L bracket shopping experience

[Nikolai Sklobovsky]

As some of you may know, I recently became a proud owner of a Manfrotto Magfiber NG edition tripod and an Acratech Ultimate Ballhead V2.
I don't have enough experience with them to write a full review (although I'm getting there and getting a kick out of it, but I have some other I wanted to share: the L-bracket shopping experience.

Once I decided on a head I immediately started researching the L bracket for my Canon 30D with the BG-E2 grip. I have even contacted Acratech and they responded promptly.
Essentially, it boiled down to only two models: Kirk and Really Right Stuff, with nearly identical features and prices (~$160)

Actually getting the tripod and the head and saving for the bracket gave me enough time to contemplate both options. The differences I found were:

RRS

• the bracket has a longer platform on the side (in portrait mode), thus allowing for more freedom to position the camera on a QR clamp;
• it has nice centering marks denoting the lens axis;
• with a single mounting screw on the bottom it does not affect the strap shoulder (on the left of the camera).

Kirk

• the bracket has a slightly "sexier" curved body-plus-grip following design;
• "portrait" side, while being shorter than RSS', is also bit taller, altogether providing an easier access to the remote cable socket;
• unlike RSS (and other designs) it has not one, but two anchor points: one goes to the grip bottom (duh), while the other locks securely into left strap bracket, thus forcing you to reattach the strap if you install or remove the bracket.

Finally I made my choice and placed the order. The bracket arrived today (I coughed up extra $5 for 2nd day FedEx delivery, and I was very glad I ordered it.

It was Kirk.

Now here goes my reasoning.

Since I hardly ever remove the grip (I removed it once for a Delicate Arch hike and missed it so much that I don't think I'll ever do it again) the need to reattach the strap became a non-issue (for me, that is).

Lack of the centering marks - well, since I don't have matching marks on the head (RSS head probably do, but UB doesn't anyway) it's not really that big of a difference.
EDIT: I came home (where the tripod was) and realized that the detention pin on Acratech QR clamp actually pinpoints the bracket location, so no visual centering marks are needed!

Length of the side/portrait plate also didn't bother me much. I was rather glad to have a better access to the RC/PC compartment.

But what really won my heart (as of an engineer) was the second anchor point. I always felt that with a single mounting screw connecting the grip to the body the grip feels a bit wobbly (on the body, I mean, nothing to do with the bracket).
Now, with a very sturdy L bracket connecting the top of the camera with the bottom of the grip, the whole assembly feels like a tank.

For the record:
I have no affiliation with any photo-hardware companies.
I'm sure RSS plate would work just fine (especially on smaller bodies without a grip).
I only post this to express my own decision-making process.

HTH

 

[Diane Fields]

But what really won my heart (as of an engineer) was the second anchor point. I always felt that with a single mounting screw connecting the grip to the body the grip feels a bit wobbly (on the body, I mean, nothing to do with the bracket).
Now, with a very sturdy L bracket connecting the top of the camera with the bottom of the grip, the whole assembly feels like a tank.

For the record:
I have no affiliation with any photo-hardware companies.
I'm sure RSS plate would work just fine (especially on smaller bodies without a grip).
I only post this to express my own decision-making process.

HTH

Ah, I understand that. However, my 5D L bracket from Kirk did not have the second anchor point as my Kirk L did for the 20D. I loved it but sold it when I sold the 20D. When I bought the 5D--I bought the Kirk L bracket but really wanted the lug for the wrist strap that the RRS had for several camera bodies. When it was available for the 5D--I sold the Kirk (though I actually preferred it overall) and bought the RRS. Each of us finds the things that we need in our accessories. I think the Kirk 'fits' the 5D better, but the RRS allows me to keep an old E1 wrist strap on the camera all the time. Previously I was carrying an Allen wrench and changing from a Camdaptor (flat AS plate) to the Kirk L bracket off and on.

Diane

 

[Nill Toulme]

On some models the RRS has a tripod screw hole (for mounting a clampless pod) on both angles of the plate while the Kirk only has it on the bottom — for whatever that's worth (nothing to me, but there it is).

BTW, since mounting (RRS) L-plates on my two Mark II's and one 20D, I have only felt moved to remove one of them once — from the 20D when I went on a ten day trip to Italy recently without a tripod. The L-plates almost disappear into the camera, they're so unobtrusive.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

 

[Mike Spinak]

But what really won my heart (as of an engineer) was the second anchor point. I always felt that with a single mounting screw connecting the grip to the body the grip feels a bit wobbly (on the body, I mean, nothing to do with the bracket).

I think your engineering instinct led you astray in your reasoning. You need to make sure you correctly identify what the purpose is for a particular design aspect, before you can conclude how well engineered it is. In the case of the RRS plate, the single anchor point design need not be wobbly when properly tightened down, but is also made to flex and protectively absorb energy from a hard impact to the side of the camera.

Now, with a very sturdy L bracket connecting the top of the camera with the bottom of the grip, the whole assembly feels like a tank.

Feeling like a tank, i.e., feeling like the L bracket and the camera body are one (in regard to the second attachment point), means the Kirk L plate efficiently (but undesireably) transfers side impacts directly into the camera body.

Anyway, as long as you avoid dropping your camera or banging it into things, both the Kirk and the RRS L plates should be fine.

Mike

 

[Nikolai Sklobovsky]

Mike,

I think your engineering instinct led you astray in your reasoning. You need to make sure you correctly identify what the purpose is for a particular design aspect, before you can conclude how well engineered it is.

Two anchor points, especially spaced out from a single line/plane, are better than one, since they totally disable any possible rotation movements. One does not have to graduate from Berkeley to understand this concept.

In addition, as I mentioned earlier, the single connection point between BG-E2 grip and 30D body does not feel solid. The bracket solidifies the assembly. It's obviously a non-issue for dual-grip 1D series bodies, but for me it was.

Feeling like a tank, i.e., feeling like the L bracket and the camera body are one (in regard to the second attachment point), means the Kirk L plate efficiently (but undesirable) transfers side impacts directly into the camera body.

So, you're saying that L-bracket also needs to soften the blow? And all those numerous discussions that nitpick over the sturdiness of any tripod-related solutions are getting their stuff wrong?
Follow your logic, and the purpose of the tripod usage here in sunny California would be to isolate the camera from the occasional earthquakes?
Here's a free advice: try to avoid the impacts, side or frontal. Remember: even RSS L-brackets cover only one side of the body

Cheers!

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

There was a series of posts on Rob Galbraith by a guy who wanted to know which to get after finding some flex in the RRS one in portrait mode. He bought the Kirk but found that if anything it was slightly worse. I came to the conclusion at the end of the discussion that at the shutter speeds he was using, because in landscape mode the mirror slap is towards the center of where the camera is supported, i.e. the weight of the tripod+head, it is easily negated. However in portrait mode the slap is sideways where the camera is not supported at all. Hence the L plate design, however it is supported at the side of the camera, has an inherent disadvantage in portrait mode with high magnification and 'danger mode' shutter speeds, whatever the manufacturer. With MLU of course the problem disappeared. You probably would not see the problem either unless shooting macro with a 180mm lens at a 1/8 shutter speed!

That is by the by, but he did come to the conclusion that for all that the kirk fits into the side lug as well, the RRS did a better job overall.

 

[Nikolai Sklobovsky]

Ben,

There was a series of posts on Rob Galbraith by a guy who wanted to know which to get after finding some flex in the RRS one in portrait mode. He bought the Kirk but found that if anything it was slightly worse. I came to the conclusion at the end of the discussion that at the shutter speeds he was using, because in landscape mode the mirror slap is towards the center of where the camera is supported, i.e. the weight of the tripod+head, it is easily negated. However in portrait mode the slap is sideways where the camera is not supported at all. Hence the L plate design, however it is supported at the side of the camera, has an inherent disadvantage in portrait mode with high magnification and 'danger mode' shutter speeds, whatever the manufacturer. With MLU of course the problem disappeared. You probably would not see the problem either unless shooting macro with a 180mm lens at a 1/8 shutter speed!

That is by the by, but he did come to the conclusion that for all that the kirk fits into the side lug as well, the RRS did a better job overall.

Thank you for the interesting reference point!

I think we can all agree that the "mirror slap" is an inherent design issue of all SLRs (digital or not) and we should use MLU when shooting in "danger mode".

I also would like to emphasize that my original post was not meant to be a flame, or in any means provoke a holy war between different gear user, be it RSS, Kirk or any other hardware manufacturer.
In many aspects it's a coin toss, or six over half a dozen. I'm satisfied with my decision, since it was tuned towards my particular hardware combination, but if yours is any different (and even if it's not, so can be your choice. As they say, YMMV

 

[Mike Spinak]

Nik,

You can become adversarial and mocking if you want, but it doesn't add to the quality of the arguments. The facts remain that the RRS plate is more protective against blows to the left side of the camera body, and that this can be valuable insurance against accidents, and is an intended part of the design.

