A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Tripod collars by size?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 10th 12, 09:01 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Paul Ciszek
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 244
Default Tripod collars by size?

All of the tripod collars I can find for sale list the lens they are
intended to grip, but never the size. I am quite certain that there
has never been a tripod collar for the teleconverter I want to grip,
so I was hoping to shop by size and "wrap" the teleconverter to make
it fit.


--
Please reply to: | No nation is drunken where wine is cheap.
pciszek at panix dot com | --Thomas Jefferson
  #2  
Old December 10th 12, 09:31 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Rob
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 95
Default Tripod collars by size?

On 10/12/2012 7:01 PM, Paul Ciszek wrote:
All of the tripod collars I can find for sale list the lens they are
intended to grip, but never the size. I am quite certain that there
has never been a tripod collar for the teleconverter I want to grip,
so I was hoping to shop by size and "wrap" the teleconverter to make
it fit.




Whats more I don't think there would be enough strength in the converter
shell to enable the collar to tighten.
  #3  
Old December 10th 12, 09:54 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Eric Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,611
Default Tripod collars by size?

On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 19:31:03 +1100, Rob
wrote:

On 10/12/2012 7:01 PM, Paul Ciszek wrote:
All of the tripod collars I can find for sale list the lens they are
intended to grip, but never the size. I am quite certain that there
has never been a tripod collar for the teleconverter I want to grip,
so I was hoping to shop by size and "wrap" the teleconverter to make
it fit.




Whats more I don't think there would be enough strength in the converter
shell to enable the collar to tighten.


What's wrong with clamping on to the lens with which you are using the
teleconverter? It is almost certainly made to be supported in this
way.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens
  #4  
Old December 10th 12, 12:13 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Rob
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 95
Default Tripod collars by size?

On 10/12/2012 7:31 PM, Rob wrote:
On 10/12/2012 7:01 PM, Paul Ciszek wrote:
All of the tripod collars I can find for sale list the lens they are
intended to grip, but never the size. I am quite certain that there
has never been a tripod collar for the teleconverter I want to grip,
so I was hoping to shop by size and "wrap" the teleconverter to make
it fit.




Whats more I don't think there would be enough strength in the converter
shell to enable the collar to tighten.




Oh BTW what lens/TC????
  #5  
Old December 10th 12, 04:17 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Paul Ciszek
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 244
Default Tripod collars by size?


In article ,
Eric Stevens wrote:
On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 19:31:03 +1100, Rob
wrote:

On 10/12/2012 7:01 PM, Paul Ciszek wrote:
All of the tripod collars I can find for sale list the lens they are
intended to grip, but never the size. I am quite certain that there
has never been a tripod collar for the teleconverter I want to grip,
so I was hoping to shop by size and "wrap" the teleconverter to make
it fit.


Whats more I don't think there would be enough strength in the converter
shell to enable the collar to tighten.


What's wrong with clamping on to the lens with which you are using the
teleconverter? It is almost certainly made to be supported in this
way.


That is in fact my plan B, but the reason is simple: The center of gravity
of the camera-teleconverter-lens combo is closer to the teleconverter than
to the only grippable area of the lens.

The lens is a Tamron 55BB mirror lens. The 55BB, unlike its predecessor,
was not designed to have a mounting bracket. Focusing rotates almost the
entire barrel except for a portion approx. 3/8" long. This part of the
lens is slightly forward of the center of balance of the camera+lens combo
even when there is no teleconverter, and is even further forward of the
center when the teleconverter is added. The teleconverter is a Tamron
140F; since they no longer sell the adaptall mount version, I had to get
a Nikon mount version and add an adapter, but it seems to work. (The
Tamron 140F was meant to work hand-in-glove with Tamron lenses like the
55BB; that's why I went to the trouble.) The camera is an Olympus OM-D.

I think the 140F is sturdy enough to be gripped. If the mounts on either
end of it can't hold up the weight, then I am screwed no matter where I
grip the combination. I do think it makes more sense to hang the camera
off of one side of the teleconverter and the mirror lens off of the other
side than it does to either hang the whole thing one-sided off of the
camera or the lens.

--
Please reply to: | No nation is drunken where wine is cheap.
pciszek at panix dot com | --Thomas Jefferson
  #6  
Old December 10th 12, 05:00 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Robert Coe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,901
Default Tripod collars by size?

