Why are tripod collars so hard to find?

Probably for sound economic reasons. Aftermarket tripod collars would be a
niche market, and the cost of making such an item wouldn't be amortised over
a great number of sales. Kirk Enterprises used to make one for the first
generation Nikkor 80-200/2.8 AF, but Nikon corrected the omission of the
tripod collar in the next generation of this lens. The Kirk collar worked,
but was something of a kludge.

Doug

"TheDave©" wrote in message
...
I've looked at online stores, and on eBay, and I can't seem to find
very many at all. Most are specific designed for particular lenses,
and even then are almost non-existent. Nobody seems to make a generic
one that I can find. I have a Canon 100mm f2.8 Macro Mark I lens that
is somewhat heavy and I'd like to get a generic collar for tripod
mounting, but I cannot find anything suitable. Anyone know of anything
available?

I have one that came with my 70-200 f2.8L IS, and even a replacement
for that, if I were to need one for whatever reason, doesn't seem to be
available. Why are they not more readily available?

William Graham wrote:
"TheDave©" wrote in message
...
Annika1980 wrote:
TheDave) wrote:
I've looked at online stores, and on eBay, and I can't seem to find
very many at all. Most are specific designed for particular
lenses, and even then are almost non-existent. Nobody seems to
make a generic one that I can find. I have a Canon 100mm f2.8
Macro Mark I lens that is somewhat heavy and I'd like to get a
generic collar for tripod mounting, but I cannot find anything
suitable. Anyone know of anything available?

They are available, but expensive.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...s&Q=&is=REG&O=
productlist&sku=194450

I looked at B&H, but that one didn't come up in my search. You're
right, that is expensive. I'll have to keep an eye out on the used
market. Thanks.

It seems to me that, unless the lens weighs significantly more than
the camera, one wouldn't need a separate mount for it....The camera
should be capable of holding at least it's own weight by the
mount.....For example, my F5 weighs about 2-12 pounds, so I don't
even think about a lens tripod mount unless the lens weighs like 3
pounds or more. (and I don't have any lenses that weigh that much)
Any lens that does weigh 3 pounds or more should have a built-in
tripod mount......

Since true macro shots show ANY movement of the set-up as a major subject
shift withing the frame, framing becomes extremely difficult with even the
slightest sag. It makes a significant difference because the torque on the
contact point is reduced. Another reaon it helps if because when the
attachment point is the camera, any adjustment of angle means a relatively
HUGE swing of the front element. -With a collar, the movement is less
severe, since the camera body AND the front element move (turn)...rather
than just the front element.


--
Images (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by Mark² at:
www.pbase.com/markuson

William Graham wrote:
"TheDave©" wrote in message
...
Annika1980 wrote:
TheDave) wrote:
I've looked at online stores, and on eBay, and I can't seem to find
very many at all. Most are specific designed for particular
lenses, and even then are almost non-existent. Nobody seems to
make a generic one that I can find. I have a Canon 100mm f2.8
Macro Mark I lens that is somewhat heavy and I'd like to get a
generic collar for tripod mounting, but I cannot find anything
suitable. Anyone know of anything available?

They are available, but expensive.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...s&Q=&is=REG&O=
productlist&sku=194450

I looked at B&H, but that one didn't come up in my search. You're
right, that is expensive. I'll have to keep an eye out on the used
market. Thanks.

It seems to me that, unless the lens weighs significantly more than
the camera, one wouldn't need a separate mount for it....The camera
should be capable of holding at least it's own weight by the
mount.....For example, my F5 weighs about 2-12 pounds, so I don't
even think about a lens tripod mount unless the lens weighs like 3
pounds or more. (and I don't have any lenses that weigh that much)
Any lens that does weigh 3 pounds or more should have a built-in
tripod mount......

Since true macro shots show ANY movement of the set-up as a major subject
shift withing the frame, framing becomes extremely difficult with even the
slightest sag. It makes a significant difference because the torque on the
contact point is reduced. Another reaon it helps if because when the
attachment point is the camera, any adjustment of angle means a relatively
HUGE swing of the front element. -With a collar, the movement is less
severe, since the camera body AND the front element move (turn)...rather
than just the front element.


