Simple Solution needed for Long Lens

egproductions

egproductions

Veteran
Fortunately I've gotten by so far without needing to purchase a Rod support system. I recently purchased the Sigma 150-600 contemporary lens (contemporary over sport partially because contemporary is 2 pounds lighter). That being said, when extended to 600mm, there is a lot of flex in the lens (I think the sport version probably flexes also.) When doing fast tripod movements or on a windy day, you can see the lens flexing and bouncing around. It doesn't matter how great of a tripod I have, the shake seems to be coming from the flex of the lens.

Now that you know the background, I would like a simple solution for stabilizing this lens when shooting video. I have a Sony FS7 but I don't want to mount rails to the camera body if possible. Ideally, I would like a solution that attaches to the lens collar and stabilizes the entire lens. This way I'm not using rails when I'm not using this lens and I it won't require any additional setup while out on location. The big issue, I imagine, is that this lens telescopes when zooming. I'm new to rails or additional lens support so hopefully someone has a good solution or product they can recommend.

Thank you!
 
I don't think you can get anything that secure unless you get a cage and PL mount adapter with screws to lock it down to the cage. But even then with that much reach you're still bound to get some flex. Honestly, rails aren't the end of the world. I'm not familiar with the lens but is there a portion of the lens that doesn't shift when you zoom? If so, then I would try to find some rails that only extend as far and look for a lens support that will let you strap it down tight. You don't want one that only sits under the lens.

On my camera I have the SmallRig Y shaped lens support and used relatively large zip ties to lock the lens down. I cut up a rubber wrist band to give it more friction since my lens isn't rubberized where the support goes. It's not 100% solid but it's enough to keep the barrel from shifting on it's own under normal use.
 
This is a simple matter of physics and weight ratios (cue African Swallow).

The lens mount is pretty lightweight, and you are cantilevering a lot of weight off of it. It simply isn't beefy enough. So you have to stabilize the lens with an additional contact AWAY from the lens mount.

You could get a bar that connects to the cold shoe on the front of the top handle. Then sling a strap from this bar around the lens somewhat towards the front but not on a part that rotates or extends. This won't stabilize it like a proper locked in place support would, but it will take a bunch of pressure off the lens mount and limit the movement a good deal.
 
No such thing as a simple solution I would guess. Probably first step is a good head like my miller arrow 25.

My approach with my 400 is to mount that on sticks and place the camera behind, then support the camera. My camera has a long 'frotto plate on it so I can remove it from my regular rig easily.

Not perfect but with my limited engineering resources it works..

https://twitter.com/sammorganmoore/status/674656992858923008
 
Thanks for the replies. Perhaps I wasn't clear enough in my original post but I don't believe all the flex is coming from the mount to the camera but rather a poor design of the lens (a lot of flex is introduced when telescoping the lens to 600mm.) The tripod collar is so far back on the lens that even when no camera is mounted and I hold the tripod collar down to a solid surface I notice some bounce back/flex when touching the lend hood. This is why I was thinking that a stabilizing solution was needed from the tripod collar to the front of the lens.

After I solve this issue, I might realize I need some additional stabilization between the camera body and lens as well.

sigma150-600.JPG
 
The lens telescopes in/out with zoom?

which bits rotate?

Looks like

-the lens is not fit for purpose
-you have some major engineering on your hands

S
 
You have come up against the design limitations of a lens designed for stills work v one designed for motion picture capture. There will always be some issues with a mechanical design like this one.

That said, I suggest you invest in a simple set of plates. You didn't mention before that the lens comes with an integrated support. Get a plate of aluminum to go between your camera base and your lens support. You'll likely need some thin strips of metal added to one end or the other to get them to a matching height. The plate needs to be hard & thick enough to eliminate flex. Drill out some holes to mount this between the two points and you have now taken the stress off the lens mount and provided a lot more stability to the lens by holding it at two points. Then drill some more holes to attach a tripod plate to this aluminum plate. I would suggest buying a spare tripod plate to leave attached to this setup. That way when you want to use this lens you only need to remove the tripod plate from the bottom of the camera and attach this rig. You could even keep it mounted to the lens if you have room.
 
Correct Morgan. The zoom ring is the large ring (focus is the small one). The picture shows it extended to 600mm. When zooming, the inner barrel (thin part) extends out of the lens. It's a great lens in almost every other regard but this is proving to be it's weakness.
 
Mitch Gross said:
You have come up against the design limitations of a lens designed for stills work v one designed for motion picture capture.
Click to expand...

It's true, however, it's actually a problem for still photography also when I try to do long exposures with this lens. For instance, I recently did some long exposures of the Vegas skyline during twilight from about 15 miles out. Up in the Frenchman mountains there was a lot of wind which really caused some issues.

Perhaps I will stabalize the camera to the tripod Collar as suggested and just live with the amount of flex that is inherent in the design of the lens. Thanks guys!
 
Mitch Gross said:
You have come up against the design limitations of a lens designed for stills work v one designed for motion picture capture.
Click to expand...

Stigmas are not really built for either discipline.

--

Eg

I think you have a problem here. For some background IMO you need excellence to work with long lenses, I struggle with my 400 and 50-300 proper build nikkors that dont telescope to get a stable shot.. properly bolted down on a $2000 head.

The fat front section has some length if you can do as mitch says and then add a cradle for the front you might be in business but really my feeling is this is beyond the annoyance of finding a non telescoping lens.

Maybe start with a 300/4 canon FD or nikkor for $250
 
The rods will be lighter than a flat rigid plate, I'd go with long rods that attach at the camera, attach at the lens tripod support, and have some kind of support at the objective end on the lens that will still let it slide so you still have a zoom function. Then a tripod plate goes in the middle somewhere so the whole thing will balance.

Either that or I would go to prime lenses, but even then your camera is heavy and needs to be supported, hanging off the back of a lens would not be good.
 
If everyone looks carefully at the rig I made the camera is supported and lens too and the camera quick releases as there is a plate on the lens cradle.

Still none of this battles a wobbly front element. But of course we dont know how wobbly that is until the rest of the system is locked down.

S
 
morgan_moore said:
Stigmas are not really built for either discipline.
Click to expand...

A lot of what you are saying is very true. While it used to be the case, I very much disagree with the above statement. Sigmas new line of Art, Sport and Contemporary lenses are wonderful, affordable, and more often than not, exceed the build and optical quality of canon L series counterparts. I own the 35 1.4, 50 1.4 and now the 150-600 C. Half of my work is still photography, Sigma has quickly become the new favorite among pro still photographers, they are very reliable despite the fact that they are off brand.

In the case of this lens, however, it seems it is not perfect, but still an amazing value for what it is.
 
Last edited:
I have a Shape Lightweight (Base)Plate for the FS7, but don't always use it, & even when I do I prefer to support larger lenses that have their own foot from a short pair of rods attached to the top of the camera. The benifit is it keeps the bottom rails clear, works without a baseplate, & makes lens swaps quicker.

I use a low-profile threaded rod block attached to my Wooden Camera Top Plate, but if you want to run more bare Zacuto makes a minimalistic setup.

http://store.zacuto.com/fs7-rod-lock/

http://store.zacuto.com/minimount/

To connect the rods to the lens foot I use Letus' Quick Snap. The post lives on the lens foot while the block lives on the rails, & the quick attach feature makes swaps relatively quick.

http://www.letus35.com/letus-quick-snap-lens-support/

Haven't tried this setup with either Sigma 150-600mm, which appear to have short foots, but it works well with my 28-135mm.
 
Last edited:
Just wanted to give a little update on this. I thought there was more play in the actual lens than there really was, it turned out to mostly be coming from the mount (and also because I was using sticks with a center column.) I wound up getting a new tripod legs (Induro GIT505XXL) and For additional lens support, I ended up adding rails and going with the following items:

SmallRigs Low profile Baseplate:
http://www.amazon.com/Smallrig%C2%AE-Profile-Plate-Clamp-c500-1674/dp/B0197OP4PU?ie=UTF8&psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o02_s00

Ikan LS-T05:
http://www.amazon.com/Ikan-LS-T05-Tilta-Supporter-Silver/dp/B00XCTFAOW?ie=UTF8&psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o03_s00

The Titla lens support is nice because it has a rolling Y holder (much easier to swap off lenses) or it has a 1/4" 20 male thread for tripod collars. it also adjusts left and right to make fitting easier.

This setup essentially takes a relatively weak mount and reinforces. When using the Y holder, you are only getting up and downward support (which is 90% of the issue). If I need side to side support, I would need to get my rails lower so that the 1/4" threading could hang low enough under the lens collar.
 
egproductions said:
If I need side to side support, I would need to get my rails lower so that the 1/4" threading could hang low enough under the lens collar.
Click to expand...

This is the issue that initially lead me to the Letus Quick Snap. My Sony 28-135mm's foot is so long that it sits at the same height as the top of the rails, & the Quilck Snap was the only lens support I found that could slip below it.
 
I would like to hear your opinion about this lens.

How does it handle? Which adapter and mount are you using? How is the autofocus ?

I can get one with a canon mount and need adapter anyway. Which one you have?

thnx
 
Last edited:
Bern Caughey said:
This is the issue that initially lead me to the Letus Quick Snap. My Sony 28-135mm's foot is so long that it sits at the same height as the top of the rails, & the Quilck Snap was the only lens support I found that could slip below it.
Click to expand...

smart, I kind of like the Y adapter with the rollers though, makes lens swaps really easy. It's a tradeoff.
 
Lens is amazing for the price. From what I hear, the contemporary is optically similiar to the sport version but half the price and 2 pounds lighter. It's not as much of a tank as the sport version but I bought a accident protection warranty so that I wouldn't have to worry about that.

I wish the focus ring was a little smoother for rack focusing...it becomes a problem for slower racking.

I have it in the Canon EF mount since that is the system I am invested in. The autofocus is good. The image stabilization is not the best but is ok. Overall it's definitely a great lens if you need those focal lengths.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top