User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  2
Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Multi purpose Qd mount

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    27 Aug 2010
    Location
    sydney
    Posts
    153
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Multi purpose Qd mount

    As Im now the proud owner of 2 camera bodies, I've been wondering what the best system would be for quick detach mounts.At present I have a Manfrotto ball head with a big hexagon Qd plate,a mono pod with only a 1/4 screw , 2 camera bodies and a 300mm lens with a tripod collar. Cheers
    Waiting on a train

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    29 Jul 2009
    Location
    Cessnock, NSW AU
    Posts
    472
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    wheellathe, I too have two bodies, various lens which all fit both (except for one) and I use two tripod heads which both fit on my tripods and monopod. I find it easy to select which head I want and then screw it on. Only takes a couple of secs. But if I were you I'd replace the monopod or get an adapter screw which fits on the 1/4" and steps it up to (is it?) 5/16th.

    Ohter than that offering I'm not sure whether I've nailed your question?
    .
    Cheers, Mal

    crafthouse images - my Flickr

    Canon EOS 5DM3, 7D and a modest collection of "L" goodies

  3. #3
    A royal pain in the bum! arthurking83's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 Jun 2006
    Location
    the worst house, in the best street
    Posts
    8,185
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    It makes the most sense to stick with the hexagonal QR0 system that you already have(BTW it's referred too as a QR.. Quick Release.. mount system).

    if you search through Manfrotto's catalogue you will find references to a few QR plates and bases.

    I find(or believe) that the Manfrotto systems are too 'locked in', in that they are not compatible with any other system, and that there are many other plates and systems that cater to wider, cheaper and more sturdy requirements.

    I like thier QR5 system as it's very strong, but limited in flexibility!

    The Arca Swiss QR plates and bases are usually more flexible, in that many various manufacturers make all kinds of gizmo's and accessories to suit, and hence the entire system is able to cater to particular and peculiar needs, and in a cheaper manner(that Manfrotto's plate systems).

    Cheaper solution is to stick with the RC0 plates, as you already have some parts, but if your financial commitment to it is not heavy, I'd recommend an entire change to a more generally acceptable Arca Swiss system.

    Note that not all Arca style plates manufacturers are cross compatible too(and that p's me off madly!) What's the point in having a "Arca Swiss compatible system", if it's not compatible!?

    Anyhow.. I was only jsut doing a bit of price research and have determined that the AcraTech plates and bases seem to have a good mix of price and compatibility with the other major manufacturers.

    RRS plates are generally compatible, made from 'aircraft alloys', but seem rather expensive by comparison(to the already good quality AcraTech stuff).

    I think I'mn about to switch to one of the Arca Swiss compatible manufacturers bases soon I reckon, not sure which one it will actually be, but either the Acratech, or maybe the RRS standard(not lever release) version. RRS lever release is apparently not 100% compatible, and says so on their site too. Problem is cost! I'm looking at approximately $300 as a minimum expense... one that I'd rather not have to deal with, as that's the purchase cost of a very good macro focusing rail(the reason why I want to switch anyhow!). But I think I have to bite the bullet and stop fuffing around with this Manfrotto RC5 system now.

    So, you have a ballhead, but no tripod? Do you use the ballhead on the monopod.

    As it stands you only need three plates, so the cost in staying with the QR0 system is minimal... maybe another $40 or so for two more plates(one for the lens and another for the second body).

    But that's what I thought was the 'easy road' way back when I thought my needs were minimal, and not specific in any manner. Took a while to realise it(3 years or so), but now I know better.
    Closed source is not a good option, and should have abandoned it when my investment in it reached $100m, as opposed to the over $200 that is now!
    Nikon D800E, D300, D70s
    {Nikon} -> 50/1.2 : 500/8(CPU'd) : 105/2.8VR Micro : 180/2.8ais : 105mm f/1.8ais : 24mm/2ais
    {Sigma}; ->10-20/4-5.6 : 50/1.4 : 12-24/4.5-5.6II : 150-600mm|S
    {Tamron}; -> 17-50/2.8 : 28-75/2.8 : 70-200/2.8 : 300/2.8 SP MF : 24-70/2.8VC


  4. #4
    Member
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    27 Aug 2010
    Location
    sydney
    Posts
    153
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks for that arthurking , your a wealth of knowledge

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •