• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

A nice, inexpensive tripod ring for the EF 70-200 f/4L IS USM

Doug Kerr

Well-known member
I recently sold my Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM lens and bought a (used) 70-200mm f/4L IS USM. Its size and weight makes it so much easier for an old geezer like me to handle.

The f/2.8 lens comes new as standard with a tripod ring, but the f/4 does not, and mine did not include one. I didn't feel a great need for one. The length and weight of the f/4 lens gives it a much smaller first moment (the property that makes the rig want to tip about the pitch axis) than for the f/2.8, and most of my tripod work is done with a three-axis geared head.

Canon's list price for the Tripod Ring A II (W) ("white") is $210.00. The price new at B&H is $139.95, and used ones at KEH run about $90-$95. I don't want one that badly.

So I poked around the Internet looking for a "third party" equivalent. I was amazed to find a credible-looking one at GadgetTown for $8.99 with free shipping.

After a couple of inquiries to their customer service desk (very prompt responses, incidentally), I was convinced that this was a good risk (I believe they offer a no-questions-asked refund) so I ordered it. It came yesterday.

It is very nice, solid metal construction with a neoprene or such liner where it clamps onto the lens. The color was a credible match to the lens (note that there is considerable variation in the color of the "L" lens finish over the years and models).

The clamping and "opening" mechanism is more straightforward than that of the current Canon model, but seems to do everything needed very well.

Here we see the unit fully closed:

Ring_AX_F29638-01-S700.jpg

Here it is well unclamped:

Ring_AX_F29635-01-S700.jpg

Here it is opened (this is required to mount or demount it, since it fits over a "neck"of the lens, unlike the case for the f/2.8):

Ring_AX_F29634-01-S700.jpg

Here we see it on the lens:

Ring_AX_F29640-01-S600.jpg

I think the unit is very nice, and how can you beat the price!

Here it is on the GadgetTown site:

http://www.gadgettown.com/Tripod-Mount-Ring-Canon-EF-70-200mm-f-4L-D00464.html

Do not be confused by the line, "made by plastic with high quality". Customer service assured me by e-mail that it was "made by metal with high quality"! How they teach these New Jersey girls to write Japlish is beyond me.


I'll have some more pix in the following post.

Best regards,

Dougo
 

Doug Kerr

Well-known member
[Part 2]

Here we see the ring on a tripod (a wee one!) with the lens on an EOS 20D:

Ring_AX_F29641-01-S700.jpg

With the tightening screw slightly loosened, the body and lens can be easily rotated. A far greater amount of loosening is needed before the ring will come completely open, so there is no risk of accidental disengagement.

Here we see the same situation but with an Extender EF 1.4 in place:

Ring_AX_F29642-01-S700.jpg

A better look at the label:

Ring_AX_F29637-01-S700.jpg

Best regards,

Doug
 

Doug Kerr

Well-known member
There is a funny story in this area. On the Canon official store Web site, they list both the white and black versions of this ring (I think the same ring is used with other lenses that have a black finish). But the photo for the black ring is not a photo of the Canon item, but apparently of the non-Canon one made by this same company for the f/2.8 lens (I think it also fits other lenses with a black finish).

On the GadgetTown item, the "Canon" notation for the ring on the label is incorrect, apparently in part somehow leading to this gaffe.

Best regards,

Doug
 

Don Ferguson Jr.

Well-known member
There is a funny story in this area. On the Canon official store Web site, they list both the white and black versions of this ring (I think the same ring is used with other lenses that have a black finish). But the photo for the black ring is not a photo of the Canon item, but apparently of the non-Canon one made by this same company for the f/2.8 lens (I think it also fits other lenses with a black finish).

On the GadgetTown item, the "Canon" notation for the ring on the label is incorrect, apparently in part somehow leading to this gaffe.

Best regards,

Doug
Looks like you got a good deal . I was happy when I got my 400 5.6 L at a good price at Norman Camera that it included a ring that works well with my 70-200mm f/4L IS USM . I don't know which lens is the sharpest ;)
Don
 
I recently sold my Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM lens and bought a (used) 70-200mm f/4L IS USM. Its size and weight makes it so much easier for an old geezer like me to handle.
...

Being an OG myself, I have to ask: was the weight the only reason? I have the same lens and have wondered what alternatives I might consider. And does it reduce much the weight of what you carry around?
 

Doug Kerr

Well-known member
Hi, Denbigh,
Being an OG myself, I have to ask: was the weight the only reason? I have the same lens and have wondered what alternatives I might consider. And does it reduce much the weight of what you carry around?

Yes the weight is much less, and because of the lesser length of the f/4, its "moment of inertia" is also less (which affects the "maneuverability" greatly). And such issues as bumping the hood on door frames as I move around, or rug rats running into it as the rig hangs at my side, are also greatly ameliorated. (Part of all that is because the hood for the f/4 is substantially smaller than the hood for the f/2.8.).

The overall result is that I find it very much more convenient to work with the f/4 on my 40D than with the f/2.8. To me, it is a "night vs. day" difference.

Best regards,

Doug
 
Top