing can slide out. Or just hug the lens.

 

Shun - did you not also have a collar issue with the 200-500? I'm sympathetic, and this will curse me into dropping a lens myself, but perhaps you could look into some kind of toploader bag? (The biggest LowePro one looks like it might take the 500mm PF + D5.)

I know the 500mm PF is considerably lighter than the 500mm f4, but it could have had suspension loops too!

 

Sadly, it's an old, poor and patently flawed design mistake that has been repeated on a great new lens.

 

Whoever allowed it to continue, be it designer or accountant, should go.

 

Shun, I hope it's not a right-off, but i guess the 'cheapest' component took the hit?, hummm, maybe not?

 

These mono-coque polycarbonate or Mag Ally alloy bodies are impossible to fix, as such, they just need replacing. Maybe that's actually a good thing cost wise??

Edited August 5, 2019 by mike_halliwell

My problem with the 200-500 last year was the removable tripod collar came apart and the lens barrel fell onto the floor. However, in both cases it is the removable tripod collar or foot that is causing the problem. Again, please view Steve Perry's video, about 5 minutes and 30 second into it. He described exactly the same issue, although he was hand holding by the tripod foot. And according to his video, apparently several people have had that issue.

Shun, I am sorry it happened to you, too. It happened to me the day I got my 500mm PF. Fortunately, the lens was over my bed and it fell onto the bed with no damage to anything. I told Steve Perry about the issue before he made his video on the 500mm PF.

 

I replaced the foot with the from RRS. It is a little better, but the design issue is still present.

 

I have thought about adding some safety loop/straps to the lens and my Arca Swiss clamp as extra security but have not dome this yet. If anyone knows of a practical way of doing this, please post the idea.

 

I sure hope Nikon fixes this problem before it comes out with the 600mm PF.

Shun, Thanks for sharing your misfortune so that we can learn from it as well as sharing the Back Country Gallery web site. I have the 70-200 vr AFS and mostly carry it in my hand or at the end of a tripod but sometimes by the foot. I always assumed that since things were tightened down that I was safe. My longer lenses have low profile Wimberley feet held in place with four screws. If I carry them attached to a tripod its with the lens and pods slung over my shoulder for short distances 100-200 yards. If I carry just the cameras and the lens I hold the camera with my hand and nestle the barrel of the lens in the crook of my elbow or I carry it by the foot for short distances. Kirk even makes a handle with an Arca Swiss clamp for this purpose. While I have been happy with the 70-200 for about nine years, the collar and Nikon foot design leaves something to be desired, the Kirk version looks like a variation of the Nikon foot so I didn’t bother with it. I use a Wimberley plate on the Nikon 70-200 foot. A common practice. Otherwise I use a very good Kirk foot with two points of contact on my 300 f4 AFS and Wimberley replacement feet on every long lens I have ever owned. And now probably on my 70-200. Does the Wimberley 500mm PF foot fit on the 70-200. I noticed that Wimberley did not list a dedicated foot for this lens but that Hejnar does. I think Nikon engineers have an age old history of doing a poor job of designing hoods, tripod collars and feet but hopefully in the future will take some cues from 3rd party lenses with integrated Arca Swiss feet but also from manufactures of third party plates and feet. Sometime we get lucky and Nikon accidentally does a good job with their foot/collar. The Tamron Arca foot collar I have on my Tamron 100-400 is too short to balance on a “side kick” action head so there his still work to be done. I miss my 500mm f4 in the worst way and have been recently ogling the 500mm PF. Stay frosty.

is it not already a two-stage process

It is - but the screw needs to be tightened "securely" - which often means with more force than can reasonably be expected or applied.

 

The same applies to the tightening screw of the tripod collar - be it the various 70-200/2.8 lenses, the 80-400 or the 200-500. Tighten as much as you possible can - and then tighten some more. For the 80-400 I have the RRS replacement collar - at least its tightening screw allows to apply the torque needed to secure the collar.

 

If anyone knows of a practical way of doing this, please post the idea.

I remember having seen something quite some time back where it was demonstrated how to make a single attachment point strap connection more secure - and I managed to find the image: BlackRapid ConnectR2 with Safety Utility Loop Attached to Op/Tech Utility Loops on RRS BMBD12 and LCF-10 Foot. For more details, look into this album Tripods. If the tripod foot would release accidentally, at least the combo would still hang off the camera strap eyelet - provided the Op/Tech Utility loop would not break.

 

I already mentioned above the PeakDesign strap that provides two attachment points - so one could connect one side to the tripod foot and the other to the camera (either at the eyelet or at a plate or bracket at the bottom.

