Olympus 40-150 F2.8 Tripod Mount Ring Studs

I have an Olympus 40-150 F2.8 Pro lens and, like most users, have found it to be a superb lens.  It's extremely well made - clearly built to the "Pro" standards implicit in it's name - and takes extremely sharp, saturated and contrasty images.

However one annoying aspect is the rather sharp and prominent metal studs around the lens body near the rear of the lens that retain the (thank you Olympus!) included tripod mount. While probably not sharp enough to cause injury, they can be very irritating, sufficiently so that I leave the (bulky and a bit heavy) tripod mount on, even when I have no intention of using a tripod or monopod.  I'm frankly a bit astounded that Olympus didn't include a protective cover or trim piece of some sort for when the tripod mount isn't attached. I mean, they even included a removable cover piece for their venerable (and consumer grade/priced) 47mm F1.8 hood mount ring.

Is anyone aware of either an Olympus or aftermarket item to cover these annoying little studs?  (As an aside, these aren't even very well done or designed.  Frankly they look, and feel, like little stainless steel pop-rivets.)  Or possibly some clever DIY solution?  Hell, if nothing else I may have to pull out a roll of gaffers tape.  Would serve Oly right to see their $1200 masterpiece gaffed up!

WNeuetc wrote:

I have an Olympus 40-150 F2.8 Pro lens and, like most users, have found it to be a superb lens. It's extremely well made - clearly built to the "Pro" standards implicit in it's name - and takes extremely sharp, saturated and contrasty images.

However one annoying aspect is the rather sharp and prominent metal studs around the lens body near the rear of the lens that retain the (thank you Olympus!) included tripod mount. While probably not sharp enough to cause injury, they can be very irritating, sufficiently so that I leave the (bulky and a bit heavy) tripod mount on, even when I have no intention of using a tripod or monopod. I'm frankly a bit astounded that Olympus didn't include a protective cover or trim piece of some sort for when the tripod mount isn't attached. I mean, they even included a removable cover piece for their venerable (and consumer grade/priced) 47mm F1.8 hood mount ring.

Is anyone aware of either an Olympus or aftermarket item to cover these annoying little studs? (As an aside, these aren't even very well done or designed. Frankly they look, and feel, like little stainless steel pop-rivets.) Or possibly some clever DIY solution? Hell, if nothing else I may have to pull out a roll of gaffers tape. Would serve Oly right to see their $1200 masterpiece gaffed up!

I have that very same lens, and have never noticed the studs.  I also grip the lens by the tripod collar, which is bad form but it fits very comfortably.  I will certainly not be gaffing up my lens, thank you very much.

Roger Engelken wrote:

WNeuetc wrote:

I have an Olympus 40-150 F2.8 Pro lens and, like most users, have found it to be a superb lens. It's extremely well made - clearly built to the "Pro" standards implicit in it's name - and takes extremely sharp, saturated and contrasty images.

However one annoying aspect is the rather sharp and prominent metal studs around the lens body near the rear of the lens that retain the (thank you Olympus!) included tripod mount. While probably not sharp enough to cause injury, they can be very irritating, sufficiently so that I leave the (bulky and a bit heavy) tripod mount on, even when I have no intention of using a tripod or monopod. I'm frankly a bit astounded that Olympus didn't include a protective cover or trim piece of some sort for when the tripod mount isn't attached. I mean, they even included a removable cover piece for their venerable (and consumer grade/priced) 47mm F1.8 hood mount ring.

Is anyone aware of either an Olympus or aftermarket item to cover these annoying little studs? (As an aside, these aren't even very well done or designed. Frankly they look, and feel, like little stainless steel pop-rivets.) Or possibly some clever DIY solution? Hell, if nothing else I may have to pull out a roll of gaffers tape. Would serve Oly right to see their $1200 masterpiece gaffed up!

I have that very same lens, and have never noticed the studs. I also grip the lens by the tripod collar, which is bad form but it fits very comfortably. I will certainly not be gaffing up my lens, thank you very much.

Perhaps I misunderstood you - or perhaps you misunderstood me (a common issue, I'm not always clear).  The studs are completely concealed and out of the way when the tripod mount is attached.  They're only exposed when the tripod mount is removed.  I was thinking of some sort of ring (much more compact than the tripod mount) which could be placed over the studs, in lieu of the tripod mount.

Yeah, I'd rather not gaff up my lens either.  Though will say, gaffer's tape is what duct tape should have been.  I've left it on gear for months, or longer, and it always peels off clean - no residue.

I've thought the same thing-- including electrical tape-- but that would leave a sticky residue and be difficult to take of when the ring is needed.  I think gaffer tape would have similar issues unless you never intend to remove it.

Skeeterbytes suggestion has some real merit if you can find a way to slip it on and off.  Anyway, I'm having the same type of issues w/ my 40-150 f2.8 and am looking for a solution.

O/T, but Related, I've only used that huge lens hood once and that was just to try it out, besides being big it's heavy and this lens is virtually flare free.  I'd use it for rain protection though.

