Just discovered something about Nikkor Z 70-200mm and 100-400mm

[shuncheung]

Since the original foot for my 500mm PF came off once, causing the lens with my D5 attached drop to the ground, resulting in a $600 repair bill, I now use Hejnar replacement feet that are screwed onto the collar, without any quick release.

Does not having a removable foot on your 70-200S cause any ergonomic problems for you when handholding? I sometimes remove my current foot, but I’m wondering if I can forego that for a better designed, more secure foot.

Currently I have three Hejnar feet, for my 500mm PF, 70-200/2.8 S and 100-400 S respectively. The latter two are identical.

For those larger lenses, I typically use a Kirk SS-1 strap with a A/S clamp onto that tripod foot. Therefore, that tripod foot is rotated to the top side of the lens and does not interfere with hand holding at all. In fact, that was the exact situation when the Nikon foot on my 500 PF came off, and my D5 fell on concrete back in 2019. My previous thread from 2019 in the F-mount lens forum has a lot more details.

(Edit) I think I just need to try it - ordered.

 

[Ellis Vener]

Not only is the tripod foot for each lens removable, they are also interchangeable.

Yes, I too have both of those lenses, and the tripod feet are interchangeable. I bought the Hejnar replacement feet for them, and it is the same model of replacement foot for both lenses.

Since the original foot for my 500mm PF came off once, causing the lens with my D5 attached drop to the ground, resulting in a $600 repair bill, I now use Hejnar replacement feet that are screwed onto the collar, without any quick release.

Does not having a removable foot on your 70-200S cause any ergonomic problems for you when handholding?

Not for me. If it feels like it is n the way I simp[ly rotate the collar so it is out of my way. Because I frequently switch from horizontal to vertical framing when I know I'll be handholding I rotate it to the two or ten o'clock angle.

 

[shuncheung]

I agree with you Ernie, but I see Shun’s point.

While I always check that it’s tight, things can get knocked loose and I’d rather have a one piece tripod foot that is secured to the collar with either a hex or screw headed recessed bolt.

The problem is that on the 500mm PF foot, I think there is some Nikon design flaw that the foot can come off even though the knob is tight. Prior to the 500mm PF, I have had (and still have them) both versions 1 and 2 of the 70-200mm/f2.8 AF-S VR, and I use a RRS foot with A/S dove tail on it. The RRS foot has the same type of quick release as the Nikon foot. In 15 years I never had any issues with that RRS foot.

If it is just me, perhaps I wasn't careful that time in 2019, but Steve Perry had the same issue and the described in his 500 PF review video, around the 5:30 mark:







The Hejnar foot is screwed onto the 100-400 and 70-200's tripod collar and IMO is a lot more secure. Should you need to take it off, just unscrew with an Allen wrench.


Hejnar NFR-001 Foot on 100-400 S. It also fits the 70-200/2.8 S.

 

[Hooligans Imagery]

Plus, his shipping is brutal.

He clearly is taking advantage or isn't schooled in shipping. $27 UPS shipping for the 100-400 foot? At the size he could put it in a USPS padded flat rate envelope for $9.65 and in many places in the US it would arrive earlier, or even less if he used a shipping service with a label maker.

I found his website is a little wonky. If you pick the second listbox first, you can select USPS options including first class and Priority mail which is more reasonable.

ok that makes sense $ 7.30 that works if you like the design


--
Thanks for your help, Michael

 

[Paddler213]

I agree with you Ernie, but I see Shun’s point.

While I always check that it’s tight, things can get knocked loose and I’d rather have a one piece tripod foot that is secured to the collar with either a hex or screw headed recessed bolt.

The problem is that on the 500mm PF foot, I think there is some Nikon design flaw that the foot can come off even though the knob is tight. Prior to the 500mm PF, I have had (and still have them) both versions 1 and 2 of the 70-200mm/f2.8 AF-S VR, and I use a RRS foot with A/S dove tail on it. The RRS foot has the same type of quick release as the Nikon foot. In 15 years I never had any issues with that RRS foot.

If it is just me, perhaps I wasn't careful that time in 2019, but Steve Perry had the same issue and the described in his 500 PF review video, around the 5:30 mark:
The Hejnar foot is screwed onto the 100-400 and 70-200's tripod collar and IMO is a lot more secure. Should you need to take it off, just unscrew with an Allen wrench.


Hejnar NFR-001 Foot on 100-400 S. It also fits the 70-200/2.8 S.

The other possibility is that both you and Steve unknowingly pushed the release button while the knob was loose. I just checked both my 500PF and 70-200FL, when the knob is tight you cannot remove the foot. It only takes a bit over 90* after it makes contact to tighten the knob enough to prevent accidentally releasing it.

