RRS vs Kirk L-Plate

photoguy6405 wrote in post #14770887
To be fair, almost ALL manufacturers (regardless of product) recommend you use exclusively their products... and the base reason is not always for compatability... it's simply to try and keep customers loyal to them and to keep them from straying.

True, but in this case they do not recommend only themselves. They also recommend Wimberly, as I recall.

krb wrote in post #14770985
True, but in this case they do not recommend only themselves. They also recommend Wimberly, as I recall.

Yeah, but they obviously have some kind of an agreement with Wimberley. It wasn't until recently that RRS even released a gimbal. I always thought that was strange considering all the products they try to release. They don't even call it a gimbal; they call it a Pano-Gimbal.

klr.b wrote in post #14771088
Yeah, but they obviously have some kind of an agreement with Wimberley. It wasn't until recently that RRS even released a gimbal. I always thought that was strange considering all the products they try to release. They don't even call it a gimbal; they call it a Pano-Gimbal.

They have a similar (symbiotic?) relationship with Gitzo. RRS designed their plates after Wimberley's interpretation and implementation of the Arca "standard" just as they've done with Gitzo's tripods. Wimberley's plates have identical dimensions and pertinent features, unlike with other manufacturers. That's why Wimberley is recommended as opposed to others who have different takes on the Arca-style plate.

Well, the Kirk generic plate fits perfectly in the RRS lever clamp. It's only the l plate which fits tightly. At least the Kirk l plate doesn't damage my 5d3 like the rrs l plate I had did.

If the Generic plate fits great and the l plate fits more tightly, that says something about kirks tolerances for exactness.....

klr.b wrote in post #14771088
Yeah, but they obviously have some kind of an agreement with Wimberley. It wasn't until recently that RRS even released a gimbal. I always thought that was strange considering all the products they try to release. They don't even call it a gimbal; they call it a Pano-Gimbal.

Because it's not a traditional gimbal. It's optioned for nodal placement and movement as well. The Wimberley is a proper gimbal and nothing else (without compromise). The RRS modular kit allows for a much different camera movement if needs be.

I just went through this debate myself. I ended up going with the Kirk. I like that the RRS is made from thicker material in the elbow area of the plate. However on my 40D (and some other camera models) the RRS plate needs to be loosened and slid over to use the remote release in portrait orientation. This was the deal breaker for me since the Kirk has enough clearence built in to allow the remote release enought clearence (in portrait orientation) without moving anything around.