DIY stabilizer

On 4/21/2014 5:25 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN
wrote:

When hand holding (a tele lens,) I remove the tripod collar to reduce
the weight. I also turn off VR for my bird shooting.

because the weight of a tripod collar is such a significant percentage
of the overall weight of the camera and a long lens.

be sure to also remove the quick release plate, the neck strap and even
the lcd cover. it adds up.


When you shoot wildlife you will be in a position to comment.


--
PeterN

In article ,
says...

Le 31/03/14 02:33, PeterN a écrit :

Not sure it works where it is most needed, on long, heavy lenses.

Noëlle Adam
I have used a variation, using mono filament, instead of a string. It is
similar to what tony Cooper described and works quite well.


On long heavy lense with no place to mount a tripod ?
Nowadays, when I have a blurry shot it is with my 80-200 2,8, old model
that does not allow the use of a tripod collar. (It slide for zooming).

A friend, who was not a experienced photographer but a ranked elite
military (and martial artist), was able to shoot pictures with no blur
at 1 to 2 second.
With no VR of course, whatever the weight of the lense.
Oh ****.


"I don't know but I've been told, sight alignment and trigger control"--
common cadence on the way to or from the rifle range in the US military,
or those parts of it which still teach sight alignment and trigger
control.

On 2014-04-22 00:38:43 +0000, "J. Clarke" said:

In article ,
says...

Le 31/03/14 02:33, PeterN a écrit :

Not sure it works where it is most needed, on long, heavy lenses.

Noëlle Adam
I have used a variation, using mono filament, instead of a string. It is
similar to what tony Cooper described and works quite well.


On long heavy lense with no place to mount a tripod ?
Nowadays, when I have a blurry shot it is with my 80-200 2,8, old model
that does not allow the use of a tripod collar. (It slide for zooming).

A friend, who was not a experienced photographer but a ranked elite
military (and martial artist), was able to shoot pictures with no blur
at 1 to 2 second.
With no VR of course, whatever the weight of the lense.
Oh ****.


"I don't know but I've been told, sight alignment and trigger control"--
common cadence on the way to or from the rifle range in the US military,
or those parts of it which still teach sight alignment and trigger
control.

Those are the fundamentals, they have been ever since rudimentary
sights were fitted to a wheel-lock. They still apply to an M16, an
AK47, shotgun, or a handgun whether you are using iron/open, or optical
sights.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

In article 2014042117543059044-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
says...

On 2014-04-22 00:38:43 +0000, "J. Clarke" said:

In article ,
says...

Le 31/03/14 02:33, PeterN a écrit :

Not sure it works where it is most needed, on long, heavy lenses.

Noëlle Adam
I have used a variation, using mono filament, instead of a string. It is
similar to what tony Cooper described and works quite well.


On long heavy lense with no place to mount a tripod ?
Nowadays, when I have a blurry shot it is with my 80-200 2,8, old model
that does not allow the use of a tripod collar. (It slide for zooming).

A friend, who was not a experienced photographer but a ranked elite
military (and martial artist), was able to shoot pictures with no blur
at 1 to 2 second.
With no VR of course, whatever the weight of the lense.
Oh ****.


"I don't know but I've been told, sight alignment and trigger control"--
common cadence on the way to or from the rifle range in the US military,
or those parts of it which still teach sight alignment and trigger
control.

Those are the fundamentals, they have been ever since rudimentary
sights were fitted to a wheel-lock. They still apply to an M16, an
AK47, shotgun, or a handgun whether you are using iron/open, or optical
sights.

You know that and I know that, but at one time I understand the Army
went off the deep end with "instinct shooting" or some such. I don't
know if they've continued that or if any other branches have joined the
madness.

On 2014-04-22 01:21:59 +0000, "J. Clarke" said:

In article 2014042117543059044-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
says...

On 2014-04-22 00:38:43 +0000, "J. Clarke" said:

In article ,
says...

Le 31/03/14 02:33, PeterN a écrit :

Not sure it works where it is most needed, on long, heavy lenses.

Noëlle Adam
I have used a variation, using mono filament, instead of a string. It is
similar to what tony Cooper described and works quite well.


