70-200mm f4 RRS collar is here

Started Apr 19, 2013 | Discussions thread
Denis of Whidbey Island
OP Denis of Whidbey Island Senior Member • Posts: 1,244
Re: 70-200mm f4 RRS collar is here

Michael Siemon wrote:

Denis of Whidbey Island wrote:


Knowing that the Kirk product is substantially less expensive, I can't really argue against it. I've no doubt it will do the job for anyone who does not mind its larger size and (presumably) weight.

The Kirk weighs 156 grams (5.5 ounces), or so says my kitchen scale... I don't know what the coating on the ring is (it is quite slippery/smooth). And to second your own remark, I am not really trying to argue against the RRS, but I am pleased with the Kirk.

-- hide signature --

Michael L. Siemon

My postage scale indicates that the RRS is 174 grams or 11 percent heavier than the Kirk. I'll guess that the weight is in more steel parts in the collar/foot mating mechanism as well as what appears to be a longer knob shaft on the collar. I've no idea if this difference in mass would show up as a difference in slow shutter speed damping.


-- hide signature --

I have made this letter a rather long one, only because I didn't have the leisure to make it shorter. Blaise Pascal, 1623-1662

 Denis of Whidbey Island's gear list:Denis of Whidbey Island's gear list
Sony a6000 Sony Alpha a7R II YI M1 Sony Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm F4 ZA OSS Sony FE 55mm F1.8 +3 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow