I see your dilemma. Is the lens tripod mount modified? It doesn't look like it would go with a lens of that size/weight.
>I am hesitant to put a spacer between the lens plate and the lens body, as >it would add a weak point in the attachment, and would complicate >supporting the lens at the front of the plate. I think if you used quality attaching bolts, that engage the maximum thread depth in the lens mount, the joint would be no less strong than what you have now. You would have a slightly higher cantilever moment on the lens mount but it should be OK. If the added spacer only shadowed the existing lens mount footprint, I don't see how it would complicate supporting the lens @ the front of the plate. HTH Kenneth Waller -----Original Message----- >From: William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: Continuing to Accessorize Bertha > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Kenneth Waller" >Subject: Re: Continuing to Accessorize Bertha > > >> >I got my 600 sorted out on the Wimberley as well. >>>The lens has a really retarded placement of the tripod mount. To mount the >>>LX, I need to have the winder attached to counterbalance, and I need the >>>battery pack with batteries on the istD to balance as well. >>>I am thinking I should just attach weight to the cameras' tripod >>>sockets.... >>> >>>William Robb >> >> Can't you get the adjustment needed by sliding the Arca lens plate in the >> receiver? >> Sounds like you need a longer (Arca) plate on the lens mount to allow more >> adjustment. >> I sure wouldn't want to add any more weight to my setup, but if that's the >> only way you can get the balance sought, you gotta do what you gotta do. > >Please see: >http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrobb/pictures/IMGP8908.jpg >In order to be able to move the balance point back any farther, the lens >needs to be raised so that the front element flare can clear the release >plate. That's the longest plate Wimberley sells, a plate 3/4 inch longer >would butt up nicely to the flare. >I am hesitant to put a spacer between the lens plate and the lens body, as >it wouls add a weak point in the attachement, and would complicate >supporting the lens at the front of the plate. >I may do it anyway, and see what happens, but it's not too much difficulty >to have a battery pack or winder on the camera. >I will be peeved if the "improved" DSLR weighs less than the istD, and/or >doesn't accomodate a vertical release and battery pack. > >As an aside, I was showing my istD to a Nikon slut, he was really impressed >with the vertical release. Apparently, this is something Nikon doesn't offer >on whichever DSLR he is using. > >William Robb > > ________________________________________ PeoplePC Online A better way to Internet http://www.peoplepc.com
