Tripod mounted A6000 - the real source of wiggle

[TJ61]

I think I've found the weakest link when it comes to vibration in a tripod-mounted a6000. It's where the camera mounts to the base plate. This is because the camera is so thin, and because most base plates have some amount of cushion material. With anything but the smallest lens attached, any minor bump will cause undue vibration at this connection.

I can't be the first to have noticed this, and so I'm hoping that someone else has not only noticed it, but figured out a solution. I've come up with a few sketchy ideas involving a base plate that extends up the front of the camera, but no ideas worth trying to implement yet.

Without a solution to this, it seems like any tripod more complex than a bean bag is wasted money. Thoughts? Solutions?

 

[techjedi]

I think I've found the weakest link when it comes to vibration in a tripod-mounted a6000. It's where the camera mounts to the base plate. This is because the camera is so thin, and because most base plates have some amount of cushion material. With anything but the smallest lens attached, any minor bump will cause undue vibration at this connection.

I can't be the first to have noticed this, and so I'm hoping that someone else has not only noticed it, but figured out a solution. I've come up with a few sketchy ideas involving a base plate that extends up the front of the camera, but no ideas worth trying to implement yet.

Without a solution to this, it seems like any tripod more complex than a bean bag is wasted money. Thoughts? Solutions?

Yes, this is definitely known and experienced by me at least.

I solved it by building a lens brace. Manfrotto sells one that is more expensive, but I took a few items from amazon that were much cheaper:

This first item is a configurable rail system that provides its own quick-release plate for the camera and a rail to mount more things - $29.99:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00OFJMKZA

This second item mounts to the rail just below the front of the lens and can be adjusted forward/backward for different lens lengths as well as up and down for different lens radius. - $16.99

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00MJLQDE0/

I've been meaning to do a video demonstrating this, but it significantly reduces any vibration. I would say it is even more solid than a 70-200 with its native tripod collar.

 

[uhligfd]

I think I've found the weakest link when it comes to vibration in a tripod-mounted a6000. It's where the camera mounts to the base plate. This is because the camera is so thin, and because most base plates have some amount of cushion material. With anything but the smallest lens attached, any minor bump will cause undue vibration at this connection.

I can't be the first to have noticed this, and so I'm hoping that someone else has not only noticed it, but figured out a solution. I've come up with a few sketchy ideas involving a base plate that extends up the front of the camera, but no ideas worth trying to implement yet.

Without a solution to this, it seems like any tripod more complex than a bean bag is wasted money. Thoughts? Solutions?

This problem has been known and solved since the Arca-Swiss clamps and plates were invented maybe 30 + years ago. These have no cork or rubber 'bouncers' but instead grab the camera and tripod hard and directly without any wiggle room.

Go look them up and throw your rubber/cork plated tripods etc out if you care about your long exposures.

 

[missingendpoint]

I think I've found the weakest link when it comes to vibration in a tripod-mounted a6000. It's where the camera mounts to the base plate. This is because the camera is so thin, and because most base plates have some amount of cushion material. With anything but the smallest lens attached, any minor bump will cause undue vibration at this connection.

I can't be the first to have noticed this, and so I'm hoping that someone else has not only noticed it, but figured out a solution. I've come up with a few sketchy ideas involving a base plate that extends up the front of the camera, but no ideas worth trying to implement yet.

Without a solution to this, it seems like any tripod more complex than a bean bag is wasted money. Thoughts? Solutions?

Use a remote shutter release and don't bump the tripod.

 

[FunkySpoo]

I think I've found the weakest link when it comes to vibration in a tripod-mounted a6000. It's where the camera mounts to the base plate. This is because the camera is so thin, and because most base plates have some amount of cushion material. With anything but the smallest lens attached, any minor bump will cause undue vibration at this connection.

I can't be the first to have noticed this, and so I'm hoping that someone else has not only noticed it, but figured out a solution. I've come up with a few sketchy ideas involving a base plate that extends up the front of the camera, but no ideas worth trying to implement yet.

Without a solution to this, it seems like any tripod more complex than a bean bag is wasted money. Thoughts? Solutions?

Use a remote shutter release and don't bump the tripod.

I searched Amazon and B&H for hours and couldn't find any Don't Bumps to buy. How can I get sharp pictures if I don't spend more money.

