Gary Naka

Good luck with it Gary.

One slight caveat. Its size prevents you from seeing exactly where the 3 'feet' are and it's easy to misalign it with the tripod head and for it not to lock in place. So just take care that it's properly seated in the socket before letting go of the camera!

It arrived :D

Now to go tinker with it.

The plate has a 3/8 screw, I have to look at my view camera, but I think it has a 1/4 screw. If so, I have to replace the screw on the plate.

DANG $18.55 for a replacement screw.

Arca QR with a lever operated clamp is arguably the safest. The force needed to close the lever is very consistent when correct. If it is too loose, you know immediately. If too tight (usually impossibly tight), the plate is tipped and only catching on the edge. The latter can be deceiving when using a screw-type closure. To borrow a political phrase, "trust but verify!"

 

Better video heads use a side-entry plate. The long beveled plate is engaged on one edge, then tipped level until it snaps into place.

My experience with my lever AS clamp is, it depends on the rail/plate.

If you use ONE brand of rail/plates, you are OK, but if you use several brands, as I do, maybe not.

The different brands are just a "little" bit different, so when my lever clamps down, some are tight and some are loose. Then I have to go to the other side of the clamp to adjust the screw.

I would like to find a snap locking AS clamp, like the Manfrotto clamps and the video head you mentioned.

Maybe I have not been looking hard enough.

The 030L is listed as discontinued on several sites.

I found a used one, and bought it. :D

It has shipped and on its way to me.

[uSER=2403817]@rodeo_joe|1[/uSER] Thanks for the tip.

You're right Gary, it's a variant of Manfrotto's hex plate, model#030L. Not sure if it's still in production though. B&H have it listed as 'no longer available'. Maybe there's some NOS samples out there somewhere, but both of mine were bought used some years ago.

 

And BTW, just Googled Manfrotto QR plates: How many friggin' different designs of QR plate does one company need to produce for chrisake? :eek:

No wonder people are turning to heads that have an AS fitment.

The 030L is listed as discontinued on several sites.

I found a used one, and bought it. :D

Nice! But why isn't everybody offering such?

OEMs like Nikon, Canon and Sony do not have to. So why bother.

It is the 3rd party companies that have to make something different, to get people to buy their lens, rather than the OEM.

I am quite content with the Novoflex 1" diameter screw heads sticking maybe 5mm out of my (comparably light!) stuff. But yeah, after bending my Super A's base plate enough to loose MD contacts, I 'd appreciate if manufacturers ditched the darn thread in favour of the Arca flange. Do they have to pay loyalties, if they machined that into feet of tripod collars? Or why don't they?

I have seen AS rails integrated into the tripod foot of some lenses.

Here is a Tamron 70-200/2.8 with the foot showing the integrated AS rail.

That's a use-case where I'll grudgingly give an advantage to the QR plate - provided both spotting scope and lens are aligned identically on their plates, and remain so.

 

However I'll definitely agree to disagree about the usefulness and ergonomic impact of having one of those sharp little plates permanently stuck to the bottom of a camera body.

The AS plates/rails are usually unobtrusive. On my current cameras, I use a L-bracket with a built-in AS rail.

However, on anything smaller than a view camera, the Manfrotto hex plate definitely is NOT unobtrusive.

BTW, what plate is that on your view camera? It looks like a Manfrotto plate, but I've not seen that one before.

What I really like about the Manfrotto hex plate on my 4x5, and why I use it, is . . .

I just place the hex plate (on the bottom of the view camera), onto the head and lower the view camera (holding it with two hands).

The head automatically clamps onto the hex plate, so I don't need a third hand to secure the plate.

A press camera is easier to handle with one hand vs. a monorail.

The other problem with QR plates are the proprietary ones.

If you buy a tripod, and you CANNOT buy replacement plates, you are playing Russian roulette.

If you loose the QR plate, you might as well throw the tripod into the garbage (if you cannot separate the head from the legs), because you can't use the tripod without the QR plate.

Neither can you keep the plate attached to different gear, if you only have that ONE plate.

If you let someone else use your tripod, there is a very good chance that the tripod will be returned to you without the QR plate.

My local school has had that happen to at least two tripods, maybe/probably more.

I suspect the students who used the tripods, removed their camera from the tripod, leaving the QR plate attached to their camera, and returned the tripod without the QR plate.

• One tripod had a Manfrotto head. I was able to help the teacher buy a replacement QR plate.
   
  
• The other was a Brand-X tripod. No idea how to get a replacement plate. So it became a hunk of useless metal in the corner of the room, cuz the teacher could not bring himself to dump it in the garbage.
  

A screw mount is just fine, as long as the gear you are putting on the tripod or monopod is not big/bulky/heavy. One it gets beyond that threshold, screwing the gear onto the tripod becomes difficult.

