Kent Shafer Posted September 20, 2008 Share Posted September 20, 2008 The RRS foot costs US$100 and the Kirk one is $70. Is there any reason to spend more for the RRS foot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ted_springer Posted September 20, 2008 Share Posted September 20, 2008 RRS makes (arguably) the best release plates, mainly because each one is made custom for each camera body to maximize surface area contact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rene11664880918 Posted September 20, 2008 Share Posted September 20, 2008 The Kirk products are also custom made. A few weeks ago I bought everything from them, ball head, camera L bracket, lens collar for the 300 f4 and monopod QR. They are great. What I read somewhere else is that its advisable to buy the accessories the same brand as the ball head coz sometimes when you mixed you might encounter that some accessories won't have the same fit. So if you have an RRS ball head maybe you should get the foot from them. 30 bucks is not that bad when you will use it on a 1,700 bucks lens. Rene' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_Ingold Posted September 20, 2008 Share Posted September 20, 2008 The RRS LCF-10 replacement foot has a double bevel for compatibility with the RRS flash brackets. It appears to be a cleaner design than the Kirk LPS-45, with a rounded front end for easier entry into the clamp. The RRS foot has a removeable stop to keep it from sliding all the way through the clamp (for safety). I can't tell if the Kirk version has a stop. I own the RRS foot but not the Kirk, so I don't have a first hand comparison. I have many RRS items and the workmanship has been uniformly first-rate. While Kirk has shown some innovation of late, many of their items appear to be copies of RRS products but less refined. Is that worth another $30? I can't say with any certainty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntv666 Posted September 21, 2008 Share Posted September 21, 2008 I just got the KRIK foot for my 70-200 AFS-VR . It is really great and perfect with my KRIK BH1 ballhead. Since I don't have RRS stuf I can't compare the two. But KRIK will performs it's duty perfectly. I am attaching a shot afetr the KRIK foor was fitted to the 70-200 . It's ver smooth and perfect fitting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kent Shafer Posted September 21, 2008 Author Share Posted September 21, 2008 Thank you all very much. I should have mentioned that I'm planning to use this on an Arca-Swiss Z ballhead - don't know if that would make a difference in your opinions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rene11664880918 Posted September 21, 2008 Share Posted September 21, 2008 Kent... I really wanted to get an Arca-Swiss ball head but then I knew I had to buy everything else somewhere else. That is why I got everything from Kirk including the BH1. To be honest, I think they are all the same. My kirk parts are great, really great craftsmanship. I also don't think they copy one from another. If you see the ball heads they are all different same as the camera mounts. When it comes to a lens foot, I don't think there can be much difference so they all look the same. The lens collar for my 300 is really great. So solid when mounted on the ball-head. I am sure the one for a 70-200 will be the same no matter who makes it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joseph_smith3 Posted September 21, 2008 Share Posted September 21, 2008 Both Kirk and RRS are of good quality and will work on all ball heads accepting Arca Swiss plates. I use products from both companies as well as Wimberley. One thing to consider in buying any brand lens plate or replacement foot is whether you are ever going to attach anything else to it like a flash bracket and other features built into the product. In your case, the RRS replacement foot is double dovetailed so it can accept some flash brackets (RRS and Wimberley) while the one from Kirk is not. Both are drilled, either with one hole or two, so that also might make a difference if your bracket is attched this way. If you are not sure what I am talking about this is explained at the RRS web site and at Wimberley's. See here for info at Wimberley's web site as they make lens and camera plates, flash brackets and replacement feet too for longer tele lenses. http://www.tripodhead.com/ Joe Smith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kent Shafer Posted September 21, 2008 Author Share Posted September 21, 2008 Thanks again to all for this helpful information. Edward and Joseph, I decided to get the RRS foot for the reasons you pointed out. René, I almost got a Kirk ballhead instead based solely your recent enthusiastic post, which I enjoyed very much. Your exuberance is