However, the Hejnar foot for the above lenses is easier to install and remove than that on my 500/4FL. The former is attched with a single screw, the latter is attached with 4 small screws. More expensive but also more elegant and lower profile than screwing an Arca Swiss plate onto the factory foot.

 

[AstigmaticOwl]

Not only is the tripod foot for each lens removable, they are also interchangeable.

The same RRS LCF-21 replacement lens foot is advertised to work on both as well.

As is the Kirk LP-70.

 

[shuncheung]

I agree with you Ernie, but I see Shun’s point.

While I always check that it’s tight, things can get knocked loose and I’d rather have a one piece tripod foot that is secured to the collar with either a hex or screw headed recessed bolt.

The problem is that on the 500mm PF foot, I think there is some Nikon design flaw that the foot can come off even though the knob is tight. Prior to the 500mm PF, I have had (and still have them) both versions 1 and 2 of the 70-200mm/f2.8 AF-S VR, and I use a RRS foot with A/S dove tail on it. The RRS foot has the same type of quick release as the Nikon foot. In 15 years I never had any issues with that RRS foot.

If it is just me, perhaps I wasn't careful that time in 2019, but Steve Perry had the same issue and the described in his 500 PF review video, around the 5:30 mark:
The Hejnar foot is screwed onto the 100-400 and 70-200's tripod collar and IMO is a lot more secure. Should you need to take it off, just unscrew with an Allen wrench.

The other possibility is that both you and Steve unknowingly pushed the release button while the knob was loose.

There is no such possibility at all.

I was standing on a sidewalk talking to a friend. My D5 was attached to the 500 PF, which was suspended over my shoulder with a Kirk strap clamped onto the tripod foot. Nobody's hands were touching the lens or camera. The tripod foot just came off suddenly by itself, due to the weight of the 500 PF with a heavy DSLR attached.

I am sure Steve Perry wouldn't spend so much time to point out this tripod foot design flaw in his 500 PF video review if he might have caused the problem himself. As a coincidence he also had a D5 attached. My incident happened after 8, 9 months after Steve Perry's video had been published. I checked with him, and he told me that by then, a number of people had contacted him because of the same issue, and he recommended the Hejnar foot. Those are not isolated cases.

I just checked both my 500PF and 70-200FL, when the knob is tight you cannot remove the foot. It only takes a bit over 90* after it makes contact to tighten the knob enough to prevent accidentally releasing it.

However, the Hejnar foot for the above lenses is easier to install and remove than that on my 500/4FL. The former is attched with a single screw, the latter is attached with 4 small screws. More expensive but also more elegant and lower profile than screwing an Arca Swiss plate onto the factory foot.

A conventional 500mm/f4 is a much bigger and heavier lens than the 500/5.6 PF so that it requires a much stronger support.

All I can do is to relay my bad experience with that kind of tripod foot quick release, and it is also Steve Perry's experience plus many others. The 70-200/2.8 and 100-400 are somewhat smaller than the 500/5.6 PF, as I have all three lenses. Perhaps it is totally fine on the other lenses. Personally I would never trust that kind of Q/R again. It is up to you to decide what to do yourself.

 

[greendog]

The Hejnar foot is screwed onto the 100-400 and 70-200's tripod collar and IMO is a lot more secure. Should you need to take it off, just unscrew with an Allen wrench.


Hejnar NFR-001 Foot on 100-400 S. It also fits the 70-200/2.8 S.

Well you all have gotten me nervous for my Z 100- 400 and I just purchased this foot replacement. Thank you for the suggestion.

 

[areallygrumpyoldsod]

vbuhay

I wonder if the Tripod foot of the 800PF is compatible with the 70-200S and the 100-400 S?

Any 800PF and 70-200S or 100-400 S verify this?

The feet for both the 800Pf and z400/2.8 tc are identical but different to the feet on the 400/2.8E.

It appears that Nikon Z mount glass with removable feet have a different design to their f-mount equivalent glass and no-one I can find makes replacement feet that fit the new design yet

--
areallygrumpyoldsod

 

[sandy b]

None of the big 3 mfg provides ARCA. As far as I know, it's not a standard.

 

[Rich Rosen]

YEP! But since they aren't Arca Swiss compatible...pretty much useless. I purchased one Arca Swiss replacement foot, from Kirk Enterprises ($40 less than RRS and in stock), for both lenses. Problem solved.