On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 15:17:39 +0000 (UTC), (Paul Ciszek)
wrote:
:
: In article ,
: Eric Stevens wrote:
: On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 19:31:03 +1100, Rob
: wrote:
:
: On 10/12/2012 7:01 PM, Paul Ciszek wrote:
: All of the tripod collars I can find for sale list the lens they are
: intended to grip, but never the size. I am quite certain that there
: has never been a tripod collar for the teleconverter I want to grip,
: so I was hoping to shop by size and "wrap" the teleconverter to make
: it fit.
:
: Whats more I don't think there would be enough strength in the converter
: shell to enable the collar to tighten.
:
: What's wrong with clamping on to the lens with which you are using the
: teleconverter? It is almost certainly made to be supported in this
: way.
:
: That is in fact my plan B, but the reason is simple: The center of gravity
: of the camera-teleconverter-lens combo is closer to the teleconverter than
: to the only grippable area of the lens.
:
: The lens is a Tamron 55BB mirror lens. The 55BB, unlike its predecessor,
: was not designed to have a mounting bracket. Focusing rotates almost the
: entire barrel except for a portion approx. 3/8" long. This part of the
: lens is slightly forward of the center of balance of the camera+lens combo
: even when there is no teleconverter, and is even further forward of the
: center when the teleconverter is added. The teleconverter is a Tamron
: 140F; since they no longer sell the adaptall mount version, I had to get
: a Nikon mount version and add an adapter, but it seems to work. (The
: Tamron 140F was meant to work hand-in-glove with Tamron lenses like the
: 55BB; that's why I went to the trouble.) The camera is an Olympus OM-D.
:
: I think the 140F is sturdy enough to be gripped. If the mounts on either
: end of it can't hold up the weight, then I am screwed no matter where I
: grip the combination. I do think it makes more sense to hang the camera
: off of one side of the teleconverter and the mirror lens off of the other
: side than it does to either hang the whole thing one-sided off of the
: camera or the lens.

You're also screwed if the wall of the TC deforms under the force applied by
the collar or by the lens. It sounds as though you're pushing the envelope,
whatever you do. It might be safer to place a large beanbag (or a small
pillow) over the tripod head, lay the camera/lens assembly on it, and use a
couple of bungee cords to secure it to the tripod. It wouldn't be pretty, but
you'd know you weren't stressing any components beyond their design capacity.

Bob
  #7  
Old December 10th 12, 05:33 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
irwell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 694
Default Tripod collars by size?

On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 11:00:35 -0500, Robert Coe wrote:

On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 15:17:39 +0000 (UTC), (Paul Ciszek)
wrote:
:
: In article ,
: Eric Stevens wrote:
:On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 19:31:03 +1100, Rob
:wrote:
:
:On 10/12/2012 7:01 PM, Paul Ciszek wrote:
: All of the tripod collars I can find for sale list the lens they are
: intended to grip, but never the size. I am quite certain that there
: has never been a tripod collar for the teleconverter I want to grip,
: so I was hoping to shop by size and "wrap" the teleconverter to make
: it fit.
:
:Whats more I don't think there would be enough strength in the converter
:shell to enable the collar to tighten.
:
:What's wrong with clamping on to the lens with which you are using the
:teleconverter? It is almost certainly made to be supported in this
:way.
:
: That is in fact my plan B, but the reason is simple: The center of gravity
: of the camera-teleconverter-lens combo is closer to the teleconverter than
: to the only grippable area of the lens.
:
: The lens is a Tamron 55BB mirror lens. The 55BB, unlike its predecessor,
: was not designed to have a mounting bracket. Focusing rotates almost the
: entire barrel except for a portion approx. 3/8" long. This part of the
: lens is slightly forward of the center of balance of the camera+lens combo
: even when there is no teleconverter, and is even further forward of the
: center when the teleconverter is added. The teleconverter is a Tamron
: 140F; since they no longer sell the adaptall mount version, I had to get
: a Nikon mount version and add an adapter, but it seems to work. (The
: Tamron 140F was meant to work hand-in-glove with Tamron lenses like the
: 55BB; that's why I went to the trouble.) The camera is an Olympus OM-D.
:
: I think the 140F is sturdy enough to be gripped. If the mounts on either
: end of it can't hold up the weight, then I am screwed no matter where I
: grip the combination. I do think it makes more sense to hang the camera
: off of one side of the teleconverter and the mirror lens off of the other
: side than it does to either hang the whole thing one-sided off of the
: camera or the lens.

You're also screwed if the wall of the TC deforms under the force applied by
the collar or by the lens. It sounds as though you're pushing the envelope,
whatever you do. It might be safer to place a large beanbag (or a small
pillow) over the tripod head, lay the camera/lens assembly on it, and use a
couple of bungee cords to secure it to the tripod. It wouldn't be pretty, but
you'd know you weren't stressing any components beyond their design capacity.