On long heavy lense with no place to mount a tripod ?
Nowadays, when I have a blurry shot it is with my 80-200 2,8, old model
that does not allow the use of a tripod collar. (It slide for zooming).

A friend, who was not a experienced photographer but a ranked elite
military (and martial artist), was able to shoot pictures with no blur
at 1 to 2 second.
With no VR of course, whatever the weight of the lense.
Oh ****.


"I don't know but I've been told, sight alignment and trigger control"--
common cadence on the way to or from the rifle range in the US military,
or those parts of it which still teach sight alignment and trigger
control.

Those are the fundamentals, they have been ever since rudimentary
sights were fitted to a wheel-lock. They still apply to an M16, an
AK47, shotgun, or a handgun whether you are using iron/open, or optical
sights.

You know that and I know that, but at one time I understand the Army
went off the deep end with "instinct shooting" or some such. I don't
know if they've continued that or if any other branches have joined the
madness.

That wasn't the case when I had my little meditation in green (1969-71)
though there was definitely a school of thought related to "spray &
pray" which was about as effective as any other faith based theory.

Today some Law enforcement agencies (my former California State agency
is one and it is part of my retired LEO qualifying course of fire) use
an "instinct shooting" course of fire on pistol qualifying ranges which
is limited to close quarters pistol combat at 3-6 feet. The logic
behind this is, at such close quarters it is impossible to bring the
handgun to eye level to aim, and raising the gun to eye level makes it
vulnerable to being grabbed and taken from the officer.
So the technique is to draw from holster with feet going to a modified
Weaver stance/position at the same time, and both hands holding the
handgun being drawn back to the belt buckle and to immediately commence
firing. This way the gun is held in close to insure retention. This can
be surprisingly effective allowing six shots from a wheel gun or a
magazine to be emptied into the center of mass of a target/subject. You
might say it is a variation of shooting from the hip, but it works
because you are really aiming with your feet and body pointed at your
target.

This technique should not be used if there is separation of 9-15 feet.
When in doubt back up and use your sights.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

Le 21/04/14 15:43, Savageduck a écrit :
On 2014-04-21 12:06:50 +0000, YouDontNeedToKnowButItsNoëlle
said:

Le 31/03/14 02:33, PeterN a écrit :

Not sure it works where it is most needed, on long, heavy lenses.

Noëlle Adam
I have used a variation, using mono filament, instead of a string. It is
similar to what tony Cooper described and works quite well.


On long heavy lense with no place to mount a tripod ?
Nowadays, when I have a blurry shot it is with my 80-200 2,8, old
model that does not allow the use of a tripod collar. (It slide for
zooming).

The Nikkor 80-200 f/2.8 was originally not delivered with a tripod
collar (it is now), or a lens hood. However, there are both Nikon and
third party accessories available.

http://www.amazon.com/DSLRKIT-Qualit.../dp/B00E0Y10DS

Suitable for NIKON AF-S 80-200mm f/2.8 D ED

Look like it is for AF-S lense...Not sure, but the customer comment says
the same. So I dont know if it would fit : plus, it must be adapted with
some contraption to make an adapter that fit the couple lense-camera,
because the only place where you can eventually put a collar on this
lense is near the front. Thus, the center of gravity will be
ill-positionned if you put this collar on a tripod.
Will it help with a string tripod ? I have no idea.
When I use my 80-200 it is not the weight of the tripod the problem, it
is the lack of elbow room to deploy it. I have tried a monopod once, but
it was just worse than without it (it was under the camera).
May a monopod under the lense with a collar add some more stability ? I
sure can make use of two more stops...
Does anyone have real experience with a long lense and string tripod ?

Noëlle Adam

On 2014-04-22 08:32:26 +0000, YouDontNeedToKnowButItsNoëlle
said:

Le 21/04/14 15:43, Savageduck a écrit :
On 2014-04-21 12:06:50 +0000, YouDontNeedToKnowButItsNoëlle
said:

Le 31/03/14 02:33, PeterN a écrit :

Not sure it works where it is most needed, on long, heavy lenses.

Noëlle Adam
I have used a variation, using mono filament, instead of a string. It is
similar to what tony Cooper described and works quite well.


On long heavy lense with no place to mount a tripod ?
Nowadays, when I have a blurry shot it is with my 80-200 2,8, old
model that does not allow the use of a tripod collar. (It slide for
zooming).

