3rd party tripod collar for 70-200mm f4L

Just stumbled upon this while searching ebay...
Appears to be an imitation of the tripod mount ring A for 70-200 f4L (and some other lenses). Just thought some users here might be interested. I've already got the tripod ring for mine, so I've no need for this, but might have considered this if it was available at the time... Has anyone tried this yet?

http://cgi.ebay.com …egoryZ30091QQcm​dZViewItem

Interesting, would like a locking mechanism like that for the tripod ring on the 100-400...

I'm not sure I'd trust this one - it's a bit expensive to get one on the off chance, and I'd hate to see my 70-200 take a tumble .....

I'd give this a miss.

$70.00 bucks.. how much is the Canon?

think the white canon ring is like 110 and the black one is 80

Yes, I recall the black one is oddly a lot less $$ despite being otherwise the same part!

According to B&H's description, the black one is only usable for 200 2.8L??? Is that just a marketing scheme or something? And if it could be used on the 70-200, who really cares about color all that much? I'd get the black canon ring as if it breaks, canon could be held liable for dmg whereas the generic one has no guarantees.

mxwphoto wrote in post #2091260
According to B&H's description, the black one is only usable for 200 2.8L??? Is that just a marketing scheme or something? And if it could be used on the 70-200, who really cares about color all that much? I'd get the black canon ring as if it breaks, canon could be held liable for dmg whereas the generic one has no guarantees.

For some reason Canon doesn't list which other lens these rings can work on. I can 100% guarantee you the Black one works on the 70-200 f/4L > cheaper and looks better to me <

mxwphoto wrote in post #2091260
According to B&H's description, the black one is only usable for 200 2.8L??? Is that just a marketing scheme or something? And if it could be used on the 70-200, who really cares about color all that much? I'd get the black canon ring as if it breaks, canon could be held liable for dmg whereas the generic one has no guarantees.

The black and white ones appear mechanically identical. Either one of them fits 70-200 f/4, 400 f/5.6 and 200 f/2.8.

The 200/2.8 is so light. Does anyone actually use the tripod ring with it?

4x4rock wrote in post #2092796
The 200/2.8 is so light. Does anyone actually use the tripod ring with it?

I certainly do.

Petkal wrote in post #2093131
I certainly do.

Petkal, I'm curious, are you also using a monopod with it? What are you shooting that you need a tripod ring with the 200?

Thanks

My hands are not as steady as they used to be. So I am forcing myself to take a monopod with me more often these days for anything over 60 mm or so.
The other issue is that the collar foot can be used as a handle or a good support for the camera/lens even without a pod.

Petkal wrote in post #2094937
The other issue is that the collar foot can be used as a handle or a good support for the camera/lens even without a pod.

This is quite true-- I 'mount' the 70-200 on my hand all the time, I find that it makes for a much more stable support that just gripping the lens barrel, especially in poor light.

On the other hand, seeing some guy with a monopod for his D50+consumer zoom was sorta silly. It couldn't have weighed more than 2 pounds, and it was broad daylight.

I'm a little late to the party, but I found this to be very useful:

http://www.bobatkins.c​om …hp/EOS/CanonTri​podCollars

I bought a used Canon EF 35-350 F3.5-5.6L USM a few years ago, perfect condition, but missing the tripod collar. I've been searching everywhere trying to find one. I finally found one here:

http://gallery.bcentra​l.com …IS-USM-Tripod-Collar.aspx

I'm expecting it any day in the mail. The problem is, like what everybody is saying, the white ones are way more expensive. I guess it's because they've got better optics.