 

I carry my 200-500 by the tripod foot (with a Arca-Swiss plate attached to make it longer) - and I also have the camera secured to my wrist with a PeakDesign wrist strap. It'll be quite a jolt should the lens tripod collar fail and the combo dangle from the wrist strap - it may even hit the ground despite the tether.

 

I wonder if instead of attaching that sling to a plate attached to the tripod foot as Shun shows in his images, if that arca swiss plate from the strap could not directly be screwed into the hole on the tripod collar eliminating the weak point of the easily release Nikon tripod foot?

I certainly agree that cranking the tightening knob on the 70-200 feet has seemed a little precarious. I'm still a little surprise that the lens would fall out without something pressing on the release catch, but the actual interlock is pretty small and delicate, so dangling a large body from it might well not work well.

 

Sorry to hear of the damage anyway, Shun - I hope your insurance covers it. We were so pleased when the 200-500 came out and it actually had a tripod foot that didn't oscillate like the 300 f/4's (I recently started using my 300/4 for astronomy, and ended up with a long lens support that's stable but doubles the weight of the lens); I guess "not falling apart" is next up on the wish list, although even the screws holding the plate on my 200/2 seem small enough that I'm a little terrified to have relied on them for so long. I've been grateful that I can take the foot and collar off the 70-200 and 200-500 respectively, but I've been lucky not to shatter any glass in doing so. (I did find the rear cap loose on my 70-200FL in the bag over the weekend, so it's possible I have my own expensive lens issue.)

 

I know others swear by them, but any support reliant on screwing into a single contact point terrifies me - I've had too many generic lens feet swivel in place, no matter how tightened. I know properly designed straps shouldn't unscrew, but the tripod feet shouldn't fall off either...

 

I'm beginning to wonder whether the grip would be more secure were I to craft a lens support from a pair of furry handcuffs. (Which, to be clear, I don't already own.)

I've heard of this happening to others; the Hejnar foot might be the solution. But to be honest I would not trust a strap to connect to the foot securely, either; the screw on the strap can become loose on its own and disengage from the foot, with much the same outcome.

 

I carry the lens and camera with two hands and never from the foot. If I am moving more than a short distance, I take the camera and lens apart and store them in my backpack for transport. I do use the foot when mounting on a tripod or monopod and tighten the knobs at that point. I have used this type of Nikon dovetail feet since 2005 and never had a problem but then I never carried any of the lenses from the tripod feet. The 70-200FL / 500 PF version is more rigid and doesn't vibrate whereas the previous 70-200/2.8G II foot vibrated quite easily and was barely adequate for 200mm. So I'm happy with the Nikon foot and the improvement in it. However, I can see how those who have dropped their kit will feel differently about it. I would just put away the strap and avoid such risky solutions for carrying gear.

Edited August 5, 2019 by ilkka_nissila

Black Rapid sells or sometime throws in a 'safety strap'. It makes things a little less handy, but has saved me on more than one occasion.

I pretty much have to use the 500 PF with a shoulder strap because I frequently have a 600mm/f4 on a tripod with another body.

When there are birds in flight opportunities, I need quick access to the 500 PF to point to a moving target. Even the delay of a second or two can cause unnecessary delays.

 

I have two 70-200mm/f2.8 AF-S VR (versions 1 and 2). Both use that same type of foot and I never had any issues with that,

but the 500 PF is a bigger lens.

 

I sent e-mail to Steve Perry, and he replied that by now, he has heard of quite a few cases of that foot coming off.

Again, Steve's 500 PF review video, from November 2018, where he pointed out the foot problem at 5:30 (5 minutes 30 seconds into the video):

Nikon 500 PF Review - Backcountry Gallery

 

Both RRS and Kirk replacement feet use that same kind of design that I wouldn't trust any more.

I assume replacing the collar assembly with a different design is not an option. Then the three viable alternatives I can think of is:

 

1) Epoxy the foot to the mount. This means it is not coming off, period. Probably the option of last resort.

 

2) All hazard insurance on all your camera gear. It can be a bit pricey. It will not prevent the damage, but it will pay for it.

 

3) Keep the weight on the shoulder harness, but have a neck strap on the camera and around you neck. If not a neck strap then a safety tether on the camera body going to the harness or otherwise attached to your body.

We routinely trust single1/4 inch screws for Arca Swiss plates on camera plates and L brackets. The Wimberley plate for the 70-200 uses double screws but they do not attached to the collar. I think I have removed the foot 3 time since I owned the lens and it always felt tight. Tonight I disconnected the foot and then reinstalled the foot. I checked it’s a little while later and found it had slipped so I tightened it up. I guess I am running with scissors. So I will buy a Hejnar

replacement plate and trust the 1/4X20 screw as I have with the camera bracket.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

attached to the collar directly

We routinely trust single1/4 inch screws for Arca Swiss plates on camera plates and L brackets. The Wimberley plate for the 70-200 uses double screws but they do not attached to the collar. I think I have removed the foot 3 time since I owned the lens and it always felt tight. Tonight I disconnected the foot and then reinstalled the foot. I checked it’s a little while later and found it had slipped so I tightened it up. I guess I am running with scissors. So I will buy a Hejnar

replacement plate and trust the 1/4X20 screw as I have with the camera bracket.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

attached to the collar directly

 

Or you could just use a little Loctite blue (243) on your current 1/4 inch screw.

I use the lens a bit differently; when I'm shooting deer or other subjects where the use of a tripod would potentially spook the subjects (deer, I take off the tripod foot and use the lens hand held. I don't use other lenses at the same time (or alternating between lenses). I typically then support my left elbow or arm on the car door and shoot, or if I'm walking then I'm just hand-holding without support in this situation (moving in the forest is much easier without tripod making noise from branches). I keep the camera strap around my neck for safety.

 

For birds, both in winter and summer, I have been using a tripod with the standard Nikon foot on the 500 PF, along with a Kirk plate. I have used Wimberley Sidekick with Arca Z1 at first, and more recently, a Gitzo GHF2W fluid head (it's lighter and seems to dampen vibrations more effectively, and the fluid mechanism seems to help with following divers smoothly when they take off). In neither case in this use have I noticed any loosening of the tripod foot from the lens. This and the experiences reported by others leads me to think that there must be some (within tolerances or outside them) variation in the tripod foot, the locking mechanism or the dovetail since mine has shown no tendency to loosen. Though it could be contributed to by the different usage.

 

I guess the Heijnar foot is a partial solution and double mounting the rig on the strap so that the camera body and lens foot both are attached to the strap would give some insurance that it's not going drop. But I would be afraid to operate two cameras and lenses in a field environment at the same time, when the heat of the action happens, accidents can also take place. I did fall on my back once in the winter while carrying the 500 PF and camera body (camera body strap around my neck). There was soft snow and I basically slipped and landed on my back. The lens and camera just bounced a bit on my stomach and the lens hood ended put touching the snow on the ground, but there was a lot of it and there was no cosmetic or functional damage. It was a really soft fall for me and I didn't notice any bruises or pain. But the tripod foot played no role in this event. :)

 

I must be one of the few people who uses the 500 PF on a tripod a lot. I just don't like to try to hold a 500mm lens on target while I'm waiting for something to happen, it gets too tiring (not so much because of the weight of the lens but because nothing happens for a long time and yet for a successful photo when something does happen, the focus sensor should be on the bird). The small fluid head has solved this issue for me and it's fluid enough to follow a take-off through. In photographing more erratically-flying birds, I think another approach is needed (some kind of optical or sound triggering is one possibility I guess, or just hand-holding with a lot of practice). I noticed in the same pond where I've been photographing divers, there is a lot of dragonfly activity. But those move way too fast for me to catch with reasonable magnification using the 500mm.

Edited August 7, 2019 by ilkka_nissila

My camera plates generally have anti-rotation flanges, which I hope stop them unscrewing (even by oscillation); I do check them periodically. I take them off often enough that I don't want to use thread lock. My lens plates have a lip at the back, but they still rotate a bit, and I check them frequently; I couldn't stop the 200/2 rotating, and got a replacement foot with an Arca dovetail (which also stopped the problem of not being able to reverse the hood with a QR plate on it). I'm a firm believer in anti-rotation screws on tripod heads; this is the main thing that's put me off a levelling base for my RRS tripod, although I might yet get the video bowl and find a third-party base which has an anti-rotation screw. Again, I swap tripod heads by use, so thread lock doesn't help.

 

I've not had a problem with any collar or foot coming loose, but then I may have been lucky, I check them frequently, and I usually have a hand where I'd feel an issue. I can't deny that a different design could benefit others more, and I'll take all the security I can get. I use the strap on my 200/2, and have the camera strap around my next as well in case of incident, although if it every has to take the weight of the lens there's a chance of more harm than benefit.

 

Briefly looking at the dimensions, it did seem that the 500mm PF and a big body would fit in Lowepro's largest toploader bag (although not necessarily with the hood on). If it does, that would be a shoulder mount that would support the lens securely and allow fast access - without using the collar at all.

 

I've put the 200-500 on a tripod for extended use (usually with an Arca d4), and pointed it at bird nests and the like. I use it more hand-held, though. I imagine the PF would be less tiring to wave about, but weight does help with stability somewhat.

