Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 01 Jul 2018 (Sunday) 12:44
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

purchased the 100-400L II

 
mcoren
Senior Member
Avatar
624 posts
Gallery: 44 photos
Likes: 303
Joined Mar 2015
Location: Northern Virginia, USA
     
Jul 23, 2018 19:53 |  #31

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18668802 (external link)
That is not at all similar to what I was saying, and therefore makes for a very poor analogy.

No, that's exactly what you're saying. I don't care how many times you edit your post trying to qualify it.

When you bought the lens, you knew exactly what you were getting. Nowhere in Canon's description of this lens does it say that the foot of the tripod collar is Arca-Swiss compatible. Nowhere do Canon's photos of the lens show a groove in the foot. Nobody on POTN has ever said, "I bought this lens and the Canon foot was Arca-Swiss compatible." I've personally said in other threads that I think it would be inexpensive for Canon to mold or machine grooves into the foot, and it would create a lot of good will among their customers. But they don't, and everybody can see that.

Knowing that you use Arca-Swiss mountings, and knowing that the supplied foot wasn't compatible with that, you had three choices:

1. Don't buy the lens;

2. Buy the lens and use it as-is;

3. Buy the lens and replace the supplied foot, at your expense, with a third-party foot that is compatible with your tripod of choice.

You chose #3. Congratulations. You have a great lens that's compatible with all of your tripods and mountings. Now move past it.


Canon EOS 7D Mark II, EOS M5, and EOS 100 (film SLR)
A bunch of Canon lenses and a couple of Sigmas
A backpack, a bicycle, and a pair of hiking boots

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
ed ­ rader
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,005 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 373
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
Post edited 7 months ago by ed rader.
     
Jul 23, 2018 20:42 as a reply to  @ post 18669015 |  #32

mine wobbled after I switched to the Kirk which was pretty early on. but I tightened the four screws -- after talking to a Kirk tech -- and I fastened the Kirk foot with blue locktite because I don't want it to loosen or come off.

I didn't have a problem with the canon foot but I could see the potential and I read about the issues others were experiencing. I don't like the design of the tripod ring or the sliding window on the hood. both are too cute but not practical for me.


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L III, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15mm FE, 35mm ef-s macro, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L, gitzo GM4562, markins Q10, markins Q3, kirk, really right stuff, sirui

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Ah-keong
Senior Member
Avatar
949 posts
Gallery: 69 photos
Likes: 1251
Joined Apr 2016
     
Jul 23, 2018 22:59 |  #33

Have you considered the Dual Plate from Peak Design?

I added the PROplate (think discontinued in 2017) to the foot so I can mount to ARCA-type, Manfrotto RC2 (with included adapters) compatible tripods....

https://support.peakde​sign.com …en-Capture-s-plates-kits- (external link)


Canon 7D2+grip | 18-35mm ART | EF-S 10-18mm | EF 70-200mm f/2,8L IS II | ZE 2/100mm | ZE 2/35mm | ZE 1,4/85mm | CV 3,5/20mm | Nikkor 60mm f/2,8D |
Olympus E-PL3 | 7-14mm f/2,8 |
Speedlite 430EX III-RT | 600EX-RT | YN 600EX-RT |
Manfrotto BeFree Travel Tripod |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
12,887 posts
Gallery: 142 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3349
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
     
Jul 23, 2018 23:00 |  #34

mcoren wrote in post #18669098 (external link)
No, that's exactly what you're saying. I don't care how many times you edit your post trying to qualify it.

The post you are referring to, post #18, is one that I never edited at any point. . Did you think that I edited the content of that post? . If so, why did you think that?

When we edit posts here on POTN, there is a little thingy in the left margin that says that the post was edited. . My post that you referred to - post #18 - does not have any such edit notice in the margin. . The absence of the edit notice means that the post was not edited. . I would be glad to show you a screen capture of the edit log for any post that I did edit, if there is a post that you think I edited "trying to qualify it".

.

mcoren wrote in post #18669098 (external link)
When you bought the lens, you knew exactly what you were getting. Nowhere in Canon's description of this lens does it say that the foot of the tripod collar is Arca-Swiss compatible. Nowhere do Canon's photos of the lens show a groove in the foot. Nobody on POTN has ever said, "I bought this lens and the Canon foot was Arca-Swiss compatible." I've personally said in other threads that I think it would be inexpensive for Canon to mold or machine grooves into the foot, and it would create a lot of good will among their customers. But they don't, and everybody can see that.

Right. . I never thought that it did have grooves machined into it. . Somehow you seem to think that I was expecting the Canon foot to come with these Arca-compatible grooves, but I never had any such expectation. . That is why I ordered another Arca-compatible speed plate as soon as I ordered the lens - because I knew that I would need one in order to mount the lens foot to my tripod heads.

.

mcoren wrote in post #18669098 (external link)
Knowing that you use Arca-Swiss mountings, and knowing that the supplied foot wasn't compatible with that, you had three choices:

1. Don't buy the lens;

2. Buy the lens and use it as-is;

3. Buy the lens and replace the supplied foot, at your expense, with a third-party foot that is compatible with your tripod of choice.

You chose #3. Congratulations. You have a great lens that's compatible with all of your tripods and mountings. Now move past it.

The tone and attitude of your post seem to be rather negative and confrontational towards me, and I cannot understand why. . Why do you seem to have some kind of problem with what I said about the Canon foot? . I simply pointed out the nuances of the foot and how they affect my use of the lens.

You said that I chose #3. . I didn't choose #3. . I never bought any kind of replacement foot. . I use the original Canon foot that came with the lens. . This is choice #2, according to your set of choices.

It is perfectly fine to buy the lens and use the original foot, and then get on a photography forum and discuss what is good about the foot and what is not good about the foot. . That is what folks often do on photography forums - they discuss the strengths and weaknesses of their gear.

Do you think that I should not say anything critical about the foot? . If there are little details about the foot that are not ideal, do you think that it is wrong for me to say what those details are, and what would work a little bit better for me? . We do this with cameras and lenses all the time, yet somehow you seem to have a negative attitude about me discussing the foot that comes on the lens. . Is this so?


.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Choderboy
I Chimp, therefore I am
Avatar
5,546 posts
Gallery: 100 photos
Likes: 3221
Joined Jul 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Post edited 7 months ago by Choderboy. (2 edits in all)
     
Jul 24, 2018 05:39 |  #35

I bought it. I have made it clear I don't like the ring and foot and I even left out another thing I don't like about the foot.

That stupid window in the hood!
It's fine if you carry around a trained mouse to get it's paws in there, but my last mouse died and I can't deal with another grief episode, I really liked the little fella.
So after the demise of Pieces the mouse, I just spent a few cents and 30 seconds of my time to put a bit of tape over the window. Problem fixed, simples!

I reserve the right to cry like a little baby on POTN though.

https://****/images/AW​nu8j (external link)


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Dave
Image editing OK

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mcoren
Senior Member
Avatar
624 posts
Gallery: 44 photos
Likes: 303
Joined Mar 2015
Location: Northern Virginia, USA
     
Jul 24, 2018 18:42 as a reply to  @ Tom Reichner's post |  #36

Tom,

I didn't mean for this to become personal or confrontational. It started as some good-natured (I thought) ribbing, nothing personal, but maybe it got a little bit out of hand. I do recognize that the tone of my post (#31) comes across as being more antagonistic than I intended it to be. I apologize.

Mike


Canon EOS 7D Mark II, EOS M5, and EOS 100 (film SLR)
A bunch of Canon lenses and a couple of Sigmas
A backpack, a bicycle, and a pair of hiking boots

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
chris001
Senior Member
Avatar
398 posts
Gallery: 209 photos
Likes: 627
Joined Dec 2014
Location: Fort Worth, TX
     
Jul 27, 2018 07:13 |  #37

well, I received my Kirk foot, went on very solid. it "feels" a little more solid than the stock foot.
Looking forward to using it on the tripod. I got it mainly for the mounting ability without swapping plates. It was pretty annoying to swap plates in the dark.


Thanks!
Chris
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,553 views & 14 likes for this thread
purchased the 100-400L II
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is baldbubba412
1008 guests, 371 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.