New 200-400 F4 AF VR...New Foot?

[jonpaulgallery]

I ordered a 200-400 F4 AF VR lens for my D300, as well as a 1.4x TC.

I use a Really Right Stuff BH-55 Ball head. Should I buy the replacement foot for this setup from RRS, or should I

just get the QR mounting plate? For double the money, will the replacement foot add great stability and less

vibration?

 

Also, should I keep the VR on when the lens is on the tripod to eliminate any vibration, or will this cause problems?

It's my first VR lens. Any experienced input is appreciated.

 

Thanks!!!

Jon

[brad_vautrinot]

When I bought my 200-400 lens the first thing I did was replace Nikon's foot with one from RRS. It's more stable and also

has a slightly lower profile. My BH-55 ball head is the quick release model. It's not advisable to use VR with the camera/lens mounted on a

tripod and if the tripod is heavy enough there is no need for VR.

 

Brad

[liljuddakalilknyttphotogra]

I was under the impression that the 200-400VR had a good foot, but I guess you feel it needs replacing. I have a Kirk replacement on my 300mm AF-S f/4 - - - super foot replacement & I do believe Kirk have a free shipping weekend this weekend, or was that the last one......

 

Worth checking out - - their products are great & I've loved everything I've ordered from them.

 

JMHO

 

Lil :-)

[curt wiler]

The tripod / VR question has been debated quite a bit here, and it seems clear that there is a tendency to give

general answers and not consider specific lenses and uses. The instructions for this lens are clear: "Set the

(VR) switch to ON when using a tripod without securing the tripod head, or when using a monopod". So, the answer

is different depending on what you are shooting. My own experience confirms this.

[marcus_andrewes]

I hope it costs you less than the $10,500 that lens is here in NZ!

 

I put the RRS foot on mine (as well as all my zooms that have feet) and I think the ease of use outweighs the small cost.

[Mary Doo]

The RRS replacement is nice to have but not necessary, unless you don't want the extra weight of that addtional QR

and you think the lens looks more streamlined with the replacement foot. There is nothing wrong with the Nikon

tripod collar of this lens.

 

Also, according to Nikon instruction, it's OK to leave VR on when placed on a tripod (for this lens only, and I

think the 200mm VR as well). The lens is smart enough to detect it.

 

Good luck,

Mary

[cliff_lesergent4]

Your money would be better spent on a Wimberley Sidekick if you plan to use that lens on a BH-55 ball head. The BH-55

isn't very stable with a lens that size mounted directly on top of it - I would definitely keep the VR on if you plan to use it

that way.

 

I just bought the 200-400 VR a few weeks ago, and ended up replacing my BH-55 with an Arca Swiss Z1, which is

much more smooth and stable.

[andy a.]

I think your asking specifically about getting a new foot versus the mounting plate. The only thing I would add is the RRS has a smoothly rounded underside that is much easier on your hand for carrying (I think the kirk does too). It's also a bit longer and so easier to find a balance point. I still find my hand cramps up badly when walking with it more than a short distance however. Better to put on the shoulder.

 

About the ball head, I'm quite happy with this lens on a markins m-20 head and gitzo legs (no wimberly). I thought I would get a sidekick right away, but I haven't found the need yet.

[jonpaulgallery]

I ordered the RRS replacement foot for the lens. I appreciate everyone's input.

 

Jon