Milling the 200-500 tripod foot

[Matthew Currie]

I was looking at my Nikkor 200-500 5.6 zoom, which as many know has a standard threaded tripod foot, and it looks rather as if one could mill the existing foot to fit an Arca Swiss type tripod mount (at least the older screw types I have), without compromising it much.  It's rather a daunting thing to undertake, and of course you can always just put a tripod pad on it,  but it occurred to me to ask if anyone here has tried it, and if so, how it worked. 

[Bjørn Rørslett]

I would not recommend this. The foot is barely acceptable as is.

[simsurace]

Yes, it seems that the foot is a bit too thin for that. I think it is easier to just buy a replacement collar which already has the ARCA Swiss dovetail.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

Many years ago, I milled the tripod foot of the 600/4 AIS to make a dovetail for Arca-Swiss clamps. However, that lens had a massive foot entirely unlike the modern long lenses.

[Matthew Currie]

I would not recommend this. The foot is barely acceptable as is.

I sort of suspected this, but the width is so close it's tempting. 

[Matthew Currie]

Heeding the sage advice of the experts, I decided not to mess with it, and instead made a custom tripod pad.

My goal in all this has been to be able to leave a tripod pad on, and still to be able to attach the lens to a monopod or other device without taking the pad off, and also to have something that served reasonably well as a hand holding handle, all without having to screw the pad on with gorilla force.  So the upshot is a custom pad with the top milled to fit the lens foot, round corners, and a couple of threaded holes.  I have an old fashioned metal shaper whose bits can be custom ground, making it very easy to cut the tapered groove for an Arca mount.  The extra length makes it possible to balance nicely with the light D3200.  The actual balance point is nearer to the front threaded hole.

[Hugh_3170]

Very nice work Matthew - well done.

[richardHaw]

3rd party ones might be pricey but they are probably your best choice

its good that you did not grind your tripod foot. the metal used on those thing can be brittle.

[Matthew Currie]

3rd party ones might be pricey but they are probably your best choice

its good that you did not grind your tripod foot. the metal used on those thing can be brittle.

You may be right, but making it was more fun, and got me the tapped screw hole that none of the third party pads seem to have in the right place.

[Mongo]

mathew, Mongo actually suggested that there was enough "meat" on the existing 200-500 foot to machine the profile into it in a write-up he did on this lens some months ago. In the end, Mongo decided that it was quicker an easier to buy a small extension to screw on the bottom of the exiting food. However, that does not mean that it could not be done or should not be done - Mongo thinks it probably can. Whilst Mongo agrees with Bjorn about the 300 F4 AFS foot, he does not agree with Bjorn about the foot on the 200-500 mm. It is a more substantial/adequate (albeit, not perfect ) foot for this lens. It is, however,  starting to push the boundaries when using it with the lens fully extended in some situations.

The only reservation is that the existing foot tappers narrower towards the front (and maybe the back - cannot remember). This would mean that possibly only the centre of the machined foot might be enough/useful to "grip" on the corresponding tripod mount. With a screwed on third party rail, you get the benefit of the useable profile for it whole length.

[richardHaw]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJKhgw9WGt0

another modification done on the 200-500's foot this time, to add a strap.

i agree with Mr. Mongo, after seeing this movie there might be just enough material there to machine. i have mixed experience with machining porous metals like zinc or more tough ones like magnesium so i will not dare to try it with the foot.
machining the tools and dies in my grandpa's watch repair shop can be scary as the alloys can sometimes be too brittle to machine. this is mostly true for cast metal in my experience. aluminum based alloys are a different thing. they can get stuck on the burrs because they are too soft.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

Put the 200-500 on a really stable tripod and the inability of its tripod mount to hold the lens properly will be evident. From that observation follows immediately that any operation on the tripod foot that will weaken it further is not very wise.

[richardHaw]

http://www.kirkphoto.com/Lens_Collar_for_Nikon_200-500mm_AF-S_f_5.6E_ED_VR.html

hey guys, look at this

THIS IS WHAT YOU WANT

kirk is not really expensive compared to RRS.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

Still, the curious and potentially unstable slanted foot design?

[richardHaw]

kirk says:

" The LS-2 lens support is highly recommended to be used in conjunction with the NC-200-500 collar. This will decrease all lens drop and play when the rotation knob is loosened and allow for smoother, more precise movement. "
in short:
"give us some more money and we will sell you the attachment"

i think that this is a nice solution. i have a kirk L-plate and its nice.

this is how the whole thing looks.
a long time ago, i fixed solutions like this by adding a small piece of wood under the lens and the arca plate as support. it is not pretty but it worked