Yes, two anchor points eliminate rotational movement. So does properly tightening the quick release plate onto the screw mount of your camera body, with the rear flange flush with the bottom rear of the camera body... or at least in my experience. I use mainly 1 series camera bodies. I have handled and briefly used the 30D with a grip and a L QR plate, but perhaps not enough to notice an existing issue.

My wording was not intended to offend you; if it did, then I apologize.

Mike

www.mikespinak.com

 

[Nikolai Sklobovsky]

Mike,

My wording was not intended to offend you; if it did, then I apologize.

It did.
Accepted.
Thank you!

 

[Nikolai Sklobovsky]

Mike,

The facts remain that the RRS plate is more protective against blows to the left side of the camera body, and that this can be valuable insurance against accidents, and is an intended part of the design.

I - personally - don't buy this type of a design. Being able to "soften the blow" (again, one side only, so what good does it make to an unprotected - at least when using a remote trigger - right-hand side?) also means "if mounted on the side, camera's shakes will not be properly opposed by the tripod".
If, as you say, this "protection" was "intended part of design", it would really make me happy that I made a correct choice.

Yes, two anchor points eliminate rotational movement. So does properly tightening the quick release plate onto the screw mount of your camera body, with the rear flange flush with the bottom rear of the camera body... or at least in my experience.

As an engineer you understand the concept of lever.
Flange's lever (located half an ince away) does not come close to the second anchor's one, located four to five inches away.
Yes, you can tighten the screw, but... in my experience, it gets loose and once it does, there goes the whole assembly.
Second anchor point provides far better protection from that types of accidents.

I use mainly 1 series camera bodies. I have handled and briefly used the 30D with a grip and a L QR plate, but perhaps not enough to notice an existing issue.

As I mentioned in a very beginning, the combination of 20D/30D and a grip is what I use.
Hence I got plenty of chances to notice it and grow to not like it. Kirk, being functionally almost identical to RSS as a bracket, solved this problem for free.

YMMV, MHO, etc.

Cheers!

 

[Dierk Haasis]

From a practical PoV:

I do own and use [and have paid for] an RRS ballhead and two RRS plates, the L for the D2x and a small one for my 70-200 mm Nikon VR lens.

When I first mounted the RRS L I was a little bit worried I'd have to unmount it, only puting it on when using a tripod. No, the RRS L is so well designed that it does not intrude into handling the camera off tripod. Even with my very small hands I find the grip with the L better than without. There's only one downside - access to the rubber door protected compartments to the left of the camera is near to impossible.

While the battery can easily be exchanged, the rubber doors can only be opened with some thin and pointed instrument like a pocketknife. Not paticularly problematic as I don't use the interfaces in these compartments very often (never in one and a half year except for testing); sadly the very practical storaging of Nikon's idiotic plastic covers cannot be accessed sensibly with the RRS L attached.

BTW, RRS ballhead is brilliant.

 

[Diane Fields]

From a practical PoV:

I do own and use [and have paid for] an RRS ballhead and two RRS plates, the L for the D2x and a small one for my 70-200 mm Nikon VR lens.

When I first mounted the RRS L I was a little bit worried I'd have to unmount it, only puting it on when using a tripod. No, the RRS L is so well designed that it does not intrude into handling the camera off tripod. Even with my very small hands I find the grip with the L better than without. There's only one downside - access to the rubber door protected compartments to the left of the camera is near to impossible.

While the battery can easily be exchanged, the rubber doors can only be opened with some thin and pointed instrument like a pocketknife. Not paticularly problematic as I don't use the interfaces in these compartments very often (never in one and a half year except for testing); sadly the very practical storaging of Nikon's idiotic plastic covers cannot be accessed sensibly with the RRS L attached.

BTW, RRS ballhead is brilliant.

For others wondering about the RRS L with the Canon 5D--I can report that access to both of the covers is quite easy. I need to lift the one on the left to hook my remote shutter release quite often so access for that is important. The battery access isn't affected in any way by the bracket.

Diane

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

I can confirm that, no problems whatsoever on my 5D accessing anything.

OT: I actually knocked over my tripod once mid shoot with the camera attached and it hit the ground hard. The flash bought it, the L grip swiveled around when the camera hit the ground taking half the rubber on of the battery grip with it, if it had been the kirk then I assume I would have been handholding the camera for the rest of that wedding and sending the camera off for an expensive repair of the strap lug having been yanked out of the camera (instead I just sent the flash for said expensive repair and thank heaven for backup!).