The Nikkor 80-200 f/2.8 was originally not delivered with a tripod
collar (it is now), or a lens hood. However, there are both Nikon and
third party accessories available.

http://www.amazon.com/DSLRKIT-Qualit.../dp/B00E0Y10DS

Suitable for NIKON AF-S 80-200mm f/2.8 D ED

Look like it is for AF-S lense...Not sure, but the customer comment
says the same. So I dont know if it would fit : plus, it must be
adapted with some contraption to make an adapter that fit the couple
lense-camera, because the only place where you can eventually put a
collar on this lense is near the front.

Nikon used to sell the tripod collar and lens hood as separate accessories.

Take a look at where tripod collars are fitted to long lenses. You want
the tripod to support the weight of the lens, not to have the lens
hanging on the F mount where damage is possible.

Thus, the center of gravity will be ill-positionned if you put this
collar on a tripod.
Will it help with a string tripod ? I have no idea.

I doubt it.

When I use my 80-200 it is not the weight of the tripod the problem, it
is the lack of elbow room to deploy it. I have tried a monopod once,
but it was just worse than without it (it was under the camera).
May a monopod under the lense with a collar add some more stability ?

Yes!

I sure can make use of two more stops...
Does anyone have real experience with a long lense and string tripod ?

Noëlle Adam


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On Tue, 22 Apr 2014 10:32:26 +0200, YouDontNeedToKnowButItsNoëlle
wrote:

Le 21/04/14 15:43, Savageduck a écrit :
On 2014-04-21 12:06:50 +0000, YouDontNeedToKnowButItsNoëlle
said:

Le 31/03/14 02:33, PeterN a écrit :

Not sure it works where it is most needed, on long, heavy lenses.

Noëlle Adam
I have used a variation, using mono filament, instead of a string. It is
similar to what tony Cooper described and works quite well.


On long heavy lense with no place to mount a tripod ?
Nowadays, when I have a blurry shot it is with my 80-200 2,8, old
model that does not allow the use of a tripod collar. (It slide for
zooming).

The Nikkor 80-200 f/2.8 was originally not delivered with a tripod
collar (it is now), or a lens hood. However, there are both Nikon and
third party accessories available.

http://www.amazon.com/DSLRKIT-Qualit.../dp/B00E0Y10DS

Suitable for NIKON AF-S 80-200mm f/2.8 D ED

Look like it is for AF-S lense...Not sure, but the customer comment says
the same. So I dont know if it would fit : plus, it must be adapted with
some contraption to make an adapter that fit the couple lense-camera,
because the only place where you can eventually put a collar on this
lense is near the front. Thus, the center of gravity will be
ill-positionned if you put this collar on a tripod.
Will it help with a string tripod ? I have no idea.
When I use my 80-200 it is not the weight of the tripod the problem, it
is the lack of elbow room to deploy it. I have tried a monopod once, but
it was just worse than without it (it was under the camera).
May a monopod under the lense with a collar add some more stability ? I
sure can make use of two more stops...
Does anyone have real experience with a long lense and string tripod ?

Noëlle Adam

See
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/ima..._1779-1200.jpg
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

Le 21/04/14 22:01, PeterN a écrit :

When hand holding (a tele lens,) I remove the tripod collar to reduce
the weight. I also turn off VR for my bird shooting.

I guess your birds are moving so you prefer high speed and fast focusing.

Noëlle Adam

Le 22/04/14 11:06, Savageduck a écrit :

Take a look at where tripod collars are fitted to long lenses.
As I reviously said, my lense is the model with the sliding zoom, so
there is no real way to put a collar on it, except may be very near the
front and that would be awkward. Usually collars are on the middle.

You want
the tripod to support the weight of the lens, not to have the lens
hanging on the F mount where damage is possible.

May be with an ultra heavy lense, but a 80-200 I doubt that it is
overweight for the nikon mount.
If I was concerned by the mount not supporting the weight, the body o
the camera with grip weight about the same or a little more than the lens.

Thus, the center of gravity will be ill-positionned if you put this
collar on a tripod.
Will it help with a string tripod ? I have no idea.

I doubt it.
I doubt it too but I have no real idea.


Noëlle Adam