JL

cfh25 wrote:

Given they've designed the "studs" to be on the top of the lens, I've found they aren't touched in the normal hand-hold for supporting a lens

I'm not sure I understand. What I'm referring to are the four small metal pins or studs, spaced around the lens barrel under the tripod mount collar, about 2" from the rear of the lens.

True, one would normally grip the lens further forward when shooting, but when walking around I'm much more likely to grip further back on the lens barrel, nearer the camera body, and the damn studs are uncomfortably sharp edged.

To provide some simple protective cover for when the tripod mount is removed - especially on a top drawer lens like this - would seem an obvious thing.

Here's a quick shot of the 40-150 F2.8 Pro lens to illustrate the issue:

Olympus 40-150 F2.8 Pro lens, with tripod mount removed.  Note the steel studs that engage - and are covered by - the collar when the tripod mount is attached.

The studs look - and feel - like steel pop-rivets. Frankly, if they had been some sort of smooth machined inserts, it would be less an issue.

put an elastic band over the studs .must admit after removing the the tripod collar on mine and looking at the studs ,it kind of detracts from the look of the lens ,so i put it back on ,i also use the mount to rest in the palm of hand while holding camera ,supports well .

macropaul wrote:

put an elastic band over the studs .must admit after removing the the tripod collar on mine and looking at the studs ,it kind of detracts from the look of the lens ,so i put it back on ,i also use the mount to rest in the palm of hand while holding camera ,supports well .

Ditto. Detracts from the looks and can be irritating - both literally and figuratively - in hand, so after trying it sans mount, I also put it back on, finding it to be a nice hand grip at times and also nice for supporting on surfaces when I need the extra stabilization. I'm on the lookout for an elastic band that will fit nicely, without detracting too much from the beautiful appearance of this Olympus masterpiece.

Back to my original post though, I guess I'm just griped that Oly didn't see fit to address this up front, particularly since they provide - an essentially superfluous - cover piece for $399.00 M. Zuiko 45mm f1.8 lens hood mounting groove. C'mon, who cares about a naked hood groove when you're bleeding from your 40-150 lacerations? (Just joking; just joking..)

It annoys me as well , sort of makes the lens look cheap so I leave the tripod ring  on , it's just not about the photos you know sometimes I just like touching the bloody thing lol.

After humping my ZD 50-200mm and ZD 150mm lenses for years, and both having very similar studs exposed, it doesn't even occur to me that their presence is an issue.

Oh, and on my MZ 40-150mm Pro, they are hex head screw heads, no pop-rivets.

Place a black rubber or siliconbracelet around it, I believe they are even marketed a zoom ring bands to prevent lens creep.

Airmel wrote:

After humping my ZD 50-200mm and ZD 150mm lenses for years, and both having very similar studs exposed, it doesn't even occur to me that their presence is an issue.

Oh, and on my MZ 40-150mm Pro, they are hex head screw heads, no pop-rivets.

OK, they *are* Allen head cap screws (minute).  They just *look* like pop-rivets.  My hyperbole.  Whatever they are, they are pretty sharp and (IMHO) look sorta cheapish.

lambert4 wrote:

Place a black rubber or siliconbracelet around it, I believe they are even marketed a zoom ring bands to prevent lens creep.

Yep. Learned something new today:

http://smile.amazon.com/Lens-Band-Stop-Creep-Black/dp/B0050KEEW0/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1425594421&sr=8-2&keywords=LENSband+Lens+Band

Exactly what I was hoping for - a simple, elegant and (reasonably) inexpensive solution.

Thanks!

I've been following this thread with interest as it's a (minor) irritation to me too.  The rubber band for lens creep as suggested by Lambert may well do the trick.  Cool, and my thanks too.

John

Well, I ordered one of those lens bands (AMZ)-- a little spendy + $5.06 shp and handling, but I'll have a go at it.  And if it works well I'll report back.  Or maybe the OP will.

John

JohnLock wrote:

Well, I ordered one of those lens bands (AMZ)-- a little spendy + $5.06 shp and handling, but I'll have a go at it. And if it works well I'll report back. Or maybe the OP will.

John

I will indeed.  My Amazon version (even more spendy; but WTH, after dropping ~$1600 on the lens, I ain't gonna sweat it) should be here Saturday. Probably could have scrounged around for a "Livestrong" (I hear they're available cheap) or some such, but I'm lazy - and don't want my fancy lens to be mistaken for a cheater (sorry, sorry; I promise no more proselytizing, or holding forth).

As an aside - or maybe the main point - what a great group this is!  Open minded - and hearted - discussion and sharing!  Thanks everyone!

I hope you didn't get the bright yellow or red one , the Pro range of lenses are only allowed to be pimped in black , will be interesting to see if this works as I can see Olypmus coming out with there own branded lens band and charging $50 for it lol.

Big Ga wrote:

Airmel wrote:

After humping my ZD 50-200mm and ZD 150mm lenses for years, and both having very similar studs exposed, it doesn't even occur to me that their presence is an issue.

I don't believe the 50-200 (mk1 anyway) has studs like that shown on the 40-150. There is just one larger locating lug.

Mine is the SWD version and it has four lugs/pins. The ZD 150mm F/2.0 has two.