400 f2.8L IS Replacement Foot

I am considering a replacement foot for my 400 f2.8L IS. I know that Wimberley, RRS, Kirk and 4th Generation make them. The Wimberley foot design doesn't permit using the foot as a handle. The RRS and Kirk designs are about the same size but don't get me a lower profile which I would like. That leaves me the 4th Generation foot to consider. Does anyone have it and what do you think? Will it allow me to use it as a handle and still give me a lower profile than the stock Canon foot? It is a sturdy design that will last? Does anyone have the specifications because they are not listed on the 4th generation site? Finally, does it interfere with the reversed hood?

jhom wrote in post #8592979
I am considering a replacement foot for my 400 f2.8L IS. I know that Wimberley, RRS, Kirk and 4th Generation make them. The Wimberley foot design doesn't permit using the foot as a handle. The RRS and Kirk designs are about the same size but don't get me a lower profile which I would like. That leaves me the 4th Generation foot to consider. Does anyone have it and what do you think? Will it allow me to use it as a handle and still give me a lower profile than the stock Canon foot? It is a sturdy design that will last? Does anyone have the specifications because they are not listed on the 4th generation site? Finally, does it interfere with the reversed hood?

I was looking into a replacement foot for my 500 f/4 yesterday and have too narrowed it down to the RRS and 4th Generation replacements. The reviews on this site and others indicate that the RRS allows good hand-holding and, most important to me, that it doesn't interfere with a reverse mounted hood. But then again, this applies to the 500/4.

There is more information on the 4th Generation design for the 400/2.8 here, but not much more: http://www.naturescape​s.net …roductid=399&ca​t=0&page=1

tmf3lehigh wrote in post #8593166
I was looking into a replacement foot for my 500 f/4 yesterday and have too narrowed it down to the RRS and 4th Generation replacements. The reviews on this site and others indicate that the RRS allows good hand-holding and, most important to me, that it doesn't interfere with a reverse mounted hood. But then again, this applies to the 500/4.

There is more information on the 4th Generation design for the 400/2.8 here, but not much more: http://www.naturescape​s.net …roductid=399&ca​t=0&page=1

One of my concerns has to do with the profile. The RRS and Kirk models are the same size as the stock Canon foot. They give your the double dove-tailed AS rail built into the foot. This a plus but doesn't reduce the profile much. This is important to me because I want to lower the center of gravity for balance reasons. With the 400 and stock foot on a Wimberley gimbal, there isn't much leeway to set the neutral balance point when using a flash bracket. By reducing the profile, I would get back some ability to set the balance point.

From what I've read it appears that the 4th generation foot will give me the lower profile and some ability to use it as a handle. However, it might be a close fit for my hand.

I can't find the specs for the 4th generation anywhere.