# Advice needed: Things around buying an 600mm Canon lens



## xps (Sep 21, 2015)

Although the DO version of the 600mm Canon is imminent (Maybe coming in 2016/2017), I decided to buy the 600mm Canon L IS II in the next two weeks. 
My question: Which things "around" are needed?

- Is the lens beeing delivered in an hard-case? (shop in the Netherlands sells it with an Tenba case) If not: Which one fits it best?

- Converter: Which version of the Canon 1.4x converter to buy? V2 or V3?

- Which universal coating?

- Which head for the tripod? I like the Eki Pro MS Teleneiger, or is there an better one in the same price class?

A lot of questions, but it would be nice, if you could help me.

Thx


----------



## Stu_bert (Sep 21, 2015)

xps said:


> Although the DO version of the 600mm Canon is imminent (Maybe coming in 2016/2017), I decided to buy the 600mm Canon L IS II in the next two weeks.
> My question: Which things "around" are needed?
> 
> - Is the lens beeing delivered in an hard-case? (shop in the Netherlands sells it with an Tenba case) If not: Which one fits it best?
> ...



Yes, it comes with a proper Canon case. All the big glass does, it has a hood and a new style lens cover for it.

Teleconverter - definitely the mk iiii - optimised for the mk ii lenses

I use a wimberley head personally, not heard of the one you mentioned, sorry

Not sure what is the universal coating, sorry.....


----------



## xps (Sep 21, 2015)

Stu_bert said:


> xps said:
> 
> 
> > Although the DO version of the 600mm Canon is imminent (Maybe coming in 2016/2017), I decided to buy the 600mm Canon L IS II in the next two weeks.
> ...



- Interesting. So, the Dutch shop removes it and sells it with an temba softcase. I think, the Canon cover is expensive. So, I thik I know the reason why this shop is cheaper than others....

- The head is from this company: http://www.eki-foto.com/de/eki-produkte-00/produkte-10-ms-g.html

- Sorry, I meant lens coating to camouflage the white lens

Thanks for your reply


----------



## DavidA (Sep 21, 2015)

I didn't look at your tripod head, but I would recommend this foot replacement if it is Arca Swis type.

http://www.reallyrightstuff.com/Shop/EF-200-400mm-f4L-IS-1-4x/LCF-53-for-Canon-400-500-600mm-IS-II-EF-200-400mm-f-4L-IS-1-4x.html

I usually rent big whites based on the trip and this fits all of the big white II versions including the 200-400. Much cleaner than using attachment plates if you use an Arca Swiss style head.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 21, 2015)

Ask the Dutch shop why it does not include a Canon Case. Are they a Authorized Canon Dealer?


----------



## candc (Sep 22, 2015)

it does come in a "transport suitcase" but its not much use other than storage and shipping. 

lenscoat makes neopreme covers that fit and look good. they also make an xpandble lens bag that works great, you can leave the hood on and camera attached.

http://www.lenscoat.com/long-lens-xpandable-series-c-42.html?osCsid=607d6614d91abf8faadce9f2279fa44d

i use a giottos 5580 monopod mostly. but also have a lensmaster gimbal which is very good and reasonably priced compared to most of the others, its also light. i use it on a gitzo lvl tripod which has a built in leveling column and also lightweight. its not as rock solid as the heavy duty ones but you are really looking to just get the weight off of you. the lens is heavy enough to carry around so i went for lightweight accessories to try to make the overall gear pack easier to hike around with. 

http://www.lensmaster.co.uk/rh1.htm

http://www.gitzo.com/ser2-6x-leveling-4s-g-l-long

tripod and head are about 5lbs


----------



## Northbird (Sep 22, 2015)

I use the Jobu Design Pro 2 gimbal head on my 600 II. Love it, a bit heavy but anything rated for glass this size will be. Beautifully machined, high quality piece of kit. 

http://www.jobu-design.com/Gimbals_c_1.html

As for Lens Covers I've been very happy with the UK company Wildlife watching Supplies covers, I use them on all my lenses, their customer support is great and they fit well. 

http://www.wildlifewatchingsupplies.co.uk/retail/acatalog/Neoprene_lens_cover_sets.html

I second the recommendation to use the Really Right Stuff replacement foot. Works great. 

http://www.reallyrightstuff.com/Shop/400-500-600mm-IS-II/

You will not regret your purchase of the 600 II, wonderful lens. 

