What manfrotto don't tell you

realspeed

realspeed

Suspended / Banned
Messages
8,827
Name
Bazza
Edit My Images
No
Equipment
Nikon D800 fitted with a Nikon af-s 80-400 G f4.5-5.6 lens. On the camera body is bolted on a Nikon MB-D12 battery pack. All this mounted on a Manfrotto 055XPROB tripod and a Manfrotto MVH502AH head.

With this setup you can't adjust the sliding rail on the 502 head if the head is screwed into the lens foot. The MB -D12 stops it. This in turn makes the camera tilt backwards.
Why can't you use the battery pack you may ask if you want a balanced setup?

Simple the camera with the battery pack attached is on a different level to the lens foot something Manfrotto/Nikon have seriously overlooked. What it wants is a 400mm (1.5inch) spacer bar to fit under the lens collar mount foot to give clearance. Then the setup would work



This shows the battery pack up against the sliding rail of the 502AH head so the whole camera unit can't be moved foreward any more. A spacer under the lens foot is the answer. Ok why not connect the sliding mount onto the camera battery pack ? Why I wouldn't do it is because it would put a strain on the lens/camera connection with the weight of the lens . So at the moment i will have to forgo the battery pack being used

Please ignore focus as was taken hand held
 
Last edited:
Why do you need the battery pack in this situation?
 
To save having to change batteries in the middle of a video shoot
 
At a guess, any SLR with an extra battery pack/grip fitted will have the same problem.
 
good chance for someone to design an extn in height block
 
If you are shooting video with that set up, ideally you should be using some kind of rail system which would then give you the extra clearance that you are after as well as allowing you to add on the ancillaries that you would expect in a video rig. That is what I do, which then also allows me to use a lens support to stop any flex of the lens as I pan or tilt. Nothing wrong with Manfrotto's or Nikon's design, you just have a DSLR on a tripod head that was designed for a video camera.
 
Last edited:
Spin it all round 90 degrees in the lens collar and shoot portrait Bazza ;)

Joking aside - without adding a rail, are you saying the whole combination needs to sit further forward before your tripod is balanced ?
 
Last edited:
I agree. I'd be blaming Nikon, not Manfrotto.
 
dinners said:
Spin it all round 90 degrees in the lens collar and shoot portrait Bazza ;)

Joking aside - without adding a rail, are you saying the whole combination needs to sit further forward before your tripod is balanced ?
Click to expand...

yes
 
OldCarlos said:
How you finding the new 80-400 Bazza?
(your `new lens just ordered` thread http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/new-lens-just-ordered.526244/ )
Click to expand...

well its heavy long with loads of switches. Joking apart it balances well with the D800+battery pack to start with, focusing is spot on but have to make sure the camera is steady as the slightest movement shows up with blurred pictures. As for focus speed very fast, if I had one criticism is the collar foot could be a bit bigger/longer considering the size of lens .
So is it worth the money? I got it for about £1600 new and a little research will find out where from.

To give some idea of the total weight of D800+battery pack SB900 speedlight with batteries fitted is 8lb 15oz, infact heavy enough to do weight lifting with.
 
but surely the mount was designed for video cameras that are nearly all flat along the bottom

and do you carry your camera with your neck strap?
 
Seen the same problem with Canon and Pentax too, lens tripod foot designed with no provision for battery grip
 
Do you need to be able to slide if forwards and backwards (to use it) or do you just need to have it locked down further forwards to have it balanced.

If I use a small body with a grip then the base of the camera is often lower than the plate. Same goes for a full size body like below. I no longer have this head but this pic shows one of mine rotated to portrait however if it was put back to landscape then the camera would be below the plate but I've no need to want to slide it forwards as that's balanced.

To me it just looks like your video head is only allowing the lens to be mounted to the rear. Hard to tell without seeing the whole tripod but does this really cause everything to topple backwards ?

5117066633_5bb82f9a6d_b.jpg
 
Pookeyhead said:
I'd be blaming Nikon, not Manfrotto.
Click to expand...
Me too.

Though before I did that, I'd try reversing the lens on the head. I'm not familiar with that head, but in the picture it looks distinctly asymmetrical and it looks as if you could mount the lens more centrally if you had it facing left-to-right instead of right-to-left.

Just a thought.
 
realspeed said:
good chance for someone to design an extn in height block
Click to expand...

No design required! 2" block of Al of the thickness required to clear the mount, with a 5.2mm hole bored all the way through and tapped to 1/4" UNC. Threadlock a 3/4" length of studding into one side, leaving the other side clear to mount on the erm... mount!

I've actually got a similar problem, again with a Nikon but my problem is that when I stick a Manfrotto QR plate on the FT1 on the V1, I have to take the plate off to remove the adaptor. I need a bit of 1/2" thick Al bar, 1 1/2" wide and 2" long. 2 holes, 1 clearance hole, countersunk so I can screw it to the FT1 and leave the bottom flush and the other tapped so I can screw the plate onto it, I need the holes about 1/2" apart (from memory) to allow the plate to clear the camera body. Just need to source a tiny piece of Al bar! I have plenty of 1/4" Whitworth machine screws and a tap (close enough for this lightweight application) and drill but no easy transport to visit a few fabricators for an offcut!
 
realspeed said:
...... it balances well with the D800+battery pack to start with, focusing is spot on but have to make sure the camera is steady as the slightest movement shows up with blurred pictures. As for focus speed very fast, if I had one criticism is the collar foot could be a bit bigger/longer considering the size of lens .
Click to expand...

Are you happy with the detail/images it produces & how do you rate it with the 1.4TC?
Have you tried any BIF's?
 
Had a nice reply from Nikon

Quote " Dear Barry,

Thank you for your email.

It seems that in order to overcome the difficulty that arises when the D800 is used with the MB-D12 on a sliding rail, would be to either remove the MB-D12 or use some kind of spacer between the rail and lens tripod foot.

Please note that we generally do not test our equipment with 3rd party accessories and do not manufacture adapters or converters that could be used with particular brand or model of accessory.

However I will send your email to our Design and Quality department for consideration." unquote
 
Phil
Hi
it slowly leans backwards so eventually it is pointing skyward. Putting the camera sideways in the collar to me isn't really acceptable to work like that and its no good for horizonal shots.. AS you can see in the above post Nikon have not rejected out of hand the idea of a plate to fit under the collar foot, which makes a nice change when a large company is prepared to look into the problem. Think it is one up for Nikon and possibly other camera users of other makes as well may benefit.

Nod
Thanks for your reply but I do not have access to what you used and suspect many others don't either.
However what you made is of interest and something to think about. Thank you

Carlos
using a teleconverter (I have a Sigma 1.4 TC ) tends to put quite a strain on the connection to the camera so wouldn't use one , not that it wouldn't work. The lens is heavy enough to really need support by hand or tripod/monopod. Just holding the camera only isn't really an option.
The images are far superior to my D300 but that is only to be expected seeing difference in the two cameras. I thought the D300 was great comming from the D200 but this D800 is in another street
 
Last edited:
Thanks Chris. I had one for a few months & was very impressed with it. (traded for a 200-400mm though)

Cheers Bazza, I agree with you about the images produced with it on the D800 ........& also that`foot` being too small (although it doesn't impinge too much while hand holding, I suppose)
Wasn't sure if a 1.4TC was a good idea tbh, even the Nik0n one, just wondered if you'd tested it & how much it affected the detail./quality.
btw, have you noticed any dust inside at all?
Thanks again.
 
Bazza, what I described is how I would approach the situation and how I am going to approach mine. Any machine workshop would be able to make up a spacer for you as long as they have the correct tap. For your application, I would go for the correct thread (1/4" UNC) but for mine, 1/4" Whitworth (same size and thread pitch but different thread angle) is close enough since the equipment is much lighter (and I have a 1/4" Whit tap!) I might see if I can source a 1/4" UNC machine screw since that's the one that'll be screwed into the expensive part.

For the time being, I would take the simple route and just take the grip off. IIRC, the D800 has a maximum shot length of 30 minutes - how long does an in camera battery last while shooting video?
 
Carlos
havn't actually tried a TC on the lens, as soon as i fitted it I took it off for the reason I gave, can't afford to ruin expensive gear.AS for dust no problems at the moment but having said that i havn't used it in anger yet but cannont forsee that particular problem, but thats not to say it couldn't occure.

Nod
taking the grip off is what I am doing for the time being and having one of these is what I use mainly for video shooting anyway, but useful to have another way of doing video work

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top