 

[TJ61]

I think I've found the weakest link when it comes to vibration in a tripod-mounted a6000. It's where the camera mounts to the base plate. This is because the camera is so thin, and because most base plates have some amount of cushion material. With anything but the smallest lens attached, any minor bump will cause undue vibration at this connection.

I can't be the first to have noticed this, and so I'm hoping that someone else has not only noticed it, but figured out a solution. I've come up with a few sketchy ideas involving a base plate that extends up the front of the camera, but no ideas worth trying to implement yet.

Without a solution to this, it seems like any tripod more complex than a bean bag is wasted money. Thoughts? Solutions?

Yes, this is definitely known and experienced by me at least.

I solved it by building a lens brace. Manfrotto sells one that is more expensive, but I took a few items from amazon that were much cheaper:

This first item is a configurable rail system that provides its own quick-release plate for the camera and a rail to mount more things - $29.99:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00OFJMKZA

This second item mounts to the rail just below the front of the lens and can be adjusted forward/backward for different lens lengths as well as up and down for different lens radius. - $16.99

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00MJLQDE0/

I've been meaning to do a video demonstrating this, but it significantly reduces any vibration. I would say it is even more solid than a 70-200 with its native tripod collar.

This looks great! I was hoping for a smaller solution for the problem in question, but I've also been looking for a good universal solution to mounting larger lenses. So this would address both problems. Thanks for the links!

 

[TJ61]

I think I've found the weakest link when it comes to vibration in a tripod-mounted a6000. It's where the camera mounts to the base plate. This is because the camera is so thin, and because most base plates have some amount of cushion material. With anything but the smallest lens attached, any minor bump will cause undue vibration at this connection.

I can't be the first to have noticed this, and so I'm hoping that someone else has not only noticed it, but figured out a solution. I've come up with a few sketchy ideas involving a base plate that extends up the front of the camera, but no ideas worth trying to implement yet.

Without a solution to this, it seems like any tripod more complex than a bean bag is wasted money. Thoughts? Solutions?

This problem has been known and solved since the Arca-Swiss clamps and plates were invented maybe 30 + years ago. These have no cork or rubber 'bouncers' but instead grab the camera and tripod hard and directly without any wiggle room.

Go look them up and throw your rubber/cork plated tripods etc out if you care about your long exposures.

Interesting. All the A-S plates I've seen have the thin rubber, but I'm sure I haven't seen them all. Even so, I removed the thin rubber from one of my plates, and there was still too much wiggle room, owing to the narrow body of the a6000, I guess.

 

[TJ61]

I think I've found the weakest link when it comes to vibration in a tripod-mounted a6000. It's where the camera mounts to the base plate. This is because the camera is so thin, and because most base plates have some amount of cushion material. With anything but the smallest lens attached, any minor bump will cause undue vibration at this connection.

I can't be the first to have noticed this, and so I'm hoping that someone else has not only noticed it, but figured out a solution. I've come up with a few sketchy ideas involving a base plate that extends up the front of the camera, but no ideas worth trying to implement yet.

Without a solution to this, it seems like any tripod more complex than a bean bag is wasted money. Thoughts? Solutions?

Use a remote shutter release and don't bump the tripod.

Already using the remote shutter, but will definitely make a note of your second suggestion. ;-)

 

[TJ61]

I think I've found the weakest link when it comes to vibration in a tripod-mounted a6000. It's where the camera mounts to the base plate. This is because the camera is so thin, and because most base plates have some amount of cushion material. With anything but the smallest lens attached, any minor bump will cause undue vibration at this connection.

I can't be the first to have noticed this, and so I'm hoping that someone else has not only noticed it, but figured out a solution. I've come up with a few sketchy ideas involving a base plate that extends up the front of the camera, but no ideas worth trying to implement yet.

Without a solution to this, it seems like any tripod more complex than a bean bag is wasted money. Thoughts? Solutions?

Use a remote shutter release and don't bump the tripod.

I searched Amazon and B&H for hours and couldn't find any Don't Bumps to buy. How can I get sharp pictures if I don't spend more money.

Don't forget to pick up a can of Wind-B-Gon while you're at it.