You didn't ask about a tripod but take a look at Feisol. The 3372 is what I use. 

http://www.feisol.net/feisol-elite-tripod-ct3372-rapid-p-57.html


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 22, 2015)

It should come in a Canon 600B lens case, in a Canon box (and B&H shipped that in another, larger box unmarked box). 

I have an all RRS setup (I'll third the recommendation of their replacement foot), also have the PG-02 LLR gimbal and a TVC-33 with leveling base.

Enjoy the lens!!


----------



## AlanF (Sep 22, 2015)

Welcome back Neuro - we have missed you!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 22, 2015)

Thanks, Alan. Just busy with travel, work and the start of the school year for two of our kids.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 22, 2015)

AlanF said:


> Welcome back Neuro - we have missed you!


I'd like to 2nd that.

Now we just need to find Marsu42..........


----------



## RGF (Sep 22, 2015)

Stu_bert said:


> xps said:
> 
> 
> > Although the DO version of the 600mm Canon is imminent (Maybe coming in 2016/2017), I decided to buy the 600mm Canon L IS II in the next two weeks.
> ...



second the lens coat protection.

I use the Wimberley, especially for 600. I don't like side mounts, always feel unstable to me with big heavy lens.

Definitely go with Mark iii of the 1.4. I have had success with the 2.0 Mark iii.


----------



## xps (Sep 22, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> Thanks, Alan. Just busy with travel, work and the start of the school year for two of our kids.


School start...  The time where grand fathers are the "der beste Opa der Welt" when the grandchildren get the wished school satchels and other things. This year 3 of my grandchildren start going to school. 8)


----------



## xps (Sep 22, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> AlanF said:
> 
> 
> > Welcome back Neuro - we have missed you!
> ...



He is at the "Wiesn" for sure. (Bavarian Volksfest in Munich) ;D


----------



## xps (Sep 22, 2015)

Much thanks for all your answers!!!!!

I will:
- buy the arca swiss compatible Really Right Stuff replacement foot. My head will be the http://www.eki-foto.com/de/eki-produkte-00/produkte-10-ms-g.html as it is really well designed and has an superb quality and is Arca Swiss compatible . Tripod: my now nearly unsed Manfrotto 055 (I do mostly use an carbon tripod from Sirui).

- buy an Wildlife watching Supplies cover

- Canon converter 1.4x III

- and ask why the Dutch company sells the 600mm only with an Temba case.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 22, 2015)

I don't like the look if that gimbal head for two reasons. 

First, it doesn't allow for height adjustment that I can see. If you can't adjust the height then you can't get the balance of the lens such that it stays at any angle. By the looks of it you can adjust fore and aft for balance, but not vertical.

Second, because it is a two arm design you limit access to the lens switches, the one arm designs are most popular because you mount the lens such that the switch side is left uncluttered.

Just a couple of thoughts.


----------



## AlanF (Sep 22, 2015)

xps said:


> Much thanks for all your answers!!!!!
> 
> I will:
> - buy the arca swiss compatible Really Right Stuff replacement foot. My head will be the http://www.eki-foto.com/de/eki-produkte-00/produkte-10-ms-g.html as it is really well designed and has an superb quality and is Arca Swiss compatible . Tripod: my now nearly unsed Manfrotto 055 (I do mostly use an carbon tripod from Sirui).
> ...



The "Dutch" company has it it listed twice, once with the Tenba bag and once without for the same price.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 22, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> I don't like the look if that gimbal head for two reasons.
> 
> First, it doesn't allow for height adjustment that I can see. If you can't adjust the height then you can't get the balance of the lens such that it stays at any angle. By the looks of it you can adjust fore and aft for balance, but not vertical.
> 
> ...



