em5 iii tripod thread breaking?

Reflector

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 31, 2013
Messages
2,270
I feel this talk about the tripod socket is just a repeat of history when it comes to "don't apply excessive forces to something that's designed to hold a camera in a static application on a tripod." In my personal use the only thing that I allow to apply the tripod thread is a vertical grip which has some pins that protrude into the body for lateral forces (and obviously, tripod plate for tripod applications) since I don't trust having the camera bouncing around too much on various systems like the PD Capture (as much as I like their plates and use it to "hold" the camera briefly for lens changes and such) or those sling systems that mount on the tripod socket.
At least it doesn't tear out like this.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Here's a 5D3 that experienced a failure when it was on a tripod but the user apparently uses a BlackRapid strap:
5D3 tripod screw failure.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


And two Nikons (D700, D50), also using the BlackRapid strap as well (with possibly some "rougher" handling):
1371123018220-socket1.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

1371097066129-socket2.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


And what the BlackRapid strap attachment looks like for anyone scratching their heads over the failure modes on the above:
Black Rapid strap.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Last edited:

doady

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
May 18, 2020
Messages
111
Location
Canada
People are carrying the camera from the tripod socket? It is dangling upside down? I'm not sure I have seen that. That is weird. What's wrong with normal camera strap and upright camera? I don't understand people.
 

Holoholo55

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 13, 2014
Messages
3,600
Location
Honolulu, HI
Real Name
Walter
People are carrying the camera from the tripod socket? It is dangling upside down? I'm not sure I have seen that. That is weird. What's wrong with normal camera strap and upright camera? I don't understand people.
I prefer to use the OpTech sling instead of the Black Rapid style. I don't like my camera hanging upside down either. I used to carry the camera hung from the strap lug alone (with a light lens), but I added a safety strap that connects to the tripod socket. I use an OpTech Lens Loop with big heavy lenses instead of the strap lugs. I don't trust hanging a heavy lens and body from just the strap lugs.
 
Last edited:

RAH

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Dec 1, 2013
Messages
1,284
Location
New Hampshire
Real Name
Rich
Being my first ILC, I have wondered if it is proper to store the camera face down in the bag, resting on 12-100mm. I've thought maybe I am doing a bad thing and I should shop for a new bag, or should turn the bag over so that the camera is upright when it is in the closet, but after reading RichardC's post maybe it is okay?
I think it would be better to either turn the bag over (so the lens is pointing up and the camera is on the bottom); or the best way - turn it sideways so the camera and lens are horizontal , in the standard shooting orientation (inside the bag). This is purely my own thinking, based on nothing other than what seems the least stressful on the equipment.
 

RAH

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Dec 1, 2013
Messages
1,284
Location
New Hampshire
Real Name
Rich
Don't over tighten slotted screw fixings - finger tight and 1/4 turn is plenty if the padding on your intended attachment is in good condition. If it isn't, change the padding.
I've always kind of thought that you should remove quick release plates and grips from your camera for this reason - give the padding (wherever it is located) time to recover some of its cushion. This would especially be true with a grip, i think, which I think a lot of people leave permanently attached, or least for long periods. It is a PITA to keep removing such plates and grips, but I think it is advisable. You think? (I guess a person could also argue that all that screwing and unscrewing is not doing the threads on the camera any good either. Sigh... Entropy rules the day, I guess).
 

ibd

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Jun 5, 2016
Messages
521
I see the bit surrounding the tripod mount is held in place with three small phillips screws. I've been wondering if the whole bit could be extracted, then replaced by a sturdier 3d-printed bit. Has anyone tried taking apart their E-M5 III who could confirm that the tripod bit can be removed separately from the rest of the base plate?

A 3d-printed replacement would also have the advantage of being able to add a "capture plate" or whatever design directly as a single part, which helps to distribute forces better.
 

RAH

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Dec 1, 2013
Messages
1,284
Location
New Hampshire
Real Name
Rich
I see the bit surrounding the tripod mount is held in place with three small phillips screws. I've been wondering if the whole bit could be extracted, then replaced by a sturdier 3d-printed bit. Has anyone tried taking apart their E-M5 III who could confirm that the tripod bit can be removed separately from the rest of the base plate?

A 3d-printed replacement would also have the advantage of being able to add a "capture plate" or whatever design directly as a single part, which helps to distribute forces better.
The DPreview forum thread linked to above has 2 links in it that have a bunch of pictures of a semi-disassembled E-M5.3. Maybe you could look there:
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/64306542
 

ibd

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Jun 5, 2016
Messages
521
The DPreview forum thread linked to above has 2 links in it that have a bunch of pictures of a semi-disassembled E-M5.3. Maybe you could look there:
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/64306542
Thanks. Looking at the design in more detail, I don't think 3d printing could be very useful here. Maybe some thin inserts could be installed between the housing base plate and the inner surface to reduce overall flex.
 

ac12

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Apr 24, 2018
Messages
2,950
Location
SF Bay Area, California, USA
People are carrying the camera from the tripod socket? It is dangling upside down? I'm not sure I have seen that. That is weird. What's wrong with normal camera strap and upright camera? I don't understand people.
The camera strap on the top right has always gotten in the way of my right hand, for the last 40+ years.
The left strap is OK where it is.
 

retiredfromlife

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
May 15, 2016
Messages
4,359
Location
Sydney, Australia
I've always kind of thought that you should remove quick release plates and grips from your camera for this reason - give the padding (wherever it is located) time to recover some of its cushion. This would especially be true with a grip, i think, which I think a lot of people leave permanently attached, or least for long periods. It is a PITA to keep removing such plates and grips, but I think it is advisable. You think? (I guess a person could also argue that all that screwing and unscrewing is not doing the threads on the camera any good either. Sigh... Entropy rules the day, I guess).
I have had similar thoughts, but in the end I leave my base plates on to protect the camera base and the tripod socket from overuse. I sometimes mount cheese plates on the bottom to give me better mount locations and to spread the load better. I dont use plates with soft strips etc. I like a hard fit / close fit between camera and plate to avoid a puling out pressure on the camera socket.

Looking at how / where the socket is on the current EM1.3 i dont think they are really ment to be used either. A mount that only allows half the plate to be supported could lead to a rocking / levering motion to be applied to the socket. I really like my EM1.3 but things like that do not lend to a Pro camrra in my eyes
 

ac12

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Apr 24, 2018
Messages
2,950
Location
SF Bay Area, California, USA
Looking at how / where the socket is on the current EM1.3 i dont think they are really ment to be used either. A mount that only allows half the plate to be supported could lead to a rocking / levering motion to be applied to the socket. I really like my EM1.3 but things like that do not lend to a Pro camrra in my eyes
The tripod socket being so far in front, always seemed silly to me.
Leverage of the weight of the lens is working against that location.
And mechanically, I want more load bearing surface around the tripod socket.
 

RAH

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Dec 1, 2013
Messages
1,284
Location
New Hampshire
Real Name
Rich
The tripod socket being so far in front, always seemed silly to me.
Leverage of the weight of the lens is working against that location.
And mechanically, I want more load bearing surface around the tripod socket.
I think one reason why they position tripod sockets close to the front edge is because with very fat lenses the lens can protrude below the bottom of the camera, making it difficult to mount such a camera on a tripod (the edge of the lens will hit the tripod head) unless the setup is positioned far forward.

Hard to describe, but, for example, I cannot mount my Pany GM5 with the P20mm lens on it on a tripod unless I use a very small arca/swiss plate. The 20mm lens is so fat it protrudes below the edge of the GM5, interfering with the tripod mounting. This is an extreme example obviously, but I have had trouble mounting the E-M10.2 with a 12-35 lens onto a tripod for the same reason. The E-M1.3 has enough body below the lens mount to accomodate a pretty fat lens before this happens. The E-M5.3 has less height, but it's not too bad.

You can often get around this by using a very small quick-release plate. Again hard to describe, and I could take some pictures to show what I mean, but I'm lazy and also I don't have any good camera equipment ;)
 

comment23

mu-43 frequent flyer
Joined
Aug 26, 2016
Messages
1,731
Location
Hampshire, UK
Real Name
Simon
I think one reason why they position tripod sockets close to the front edge is because with very fat lenses the lens can protrude below the bottom of the camera, making it difficult to mount such a camera on a tripod (the edge of the lens will hit the tripod head) unless the setup is positioned far forward.

Hard to describe, but, for example, I cannot mount my Pany GM5 with the P20mm lens on it on a tripod unless I use a very small arca/swiss plate. The 20mm lens is so fat it protrudes below the edge of the GM5, interfering with the tripod mounting. This is an extreme example obviously, but I have had trouble mounting the E-M10.2 with a 12-35 lens onto a tripod for the same reason. The E-M1.3 has enough body below the lens mount to accomodate a pretty fat lens before this happens. The E-M5.3 has less height, but it's not too bad.

You can often get around this by using a very small quick-release plate. Again hard to describe, and I could take some pictures to show what I mean, but I'm lazy and also I don't have any good camera equipment ;)
Wouldn’t that be a reason for placing it at the rear (screenward) side?
 

RAH

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Dec 1, 2013
Messages
1,284
Location
New Hampshire
Real Name
Rich
Wouldn’t that be a reason for placing it at the rear (screenward) side?
Hmmm, OK, maybe you're right. The quick release plate is usually the problem in this scenario, with the edge of the lens (which sticks out below the bottom of the camera) blocking the quick release plate from being attached to the camera bottom. But, yes, you are right - the further back the hole is, the more likely you'll be to hide the plate completely underneath the camera. OK, so scratch my original idea. :) I'll leave it on the thread just to prove that I am not perfect (rumors to the contrary!).
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom