C100: Max Unsupported Lens Weight???

[groveChuck]

Are there specs on this?

Also, can you you hang the body of a supported lens (DSLR style)?

thx

 

[Erik Naso]

Good question. I cant find this info.

 

[Shawnvfx]

dude, its designed to support all EF lens which means

if the lens has a tripod mount (like 70-200mm) you should use that with the C100's bottom hole (its designed to be aligned, you can mount both on a same long plate), or just the tripod mount on the lens, it is pretty safe this way since the lens is heavier than the camera.

again, I suggest you carry a lens support on your rig if your telephoto is vintage and does not have a tripod mount

C100's lens mount is sturdy enough to hold its own weight, if you put more things on the camera body, I suggest you start building a rig.

 

[Nicholas DK]

This question is also bothering me. I don't want to bulk up my camera with support rods as I do run & gun work but I'm worried my 70-200 will break my C100.

Canon 70-200MM F2.8 IS: 3.28 lb (1.49 kg).

Main Unit Weight
C100 Body: Approx. 2.2 lb. / 1020 g (excluding thumbrest).
-----------------------------------------
Grip: Approx. 8.1 oz. / 230 g
Handle Unit: Approx. 12.7 oz. / 360 g
BP-955 Battery: 7.8 oz / 220 g
SD Cards x 2: 0.14 oz / 4 g
Body Cap : Approx. 0.6 oz / 17 g
Thumbrest : Approx. 0.35 oz / 10 g
-----------------------------------------
Total Equipped Weight
C100: Approx. 4.0 lb. (1835 g).

 

[slidemaster]

Not that I have an answer, but at NAB I talked to an engineer at Zeiss whom I asked if EF would capture the same amount of light as a PL mount. The answer was yes, but watch the weight of the lens. He suggested if I used the CP2's that I support them.

 

[bengiles]

I'm in the middle of a solid week shoot, with 70-200 2.8 and 100-400 on and off the camera, supported just by the body/lens mount.

I can't see an easy answer at the moment to supporting both body and lens in a way that lets me lens swap as easily as I can at the mo - although I can see the attraction of a solid set-up that supports at both points.

FWIW, I don't think mounting the whole cam/lens on the lens support alone would resolve it, in the way it does with a 5D for example. The C100 body is about as heavy as the lens - so would pose the same potential threat to the body/lens mount. I think one would definitely need a plate that connects both. Someone mentioned that they align vertically. Actually, there's an approx 10mm vertical offset (the lens mount 10mm higher than the base of the C100.)

Are we just concerning ourselves with an issue that hasn't yet existed? I haven't read anywhere in Canon literature that any of their EF lenses need special treatment and that the 70-200 2.8 needs to be supported separately to the lens mount. Nothing that suggests to me I couldn't make a legitimate warranty claim if the 70-200 cracked the lens mount.

Of course, it's quite possible I've missed that - can anyone point it out?

 

[groveChuck]

OK, I figure I've exhausted internet options when for the third time I Google a variation of "C100, Unsupported Lens, Maximum Weight"... and this thread is the first 2 of 3 results... haha!!!

So I got off the internet and got on the phone and called Canon...

Technical Support by Product Line	Phone Number
EOS Digital SLR Camera Systems, EF Lenses & Flashes	800-OK-CANON	800-652-2666
Cinema EOS Cameras and Cine Lenses	855-CINE-EOS	855-246-3367
Broadcast and Studio Lenses	800-423-LENS	800-423-5367
Professional HD Video Cameras	800-OK-CANON	800-652-2666

Rings once, "Thank you for calling Cinema EOS, your call may be recorded..." I get Allen.

Me: "Hi- are there specs for maximum unsupported lens weight on a C100? I've looked everywhere."
Allen: (not even a microsecond of hesitation) "No"
Me: (brief pause, I'm slightly taken aback) "No kidding...Well, I have a 300 2.8L and 70-200 2.8L, I can't imagine it's OK to have the 300 (5.17 lbs) unsupported"
Allen: "If you hold, I can ask..."
Me: "OK, also ask if you can hang the body off the back of a lens, DSLR style"
Allen: "OK sir, please hold..."
Hold Music ..............................................more music........................................more music......................................
Allen: "Hello sir, there is no spec on that....but you should be OK with the 70-200"
Me: "No kidding."
Allen: "Now for the Canon Cine Lenses, the picture of the 30-300 (12.79 lbs) shows rods, support and follow focus."
Me: "Now there's a surprise..."
Allen: "I have a 5D and there's no problem having an unsupported 70-200. Obviously, you'd want to support the 300."
Me; "Obviously. But the mount is strong enough for an unsupported 70-200 2.8?"
Allen: "Yes. Actually the mount is stronger than on the 5D."
Me: "No kidding"
Allen: "Yep"
Me: "What about hanging the body off the back?"
Allen: "No problem. If you use the 300, support the lens, but the body's OK on the back."

So there you have it. Allen at Canon says it's OK to have an unsupported 70-200.
Or a supported lens with the body hangin off the back...

And, they answer the phone quickly!!!

 

[Erik Naso]

OK, I figure I've exhausted internet options when for the third time I Google a variation of "C100, Unsupported Lens, Maximum Weight"... and this thread is the first 2 of 3 results... haha!!!

So I got off the internet and got on the phone and called Canon...

Technical Support by Product Line	Phone Number
EOS Digital SLR Camera Systems, EF Lenses & Flashes	800-OK-CANON	800-652-2666
Cinema EOS Cameras and Cine Lenses	855-CINE-EOS	855-246-3367
Broadcast and Studio Lenses	800-423-LENS	800-423-5367
Professional HD Video Cameras	800-OK-CANON	800-652-2666

Rings once, "Thank you for calling Cinema EOS, your call may be recorded..." I get Allen.

Me: "Hi- are there specs for maximum unsupported lens weight on a C100? I've looked everywhere."
Allen: (not even a microsecond of hesitation) "No"
Me: (brief pause, I'm slightly taken aback) "No kidding...Well, I have a 300 2.8L and 70-200 2.8L, I can't imagine it's OK to have the 300 (5.17 lbs) unsupported"
Allen: "If you hold, I can ask..."
Me: "OK, also ask if you can hang the body off the back of a lens, DSLR style"
Allen: "OK sir, please hold..."
Hold Music ..............................................more music........................................more music......................................
Allen: "Hello sir, there is no spec on that....but you should be OK with the 70-200"
Me: "No kidding."
Allen: "Now for the Canon Cine Lenses, the picture of the 30-300 (12.79 lbs) shows rods, support and follow focus."
Me: "Now there's a surprise..."
Allen: "I have a 5D and there's no problem having an unsupported 70-200. Obviously, you'd want to support the 300."
Me; "Obviously. But the mount is strong enough for an unsupported 70-200 2.8?"
Allen: "Yes. Actually the mount is stronger than on the 5D."
Me: "No kidding"
Allen: "Yep"
Me: "What about hanging the body off the back?"
Allen: "No problem. If you use the 300, support the lens, but the body's OK on the back."

So there you have it. Allen at Canon says it's OK to have an unsupported 70-200.
Or a supported lens with the body hangin off the back...

And, they answer the phone quickly!!!

Nice work!

 

[groveChuck]

Thanks! That will be :beer::beer: :happy:

I'm actually just ordering the camera tomorrow!

 

[deanoise]

Something I've noticed, however, is if you use a follow focus on an unsupported 70-200, the lens tends to bounce or wiggle slightly, especially noticeable at the 200 end. So if you're already on a rig, it's good to support it for this reason.