 

[FunkySpoo]

I think I've found the weakest link when it comes to vibration in a tripod-mounted a6000. It's where the camera mounts to the base plate. This is because the camera is so thin, and because most base plates have some amount of cushion material. With anything but the smallest lens attached, any minor bump will cause undue vibration at this connection.

I can't be the first to have noticed this, and so I'm hoping that someone else has not only noticed it, but figured out a solution. I've come up with a few sketchy ideas involving a base plate that extends up the front of the camera, but no ideas worth trying to implement yet.

Without a solution to this, it seems like any tripod more complex than a bean bag is wasted money. Thoughts? Solutions?

Use a remote shutter release and don't bump the tripod.

I searched Amazon and B&H for hours and couldn't find any Don't Bumps to buy. How can I get sharp pictures if I don't spend more money.

Don't forget to pick up a can of Wind-B-Gon while you're at it.

Think I'll wait for Wind-B-Gone Pro. Been checking the W-B-G rumor site but no word yet.

 

[uhligfd]

I think I've found the weakest link when it comes to vibration in a tripod-mounted a6000. It's where the camera mounts to the base plate. This is because the camera is so thin, and because most base plates have some amount of cushion material. With anything but the smallest lens attached, any minor bump will cause undue vibration at this connection.

I can't be the first to have noticed this, and so I'm hoping that someone else has not only noticed it, but figured out a solution. I've come up with a few sketchy ideas involving a base plate that extends up the front of the camera, but no ideas worth trying to implement yet.

Without a solution to this, it seems like any tripod more complex than a bean bag is wasted money. Thoughts? Solutions?

This problem has been known and solved since the Arca-Swiss clamps and plates were invented maybe 30 + years ago. These have no cork or rubber 'bouncers' but instead grab the camera and tripod hard and directly without any wiggle room.

Go look them up and throw your rubber/cork plated tripods etc out if you care about your long exposures.

Interesting. All the A-S plates I've seen have the thin rubber, but I'm sure I haven't seen them all. Even so, I removed the thin rubber from one of my plates, and there was still too much wiggle room, owing to the narrow body of the a6000, I guess.

I have never seen any rubber stuff on A-S plates etc. google RRS = real right stuff or such for their superb products..

 

[techjedi]

I think I've found the weakest link when it comes to vibration in a tripod-mounted a6000. It's where the camera mounts to the base plate. This is because the camera is so thin, and because most base plates have some amount of cushion material. With anything but the smallest lens attached, any minor bump will cause undue vibration at this connection.

I can't be the first to have noticed this, and so I'm hoping that someone else has not only noticed it, but figured out a solution. I've come up with a few sketchy ideas involving a base plate that extends up the front of the camera, but no ideas worth trying to implement yet.

Without a solution to this, it seems like any tripod more complex than a bean bag is wasted money. Thoughts? Solutions?

Yes, this is definitely known and experienced by me at least.

I solved it by building a lens brace. Manfrotto sells one that is more expensive, but I took a few items from amazon that were much cheaper:

This first item is a configurable rail system that provides its own quick-release plate for the camera and a rail to mount more things - $29.99:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00OFJMKZA

This second item mounts to the rail just below the front of the lens and can be adjusted forward/backward for different lens lengths as well as up and down for different lens radius. - $16.99

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00MJLQDE0/

I've been meaning to do a video demonstrating this, but it significantly reduces any vibration. I would say it is even more solid than a 70-200 with its native tripod collar.

This looks great! I was hoping for a smaller solution for the problem in question, but I've also been looking for a good universal solution to mounting larger lenses. So this would address both problems. Thanks for the links!

No problem. It should also be noted that you should use a remote shutter as well or at least turn on the timer for 2-5 seconds to avoid further vibration. That said, remote shutters and timers don't stop the wind, so a tight brace is generally useful.

Also make sure you get a 5-10 lb weight and attach to the hook under the tripod. Make sure the weight/bag touches the ground so it doesn't sway in the wind, but maintains will weight tension.

 

[Camy Michel]

I think I've found the weakest link when it comes to vibration in a tripod-mounted a6000. It's where the camera mounts to the base plate. This is because the camera is so thin, and because most base plates have some amount of cushion material. With anything but the smallest lens attached, any minor bump will cause undue vibration at this connection.

I can't be the first to have noticed this, and so I'm hoping that someone else has not only noticed it, but figured out a solution. I've come up with a few sketchy ideas involving a base plate that extends up the front of the camera, but no ideas worth trying to implement yet.

Without a solution to this, it seems like any tripod more complex than a bean bag is wasted money. Thoughts? Solutions?

Use a remote shutter release and don't bump the tripod.

Already using the remote shutter, but will definitely make a note of your second suggestion. ;-)

Since i use a L PLate for my a6000
It solves some of my problem

1: Protection around the body
2: create a very practical swith vertical to Horizontal
3: Reduce vibration (Your concern)
4: inexpensive
5: acraswiss compatible
6; Easy access to battery and side connection

It's now permanently on my camera
Here is a Link you can find equivalent on the country you are in
no point to pay for a branded L plate ... this one is perfect @ 20$

Sony A6000 Quick Release L-Plate http://www.lazada.com.my/catalog/?q=Sony+A6000+L-Plate+

A good tripod helps, but worth the try at this price....

 

[Tuloom]

Get a Wimberley P5. It does not move at all.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/276977-REG/Wimberley_P_5_P5_Universal_Quick_Release.html

 

[TJ61]

I think I've found the weakest link when it comes to vibration in a tripod-mounted a6000. It's where the camera mounts to the base plate. This is because the camera is so thin, and because most base plates have some amount of cushion material. With anything but the smallest lens attached, any minor bump will cause undue vibration at this connection.

I can't be the first to have noticed this, and so I'm hoping that someone else has not only noticed it, but figured out a solution. I've come up with a few sketchy ideas involving a base plate that extends up the front of the camera, but no ideas worth trying to implement yet.

Without a solution to this, it seems like any tripod more complex than a bean bag is wasted money. Thoughts? Solutions?

Yes, this is definitely known and experienced by me at least.

I solved it by building a lens brace. Manfrotto sells one that is more expensive, but I took a few items from amazon that were much cheaper:

This first item is a configurable rail system that provides its own quick-release plate for the camera and a rail to mount more things - $29.99:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00OFJMKZA

This second item mounts to the rail just below the front of the lens and can be adjusted forward/backward for different lens lengths as well as up and down for different lens radius. - $16.99

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00MJLQDE0/

I've been meaning to do a video demonstrating this, but it significantly reduces any vibration. I would say it is even more solid than a 70-200 with its native tripod collar.

This looks great! I was hoping for a smaller solution for the problem in question, but I've also been looking for a good universal solution to mounting larger lenses. So this would address both problems. Thanks for the links!

No problem. It should also be noted that you should use a remote shutter as well or at least turn on the timer for 2-5 seconds to avoid further vibration. That said, remote shutters and timers don't stop the wind, so a tight brace is generally useful.

Also make sure you get a 5-10 lb weight and attach to the hook under the tripod. Make sure the weight/bag touches the ground so it doesn't sway in the wind, but maintains will weight tension.

Yes, definitely already using best practices for tripod -- if I don't have my remote with me, I use the shutter delay, and I hang my camera bag from the spring-loaded tripod hook.

 

[TJ61]

I think I've found the weakest link when it comes to vibration in a tripod-mounted a6000. It's where the camera mounts to the base plate. This is because the camera is so thin, and because most base plates have some amount of cushion material. With anything but the smallest lens attached, any minor bump will cause undue vibration at this connection.

I can't be the first to have noticed this, and so I'm hoping that someone else has not only noticed it, but figured out a solution. I've come up with a few sketchy ideas involving a base plate that extends up the front of the camera, but no ideas worth trying to implement yet.

Without a solution to this, it seems like any tripod more complex than a bean bag is wasted money. Thoughts? Solutions?

Use a remote shutter release and don't bump the tripod.

Already using the remote shutter, but will definitely make a note of your second suggestion. ;-)

Since i use a L PLate for my a6000
It solves some of my problem

1: Protection around the body
2: create a very practical swith vertical to Horizontal
3: Reduce vibration (Your concern)
4: inexpensive
5: acraswiss compatible
6; Easy access to battery and side connection

It's now permanently on my camera
Here is a Link you can find equivalent on the country you are in
no point to pay for a branded L plate ... this one is perfect @ 20$

Sony A6000 Quick Release L-Plate http://www.lazada.com.my/catalog/?q=Sony+A6000+L-Plate+

A good tripod helps, but worth the try at this price....

