advice regarding the nikon 70-200f 4 lens please

[salnel]

I am looking at getting the 70-200 f 4 and I had a couple of questions for any one who has it. It doesn't come with a tripod collar, so what did people end up getting? The nikon one or another brand? I would be hoping to handhold this lens as much as possible but I would need the ability to have it on a monopod or tripod . Any advice would be appreciated

[cupic]

I was looking into this lens but decide to keep the 70-200 f/2.8..... With regard to the f/4 model I believe that because of its weight that you will find that a tripod isnt needed.From memory its under 900g so it wont be a big burden where as f/2.8 glass weights in at least 1400g.Basically its an option..

[salnel]

Thanks for that...that would be really good if I didn't need to buy the collar as a separate item.

[nimrodisease]

Yeah, as cupic said, the lens doesn't actually require a tripod collar due to its weight. You could definitely get one if you wanted, but it's not necessary.

It is supposed to be a pretty awesome lens though, so let us know how you go with it!

[geoffsta]

Although I don't have this lens, but on the bigger and bulkier types lenses I like the collar. If held right (Hand held) you can adjust the focus or focal length with you pinky or index fingers. It also doubles as a carry handle.
I have the 120-300mm Sigma lens, and its weight is 3.045kg on its own. Plus a D800, makes it a handful hand held. Also it centralises the weight on a tripod, making it a bit easier to move around.

The other good thing I find with the collar is that the flat surface is handy if you don't have a tripod, you can always sit it on a fence post, or anything with a flat top to hold it steady.

[MrQ]

I've got this lens - it's terrific. There's no need for the collar; the lens is smaller than the extended 28-300mm and about the same weight. It's easily hand holdable. It will take a collar if you want one, but there's no necessity for it.

[I @ M]

I don't own the F/4 version but I did have one in the house for 2 weeks and used it a few times.
It is extremely well balanced to hand hold. It is light enough to not be a burden when hand holding over a long period of time. If you want the ability to mount the lens / camera on a tripod for long(ish) exposures I would recommend using a collar. The lens I used was fitted with a Kirk collar that was extremely well made, easy to detach and is Arca Swiss compatible.
As a side note, the owner of the lens originally bought a $40.00 ebay "special" that cracked at the collar joint screw after 3 uses. I definitely DO NOT recommend skimping on a quality mount and risking an expensive lens if you do buy a collar.

[salnel]

Thanks very much for the info..I did a bit of research and it weighs about 850g so on my d610, I should be able to either handhold it or just have it on a tripod attached to the camera ( I hope). Appreciate the help..thanks

[MrQ]

... on my d610, I should be able to either handhold it or just have it on a tripod attached to the camera

I'm using mine on a D600, so you should have no problems.

[salnel]

Thanks Andrew. If I get one, it would be a decent one!!
Thanks, Mr.Q...so you just mount it direct into the camera? I Just don't want to break the mount...too expensive to do that

[MrQ]

Yup. The camera body and lens weigh the same so there's no real difference either way. If anything the balance is better with the camera attached to the tripod.

[salnel]

Thanks so much,Mr Q. That is exactly what I wanted to hear!!