Agreed. In fact, the last few images shown with the smaller lens (+ lighting), the lens+body center of mass is clearly below the pivot vertically, meaning it would return to horizontal without tension, rather than holding in any position when released as a good gimbal should. 

Easy control access is one advantage of a side-mount gimbal - with mine, it's very easy to reach under the lens for the stop buttons, manual focus and focus preset rings out on the barrel.


----------



## xps (Sep 22, 2015)

AlanF said:


> xps said:
> 
> 
> > Much thanks for all your answers!!!!!
> ...



Thanks, I phoned with an shop assistant today. He told me, the lens will be shipped with the case and the bag to Germany for an reduced price (>1000€ off the normal price). I was in the wrong "country"


----------



## xps (Sep 22, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > I don't like the look if that gimbal head for two reasons.
> ...



Thank you both for your thoughts. I will check this problem with the constructor of this head. If it is still an problem afterwards, I will switch to the Gimbal. But I think, the designer knew this problem well, as he uses a lot of such lenses (I think Nikon 600mm).


----------



## Deleted member 91053 (Sep 22, 2015)

I didn't like the look of that head either. It is going to get in the way of controls and would get in the way of my left hand/arm which I rest on top of my Canon 800 to help steady and control it. I couldn't see any provision for vertical balance either - that is a definite no go for me. I use the Wimberley 2 and am very happy with it.

Given that it is the Mk2 600 mm then I would suggest the Canon 1.4 Mk3 extender - they are designed for each other. If you are thinking of a 2 x extender then ONLY consider the Mk3 - it is significantly better than the Mk2 regardless of the lens used.

On my 300 F2.8 and 800 F5.6 lenses I use these covers:
http://www.outdoorphotographygear.co.uk/canon-neoprene-lens-covers
I had a Lenscoat when I had my 600 IS Mk1 but prefer these. Note I think the "Woodland Green" is the nicer pattern.


----------



## xps (Sep 23, 2015)

johnf3f said:


> I didn't like the look of that head either. It is going to get in the way of controls and would get in the way of my left hand/arm which I rest on top of my Canon 800 to help steady and control it. I couldn't see any provision for vertical balance either - that is a definite no go for me. I use the Wimberley 2 and am very happy with it.
> 
> Given that it is the Mk2 600 mm then I would suggest the Canon 1.4 Mk3 extender - they are designed for each other. If you are thinking of a 2 x extender then ONLY consider the Mk3 - it is significantly better than the Mk2 regardless of the lens used.
> 
> ...



Thanks a lot!

The MKIII 1.4 extenders is ordered.
The coating looks good. 
And I just made another decision. My local shop sold me an Sirui PH-20. This Gimbal head was for in-shop-demonstration, so I got for 150€. If it does not work, I can give it back or sell it and get an Wimberly.


----------



## krautland (Sep 23, 2015)

The Canon case it utter dogshite. They should have put soft foam inside instead of that horrible plastic, which doesn't protect the lens one bit. The extenders rattle in the little holes, which are presumably made for those very extenders they don't fit. The only reason to get the Canon case is the resale value. I think they charge $800 for it.

Do get the drop-in pola filter. I mean, you want a pola anyway, right? There is only one and it is solid. 

A third party vendor offers lens covers (the cloth cover only fits when you have the reversed hood attached), you could consider that. 

I use it with a nice monopod, not sure you'd need more.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 23, 2015)

xps said:


> And I just made another decision. My local shop sold me an Sirui PH-20. This Gimbal head was for in-shop-demonstration, so I got for 150€. If it does not work, I can give it back or sell it and get an Wimberly.



That is an excellent buy on the head. If you don't get on with it I'll buy it from you, seriously.


----------



## LovePhotography (Sep 26, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> It should come in a Canon 600B lens case, in a Canon box (and B&H shipped that in another, larger box unmarked box).
> 
> I have an all RRS setup (I'll third the recommendation of their replacement foot), also have the PG-02 LLR gimbal and a TVC-33 with leveling base.
> 
> Enjoy the lens!!



Call me an idiot, but, I can't figure out the advantage of side mounting the lens, with gravity, sheer and torque forces in effect, and the benefit of axial loading removed. If there is an advantage, please explain.
Also, wondering if, when the RRS mount is used in place of the one from Canon, whether the lens will still fit in the Canon suitcase?
Any insights appreciated.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 26, 2015)

LovePhotography said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > It should come in a Canon 600B lens case, in a Canon box (and B&H shipped that in another, larger box unmarked box).
> ...



No you are not an idiot, but one thing people new to gimbals miss is that the lens has to swing about the center point of the mass in both horizontal and vertical axes, if it isn't set in the vertical axis then when the knobs are loosened and you let go of the camera the setup will swing to level, if the pivot point is at the center of mass in the vertical axis the lens will stay wherever you let go of it. This centered mass is intrinsic to side mounting as the lens foot is always in the center of the lens, it makes the setup much smaller and lighter and is more efficient. Of course you still need to adjust for fore and aft balance but that is done with the longer lens plates.

The full style gimbals need the vertical adjustment that I talked about earlier which makes them bigger and heavier and more complicated. Incidentally, they also have some kind of vertical clamp arrangement to allow for this vertical height adjustment so you concerns on sheer forces are just as relevant to those style heads too.

My experience of RRS lens feet is they still fit in the Canon lens cases (though I have not specifically used the 600 IS MkII). Though I don't normally use the lens cases for much anyway, the lenses are normally in a bigger roller case or in a smaller or custom soft bag.


----------



## Kestrel (Sep 26, 2015)

I understand your concerns about the mechanical loading inherent in a side mount versus bottom mount gimbals. I use a side mount gimbal (Mongoose m3.6) along with the low mount replacement foot from 4th generation design. The low mount foot shortens the moment arm on the camera and lens (which is significant considering the weight of the 600 II + teleconverter and a 5dIII). The 4th generation low mount foot is a good compromise between height (tall enough to serve as a handle but short enough to keep the moment arm reasonable and to also pack easily in the backpack). I had tried the RRS foot but found it too tall for the side mount Mongoose (although it was a great handle for carrying). I also tried the Wimberley replacement foot, which was too short to use as a handle and also surprisingly heavy.

Anyway, the I really like the Mongoose because it is light weight, and since I'm carrying my whole rig around a lot that makes a difference. Aside from the care needed when mounting/dismounting the lens, there isn't a disadvantage I can see and the pivot on the Mongoose is more that adequate to handle the shear loading from the camera/lens.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 26, 2015)

LovePhotography said:


> Call me an idiot, but, I can't figure out the advantage of side mounting the lens, with gravity, sheer and torque forces in effect, and the benefit of axial loading removed. If there is an advantage, please explain.
> Also, wondering if, when the RRS mount is used in place of the one from Canon, whether the lens will still fit in the Canon suitcase?
> Any insights appreciated.



I prefer the side mount because it's lighter, smaller when disassembled for transport, and allows better access to lens controls. Another significant advantage is that if you use an L-bracket on your camera, you can mount the camera directly to the gimbal for use with a non-collared lens (wildlife is sometimes found in scenic locations, and an bringing along a ballhead in addition to the gimbal 'just in case' isn't my preferred solution). 

So, lots of advantages to the side mount. The only disadvantage is that slightly more care is needed when mounting/unmounting the lens to/from the clamp. I don't worry about it, I lift my kids all the time, they weigh more than my 600 II, I value them far more and I haven't dropped them...