Shun, I am sorry that you have dropped more camera gear. I hope your repair will not be that expensive and that you have had your share of dropped equipment for years to come.

 

Even though there are several reports of this problem, I would not call it a common problem. Consider how many lenses Nikon has shipped with this foot design since 2003. According to Photosynthesis.co.nz over 800 000 of Nikon 70-200/2.8 (versions 1-3) have been made, of which 67 612 are E FLs with the exact foot in question and 5 834 of the 500/5.6PF lenses (per July 31, 2019).

Then the three viable alternatives I can think of is:

 

1) Epoxy the foot to the mount...

 

2) All hazard insurance on all your camera gear...

 

3) Keep the weight on the shoulder harness, but have a neck strap on the camera and around you neck...

Perhaps I am overly cautious, but I regularly check that everything is tight before (and sometimes even during) use. Knock on wood, that is a practice that has served me well. I had the 70-200/2.8 VRII for quite some time and since this January, I have the E FL. I am yet to experience that a lens foot has even started to work its way loose. My only beef with the Nikon feet is that they lack the Arca Swiss mount (and that the 600G came with an unnecessarily tall foot, as did the 400 and 500 G VR).

...The same applies to the tightening screw of the tripod collar - be it the various 70-200/2.8 lenses, the 80-400 or the 200-500. Tighten as much as you possible can - and then tighten some more...

While I do agree that the tripod collar on the VRII required slightly more torque to lock down than that on the E FL, both where/are easy to secure.

I wonder if instead of attaching that sling to a plate attached to the tripod foot as Shun shows in his images, if that arca swiss plate from the strap could not directly be screwed into the hole on the tripod collar eliminating the weak point of the easily release Nikon tripod foot?

I would say so, but I noted that there is a thread on Fredmiranda about a user that had that plate (where the foot attaches to the tripod collar) come off - apparently all four screws had worked their way loose...

 

Stay safe!

Oh, I've realised looking at the pictures (sorry, I'd been reading the thread on my phone) that Shun seems to have a similar "foot-on-QR-plate" arrangement that I have. Despite the anti-rotation lip at the back, I find they still work loose - the plates I have are generic, and the foot slides forward under rotation pressure, which then allows it to wiggle. I always check them for tightness immediately before use. I suppose I'd therefore notice a loose foot/collar connection, but I'm in the habit of checking everything unscrewable anyway - especially after stories of people carrying big lenses on a tripod over their shoulders and them falling off (or the apex plates coming out). Not that there's any reason I'd have caught the foot itself falling off.

 

The foot attachment is a little weedy, especially for the 500mm - but then if it's mostly supposed to stop the foot falling off the lens rather than support the lens in motion, I suppose Nikon under-engineered. I guess a screw through a replacement foot that is also slipped over the "QR foot release" shouldn't unscrew.

 

A cracked prism housing is scary - and I'm a little surprised it happened from 3'. As far as I know it's all one frame, so I'll be pleasantly surprise if a repair is possible (as with the dropped D800 stories). Very bad luck, and a good cautionary tale.

After over two weeks of parts hold, I finally got my D5 back from Nikon. I have only done some preliminary testing, but it looks like Nikon did an excellent job fixing the camera. This episode lasted a whole month.

 

I quickly bought the Wimberley foot for the 500mm PF to replace the stock Nikon foot. It seems to be a lot more secure now.

I'm very glad to hear your D5 is back, Shun - I honestly expected Nikon to write it off with that injury*. My faith in humanity is marginally restored. (Also, glad the new foot is better for you.)

 

* Aside: Many years ago, my driving instructor told me that she bought a different car from most driving schools. Most used a cheap one that happened to have the entire frame in one piece. Whenever a student dinged it, it would write off the whole car. She paid slightly more for a car that was easier to repair. I owe Nikon an apology for thinking the D5 shell might be in the wrong category - or failing that, for assuming they wouldn't give you a new shell.

As with a lot of Nikon DSLRs, the top of the D5, including whatever that covers the prism and mounts the hot shoe that sticks out, plus the two sides with all the top controls, is one piece of plastic. In this case there is no pop-up flash. Obviously Nikon replaced that. Otherwise, I assume there was not much internal damage. Other than a dim viewfinder, the D5 was working properly after the drop. Nikon replaced some of the usual stuffs such as the rubber on the grip, etc., not that I had any complaints about that beforehand. They seem to replace those parts routinely when an older camera goes back to the shop.

Shun, thanks for the info on the Wimberley replacement foot for the Nikon 500mm f5.65 PF. The Wimberley one looks like it will work better than the other replacement feet I have seen that both share the same design flaw as the one from Nikon.