For that kind of stuff, I use the AS clamp system. It is faster and less clumsy to use.

For my 4x5 view camera, I use a Manfrotto hex plate QR plate. MUCH easier (faster and safer) than trying to screw a 4x5 view camera onto the tripod.

On MY gear, the QR plate is KEPT on the gear. So no hassles of removing and installing it.

I help with photography at my local high school.

EVERY year, for the past four years, I have had students asking me, if I had a spare memory card that they could use. I did not carry spare memory cards.

This past year, with a different class, I started carrying one then two spare memory cards with me, anticipating just this problem. And sure enough, it happened.

This past year, I think I have had about SIX times when the student came to me and asked me "if I had a spare memory card." :eek:

The teacher and I thought about this and we think that the problem probably happens after they leave class with the camera.

I don't know how many times this happened when I was not around, with a spare card.

The more problematic is when students ask me if I have a spare battery for their camera :eek:

There are two problems here.

#1 - Grabbing a battery for their camera when they check out the camera.

#2 - Grabbing the CORRECT battery. A Canon T5 battery does not work/fit in the T7i, and visa versa.

First time I used my new mirrorless camera.

I shot it for one day, then the next day . . . one shot and the battery was empty :eek:

I did not realize how fast the mirrorless drains the battery vs. my dSLR. My dSLR could go the entire weekend on a single charge.

After that I learned to check the CHARGE of the battery at the end of the day, and I got several spare batteries.

I ultimately ended up with FIVE batteries and three chargers for that camera.

Not digital, but a couple of times I've arrived with a medium format camera, film, exposure meter, lens hood etc etc, then upon opening the camera to load the film, found no take up spool present.

 

Another time I had decided to try out a Japanese folding camera, on a bright Sunday to take some shots around town. Loaded the film, fine, wound on to bring the number 1 into the red window ... and wound ... and wound. I just could not see the numbers on the film backing paper and had reached frame 5 before I realised, whereupon I packed up and went home. The camera - a very nice Sisley 2A coupled rangefinder - still hasn't made a shot in anger.

Sounds like what I did with a Hasselblad.

Having never used one before, I shot a roll of B&W and brought it to the local shop to process.

I went to pick it up . . . and the roll was clear :confused:

The shop owner and I spent a long time trying to figure out what happened.

Nearest we could guess, was that I loaded the Hasselblad back, like a TLR.

IOW the paper backing was facing the lens, not the film. :eek:

Lesson learned, THINK when I load the film. Don't go on autopilot.

I looks like an Instamatic.

Pitty the old film cartridges are no longer available. That is what made them easy to use for the average person.

FEEL

Camera shutter releases feel different between brands and sometimes between models.

Some cameras have a harder to detect half press feel.

And as RJ said, all bets are off with old gear.

Does it even have a "half press" option.

Looks like Canon have gone 'All-In' with DX size MILC with the R7 and R10....:eek:

 

What's Nikons reply this time? :)

 

One of the comments heard so far was EOS M .... RIP.

Nikon does not and did not have a 32MP DX camera. The DX cameras stopped at about 24MP. And the D500 regressed to 20MP.

Nikon did not have a reply to the Canon 90D, so may not reply to the R7.

I have to compare the specs, but I think the Z50 is like a weak version of the R10. IOW Nikon has to play catch up.

BUT . . . that depends on the target market.

• If Nikon's target market is more consumer, then the Z50 might be on target.
  

• Canon's target, based on the performance specs, seem to be more high end/enthusiast/pro.
  The R7, like the 90D seems to be more tilted towards the pro level user.
  

I agree about the EOS-M.

Canon should have ONE APS-C line, not two. Two will just confuse and split the market, and dilute their R&D.

To me, it appears that Canon decided that Nikon's Z single mount strategy for FF+APS-C is better than Canon's two mount strategy of different mounts for FF ® and APS-C (M). And rather than keep spending more R&D money on the M, cut it and put it into the R-S line.

Then again, maybe Canon is splitting the APS-C market.

I did a "rough" comparison with their dSLRs.

The R7 is like an upgraded 90D

With a 32MP APS-C sensor, the R7 and 90D have no comparable Nikon DX dSLR. It would be similar to what a D8000 might be.

The R10, with no rear wheel, is operationally like an upgraded T8i.

The T8i is kinda similar to the D5600, in that it has one control dial.

I HATE you.

Now I want to get one. ;)

Do your testing/learning indoors where you can repeat the EXACT shot.

That way your testing is not affected by an uncontrolled variable.

As was mentioned, check the FLASH exposure compensation.

In the early days of using my dSLR, I often forgot that EC and flash EC are two DIFFERENT control settings.

TTL depends on the light reflected back by the subject.