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 26, 2015)

Kestrel said:


> I understand your concerns about the mechanical loading inherent in a side mount versus bottom mount gimbals. I use a side mount gimbal (Mongoose m3.6) along with the low mount replacement foot from 4th generation design. The low mount foot shortens the moment arm on the camera and lens (which is significant considering the weight of the 600 II + teleconverter and a 5dIII). The 4th generation low mount foot is a good compromise between height (tall enough to serve as a handle but short enough to keep the moment arm reasonable and to also pack easily in the backpack). I had tried the RRS foot but found it too tall for the side mount Mongoose (although it was a great handle for carrying). I also tried the Wimberley replacement foot, which was too short to use as a handle and also surprisingly heavy.
> 
> Anyway, the I really like the Mongoose because it is light weight, and since I'm carrying my whole rig around a lot that makes a difference. Aside from the care needed when mounting/dismounting the lens, there isn't a disadvantage I can see and the pivot on the Mongoose is more that adequate to handle the shear loading from the camera/lens.



The difference between the Mongoose style side mount and the RRS side mount is that the RRS setup allows for lateral adjustment to account for varying lens feet height and lens diameter, this is an intrinsic limitation of most side mount setups.

There is little difference in loading on any component in side mount or bottom mount, indeed to get to a bottom mount you also need to hang the weight and moment of the additional mounting to the top bearings, so counter intuitively a bottom mount would give more loads and moments to a gimbal system.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 26, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> The difference between the Mongoose style side mount and the RRS side mount is that the RRS setup allows for longitudinal adjustment to account for varying lens feet height and lens diameter, this is an intrinsic limitation of most side mount setups.
> 
> There is little difference in loading on any component in side mount or bottom mount, indeed to get to a bottom mount you also need to hang the weight and moment of the additional mounting to the top bearings, so counter intuitively a bottom mount would give more loads and moments to a gimbal system.



That lateral adjustment needed to center a side mount is the reason Mongoose, Wimberley, etc. offer the low-profile replacement feet (intended for larger lenses). The RRS solution works with any lens/foot or camera body, the latter allows use as a multirow pano rig.

More loads/moments and a longer connection between gimbal base and lens also increases the potential for vibration (although that's not usually an issue with the high shutter speeds I use for BIF).


----------



## LovePhotography (Sep 27, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> LovePhotography said:
> 
> 
> > Call me an idiot, but, I can't figure out the advantage of side mounting the lens, with gravity, sheer and torque forces in effect, and the benefit of axial loading removed. If there is an advantage, please explain.
> ...



I don't have one, so I don't know, but, wouldn't the RRS bracket for my 6D have the camera pointing backwards in the horizontal position?


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 27, 2015)

LovePhotography said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > LovePhotography said:
> ...



If you have a regular body plate it will orientate your camera in portrait aspect ratio (forwards/backwards in 360º). If you have an L-Plate it will give you both portrait and landscape orientation.


----------



## Kestrel (Sep 27, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > The difference between the Mongoose style side mount and the RRS side mount is that the RRS setup allows for longitudinal adjustment to account for varying lens feet height and lens diameter, this is an intrinsic limitation of most side mount setups.
> ...




I tried the Mongoose low mount arm but didn't like it and converted it back to side mount. You are correct that the extra low mount arm just reduces the stiffness of the overall system.


----------



## LovePhotography (Sep 27, 2015)

Okay, so, if for 2016 I wanted the ultimate RRS set up (but not redundant), for EOS DSLR and anything between 8mm and 600 with 1.4 TC, if you don't mind, what would that include?
Would like it to be the heaviest and steady enough necessary to do astrophotography and long exposure river water (Series 3 or Series 4 for EOS plus 600mm?). But, obviously don't want it to be heavier than necessary.
If I get the full enchilada Gimbel, would I also want the BH-55 ball head for "walking around" or wide angle?
What about the Series 4leveling base ( http://www.reallyrightstuff.com/Shop/Leveling-Bases/TA-4-LB-HK-Series-4-Leveling-Base-with-Platform.html ), and the long lens support Y-shaped thing? http://www.reallyrightstuff.com/Shop/Long-Lens-Support-Packages/Lens-Support-Pkg-dual-Quick-Release.html
Which are the best multi-purpose rails to get for Canon EOS, and lenses?

