7D L plate: Kirk or RRS?

Anybody got any views (or -- better -- experience!) on this choice?

jgrussell wrote in post #9131477
Anybody got any views (or -- better -- experience!) on this choice?

get the RRS. if you use the flip lever release -- and i sure would with an L bracket -- it's the only one that's machined to spec.

ed rader

RRS.......no one else comes even close to their quality, integrity and soundness of design.

They think of everything. Cut-outs for strap lugs, cut-outs for electronic remore shutter release, laser engraved reference marks for locating L-plate in their quick-release clamps equally in the landscape and portrait position, no sharp edges, hard-anodized finish, positive protection against the camera slipping out of the QR clamp.

No, I don't own stock in the company ( privately held ), but through long experience with their products I have found them to be the best in their field, by far.

JZG

I seemed to recall an issue with RRS on one L plate -- was it for the 40D? -- where the cutout wasn't quite as good as on the Kirk. That's why I asked.

I have had both and generally agree that RRS are better. However, on the 7D, they use something called the bidirectional dovetail instead of a full length rail for the horizontal position. I much prefer the rail the whole length. Not sure why the design change, but they claim it aids in video. The kirk has one quirk that I don't like, the top is attached to your camera strap lug. It is secure, but if you ever want to take off your L plate, your have to re-string your camera strap! Hope that helps.

Forgive me, but what the heck is a bidirectional dovetail???

They are exactly the same price, no accident!
Kirk has improved its design by adding handstrap lugs and centering marks on its L plates. The only 2 design differences I see between them is that 1) RRS has lugs on both ends of the plate, the second for neckstrap; and that 2) that the Kirk portrait portion of the plate is much deeper to allow for clearance of the remote, right angle plug. The RRS has a thinner vertical plate to allow for a more compact design, easier hand holding with the left hand. To address the remote plug use they have the attachment screw on the plate bottom in a short slot so that if you use a remote you can mount the entire plate a short distance to the left to create clearance of the right angled remote plug. As a result they also have a second centering mark.
These companies are very competitive as they are the only ones making these A/S style L plates for individual camera bodies.
Mike K

jgrussell wrote in post #9135799
Forgive me, but what the heck is a bidirectional dovetail???

What he meant was that the bottom rail can be mounted with the clamp either parallel to the lens axis or perpendicular to it. The "standard" rail that runs the length of the bottom plate can only be mounted with the clamp perpendicular to the axis of the lens. In contrast, plates on lens tripod rings are mounted with the clamp parallel to the lens axis.

Mike K wrote in post #9135838
The only 2 design differences I see between them...

Thanks for that analysis, Mike.

PacAce wrote in post #9136071
What he meant was that the bottom rail can be mounted with the clamp either parallel to the lens axis or perpendicular to it. The "standard" rail that runs the length of the bottom plate can only be mounted with the clamp perpendicular to the axis of the lens. In contrast, plates on lens tripod rings are mounted with the clamp parallel to the lens axis.

Ah. Now I understand. Thanks.

RRS of course

Mike K wrote in post #9135838
They are exactly the same price, no accident!
Kirk has improved its design by adding handstrap lugs and centering marks on its L plates. The only 2 design differences I see between them is that 1) RRS has lugs on both ends of the plate, the second for neckstrap; and that 2) that the Kirk portrait portion of the plate is much deeper to allow for clearance of the remote, right angle plug. The RRS has a thinner vertical plate to allow for a more compact design, easier hand holding with the left hand. To address the remote plug use they have the attachment screw on the plate bottom in a short slot so that if you use a remote you can mount the entire plate a short distance to the left to create clearance of the right angled remote plug. As a result they also have a second centering mark.
These companies are very competitive as they are the only ones making these A/S style L plates for individual camera bodies.
Mike K

the third difference is RRS and wimberely plates are the only ones that fit the RRS flip lever correctly, which i use on both tripod and monopod.

ed rader

Yeah, what Leo said! It' really a square plate that does allow the camera to turned 90 degrees when set in the clamp. I guess I don't get it, but isn't that what I spent all that money on the ball head for? I would much prefer the rail run the the whole length--much easier to place and it would seem to me, more secure. There must be some demand for the "bidirectional dovetail" as most of their newer L brackets feature it, I just don't see any advantage.

Without a doubt, RRS!

Bryan

MarkoPolo wrote in post #9137920
Yeah, what Leo said! It' really a square plate that does allow the camera to turned 90 degrees when set in the clamp. I guess I don't get it, but isn't that what I spent all that money on the ball head for? I would much prefer the rail run the the whole length--much easier to place and it would seem to me, more secure. There must be some demand for the "bidirectional dovetail" as most of their newer L brackets feature it, I just don't see any advantage.

If you have plates on both the camera and the lens tripod ring (for example, when using one camera with a long lens and another with a normal or wide angle lens), it makes it easier to switch between the two if you didn't have to keep turning the clamp 90 degrees every time you went from one to the other.