Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by swampduck, Jun 11, 2013.
Does the 100-300 Panny have/need a tripod ring?
Can't speak to the need for a collar since I don't have the lens, but I do know there's a man in Germany who does custom collars for the P100-300 that supposedly work well:
Rudolf Rösch Feinmechanik
Sorry, page is in German but Google translate is only a few clicks away! Also, here's the one of the links on this site referencing a review of the collar:
I am assuming no. The principal reason for a lens collar is determined by the weight of the lens. A very heavy lens can bend/damage the mount on the camera, so the weight bearing axis is moved away from the mount vis-a-vis the lens collar.
I am confident that Pany took the weight-mount thing into consideration when they produced the lens sans collar.
Use mine with a monopod at time, never felt the need for a collar...
To be fair... a monopods have much less need for tripod collars, perfect balance, or as strong a mount support as a tripod. A camera on a monopod never leaves your hands. A camera on a tripod is usually left on its own, supported only by the tripod.
Personally, where I run into difficulty using a longer lens on these small bodies, especially with a light-weight tripod and not the heaviest beast I can find, is in video. It's not too likely that you'll find much difficulty finding a tripod to support these light cameras and lenses at all, until you're trying to pan and lock in shots with no shifts caused by front-heavy nose drops.
With still photos this is no problem. It's not like your camera is going the break, and if the nose drops a little you just adjust the head up a bit. Not so easy when you're in the middle of filming...
Good point, a collared P100-300 is less likely to nose-dive than a non-collared P100-300 on a light weight tripod.
I have the 100-300 and use the collar mentioned previously. I find it essential when shooting at anything above 200. But then I am old and not as steady as I used to be.
I need one, but if anybody knows anyone who wants to sell theirs, kindly let me know.
This is a good segway into a question I have: My one tripod is light-duty, and I wish to buy a beefier one. Is there a consensus on which might be the top 3-6 to choose from for a M4/3 camera? General use, can sit on my Flipside 200 pack.
+1 - Recently spent a day wandering all over a park shooting a disc golf tournament with the 100-300 on my E-P3 and had no problems.
They are only $100 new from the source above.
Yup, and I'll likely do that, but I thought I'd put it out there just in case someone didn't want theirs.
I would distinguish "need" (in which case I agree with Gary) from "benefit from" (in which case I agree with RKlepper. Above ~200mm, my photos need some kind of stabilization and I find the collar a big help, even if (as I have sometimes done) it's merely resting the foot of the collar on a fixed surface - yes, that could be done by resting the camera baseplate on the same surface but sometimes that works poorly or not at all from an ease of use perspective.
I see there is an Oly 75-300 model as well. I think that would help that lens a lot.
Sent from my iPad using Mu-43 mobile app
Thinking about getting the ring for my panny 100-300. Locking in the tripod head the lens dips slightly. I am using the Manfrotto 498RC2 ball head. Note my Kowa 60MM spotting scope does not dip at all on the same head. Panasonic did a disservice not providing a tripod collar. The small body of the OMD does not offset the weight on the 100-300 especially when extended to 300mm.
Most of the birds and insects that I photograph with this camera move around too much for me to use a tripod. So I guess the "need" question depends on your subjects to some degree. For longer lenses (such as our adapted spotting scope), a tripod becomes essential, but I've rarely used this lens with one.
There is one more way guys to use the excellent collar from Roesch. Not everybody will find it convenient but for me it works well and during all my long forest walks I use this combo:
<a href="https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/yugw2jK9FeBrAZ3P0MElvZn7Hw5gkckSp0-eE0JWL2E?feat=embedwebsite">"533" width="800" /></a>
What is it, and how does it work?
This bracket I use as an alternative to simple pistol handle (much more variations for hand positions). Just support for the left hand...
Left elbow rests to the chest and this bracket to the left palm.
With all due respect, guys, these discussions amaze me.
There are lenses that do need to have their own tripod mounts. The old 50-300mm f4.5 Nikkor for example:
I owned one of these for a while and the only way I could shoot it was with a pistol grip/shutter release mounted to the lens. It was just under a foot long and weighed slightly over 5 pounds.
The Panny 100-300mm is 5" long and weighs about a pound. Minuscule in comparison. Properly supported (heel of left hand under camera body, fingers supporting lens, elbow tight against your body) it works great. I have several hundred frames shot hand-held in Africa, almost always zoomed to 300mm, and very few with camera motion problems.
If you want small apertures and consequent slow shutter speeds you will need a monopod or, better, a tripod. Even the smallest ball head will be able to hold this lightweight camera/lens combination without it falling over. So, again, no need for a ring. The only possible need I see for a lens-mounted support point would be for video, to get the center of gravity of the combination closer to the support point/better balance for panning and tilting while shooting.
There is a reason we (I anyway) buy these tiny cameras and their tiny lenses. We don't have to be pack mules and deal with heavy, bulky, stuff.
If you have GAS, go for the ring. Get the titanium one with the gold plating, signed by Oskar Barnack. If you just want to take pictures, don't bother.
Separate names with a comma.