I've been curious about whether an L-plate might help with this. I know it would if both legs of the "L" had attachment points to the camera, but it looks like that's not the case(?). Still, I might have to check these out. Thanks!

 

[TJ61]

I think I've found the weakest link when it comes to vibration in a tripod-mounted a6000. It's where the camera mounts to the base plate. This is because the camera is so thin, and because most base plates have some amount of cushion material. With anything but the smallest lens attached, any minor bump will cause undue vibration at this connection.

I can't be the first to have noticed this, and so I'm hoping that someone else has not only noticed it, but figured out a solution. I've come up with a few sketchy ideas involving a base plate that extends up the front of the camera, but no ideas worth trying to implement yet.

Without a solution to this, it seems like any tripod more complex than a bean bag is wasted money. Thoughts? Solutions?

This problem has been known and solved since the Arca-Swiss clamps and plates were invented maybe 30 + years ago. These have no cork or rubber 'bouncers' but instead grab the camera and tripod hard and directly without any wiggle room.

Go look them up and throw your rubber/cork plated tripods etc out if you care about your long exposures.

Interesting. All the A-S plates I've seen have the thin rubber, but I'm sure I haven't seen them all. Even so, I removed the thin rubber from one of my plates, and there was still too much wiggle room, owing to the narrow body of the a6000, I guess.

I have never seen any rubber stuff on A-S plates etc. google RRS = real right stuff or such for their superb products..

If you look at Arca-Swiss, the brand (which is what I assumed you were referring to), you'll see they mostly (all?) have the rubberized plates.

I looked at the RRS plates, and I think what they have going for them is not that they're not rubberized, but that their plates have more mating surface with the camera (not a lot, but some). I think this could make a difference, but not clear how much. Sadly, they've discontinued their product for the a6000.

 

[zackiedawg]

I honestly can't say I ever noticed a problem - but admittedly I tend to be much more careful when taking shots on a tripod as the only times I really use a tripod is for long exposures - and that means keeping hands off the tripod and camera, triggering with a remote, and standing back.

I have occasionally mounted my camera on the tripod plate 'sideways' rather than longways - finding that the longer side of the rectangle mounted down the long axis of the camera body is more fitting - it just requires using the tripod head and control handle turned to the side but doesn't really affect my range of motion unless I am taking a shot at an extreme angle...I've only done this on the NEX-5N/A6000/A6300 because of their thin bodies - not because of any perceived instability but just because I didn't like the way the plate jutted out from the front and back of the camera when I removed it for a handheld shot - it fits better when mounted sideways to the plate.

 

[TJ61]

I honestly can't say I ever noticed a problem -

My problem is I went looking for it, complete with laser pointer attached to camera, and watching the spot jiggle on the far wall after tapping the tripod leg. I have a $70 tripod that's overkill because of the wiggle in this last connection to the camera.

but admittedly I tend to be much more careful when taking shots on a tripod as the only times I really use a tripod is for long exposures - and that means keeping hands off the tripod and camera, triggering with a remote, and standing back.

Yeah, that's my standard protocol (along with not extending the center column, and holding my breath ;-) ). But there are vibrations you can't avoid (wind gust catching the lens hood, passing truck, etc.), which could be better attenuated with a more solid connection to camera.

I have occasionally mounted my camera on the tripod plate 'sideways' rather than longways - finding that the longer side of the rectangle mounted down the long axis of the camera body is more fitting

I thought this WAS the normal way, at least with the plates I have. The rubber pads on the plate suggest this alignment, anyway. I guess each brand is gonna be different.

 

[zackiedawg]

I have occasionally mounted my camera on the tripod plate 'sideways' rather than longways - finding that the longer side of the rectangle mounted down the long axis of the camera body is more fitting

I thought this WAS the normal way, at least with the plates I have. The rubber pads on the plate suggest this alignment, anyway. I guess each brand is gonna be different.

On my Slik tripod, the standard or default mount is the other way...long side facing forward...and that's how I mount all my DSLRs/SLTs with their fatter bodies.

My pod does have a small rubber base on the plate, but it's very thin and seems to clamp down hard on the camera, so I don't sense or feel any wiggle. I really tighten that sucker down hard though!