70-200 F4 IS 3rd Party Tripod Collar

I purchased a 3rd party tripod collar for my 7-2F4IS and it's build quality and functionality is excellent, basically identical to my L collars. I have no affiliation with the eBay seller "Roxsen", but they have quality collars. The collar was $77 shipped. Here's what I have written at my site on it (sorry if it sounds like a sales pitch; again, I have no connection to them at all):

I do not have ANY affiliation with the eBay seller Roxsen, but I purchased their tripod collar for my 70-200 f4 L IS USM (purchased on 11/9 for $77 and arrived 11/15 to the USA from Hong Kong) and it works flawlessly. The collar is very close in color to the L, maybe a tad brighter but hard to tell in most lighting. The construction is solid metal and the turn-lock has a nice "seal" when tightened fully, just like my Canon L collars. I would highly recommend this collar as it is 66% the price of the Canon version. This is an excellent 3rd party purchase. If interested, their eBay site is http://stores.ebay.com​/ROXSEN

I'm big on collars, especially since I use my m/t-pods a lot. Even with this lens, mounting it to my battery grip renders too much "droop" and play; these collars basically eliminate all that so composing/framing is extremely precise and images as sharp as can be. Anyway, here are four images from different angles:

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'

Nice, but I still consider that it is very expensive... I will make a DIY one when I have my 70-200 f/4L and I am sure I will not spend more that 15 americans and the look will be at least 75% accurate to the Canon one...

Nice find!

Light....thanks for helping us find out!

You've addressed all the main concerns about the ring, which is build quality and lockup quality (wouldn't want to trust a heavy expensive rig to a cheap collar). I have seen these around for a while and thought they would be good value but simply wasn't sure how reliable they would be. This ring also fits the 300/4 (non-IS only, because the IS has a fatter diameter).

Man that lens is so amazingly SMALL..... (after I'm used to all the big tele's)

Hm. Does this fit the non-IS? At $77 shipped, it's still quite expensive. Isn't that almost the price of the Canon's black one?

KevC wrote in post #2321553
Hm. Does this fit the non-IS? At $77 shipped, it's still quite expensive. Isn't that almost the price of the Canon's black one?

Yes and yes.. I did some checking, $90 at B&H for the black one. Now this is a tough call for me, OEM black collar or white 3rd party collar? I like white, actually. (as a personal preference and NOT just because it is a L color!)

what a sexy lens

KevC wrote in post #2321553
Hm. Does this fit the non-IS?

Yes, actually it's made for the non-IS (see the actual collar and it says it there). But the IS version takes the same collar.

Lightstream, as for color, I prefer the off-white to the black, so I opted for this one.

Congrats on the new purchase, I am glad to see that you did not get ripped off

md_129 wrote in post #2321589
I am glad to see that you did not get ripped off

I still got ripped-off...It should've come with the lens

LightRules wrote in post #2321626
I still got ripped-off...It should've come with the lens

I hear ya,

LightRules wrote in post #2321626
I still got ripped-off...It should've come with the lens

Hehehe ::Thinks of the Sigma 70-200 2.8::


(I WANT IT!)

Does it match up with the foot pattern on the canon one? I mean, will RRS or Wimberly plates fit it?

J

LightRules wrote in post #2321626
I still got ripped-off...It should've come with the lens

I agree! So many carp about the 17-55 2.8 not coming with a hood yet I hear not a peep, or rather the excuse "you don't need a tripod collar" - well, I "don't need a hood" either (and I can be as stubborn, pigheaded and pedantic about it as I want to be despite the fact I normally use hoods )

NicolasRubio wrote in post #2321475
Nice, but I still consider that it is very expensive... I will make a DIY one when I have my 70-200 f/4L and I am sure I will not spend more that 15 americans and the look will be at least 75% accurate to the Canon one...

what's your hourly labor rate and how long will it take you?

ed rader