If most of the flash is going out PAST the bird, then the TTL is trying to expose for the background, not the bird.

Selecting the appropriate metering mode (spot, CW, matrix) is important.

If the bird is at a feeder, then the distance from the flash to the bird is fixed.

With a fixed distance, you can go full manual, and avoid the TTL issues.

What's wrong with very inexpensive 2nd hand DSLRs? Learn the fundamentals first!

But can't I buy a better camera and get the kind of pictures the pro does?

That happens more often than one would logically think. People with money will just throw money at the problem.

I talked to a parent who was shooting a FF Canon kit, probably worth well more than $6k (camera, 70-200/2.8, + another lens). He was shooting in "Auto" because he did not know how to use the other modes. :eek:

I prefer the Fuji approach which is APC-C only or the Canon approach with a seperate line of APC-C cameras. Even Sony is not doing much with their APC-C A body any more. Using 2 sensor sizes for 1 lens mount is what I dislike. It was the reason I never bought a Nikon DX camera.

And if Canon stops making M lenses, your only option for lenses, is to put an EF lens on with an EF to M adapter.

Doesn't that negate the smaller & lighter reasoning behind DX?

My DX D7200 is not too much smaller and lighter than a FX D750.

And it is bigger and heavier than a DX D5600.

The extra capability of the D7200 comes with larger size and greater weight over the D5600.

But could you put a FX dSLR on a diet and bring the size/weight down? Take out the mechanical AF mechanism, lighten the frame (reduce the durability), etc.

The F-FX 50/1.8 is not much bigger than the F-DX 35/1.8.

The consumer dSLR FX lenses are not as big/heavy as the pro lenses.

I would initially pair up similar consumer Z-FX lenses with the consumer Z-FX camera.

Using plastic and lightweight metals on the consumer lenses rather than all metal as on the pro lenses, helps to keep the weight down.

As will smaller max apertures, less metal and glass.

Where you are correct is lens focal length to size/weight for longer lenses.

Rather than a FX 70-200/2.8, on DX I would need a 45-135/2.8. Same magnification and max aperture, but a smaller/lighter lens.

So rather than a DX 70-300, I would need a FX 105-450. A larger/heavier lens.

One of the problem with smaller/lighter mirrorless, is power.

A small camera, like the D3xxx/D5xxx, calls for a smaller battery, just to fit in the small camera.

But mirrorless sucks battery power. So you need a LARGER capacity battery.

Olympus found out that with the high end EM1 cameras. The EM1 line has steadily increased the battery capacity from the mk1 to the mk2/mk3 to the OM1. And the camera has had to be bigger each time, to house the bigger battery. And the run time is still SIGNIFICANTLY shorter than my D7200.

The more processing power that is put into the mirrorless camera, the more power it burns.

The problem is the phone cameras have become sooo much better over the years, that it has eroded the lower end consumer market.

As phone cameras get better, does the basic APS-C camera that is sold in CostCo/BestBuy have a place in that market? I would hope so, but I don't know.

Repeating that cock-up was sadly very predictable.....:(

After Canon came out with their APS-C mirrorless, the M-50, Nikon was forced to reply in kind, or give Canon that market. And Nikon cannot afford to give up market share.

The unknown is the Japanese market. Maybe that market WANTS a DX camera.

I would have preferred that both Nikon and Canon have come out with a low end consumer grade FX mirrorless, and consolidate back to just the FX line, like back in the film days. That would have simplified the system landscape.

Unfortunately, Nikon was stretched too thin bringing out the Z-FX line, and even thinner bring out a Z-DX line at the same time.

In that situation, it was predictable, that the Z-DX line would play second fiddle, Z-FX has priority.

As for the "cock-up," that is both Nikon and Canon.

Canon treated their dSLR APS-C line just as second-rate as Nikon did.

But at least Canon got the mirrorless APS-C M50 lenses, going faster than Nikon did the Z-DX lenses. Last I looked, Canon had a decent basic line, vs. Nikon with only three DX lenses.

The Problem that Canon has is, they MUST make mirrorless APS-C lenses, or they dead-end the M-50 series camera.

Nikon Z-DX users can use Z-FX lenses.

while am not suprise that Nikon made the Zfc but I was surprised that they made the Z50. I don't think it makes sense to introduce APC-C camera that share the same lens line as the FX. I understand the Zfc because with an FX body it won't be as small as film camera.

Gives the Z-DX guys a chance to move up to Z-FX, or use Z-FX lenses.

Otherwise like the Canon M-50, a Z-DX would be DX ONLY.

Half the lenses I use on my DX dSLR are FX lenses.

International Camera, in San Diego

ICT Camera and Lens Repair, San Diego

I am planning to send him my Olympus 500/8. Same problem, the old lube in the focus threads has dried, and focusing is STIFF.