 

[Ellis Vener]

While not an official standard, many photographers who use a quick release system prefer the speed, security, and versatility of using the Arca-Swiss system. Others may feel like it is either overkill or that quick release systems are not useful. I disagree with both of those view points but that’s just my opinion based on my experience based on using various QR systems (Arca-Swiss, various Manfrotto, Sachtler, Hasselblad, Novoflex (which looks like the Arca-Swiss design but has a smaller width), and Linhof), and none at all.

It would not cost Canon, Nikon, or Sony lens teams anything to incorporate an Arca-Swiss plate into their long lens tripod mounts and at most would add minimum weight and bulk to the foot. As long as the foot is tapped for standard tripod screws (1/4”-20 and 3/8”-16), people who want to use other QR systems or none at all will have that option.

 

[Paddler213]

The other possibility is that both you and Steve unknowingly pushed the release button while the knob was loose.

There is no such possibility at all.

I was standing on a sidewalk talking to a friend. My D5 was attached to the 500 PF, which was suspended over my shoulder with a Kirk strap clamped onto the tripod foot. Nobody's hands were touching the lens or camera. The tripod foot just came off suddenly by itself, due to the weight of the 500 PF with a heavy DSLR attached.

I am sure Steve Perry wouldn't spend so much time to point out this tripod foot design flaw in his 500 PF video review if he might have caused the problem himself. As a coincidence he also had a D5 attached. My incident happened after 8, 9 months after Steve Perry's video had been published. I checked with him, and he told me that by then, a number of people had contacted him because of the same issue, and he recommended the Hejnar foot. Those are not isolated cases.

I just checked both my 500PF and 70-200FL, when the knob is tight you cannot remove the foot. It only takes a bit over 90* after it makes contact to tighten the knob enough to prevent accidentally releasing it.

However, the Hejnar foot for the above lenses is easier to install and remove than that on my 500/4FL. The former is attched with a single screw, the latter is attached with 4 small screws. More expensive but also more elegant and lower profile than screwing an Arca Swiss plate onto the factory foot.

A conventional 500mm/f4 is a much bigger and heavier lens than the 500/5.6 PF so that it requires a much stronger support.

All I can do is to relay my bad experience with that kind of tripod foot quick release, and it is also Steve Perry's experience plus many others. The 70-200/2.8 and 100-400 are somewhat smaller than the 500/5.6 PF, as I have all three lenses. Perhaps it is totally fine on the other lenses. Personally I would never trust that kind of Q/R again. It is up to you to decide what to do yourself.

Fair enough. Maybe you and others received a defective foot? The only time the camera body and lens can fall off is with a body heavy enough to tip the lens pointing up. If the lens is pointing down it cannot not fall off.

I find it impossible to replicate your experience. I can't pull either lens off the foot even with the knob loose so long as the release button isn't pushed, even applying a significant amout of pressure. Similarly, I cannot take the lens off the foot if the knob is tight, even pushing the release button and again trying to force it off.

I probably won't replace my factory foot as I already have an Arca Swiss adaptor plate. It slightly changes the vertical COG vs a replacement foot, but that's not a big deal.

 

[sandy b]

Ok. Curious why they don't. Maybe in different parts of the globe ARCA is not as widely used. Maybe Manfrotto is. I don't know. It certainly would not be difficult for Nikon to supply a couple of different styles with the higher end lens, either in the box or as an option.

 

[shuncheung]

Fair enough. Maybe you and others received a defective foot?

No idea, but it really bothers me that clearly a non-trivial number of people have had issues with the Nikon tripod foot on the 500mm PF.

The only time the camera body and lens can fall off is with a body heavy enough to tip the lens pointing up. If the lens is pointing down it cannot not fall off.

I find it impossible to replicate your experience. I can't pull either lens off the foot even with the knob loose so long as the release button isn't pushed, even applying a significant amout of pressure. Similarly, I cannot take the lens off the foot if the knob is tight, even pushing the release button and again trying to force it off.

I also wasn't able to replicate that experience, both before and after my incident. As I said I have been using a RRS foot with a similar design on my F-mount 70-200/2.8 for 15 years, without any problems. I thought I had tested the 500 PF foot when I got my lens.

I probably won't replace my factory foot as I already have an Arca Swiss adaptor plate. It slightly changes the vertical COG vs a replacement foot, but that's not a big deal.

That is up to each individual to decide. I know I will never trust that kind of QR foot again. It is easy to accidentally loosen the knob. I would much rather use a foot that is screwed onto the tripod collar. Hejnar is one option and I had a Wimberley foot for my 500 PF but eventually switched to a Hejnar foot recently.

 

[Steve W]

None of the big 3 mfg provides ARCA. As far as I know, it's not a standard.

