Today I received the Canon* EF 500mm f/4.0L IS… [Archive]

Nicolas Claris

March 13th, 2007, 12:34 AM

Congrats Nicolas! You will need to get your son to schlepp this for you!! Do you intend yo use it from the helicopter? I guess it's much heavier than the 70-200 2.8L. Got to use that with a very fast shutter speed!

Asher

Hi Asher
my son has enough to do with his video gear!

Of course I will use the 500 from helicopter!

Of course shutter speed is needed, but I'd like to know from the wildlife shooters that use such long lens, what "by default" settings they use in regards to shutter speed and ƒ stop.

For the very few shots I tried yesterday the difference of DOF between ƒ4 and ƒ! isn't really noticable.
What is noticable is that at ƒ4 your shutter speed is faster and the pic is sharper…

So, come on guys, gimme some tricks for the use of that lens!

I'll find them anyway, but it will save me some time, avoiding a lot of tries/tests and see…

Thanks in advance

Nicolas Claris

March 13th, 2007, 12:36 AM

Thanks Nill, that the kind of info I needed, and coming from you… a must have!
I'll give it an eyeshot…

Scott B. Hughes

March 13th, 2007, 02:06 AM

Got to use that with a very fast shutter speed! Asher

Maybe, maybe not always. This photo was made with a 500/4, handheld at 1/30 f18.

IS is a wunderful thing. -Scott

http://hughesphoto.net/miscpics/mmm3_001.jpg

Antonio Correia

March 13th, 2007, 03:55 AM

Congrats Nicolas!
I hope you shoot many nice pictures with that lens ! :)
Hope to see some. :)

Nicolas Claris

March 13th, 2007, 04:00 AM

Hi Scott

yep nice toy!
what IS did you have set for this one? set 1 or 2? (I guess 2)

Nicolas Claris

March 13th, 2007, 04:01 AM

Yes Antonio, as soon as interesting ones will get out of it!

Nill Toulme

March 13th, 2007, 07:10 AM

Nicolas mind you I have no experience with that head, I just know of it as a "budget" solution. The "correct" solution for that lens on a tripod is the Wimberley Head II (http://www.tripodhead.com/products/wimberley-main.cfm). On a monopod I prefer no head at all, just QR bracket and clamp (or replacement foot), unless you're shooting at acute up or down angles, e.g., birds in flight.

Use IS Mode 1 unless you are doing intentional panning shots like Scott's above.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

Nicolas Claris

March 13th, 2007, 09:19 AM

Thanks Nill
Usually when I shoot boats, I look down, not up, otherwise, I'm really wet! (and the lens too!)

I, like you, wonder if I really need a head…

Ron Morse

March 13th, 2007, 10:48 AM

Congrats Nicolas. I'm anxious to see some of your wonderful photos with the new lense.

KrisCarnmarker

March 13th, 2007, 10:51 AM

Congrats on the new lens, Nicolas! Oh, how I wish I had one of those :)

Have you looked at Canon's Virtual Plant (http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/tech/l_plant/f_index.html)? They show the manufacturing process of that lens from start to finish. Very interesting.

Nicolas Claris

March 13th, 2007, 10:58 AM

Thanks Kris for the link to Canon's Virtual Plant, I knew i t already, really interesting.

The funny thing is that I fly tonight (leave Bordeaux at 8:00PM) to...... Dubaï!
I'll stay there until Sunday, visiting some clients and prospects at the boat show...

I'll PM you my cell phone (I hope it works there), we may have a drink somewhere around and toast OPF!

Nill Toulme

March 13th, 2007, 11:07 AM

Nicolas are you strapped into the helicopter? I would think you'd want to decouple the lens/camera from the copter's vibration by hand holding if at all possible.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

Cem_Usakligil

March 13th, 2007, 11:11 AM

..The funny thing is that I fly tonight (leave Bordeaux at 8:00PM) to...... Dubaï! I'll stay there until Sunday, visiting some clients and prospects at the boat show...
You lucky devil, you! :-) Have a safe journey and show us later what you saw there....

Ray West

March 13th, 2007, 11:45 AM

Hi Nil,

I reckon Nicolas could almost do with a special rig made, something like a shoulder mount, maybe with open frame separate sights, get it balanced on his shoulder, like the larger video cams were used (not the very large cams).

Best wishes,

Ray

Nicolas Claris

March 21st, 2007, 03:01 AM

Nicolas are you strapped into the helicopter? I would think you'd want to decouple the lens/camera from the copter's vibration by hand holding if at all possible.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

Bonjour Nill
If you mean by "strapped" that I have security belt, yes !

Until now I always used my arms as "silent blocks" to prevent the vibrations to be transmitted to the camera, but with the 500, that's gonna be sport!
I'll try some testing and let know what will come up with these.

BTW
I always have protected my front lenses with UV filters (that I have to change at least every year, otherwise they bring blurr). Now with the 500 it is impossible to have a UV filter on front, how you huys clean the front lens?

Thanks

Will_Perlis

March 21st, 2007, 08:49 AM

Bart_van_der_Wolf

March 21st, 2007, 08:58 AM

BTW
I always have protected my front lenses with UV filters (that I have to change at least every year, otherwise they bring blurr).

Hi Nicolas,

Just wondering about the need to replace filters, do you have any idea why they change so rapidly? Could it be some kind of mold, or oxidation/deposit due to salt water (spay or atmosphere)? Knowing the reason might help to avoid the cause.

Anyway, I'd asume your lens could benefit from a cleaning routine after each job in hostile atmosphere, if that's the source. Pec*Pad (http://www.photosol.com/padproduct.htm) with Eclipse (http://www.photosol.com/eclipse_e2product.htm), or a pre-'wipe' with distilled water or VisibleDust's 'Lens Clean™', should allow to spare the front lens coating of the 500mm, yet remove a film deposit and dry the lens to avoid mold if kept in a relatively dry enclosure when not in use.

The thing worrying me most might be salt crystals that could scratch the coating unless dissolved before wiping (I'm not suggesting you lick the front element clean before wiping, but my pair of spectacles fare well under such treatment when sailing http://www.openphotographyforums.com/forums/images/smilies/tongue.gif). Maybe you'll need to resort to something like Opticlean (http://www.caliope.co.uk/using-opticlean.htm) which avoids all wiping action.

Bart

Nill Toulme

March 21st, 2007, 09:23 AM

Nicolas I have had the best luck cleaning lenses and filters with Zeiss lens fluid and Kim-wipes.

Will is right about the front element, but I too would be curious to know what Canon charges to replace one.

Also for the kind of stuff you do you might want to invest in the drop-in polarizer for that lens. I think it runs about US$100-125.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

Bart_van_der_Wolf

March 21st, 2007, 11:54 AM

The last I heard, the front elements on the big Canon teles are plain optical glass for protection. You might check with Canon on the cost of that element and find out if it's at all possible to replace it yourself.

The diagram (http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/lens/ef/data/ef_500_4lis_usm_bd.html) from the Canon camera-museum seems to suggest something like that, much to my surprise. The rear element also looks suspiciously plan-parallel.

Bart

Will_Perlis

March 21st, 2007, 12:43 PM

"I have read that the front element of 'white' EF telephoto lenses is just protective glass that is relatively inexpensive to replace if damaged. Does this mean that a protective filter is not needed?"

"This is true for EF super-telephotos like the 300mm f/2.8L, 400mm f/2.8L, 500mm f/4L and 600mm f/4L, but not so for the smaller white lenses like the 300mm f/4L and the 400mm f/5.6L. With those lenses, the front element is very much a part of the optical system and you need to supply your own protective filter if you want one."

From Canon Europe CPS http://www.cps.canon-europe.com/kb/detail.jsp?faqId=1024

I think I also read it in the Canon Lens Work book. In any event, it might be worth checking into.

Nicolas Claris

March 21st, 2007, 03:04 PM

As a quick reply to everyone:
The UV filters get blurred as, when we are at sea, salted water sprays is very abrasive when I do "dry/clean" the front element.
I have no time to rinse and dry + clean, sometimes I can only shoot 2 or 3 piccs and have to dry... that's the reason why, after a year the front element comes to be "soft/blured".

I've already read that, on the 500, the front element can be changed easily...

After each shoot, I clean all my lenses and camera body with fresh water (unsa&lted!) and dry , but I guess the front element is different, I'll give a try to eclipse fluid, that I do have already for cleaning sensor...

Have all a great day and thanks for the good advices...

Will_Perlis

March 21st, 2007, 03:14 PM

To beat this horse just a little more, I wouldn't be surprised if the normal components of seawater and the various industrial chemicals found in it near shore react with lens coatings over time. That might affect images even if abrasion wasn't a factor. I'll suggest you send some old filters to the factory (rather than throwing them away) to see if their people could analyze what has happened to them.

Bart_van_der_Wolf

March 21st, 2007, 05:03 PM

The UV filters get blurred as, when we are at sea, salted water sprays is very abrasive when I do "dry/clean" the front element.
I have no time to rinse and dry + clean, sometimes I can only shoot 2 or 3 piccs and have to dry... that's the reason why, after a year the front element comes to be "soft/blured".

Just a crazy thought ...
On my car windows I use a coating (applied as liquid) that repells water, which results in the rain droplets to be blown off by wind. It would possibly hurt the AR-coating of the front lens element, and I wouldn't let it creep under the lens retaining ring at the front, but why couldn't there be something similar and compatible with a photographic lens' coating?

Maybe Canon could see something useful in such a consumable ...?

Bart

Asher Kelman

March 21st, 2007, 06:15 PM

Bart_van_der_Wolf

March 22nd, 2007, 03:26 AM

I would imagine that this is the one place I'd want to use a whole supply of UV filters which I'd swap out and drop in water regularly. I hope you won't use that lens without a filter just to be a purist!!

I'm not even sure whether the lens has filter threads, it does however use drop-in filters. In general, filters have a very strong/negative effect on the optical performance of longer lenses. Canon seems to have chosen flat front and rear glass for protection, and included those in the optical design. Seems like a reasonable trade off, although the salt water abrasive issue adds some unique constraints.

Bart

Nicolas Claris

March 22nd, 2007, 05:28 AM

Bart
As far as I know and have read, you're fully right there.
I've tested the best UV filters I could buy on the 70-200 2.8 IS and even new, they have bad effect on the optical quality, even bringing/adding flares for someones…
But i chose to use one to protect the front element…

As for the the 500 there is absolutely no way to put a filter in front.

I know that in the movie industry, they use compressed air on the front element to blow water droplets.
Not an easy solution for me! and I still have to deal with the salt issue.

I'd like our Canon man, next time he's coming around in OPF, gives us his opinion, particularly on the Canon's supposed protected front lens... Thanks in advance!

Chuck Westfall(Canon USA)

March 22nd, 2007, 07:25 AM

Hi, Folks:

For the following current lenses:

EF300mm f/2.8L IS USM
EF400mm f/2.8L IS USM
EF400mm f/4 DO IS USM
EF500mm f/4L IS USM
EF600mm f/4L IS USM

The front element is a protective glass filter. It's very close to being an optical flat, but in reality it is a weak meniscus lens, intentionally curved to eliminate ghosting when used with digital SLR cameras. The front elements of these lenses are also multi-coated so as to maintain the color balance of the lens as well as to improve transmissivity. There is more documentation on the front elements of our IS super-telephoto lenses in "EF Lens Work III," which is available for purchase through many Canon EF Lens dealers, as well as directly through Canon USA. The current retail price for "EF Lens Work III" in the USA is $24.

As for other Canon EF lenses, here's the rule of thumb: If the lens has a front filter thread, it doesn't have a built-in protective glass filter. This would include lenses like the EF400mm f/5.6L USM, EF 300mm f/4L IS USM, EF100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM, etc.

Best Regards,

Chuck Westfall
Director/Media & Customer Relationship
Camera Marketing Group/Canon U.S.A., Inc.

Nicolas Claris

March 22nd, 2007, 03:51 PM

Thanks a lot Chuck
As usual clear and informative informations.
In the case of the EF500mm f/4L IS USM, is the front element easily changeable? or should the lens be sent back to a Canon repair center?
I mean, can a local lens dealer do this...

Nicolas Claris

March 25th, 2007, 09:55 AM

Bonjour Bart
The workflow you have described is the method I use...
Cleaning routine after a shoot is done everytime on lenses and body, usualy onboard the chase boat when we sail back to port.
I use a fresh water wet cloth to rinse and dry all parts includung the UV filter on the front lens with a dry cloth (or paper roll usually found in our kitchen like this one (http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Reczniki_papierowe.jpg))

This is a soft and gentle unsalting/drying method used for all my gear that looks like new (except the flash horse shoe that always get some paint off, but this is not due to "at sea" shooting).

I strongly suspect that the UV filters get somewhat "sanded" by the frequent use of paper (like above) used without prior rinsing, when shooting action, we sometimes are shooting with permanent (to say the least!) seawater sprays that I do have to dry instantly...

Have a great day

Hi Nicolas,

Just wondering about the need to replace filters, do you have any idea why they change so rapidly? Could it be some kind of mold, or oxidation/deposit due to salt water (spay or atmosphere)? Knowing the reason might help to avoid the cause.

Anyway, I'd asume your lens could benefit from a cleaning routine after each job in hostile atmosphere, if that's the source. Pec*Pad (http://www.photosol.com/padproduct.htm) with Eclipse (http://www.photosol.com/eclipse_e2product.htm), or a pre-'wipe' with distilled water or VisibleDust's 'Lens Clean™', should allow to spare the front lens coating of the 500mm, yet remove a film deposit and dry the lens to avoid mold if kept in a relatively dry enclosure when not in use.

The thing worrying me most might be salt crystals that could scratch the coating unless dissolved before wiping (I'm not suggesting you lick the front element clean before wiping, but my pair of spectacles fare well under such treatment when sailing http://www.openphotographyforums.com/forums/images/smilies/tongue.gif). Maybe you'll need to resort to something like Opticlean (http://www.caliope.co.uk/using-opticlean.htm) which avoids all wiping action.

Bart

Asher Kelman

March 25th, 2007, 06:19 PM

I'd want to change the front element after say 2 years of salt water work and have everything checked.

Is the UV filter a drop in near the back of the lens? If so, do you put tape over it to keep it dry?

I's get a box of tissues from the optical supply store so you don't need to use these kitchen towels!

Asher

Alan T. Price

March 28th, 2007, 06:58 PM

If you are going to use the lens with a monopod then get yourself a decent ball head to go with it. Panning feature is not required as the monopod can be spun around, but you will want the ability to point the lens upwards or downwards unless you just sit on the sidelines of a sports field all day. You also want to be able combine the movements so that you can pan diagonally to follow birds in flight, for example.

A ball head set up with just the right tension lets you move the lens in any direction and hold the monopod in any angle, so you don't need to have it vertical. A vertical monopod is inherently unstable (easily proven - just let it go). Better to lean it towards you or across your legs so there is some weight against it to provide stability. Once you do this the ball head really becomes handy. You can still pan up/down/sideways in any combination regardless of the angle of the monopod.

I happen to use a Manfrotto 468 (I think - the one with the fluid adjustment). I bought that head to use it on a tripod too but so far I have only used a monopod with my 300 f/2.8 plus TC.

A gimbal head on a tripod would be great but it is more appropriate if you are setting up at one location for a while. The monopod / ball head option is better if you are roaming around a lot such as when looking for birds up trees.

Nicolas Claris

March 28th, 2007, 11:53 PM

Thanks Alan for your recommendation, I'll keep in mind! but needs to make some money now!

Paning is not my first concern as the birds I shoot (don't worry Asher, not with a gun!) are not that fast.
But, as I mainly shoot from boat or helicopter, a ball head might help.

I do have one for my tripod (for shooting interiors) but I wonder if I'd like to change the friction brake setting each time I change from mono to tripod... anyway for a try it may be the right solution...

Thanks again

Have a great night down under!

Nicolas Claris

April 20th, 2007, 09:41 AM

I was yesterday on a quite difficult shoot in the Golfe de Saint-Tropez.
Why?
A very small shake/chase boat to shoot a beautifull 63 footer.
Low grey sky
Haze... hmmmm

and suddenly a sun beam for a few minutes...

Unfortunately I cannot post now any pics of this, but I will as soon as I can.
That 500 mm is as amazing to me as was the Sigma 12-24 when I discovered it.

Opening to new compositions, a new way of tracking power and... beauty (BTW we had a beautiful Russian Blonde model on board...)

Yes teasing!

Georg Baumann

April 21st, 2007, 08:53 AM

Hi Nicolas,

congrats on your new tele!

“Only the guy who isn't rowing has time to rock the boat.”- J.P. Sartre <grins>

Nicolas Claris

May 14th, 2007, 03:00 PM

Some of the shots made 2 days ago:

http://clarisorganisation.free.fr/diapo/Diaporama_IBIZA/images/_G8A4851.jpg

http://clarisorganisation.free.fr/diapo/Diaporama_IBIZA/images/_G8A4955.jpg

same place but thru 24 mm:

http://clarisorganisation.free.fr/diapo/Diaporama_IBIZA/images/_G8A4961.jpg

Asher Kelman

May 15th, 2007, 01:22 AM

Nicolas,

I discovered late the 3 pictures at Saint Tropez.

These are wonderful. So different but related. The first present a hot bright water surface and a distant set of sails beyond the catamarine.

The next is idyllic. The layered hills bathed in mist provides a pastel background to a dark blue distant and aquamarine near-field sea. Embedded in the lighter blue, are 3 fine ships sails down and apparently at anchor in the bay.

Now we realize the whole picture is made of shades of blue. It is a very restful picture too but with a feeling that we are home.

The last picture attests to your choice of this lens for your work. This Sigma draws very well and the distortion that may be there is hidden in scenes like this. The proximal sea side scene is delivered well with enough detail and the distant horizen with the same boats are presented with appropriate softness.

Perhaps more contrast would enhance the linear cloud pattern. I doubt that this picture has been extensively photoshopped.

I would love to be able to see more of the pastel layering of the hills seen with the 500 4.0. I don't know whether or not this is possible.

I now need that 500 4.0!

Asher

Nicolas Claris

May 15th, 2007, 04:28 AM

Thanks Asher

May I suggest some corrections?
This is not Saint-Tropez but Ibiza (Balearic Island in Spain)
We say catamaran, not catamarine ;-)
the 24 mm shot was made with the Canon L 24-70, not the 12-24 Sigma

No Photoshop here only my sharpening action (and export for the web) on the tif file (batched) extracted from RAW with C1.

Some more?

http://clarisorganisation.free.fr/diapo/Diaporama_IBIZA/images/_G8A4873.jpg

http://clarisorganisation.free.fr/diapo/Diaporama_IBIZA/images/_G8A4846.jpg

and, for the end, Mona Lisa? (3200 ISO - Canon L 24-70 @ 70 mm hand held at 1/8s)

http://clarisorganisation.free.fr/diapo/Diaporama_IBIZA/images/_G8A4164.jpg

Nicolas Claris

June 3rd, 2007, 04:20 AM

You definitely want some sort of gimbal head for that lens. Probably the least expensive option is the Bogen/Manfrotto 3421 (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=Search&A=details&Q=&sku=126663&is=REG&addedTroughType=search). I don't how how good it is.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

Bonjour Nill

after having tried the 500 mounted straight on the monopod… got seasick after 20 minutes! and very difficult to frame accurately.
So I went yesterday to my local dealer and I bought this Bogen Manfrotto 486RC2 (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/272449-REG/Bogen_Manfrotto_486RC2_486RC2_Compact_Ball_Head.ht ml) for a try, not an expensive try anyway!

I'll post later if it does its work as expected.

Have a great day

Alan T. Price

June 3rd, 2007, 03:11 PM

My guess is that you'll want a ball head that offers better friction adjustment so that you can set it up just like you do on your tripod. i.e. it won't be locked solid, it won't be flapping loose, but it will have just enough friction to allow smooth movement of the lens without dragging the monopod around.

A lot depends on how you use your monopod. Ideally it will be leaning against you or wedged aganst one of your feet and across the opposite leg. Both techniques let you and the monopod form a relatively solid support - unlike just parking the lens on top of a vertical and hence unstable monopod. Having locked the monopod in you need the flexibility of movement in the ball head but it has to be smooth and firm or it will cause problems. You don't want to be fighting the monopod because the ball head is too tight.

Nicolas Claris

June 4th, 2007, 12:08 AM

Thanks Alan for your advice
It is I think completely correct.

I know that this Bogen Manfrotto 486RC2 is a bit "small" and that the strength of friction is not really "adjustable", but I want to check (for a "low" price) first that the system is what I need.

Why don't I go directly to a much better ballhead?
Because I shoot 99% of time from a boat, sometimes from a small (though 15 feet) "dinghy" so I have to care with my 3 legs (mine + monopod).
In the same time as shooting I also have to care about my very own… verticallity!

Then if I feel it's Ok I'll certainly go the right ballhead.

I've already checked that I need a head for the monopod…

Bart_van_der_Wolf

June 4th, 2007, 03:46 AM

Why don't I go directly to a much better ballhead?
Because I shoot 99% of time from a boat, sometimes from a small (though 15 feet) "dinghy" so I have to care with my 3 legs (mine + monopod).
In the same time as shooting I also have to care about my very own… verticallity!

I'm wondering if a Wimberley Head (http://www.tripodhead.com/products/wimberley-main.cfm) isn't a better solution, although I don't have experience how it works on a non-vertical monopod mount.

I imagine if you lock your 2+1 legs in a stable position (without piercing the inflatable dingy ;-) ) then gravity will stabilize the lens+body and mild friction will ensure smooth panning as you target the boat. You might still need some adapter to get the best orientation on the monopod, but once settled then that can be fixed in position.

Bart

Nicolas Claris

June 4th, 2007, 05:11 AM

Hi Bart
unfortunately this one won't work as I need to be able to move in all directions.

