# Really Right Stuff L-Plate 5D3



## Mike Miami (Mar 31, 2012)

Not liking the look of the Really Right Stuff L-Plate for the 5D3. The large gap on the cable connection side doesnt look very good to me. Anyone agree? I'm sure its necessary but I still dont like the look.http://reallyrightstuff.com/mmRRSNET/Images/gallery/B5D3L-rear.png


----------



## nehemiah (Mar 31, 2012)

I've already pre-ordered my L-plate and will still need it -- but with the cost of that thing about $170 or so (just ballpark, don't remember exact figure), do you think just a battery grip is a better way to go? Of course they have different functions, but both allow you to do the horizontal/vertical easier.


----------



## Z (Mar 31, 2012)

I must admit I'm not a fan of that gap either.

nehemiah, I'm not sure I completely understand you. The battery grip makes it easier to shoot in portrait mode when handheld or otherwise - the L plate allows you to mount the camera on a tripod in portrait orientation. If you want to mount a gripped camera on a tripod in portrait orientation, you're going to need an L bracket all the same.


----------



## nehemiah (Mar 31, 2012)

I was assuming that one could get a quick release plate that fits the RRS ballhead for both portrait/landscape orientations (one for each end). However, I think you must be right that we would still need the L-plate with the battery grip. Thanks.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 31, 2012)

I agree - that gap is annoying. For other bodies, some RRS models have such a gap, whereas the Kirk equivalent does not. Worth a look...



nehemiah said:


> I was assuming that one could get a quick release plate that fits the RRS ballhead for both portrait/landscape orientations (one for each end). However, I think you must be right that we would still need the L-plate with the battery grip. Thanks.



Still sounds like you may be a bit confused. There's only one tripod mount socket to attach a QR plate to the camera, and that's on the bottom, with or without grip. If you have a standard plate on the bottom, that's landscape and the only way to get portrait is to rotate the ball of the ballhead 90 degrees and drop the stem into the slot. That works, but doesn't give optimal balance. The only way to get a plate on the side of the camera is if that side plate is attached to the bottom plate - that makes for an L shape...thus, the L-bracket.


----------



## Mike Miami (Apr 1, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> I agree - that gap is annoying. For other bodies, some RRS models have such a gap, whereas the Kirk equivalent does not. Worth a look...
> 
> 
> I cant seem to find a photo of the Kirk L-plate. Have you seen one? If so, where? Thanks!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 1, 2012)

Mike Miami said:


> I cant seem to find a photo of the Kirk L-plate. Have you seen one? If so, where? Thanks!



No, not for the 5DIII. Probably not ready yet...


----------



## Mike Miami (Apr 2, 2012)

Thanks neuroanatomist , i'll wait til I see the Kirk version before ordering from RRS.


----------



## wickidwombat (Apr 3, 2012)

I preordered before i saw what it looked like :'(


----------



## AUGS (Apr 3, 2012)

Mine is on pre-order, and hope to get it soon. I don't mind the gap as shown above. My 7D l-plate doesn't have the gap, but to use the camera in portrait orientation, I have to loosen the mounting screw and slide the l-plate about 5mm "IF" I want to use a remote trigger. This means I have to carry the allen key.
As shown in the other view orientations of the 5D3 l-plate, the gap means there is no need for any l-plate adjustment when using a remote trigger. I think they have thought this through quite well.
I'm sure I recall seeing an image that showed the port cover being able to rotate through the gap to stop it being pinched or caught up in the clamp too (maybe they updated their images with the laser etched versions), so I thought it was a functional gap.


----------



## Jamesy (Apr 3, 2012)

I investigated the gap prior to my pre-order (I was told end of April) but if it gives the cable more space then I am good with it. My 40D L-bracket needed to be moved away from the body a fair bit for a cable release to fit properly. BTW, I use mine without a grip as it makes things too bulky for my taste.
An added bonus of L-brackets is they protect the camera body on the two most exposed sides of the body.


----------



## jasonsim (May 4, 2012)

The Kirk L-bracket is out and they will be shipping one out to me tomorrow. Ordered it last Wednesday. 

To me the Kirk plate looks a bit better and I've never had problems with the trigger remote connector on my other two Kirk L-brackets ( one for my 7D and another I had for my 5D MK II).

I also pre ordered the RRS L-Bracket for the 5d MK III, however, Mr. Joe J who I spoke to today said that I am still in the middle of the list to receive the bracket. And that's that I ordered in on April 5th. I think RRS has a production shortage...they need to better prepare for market demand. It was like this for the TVC-23 tripod I ordered...had to cancel because I got tired of waiting and found a great deal on a Gitzo GT2830 tripod instead...saved over $700.

The only reason I considered the RRS plate was because I had just purchased a RRS BH-30 ball head with the QR lever clamp. However, I was able to get a used BH-40 with a pro screw clamp for about the same money as the BH-30. Needless to say, I'm trying to sell the BH-30, so I have no more lever clamps to worry about.