--
Images (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by Mark² at:
www.pbase.com/markuson

"Doug Robbins" wrote in message
...
Probably for sound economic reasons. Aftermarket tripod collars would be
a niche market, and the cost of making such an item wouldn't be amortised
over a great number of sales. Kirk Enterprises used to make one for the
first generation Nikkor 80-200/2.8 AF, but Nikon corrected the omission of
the tripod collar in the next generation of this lens. The Kirk collar
worked, but was something of a kludge.

Doug

"TheDave©" wrote in message
...
I've looked at online stores, and on eBay, and I can't seem to find
very many at all. Most are specific designed for particular lenses,
and even then are almost non-existent. Nobody seems to make a generic
one that I can find. I have a Canon 100mm f2.8 Macro Mark I lens that
is somewhat heavy and I'd like to get a generic collar for tripod
mounting, but I cannot find anything suitable. Anyone know of anything
available?

I have one that came with my 70-200 f2.8L IS, and even a replacement
for that, if I were to need one for whatever reason, doesn't seem to be
available. Why are they not more readily available?


Well, how about making a cradle out of hardwood, that could be bolted to the
bottom of the camera with a 1/4-20 bolt at the back end, and had a "V" cut
in it at the front end to cradle the lens? - Then, you could mount a tripod
quick release plate in the middle of the bottom right at the balance
point......

I don't know if I'd say "need", but it is heavier than other lenses of
comparable size, and I feel that it would put less stress on the mount
if I did have one.

Local machine shop?

Ouch. Way more expensive than buying the official collars I'd think.

"Doug Robbins" wrote in message
...
Probably for sound economic reasons. Aftermarket tripod collars would be
a niche market, and the cost of making such an item wouldn't be amortised
over a great number of sales. Kirk Enterprises used to make one for the
first generation Nikkor 80-200/2.8 AF, but Nikon corrected the omission of
the tripod collar in the next generation of this lens. The Kirk collar
worked, but was something of a kludge.

Doug

Interestingly, I recently saw a Swedish-made aftermarket collar for the
Canon 70-200 f/4L / 80-200 f/2.8L. A straight replacement for the Canon
"Tripod mount A", in other words. Much cheaper than the Canon one, too.

Ståle Sannerud wrote:
Interestingly, I recently saw a Swedish-made aftermarket collar for the
Canon 70-200 f/4L / 80-200 f/2.8L. A straight replacement for the Canon
"Tripod mount A", in other words. Much cheaper than the Canon one, too.

Can you please provide us with a link to where you saw these? I think
many of us would be interested. I did a search but couldn't find anything.

Menno

TheDave© wrote:
I've looked at online stores, and on eBay, and I can't seem to find
very many at all. Most are specific designed for particular lenses,
and even then are almost non-existent. Nobody seems to make a generic
one that I can find. I have a Canon 100mm f2.8 Macro Mark I lens that
is somewhat heavy and I'd like to get a generic collar for tripod
mounting, but I cannot find anything suitable. Anyone know of anything
available?

I have one that came with my 70-200 f2.8L IS, and even a replacement
for that, if I were to need one for whatever reason, doesn't seem to be
available. Why are they not more readily available?

Tripod collars are generally specifically made for lenses that have a
provision
for the rotating ring. A generic version you might want to look at is
the
Manfroto TELEPHOTO LENS SUPPORT / Cat. No: 3420
You can see a picture and description at http://www.bogenimaging.us/
I have one of these and it works well on some telephotos I have without
collars.

Mark² wrote:
TheDave© wrote:

TheDave© wrote:

I don't know if I'd say "need", but it is heavier than other lenses
of comparable size, and I feel that it would put less stress on the
mount if I did have one.

I should also add that I feel it would distribute the weight more
evenly and reduce the potential for camera shake.


It would help. As I'm sure you know, macro work is sensitive to even the
SLIGHTEST of head slips/movements when framing, and the torque on the head
is significantly reduced by moving the connection point forward.

I've found a geared head better for that aspect, but it is bloody slow
if you're trying to get moving subjects. Not to belabour the point but
my macro lens is not heavy enought that when used with a Maxxum 9 or 7D
that the body weight outweighs the lens weight by at least 3:1.

Cheers,
Alan



--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.

wrote:
Tripod collars are generally specifically made for lenses that have a
provision
for the rotating ring. A generic version you might want to look at is
the
Manfroto TELEPHOTO LENS SUPPORT / Cat. No: 3420
You can see a picture and description at http://www.bogenimaging.us/
I have one of these and it works well on some telephotos I have
without collars.

This looks promising. It's about $61 at B&H. What are some of the
pros and cons?