Agreed but at least Sony and Nikon have designed their feet to be easily removable to take Arca Swiss feet from RRS, Kirk Photo, Hajnar, LeoFoto, Wimberley, and others. On Canon I’m still stuck having to use plates to adapt them to Arca Swiss.

Haven’t decided if I prefer ones that use the exact same too less approach Nikon is using on Z mount or the Hajnar approach that requires an Allan wrench. Both have merit depending on how much you trust the OEM’s attachment approach. On Sony I’ve never had a problem with theirs but new to Nikon. The Z 70-200/2.8 VR S is my one lens so far and I bought it used and the original owner included the Hajnar one. On the 70-200 I’m more likely to remove it so I also got a Kirk Photo. I will the put the Hajnar on my Z 100-400 if the lens ever ships to me.

 

[shuncheung]

None of the big 3 mfg provides ARCA. As far as I know, it's not a standard.

Agreed but at least Sony and Nikon have designed their feet to be easily removable to take Arca Swiss feet from RRS, Kirk Photo, Hajnar, LeoFoto, Wimberley, and others. On Canon I’m still stuck having to use plates to adapt them to Arca Swiss.

Arca-Swiss-style quick-release maybe the type a lot of us use so that it can be considered as the de facto standard, but it is not THE standard. I know some individuals use other type quick releases; those people are probably not interested in paying extra for an A/S type foot.

Haven’t decided if I prefer ones that use the exact same too less approach Nikon is using on Z mount or the Hajnar approach that requires an Allan wrench. Both have merit depending on how much you trust the OEM’s attachment approach. On Sony I’ve never had a problem with theirs but new to Nikon. The Z 70-200/2.8 VR S is my one lens so far and I bought it used and the original owner included the Hajnar one. On the 70-200 I’m more likely to remove it so I also got a Kirk Photo. I will the put the Hajnar on my Z 100-400 if the lens ever ships to me.

The 100-400 shouldn't be that hard to find in the US. I ordered one from a local store in mid March and got it in early May. Occasionally it is in stock at some stores for a short while.

 

[Paddler213]

I think most, if not all, gimbal tripod heads accept Arca Swiss type QR plates. Maybe Nikon should provide A/S feet on their larger and heavier lenses. Not as important on smaller lenses since they are more often hand held.

 

[HeavyDuty]

None of the big 3 mfg provides ARCA. As far as I know, it's not a standard.

Agreed but at least Sony and Nikon have designed their feet to be easily removable to take Arca Swiss feet from RRS, Kirk Photo, Hajnar, LeoFoto, Wimberley, and others. On Canon I’m still stuck having to use plates to adapt them to Arca Swiss.

Arca-Swiss-style quick-release maybe the type a lot of us use so that it can be considered as the de facto standard, but it is not THE standard. I know some individuals use other type quick releases; those people are probably not interested in paying extra for an A/S type foot.

Haven’t decided if I prefer ones that use the exact same too less approach Nikon is using on Z mount or the Hajnar approach that requires an Allan wrench. Both have merit depending on how much you trust the OEM’s attachment approach. On Sony I’ve never had a problem with theirs but new to Nikon. The Z 70-200/2.8 VR S is my one lens so far and I bought it used and the original owner included the Hajnar one. On the 70-200 I’m more likely to remove it so I also got a Kirk Photo. I will the put the Hajnar on my Z 100-400 if the lens ever ships to me.

The 100-400 shouldn't be that hard to find in the US. I ordered one from a local store in mid March and got it in early May. Occasionally it is in stock at some stores for a short while.

Once I switched to Arca Swiss years ago, I was much happier - I used different Manfrotto ones before that. The AS just works better.

I’ve been casually looking for a 100-400 here in the US for a few weeks, finding one in stock might be more than I can resist. No joy.

 

[Ernie Misner]

The Hejnar foot is screwed onto the 100-400 and 70-200's tripod collar and IMO is a lot more secure. Should you need to take it off, just unscrew with an Allen wrench.


Hejnar NFR-001 Foot on 100-400 S. It also fits the 70-200/2.8 S.

Well you all have gotten me nervous for my Z 100- 400 and I just purchased this foot replacement. Thank you for the suggestion.

Nice! Does this foot bypass (get rid of) the 4 tiny screws on the mounting block? That would be nice. Those screws keep coming loose for me.



--
Ernie Misner

Ernie Misner

Explore Ernie Misner’s 742 photos on Flickr!

www.flickr.com

Creating art is not enough; it needs to be shared. Sharing demands that you reveal who you are as an artist and how technically inclined you are. To share, you must be, on some level, vulnerable in front of your friends, family, and peers. There's no reward without risk. I suggest being vulnerable and taking that risk. - Jason Bradley