While shooting, I am standing on something moving up and down rolling from left to right and from front to back, shooting a boat doing the same but not in the same chronology!
Plus sometimes I'm going fast while the chased boat is slow (the contrary happens also!).

Gravity is never in the same direction… ;-) well, it is, but not me!!!

Ray West

June 4th, 2007, 05:36 AM

Bart_van_der_Wolf

June 4th, 2007, 09:51 AM

Hi Bart
unfortunately this one won't work as I need to be able to move in all directions.

To bad, you're probably going to have to 'compromise' on a BH-55 (http://www.reallyrightstuff.com/ballheads/index.html). I just ordered one this afternoon, so I can tell you how smooth it can pan/bob/twist/turn/roll ... in a couple of weeks from personal experience. Besides the large ball, quality machining, and rave reviews, it also has numerical settings for friction. That looks quite useful to reset certain characteristics that worked out in practice. I'm not sure how it would be affected by salt water chrystals though.

While shooting, I am standing on something moving up and down rolling from left to right and from front to back, shooting a boat doing the same but not in the same chronology!
Plus sometimes I'm going fast while the chased boat is slow (the contrary happens also!).

I can imagine that! Although I like Ray's suggestion for gyro gear, I think it would also slow down your ability to pan as you are chasing along side the slower (or trying to catch up to the faster) target. It would definitively build great biceps, but then you already have the 500mm for that ;-) .

Bart

Nicolas Claris

June 4th, 2007, 01:28 PM

Hi Bart
Of course I followed your link and browsed the RRS website…
LOL:
One thing that you don’t need on a monopod is some sort of fussy ballhead (or pan-tilt head) to adjust; there’s a better answer. It's here (http://www.reallyrightstuff.com/tutorials/monopods/index.html) but this won't fit.

These are really beautifull ballheads. Tell me more when you receive yours… BTW which one did you order? may I ask you the price you paid for?

Thanks

Nicolas Claris

June 4th, 2007, 01:39 PM

Hi Nicolas,

I think you need to look for the solution in an entirely different direction. Get away from what is available from the usual camera suppliers. Try and define the problem, and engineer something to solve it.

(I am _not_ suggesting any of the following will help you, but maybe an example of lateral thinking, get your juices flowing, so to speak.) For example, in the video side of things, there is a device called a 'steadicam' - a bit cumbersome in some situations. However, the steadiest platform is your head, well damped wrt. vibration, stays substantially in the same orientation. You can get good stable video from a helmet camera. Go remote - servo driven pan /tilt gyro stabilised platform, pay more for bigger chase boats (IoW ferry seems a favourite for at least one member here ;-)

Best wishes,

Ray

Thanks Ray
Yes I know very well the steadicam system, we own one! and for video, this is really a very good investment. But the cam (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/382085-REG/Sony__HVR_Z1U_1_3_Inch_3_CCD_HDV.html) wheights only 4.25 Lbs.

I don't think I could afford the gyro system!

I think/hope the ballhead will make it… this one or another, what I need to check is if I need or not the friction brake, if yes, I'll have to change for a RSS or similar sophisticated ballhead…

Bart_van_der_Wolf

June 4th, 2007, 02:30 PM

Hi Bart
Of course I followed your link and browsed the RRS website…
LOL:
It's here (http://www.reallyrightstuff.com/tutorials/monopods/index.html) but this won't fit.

LOL indeed, but then they probably don't use their monopods on sea.

These are really beautifull ballheads. Tell me more when you receive yours… BTW which one did you order? may I ask you the price you paid for?

Because I already own some RRS components (one should think about their stuff as a system) for Pano work, I know that it is of excellent quality and very well thought through. There are several reviews on the web that also speak highly of their stuff, e.g.
http://www.outbackphoto.com/the_bag/pauls_rrs_bh55/essay.html
http://www.outbackphoto.com/the_bag/uwes_tripods/essay.html

I ordered the BH-55 unit with no clamp or platform (because there was one PCL in the Pano kit already, remember it's a system), from them directly for US$ 355. One should remember that there will also be a customs/tax fee involved for importing in Europe, so it's not cheap stuff, but it's indeed a joy to handle and it's build to last.

Bart

John Harper

June 4th, 2007, 02:32 PM

Hi Nicolas,

I think you need to look for the solution in an entirely different direction. Get away from what is available from the usual camera suppliers. Try and define the problem, and engineer something to solve it.

(I am _not_ suggesting any of the following will help you, but maybe an example of lateral thinking, get your juices flowing, so to speak.) For example, in the video side of things, there is a device called a 'steadicam' - a bit cumbersome in some situations. However, the steadiest platform is your head, well damped wrt. vibration, stays substantially in the same orientation. You can get good stable video from a helmet camera. Go remote - servo driven pan /tilt gyro stabilised platform, pay more for bigger chase boats (IoW ferry seems a favourite for at least one member here ;-)

Best wishes,

Ray

Ray - Nicolas

I can recommend the IOW ferry!!!! the equivalent of £6 per hour. Very steady platform (might have something to do with the 80 cars on it (gives it a bit of mass)

Its very maneuverable ( most of the time) and manages to dock 1st time nearly always (http://www.solent.tv/pageviewer.aspx?page=S632797622491436250)

Only problem lots of screaming kids and i have never actually managed to catch up with anything on it, things sort of drift past in a sedate manor!! :)

And before you ask i wasn't driving it when it had its altercation with the newly installed loading platform :)

John

Nicolas Claris

June 4th, 2007, 02:39 PM

LOL
I'll try to remember to rent a ferry with captain (another one maybe °•) for my next shoot!

John Harper

June 4th, 2007, 02:59 PM

Nicolas

I don't know if you have seen this piece of kit ERGOREST (http://www.ergorest.com/eng/products/tripod.htm)

It may help?

John

Nicolas Claris

June 4th, 2007, 03:07 PM

Thanks John

I wonder how they fit it on shoulders...

John Harper

June 4th, 2007, 05:07 PM

Hi Nicolas

One more thought

If you used something like a "flag carrier" (http://www.northrup.org/photos/athol/three-men-carrying-flags.htm) you could plant the bottom of the monopod into the flag socket, so it doesn't touch the deck. Adjust the height of the monopod to get the lens at just the right height for your eye. The weight of the lens is taken on the socket and is transfered to your back or shoulders, but takes most of the weight off your arms.
Need to brace the lens.... press down on the monopod and press it harder into the socket.

Your knees are acting as shock absorbers for the boat moving and you should be able to pan with it as fast as handheld, but a lot of the weight is now on your back & shoulders.

John

John Harper

June 5th, 2007, 08:19 AM

Nicolas

Here is a page showing the sort of thing i mean. I am sure these could be used with a monopod and take a lot of the weight off your arms.

Flag Carrier Harness (http://www.ecbensonassociates.com/products/styleplus/flag_carriers.htm)

John

Nicolas Claris

June 5th, 2007, 01:54 PM

Thanks John
that's interesting!

I cannot resist: Should I get a white one like the lens or a black one like the 1DSMKII ?•)

John Harper

June 5th, 2007, 02:05 PM

Thanks John
that's interesting!

I cannot resist: Should I get a white one like the lens or a black one like the 1DSMKII ?•)

Hi Nicolas

Personally i would get one of each!! Then you could change it to suit your mood or your outfit.... or the camera for that matter.

I know it might sound a bit crazy but i really think it could work.

John

Nicolas Claris

June 17th, 2007, 02:54 PM

500 mm
South Toscania light:

http://mnclaris.free.fr/forum/_G8A6577_LR.jpg

Bart_van_der_Wolf

June 22nd, 2007, 09:24 AM

To bad, you're probably going to have to 'compromise' on a BH-55 (http://www.reallyrightstuff.com/ballheads/index.html). I just ordered one this afternoon, so I can tell you how smooth it can pan/bob/twist/turn/roll ... in a couple of weeks from personal experience. Besides the large ball, quality machining, and rave reviews, it also has numerical settings for friction. That looks quite useful to reset certain characteristics that worked out in practice. I'm not sure how it would be affected by salt water chrystals though.

Well, the package arrived yesterday! Shipping took a bit longer because another item that I also ordered was temporarily out of stock. As expected, the BH-55 is very well machined, handles quite nicely, and as a bonus it also looks very nice.

The large diameter ball allows to apply a lot of friction, so I'm confident it can easily carry larger loads (it's rated to carry up to 23Kg) than I currently have available. The adjustable friction works fine when swiveling the gear around handheld, although for a heavy camera/lens one needs to almost apply maximum friction if you want to prevent it from accidentally tipping over when you let go of it in a non vertical position.

In that particular maximum friction position it becomes slightly jerky if you want to pan around. That will improve with use, according to the (A note about break-in) accompanying paper. For normal use it is not recommended to lubricate the ball (because that would retain dirt), but for Nicolas' particular case it might even help (adds a silky smoothness to movements and protects against sea water). The head comes internally lubricated and the parts that need lubrication are (O-ring) sealed. Mud or salt water should be lightly rinsed off with (not submerged in) fresh water.

Of course the camera/lens combo should be mounted at a gravity balanced position, because any ballhead, almost by definition, provides an unstabilized platform. The closer the mounting point is to the camera/lens center of gravity, the smaller the force arm.

Use on a monopod almost seems like overkill (although Nicolas' shooting requirements are different from say a field sports photographer's), but the Arca style of mounting plate at least prevents the camera from rotating loose from its mount, e.g. when carrying it on your shoulder.

For regular tripod work it is a dream tool, with only a modest height (keeps center of gravity low) and a big grippy main lock-knob that locks firmly and it doesn't change camera position when you tighten the lock. I mounted a Panning Clamp to the ball, which is very useful for a good level panoramic setup. It can also be fitted (either by RRS or the user) with a quick release clamp, which works good and can be useful when camera bodies need to be swapped frequently.

There is one important warning sticker on the ballhead, that warns against mounting on the treaded stud on top of the tripod if it has more than 5 threads above the platform. My Gitzo was fine with 5 threads.

Bart

Nicolas Claris

June 23rd, 2007, 09:14 AM

Bonjour Nill

after having tried the 500 mounted straight on the monopod… got seasick after 20 minutes! and very difficult to frame accurately.
So I went yesterday to my local dealer and I bought this Bogen Manfrotto 486RC2 (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/272449-REG/Bogen_Manfrotto_486RC2_486RC2_Compact_Ball_Head.ht ml) for a try, not an expensive try anyway!

I'll post later if it does its work as expected.

Have a great day

Thanks all for your great advice and Bart for the latest infos about the RRS System.

I tried "in real world" the Bogen Manfrotto 486RC2.
It works but as others have predicted I need the friction brake.
I guess the BH-55 RRS with a quick release clamp is what I need, but phew! they don't give it!

Re. extra lubricating, I wonder if Teflon spray would do it...

Bart_van_der_Wolf

June 23rd, 2007, 01:58 PM

I guess the BH-55 RRS with a quick release clamp is what I need, but phew! they don't give it!

That's correct. It costs a bundle, although when you also need other components from their system approach it's an investment for the rest of your life. Components build on each other and everything is really well thought through.

Re. extra lubricating, I wonder if Teflon spray would do it...

It's simpler than that, and it is described in the papers that come with the head. They recommend a little bit of fine machine oil on a rag and describe how to rub it on the ball. The caveat is that you'll never get the maximum gripping action back that's achievable with the non-lubricated ball. They strongly recommend to first 'break-in' the head before resorting to lubrication, there's no way back.

Bart

John Harper

July 30th, 2007, 11:42 AM

Thanks all for your great advice and Bart for the latest infos about the RRS System.

I tried "in real world" the Bogen Manfrotto 486RC2.
It works but as others have predicted I need the friction brake.
I guess the BH-55 RRS with a quick release clamp is what I need, but phew! they don't give it!

Re. extra lubricating, I wonder if Teflon spray would do it...

Hi Nicolas

I was wondering if you might update myself and others as to your experience with a ball head on your monopod for your 500mm lens.

Have you managed to find a combination that works for you. I am now fortunate enough to have one, and have been using it mainly handheld so that i can pan fast enough for aircraft and birds in flight shots.

A monopod is nice to take some of the weight and i have had some portrait shots of birds that were sharp at 1/160th of a second on the monopod, although the IS may have been the biggest factor.

I find i can handhold it for around 30-45 seconds before i need to lower it down to give my arms a rest and have been pleased with the shots i have had from it.

I would however be pleased to hear the comments from someone who uses it "in anger" so to speak to earn a living from, rather than the more occasional user like myself.

Regards

John

Nicolas Claris

July 30th, 2007, 12:43 PM

Hi John
welcome to the long L lens owner's club!
I have tried several combination, as being on a boat shooting another one needs to hold longer than 45 secs!
The last ball head I tried showed me that it's the way to go but it was too weak and too small for the "break" to be efficient, I have ordered a new one (http://www.manfrotto.com/Jahia/site/manfrotto/cache/off/lang/fr/pid/2315?livid=80|81&idx=83) which I would get this week.

Enjoy your new baby, it is really amazing!

[EDIT] Wrong link, here (http://www.manfrotto.com/Jahia/site/manfrotto/cache/off/pid/2318?livid=80|81&idx=83) is the one I have ordered…

http://www.manfrotto.com/webdav/site/manfrotto/shared/_images/Manfrotto/product_images/zoom/468MGRC0.jpg
[EDIT]