Bob


Try the muffler Shop.
  #8  
Old December 11th 12, 11:26 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Chris Malcolm[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,142
Default Tripod collars by size?

Paul Ciszek wrote:
In article ,
Eric Stevens wrote:
On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 19:31:03 +1100, Rob
wrote:

On 10/12/2012 7:01 PM, Paul Ciszek wrote:
All of the tripod collars I can find for sale list the lens they are
intended to grip, but never the size. I am quite certain that there
has never been a tripod collar for the teleconverter I want to grip,
so I was hoping to shop by size and "wrap" the teleconverter to make
it fit.

Whats more I don't think there would be enough strength in the converter
shell to enable the collar to tighten.


What's wrong with clamping on to the lens with which you are using the
teleconverter? It is almost certainly made to be supported in this
way.


That is in fact my plan B, but the reason is simple: The center of gravity
of the camera-teleconverter-lens combo is closer to the teleconverter than
to the only grippable area of the lens.


The lens is a Tamron 55BB mirror lens. The 55BB, unlike its predecessor,
was not designed to have a mounting bracket. Focusing rotates almost the
entire barrel except for a portion approx. 3/8" long. This part of the
lens is slightly forward of the center of balance of the camera+lens combo
even when there is no teleconverter, and is even further forward of the
center when the teleconverter is added. The teleconverter is a Tamron
140F; since they no longer sell the adaptall mount version, I had to get
a Nikon mount version and add an adapter, but it seems to work. (The
Tamron 140F was meant to work hand-in-glove with Tamron lenses like the
55BB; that's why I went to the trouble.) The camera is an Olympus OM-D.


I think the 140F is sturdy enough to be gripped. If the mounts on either
end of it can't hold up the weight, then I am screwed no matter where I
grip the combination. I do think it makes more sense to hang the camera
off of one side of the teleconverter and the mirror lens off of the other
side than it does to either hang the whole thing one-sided off of the
camera or the lens.


What you want is a bracket which will let you screw the camera via its
tripod mount to one end, and a tripod collar round the lens to
other. Then beneath the bracket at a point you choose (they have slots
which to allow flexible positioning of the mounts) you mount the
tripod. Such brackets are used for lots of things like mounting
flashes, video lights, microphones, camera pairs for stereo. etc..

--
Chris Malcolm
  #9  
Old December 11th 12, 03:39 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Paul Ciszek
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 244
Default Tripod collars by size?


In article ,
Chris Malcolm wrote:

What you want is a bracket which will let you screw the camera via its
tripod mount to one end, and a tripod collar round the lens to
other. Then beneath the bracket at a point you choose (they have slots
which to allow flexible positioning of the mounts) you mount the
tripod. Such brackets are used for lots of things like mounting
flashes, video lights, microphones, camera pairs for stereo. etc..


So, where do I get one that can grip a 2.66 inch cylinder? None are
sold by size, only the model of lens they are meant to grip.

Also, the teleconverter has a tab sticking off to one side that the
bracket would have to dodge.

--
Please reply to: | No nation is drunken where wine is cheap.
pciszek at panix dot com | --Thomas Jefferson
  #10  
Old December 11th 12, 05:43 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
irwell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 694
Default Tripod collars by size?

On Tue, 11 Dec 2012 14:39:14 +0000 (UTC), Paul Ciszek wrote:

In article ,
Chris Malcolm wrote:

What you want is a bracket which will let you screw the camera via its
tripod mount to one end, and a tripod collar round the lens to
other. Then beneath the bracket at a point you choose (they have slots
which to allow flexible positioning of the mounts) you mount the
tripod. Such brackets are used for lots of things like mounting
flashes, video lights, microphones, camera pairs for stereo. etc..


So, where do I get one that can grip a 2.66 inch cylinder? None are
sold by size, only the model of lens they are meant to grip.

Also, the teleconverter has a tab sticking off to one side that the
bracket would have to dodge.


Think outside the box, visit an auto muffler (silencer) shop,
they stock all sorts of clamps, do a little modifying.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
pixels / pixel size / sensor size David Dyer-Bennet Digital Photography 2 April 26th 12 03:42 PM
question about relationship between sensor size and print size. ftran999 Digital Photography 8 February 22nd 07 04:37 PM
Why are tripod collars so hard to find? TheDave© 35mm Photo Equipment 19 February 7th 07 11:13 PM
mega pixels, file size, image size, and print size - Adobe Evangelists Frank ess Digital Photography 0 November 14th 06 06:08 PM
Mat size, border widths vs print size lew In The Darkroom 5 October 27th 05 06:23 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:26 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.