What about giving up the center column for stuff like portrait work where an inch or two up or down gives an entirely different look, and time is of the essence when it comes to sometimes figity subjects? I've always used my dad's 1950's era Quick-Set tripods which I have found to be incredible for the money (free in my case) but also available for under $70 on ebay. They all have center columns, so I'm wondering what portrait work, or certain other work where an inch or two up or down makes a difference (like, perhaps, shooting a softball game through the holes in a chain link fence) would be like...

It sounds like you could pretty easily spend $5000 on a complete RRS tripod rig, which I find rather astounding. It's a little like golf clubs. Golf clubs can't do a damn thing, yet they can cost more than the top-of-the-line Dell home computer, which has enough ability to send a man to the moon... LOL

So, if this is too exhaustive, I guess I can just call RSS, although when I have done this over the years, I usually get upsold to the point that I bought a lot of S___ that I never really needed (think computer network, home audio, business software, yada yada yada...) 

Also, I though other people might like to know.

Thanks...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 27, 2015)

Mr. Bean, your post disappeared but you had asked about the leveling base. It's not a need, per se, but it does make life much easier. It's always best to start with a level platform, makes even pans simpler, etc. That can be done by adjusting the legs, but I find that annoying and time-consuming, especially if you move the rig a few feet for a different viewpoint and have to do it over again. The leveling base is fast and easy.

I know the RRS leveling bases for the 3-series legs were compatible with the larger Gitzo tripods a while back, that's probably still the case but worth checking with RRS directly, their customer service is great. The do (or did, at least) sell Gitzo legs in their shop also.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 27, 2015)

LovePhotography said:


> Would like it to be the heaviest and steady enough necessary to do astrophotography and long exposure river water (Series 3 or Series 4 for EOS plus 600mm?). But, obviously don't want it to be heavier than necessary.
> If I get the full enchilada Gimbel, would I also want the BH-55 ball head for "walking around" or wide angle?
> What about the Series 4leveling base ( http://www.reallyrightstuff.com/Shop/Leveling-Bases/TA-4-LB-HK-Series-4-Leveling-Base-with-Platform.html ), and the long lens support Y-shaped thing? http://www.reallyrightstuff.com/Shop/Long-Lens-Support-Packages/Lens-Support-Pkg-dual-Quick-Release.html
> Which are the best multi-purpose rails to get for Canon EOS, and lenses?



I'll save the 'ultimate setup' for the end. 

IMO, the 3-series is plenty robust for a 600mm lens + 2x TC. The 4-series came out after I bought my TVC-33, but I would have made the same decision.

I think the leveling base is a great addition - really makes starting with a level platform a snap. Be aware that the long-handle base precludes the using lowest leg setting (retracted with widest spread), so instead of ~4" minimum height you can only get down to ~13" with the platform slightly tilted (2 legs at widest, one leg more angled, leveling base can't quite compensate for the tilt) or ~23" with all three legs at the same steeper angle setting.

The long lens support system is essentially useless with the side-mount gimbal configuration. It might help with stability with a full gimbal, but the side mount is plenty stable and as I stated earlier, most shots with at the 600 II are at shutter speeds where vibration isn't a big concern.

If you get a rail, which one will depend on your use. I have the MPR-CL II rail as a nodal slide. Was there something else you planned to use a rail for? Or perhaps you were referring to the body and lens plates? If so, for the body I prefer an L-bracket (and I love the 1D X version, since it's modular with an upright portion that can be detached and the hex key stores right in the base). Definitely get the dedicated plate for your camera, note that you need different ones for a gripped body. For the lenses, get the recommended plates either from RRS or Wimberley (both are equally good, I have a mix). Exception is for a supertele, I prefer the RRS replacement foot.