contagious. Kent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joseph_wisniewski Posted September 21, 2008 Share Posted September 21, 2008 The Arca Swiss ballhead comes with either a knob clamp or a lever clamp. If you get the knob clamp, it will work with "Arca" plates from all manufacturers: Kirk, Markins, Novoflex, and yes, even Arca themselves. If you get the lever clamp, it must be adjusted to work with one particular "family" of plates. Markins plates work with the same adjustment as genuine Arca plates, as do Novoflex, and some older Kirk plates. An Arca lever clamp adjusted for newer Kirk plates will also work for RRS plates and vise-versa. An RRS lever clamp is not adjustable, and only works with RRS, newer Kirk, and Wimberly plates. If you appreciate the sheer minimalistic elegance of a Marking bidirectional plate, do not get the RRS lever clamp. My preferred clamp is the "Acratech" knob clamp, the version with the rubber knob, the safety pin, and the "double speed" knob threads. Locks and unlocks pretty much as fast as a lever clamp, but like any knob clamp, it can accommodate any brand of plate, without worry. And the safety pin mechanism prevents plate "slide out" incidents without the silly RRS style end-stops. RRS and Kirk feet both have removable stops. Oddly enough, I find the Kirk foot more elegant than the RRS for exactly the reason Edward like the RRS better, the double dovetail. I think it looks just plain silly, and prefer the Kirk system of not bolting little clamps to your lens feet unless you're actually going to use a flash bracket on the lens, which I never do. But whichever foot you get, get the Kirk knob for the locking tripod collar. That thing is great... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liljuddakalilknyttphotogra Posted September 22, 2008 Share Posted September 22, 2008 I buy Kirk over RRS because they seem sleeker & more elegant. Super quality & I'm sticking with them. JMHO Lil :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex_lofquist Posted September 22, 2008 Share Posted September 22, 2008 I bought the KIRK foot for my 70-200 VR. Recently, I've had problems getting it to tighten properly on the dovetail, though I can't seem to find the cause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kent Shafer Posted September 22, 2008 Author Share Posted September 22, 2008 Well, both companies certainly do have their partisans here! But it sounds like both make fine products. In case anyone cares (seems doubtful), here's how I decided on RRS bracketry: I started by looking at L-brackets for my D300. The RRS bracket has centerline markings (both horizontal and vertical), which should be useful for panoramas - the Kirk bracket doesn't seem to have them. Also (and oh so trivial), I keep my camera in one of those aluminum cases with snug fitting rectangular compartments, and it appeared the Kirk bracket curved away from the body more than the RRS one and thus might be more problematic to fit in the case. I had a question about which 70-200 foot to buy, asked it here (hoping to at least save $30 on this expensive project), and the early answers anyway seemed to lean to RRS so I went with that. Goodbye $30. Finally, I needed a bracket for my Hasselblad - both companies' brackets looked about the same and both cost the same, so RRS again. Though it wouldn't matter to the camera-is-just-a-tool folks, I agree with Lil and others that aesthetics matter. Even though I chose RRS brackets for the reasons described above, I think the Kirk counterparts look a little nicer, at least in the pictures on the web. And there was no way I would buy a RRS ballhead, even though it may be a terrific performer. Why? Because it says "Really Right Stuff" right on the front of it. "Stuff"?! This stuff is too elegant and too expensive to be called "stuff." "Really Right Stuff" sounds like the new line of adolescents' jeans at kmart. "Arca-Swiss" - now there's a name! Swiss Rolex watches. Swiss Bolex cameras. Swiss Miss Cocoa. With "Swiss" in the name, the ballhead may be worth $400, but with "Stuff" - never! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shauneen_hutchinson Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 <p>I have misplaced the removable foot to my Nikon 70-200 f2.8 lens. Nikon does not sell a replacement. It looks like the Kirk QR Plate/Foot f/NIK 70-200 2.8 VR AFS should work to replace it. Is this correct?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShunCheung Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 <p>Right, I use RRS' replacement foot on my 70-200mm/f2.8 AF-S VR, because the RRS foot has the Arca-Swiss style dove-tail quick release built in. Incidentally, both version 1 and version 2 of the 70-200mm/f2.8 use the same foot.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now