----------



## Jamesy (May 4, 2012)

jasonsim said:


> The Kirk L-bracket is out and they will be shipping one out to me tomorrow. Ordered it last Wednesday.
> ~snip~
> 
> I also pre ordered the RRS L-Bracket for the 5d MK III...


Why would you purchase both the Kirk and the RRS L-Brackets? My RRS L-bracket is in transit to me in Canada but I have decided to reject the shipment when it arrives given all the bad press it has been getting around here and other forums.
I too really like the fit, on paper at least, of the Kirk but I have decided to wait until there are confirmed reports of a nice fit rather than being an early adopter. I look forward to hearing what you think about the Kirk L-bracket when it arrives.


----------



## jasonsim (May 4, 2012)

Jamesy said:


> jasonsim said:
> 
> 
> > The Kirk L-bracket is out and they will be shipping one out to me tomorrow. Ordered it last Wednesday.
> ...



Well...I placed an order for the RRS L-bracket a month ago now and they told me then two weeks to receive it. Called today and I'm half-way on the list...so doubt I will get it before the end of May. I'm missing having an L-bracket so decided to check with Kirk and they seem to have better supply chain or something, plus it only take a few days to arrive at my door; whereas it takes a week to get here from CA. 

Me thinks I will be canceling the RRS L-bracket order.

I will update with my findings of the Kirk plate once I have it in hand (early next week).

Regards,
Jason


----------



## rsk7 (May 4, 2012)

I got my RRS L-Plate for the 5D3 yesterday and am extremely happy with it. 

The only thing I see that is substantially different between the two is the Kirk plate can be slid to the left to increase the spacing between the left side of the body and the bracket if for some reason you need more there. The bottom plate on the RRS goes all the way across the bottom to the battery door where the Kirk bottom plate looks shorter. Looks to me like the RRS is going to give you a firmer, more solid mount to the camera than the Kirk. With the shorter bottom plate I would be a bit concerned sliding the bracket to the left to increase that gap on the left and then putting some heavy/heavier glass on it that I've got a solid connection between the body and the bracket. The solid bottom plate of the RRS is also going to protect the bottom of the camera body but that can be a negative too as gunk that might get in there is going to have a hard time getting out.

What gap are you guys talking about with it that is a cause for concern? The bottom left corner? I could care less about that. It isn't significant functionally or that diff from the Kirk as far as I can tell. 

Oh yeah. I ordered mine mid-March(18th?) and got it yesterday.


----------



## kirispupis (May 4, 2012)

Strange. I have the original RRS L-plate for the 5D3 - the one everyone has complained about. I have looked at the photos online and have examined my L plate and cannot see any issue. I even had other photographer friends look at it and no one can see a problem. It fits just fine.


----------



## Jamesy (May 4, 2012)

kirispupis said:


> Strange. I have the original RRS L-plate for the 5D3 - the one everyone has complained about. I have looked at the photos online and have examined my L plate and cannot see any issue. I even had other photographer friends look at it and no one can see a problem. It fits just fine.



The gap in question is here: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=5446.msg116666#msg116666


----------



## Jamesy (May 4, 2012)

rsk7 said:


> The only thing I see that is substantially different between the two is the Kirk plate can be slid to the left to increase the spacing between the left side of the body and the bracket if for some reason you need more there.


On my 40D I have used this space in the past to have a USB tether cable attached to the camera while shooting in the studio in portrait orientation - I noticed numerous subsequent RRS l-brackets that did not allow this.


rsk7 said:


> The bottom plate on the RRS goes all the way across the bottom to the battery door where the Kirk bottom plate looks shorter.


Do you mean to say the L-Bracket would need to be removed to change out the battery?

Can you please post some pics? Thanks!


----------



## jasonsim (May 4, 2012)

Thanks for the feedback rsk7. I think you meant March 18th. I know RRS revised there initial design for the l-bracket, which probably delayed things.


----------



## rsk7 (May 4, 2012)

Yeah.. sorry it was March 18th.

No, it does not cover the battery door. You can get the battery in and out just fine without removing the bracket.


----------



## kirispupis (May 4, 2012)

Jamesy said:


> kirispupis said:
> 
> 
> > Strange. I have the original RRS L-plate for the 5D3 - the one everyone has complained about. I have looked at the photos online and have examined my L plate and cannot see any issue. I even had other photographer friends look at it and no one can see a problem. It fits just fine.
> ...



I looked at that thread but when I take a look at my L-plate on my camera, I see no such gap.


----------



## Jamesy (May 4, 2012)

kirispupis said:


> Jamesy said:
> 
> 
> > kirispupis said:
> ...


Can you please post a similar picture of your L-bracket to the one I linked to?


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (May 4, 2012)

Kirk L plate photos are here. They do not have one with the BG-11 yet, likely because the BG-11 is not available yet. 

http://www.kirkphoto.com/L-Braket_for_Canon_5D_Mark_III.html


----------



## Jamesy (May 4, 2012)

Thanks for the pictures of the Kirk - I have been looking at that plate and am very interested to see what people have to say about it.

I would be very interested to see pictures of the RRS L-bracket mounted on the camera in the same manner as those taken in this shot: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=5446.msg116666#msg116666


----------