LovePhotography said:


> What about giving up the center column for stuff like portrait work where an inch or two up or down gives an entirely different look, and time is of the essence when it comes to sometimes figity subjects? I've always used my dad's 1950's era Quick-Set tripods which I have found to be incredible for the money (free in my case) but also available for under $70 on ebay. They all have center columns, so I'm wondering what portrait work, or certain other work where an inch or two up or down makes a difference (like, perhaps, shooting a softball game through the holes in a chain link fence) would be like...



For normal use, you really don't want a center column. All it does is reduce stability, even when not raised - there's a reason the higher end legs don't have one. 

When doing static portraits (I did a series of individual headshots for an entire office group), a center column would come in very handy. RRS does sell one for the 3-series legs, you can swap out the leveling base for the center column (I may pick one up at some point, but only for occasional portrait use).




LovePhotography said:


> It sounds like you could pretty easily spend $5000 on a complete RRS tripod rig, which I find rather astounding. It's a little like golf clubs. Golf clubs can't do a damn thing, yet they can cost more than the top-of-the-line Dell home computer, which has enough ability to send a man to the moon... LOL



I've spent right around that $5K figure with RRS. It's an expensive hobby..... 




LovePhotography said:


> Okay, so, if for 2016 I wanted the ultimate RRS set up (but not redundant), for EOS DSLR and anything between 8mm and 600 with 1.4 TC, if you don't mind, what would that include?



In fact, for me the setup would be pretty much what I have. TVC-33 with leveling base (the one with the clamp, and dovetails on the ballhead and gimbal), PG-02 LLR for the supertele, BH-55 LR, MPR-CL II to use the ballhead for single row panos or the gimbal for multirow panos. MC-34 monopod with the Pro head (screw clamp, the MH-01 now because the MH-01 pro isn't made any more) for hiking with the 600 II. B150-B/LMT Macro Rail, works with collared and non-collared lenses. L-plate(s) for camera(s), lens plates for collared lenses, replacement foot for 600 II. I also have the TQC-14 + BH-30 LR as a travel tripod, which is much easier to get on a plane and plenty sturdy for everything short of the 600 II (and it will even hold that in a pinch, although less stable than I prefer).


----------



## Mr Bean (Sep 27, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> Mr. Bean, your post disappeared but you had asked about the leveling base. It's not a need, per se, but it does make life much easier. It's always best to start with a level platform, makes even pans simpler, etc. That can be done by adjusting the legs, but I find that annoying and time-consuming, especially if you move the rig a few feet for a different viewpoint and have to do it over again. The leveling base is fast and easy.
> 
> I know the RRS leveling bases for the 3-series legs were compatible with the larger Gitzo tripods a while back, that's probably still the case but worth checking with RRS directly, their customer service is great. The do (or did, at least) sell Gitzo legs in their shop also.


Thanks for the response Neuro. I'll contact RRS as you have suggested. This purchase has been a long, drawn out affair for me, and I'd rather get a setup I'm happy with. The post disappeared due to "user error". I think I managed to delete it during an edit. But thanks for picking up on it


----------



## DavidA (Sep 28, 2015)

Comment on the RRS vs 4th Generation. 

I have not used the 4th generation low profile foot, but one thing I really liked about the RRS foot was using it as a handgrip. In the field, I sometimes like to detach the camera and lens from the tripod when changing locations. The RRS provides a nice sized grip to control a heave lens and 1dx. I know the RRS foot will fit in the 200-400 f4 L IS w1.4x case. I always use Gura Gear or dedicated soft bogs to carry my large lenses when traveling. The Canon case is good for storage but not that convenient for travel. It also screams photo gear checked at the airport plus it doesn't have wheels. 

BTW - RRS also makes a nice foot replacement for the Canon 100-400 II.


----------



## LovePhotography (Sep 28, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> LovePhotography said:
> 
> 
> > Would like it to be the heaviest and steady enough necessary to do astrophotography and long exposure river water (Series 3 or Series 4 for EOS plus 600mm?). But, obviously don't want it to be heavier than necessary.
> ...



Thanks for the detailed explanation.
I'm gonna print it out and save it for my Xmas or February 2016 after property taxes paid celebration! )


----------

