800mm f/6.3 pf Foot Padding

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

S

SHC

Member
Member's gallery
Hey Everybody - When I rented the 800 pf lens a few months ago, I attached an inexpensive plate to the Nikon foot. It wasn't a perfect solution and there was a little bit of play in the connection, but what I experienced was how comfortable it was to carry the Z8/800 pf combination by the foot because of the small amount of padding on the interior portion of the foot.

Now that I have my own copy of the lens, I'd like to replace the foot with something more solid, and I'm wondering, have any of you found a replacement that also has some cushioning provided? My replacement feet from RRS and Kirk for my other lenses (70-200 f2.8 VR II, 300 f4 AF-S, Z 400 f4.5) don't have any padding, and are noticeably less comfortable to carry by the foot that the Nikon one on the 800 pf.

Thank you!
 
Member's gallery
SHC said:
Hey Everybody - When I rented the 800 pf lens a few months ago, I attached an inexpensive plate to the Nikon foot. It wasn't a perfect solution and there was a little bit of play in the connection, but what I experienced was how comfortable it was to carry the Z8/800 pf combination by the foot because of the small amount of padding on the interior portion of the foot.

Now that I have my own copy of the lens, I'd like to replace the foot with something more solid, and I'm wondering, have any of you found a replacement that also has some cushioning provided? My replacement feet from RRS and Kirk for my other lenses (70-200 f2.8 VR II, 300 f4 AF-S, Z 400 f4.5) don't have any padding, and are noticeably less comfortable to carry by the foot that the Nikon one on the 800 pf.

Thank you!
Click to expand...
I have the 800 PF and Z9 and got a contoured tripod foot from Kirk (KES). It’s not padded like the Nikon OEM foot but it’s reasonably comfortable. Mine has a textured surface on the visible “pad” which resists slippage, though the linked one has a smooth surface. I like that the handle is longer for carrying, balances better with a heavy camera body with FTZ and/or TCs than the OEM, and allows the 800’s lens cover to be reverse mounted. Worth considering.

 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
I’m a big fan of Chris Hejnar’s products. Made in the USA, thoughtfully designed and extremely well executed. The 800 PF foot is slightly lower profile and longer so it will balance properly on a gimbal especially with the lighter z8. Edges are rounded and easy to carry.
 
Member's gallery
ajrmd said:
I’m a big fan of Chris Hejnar’s products. Made in the USA, thoughtfully designed and extremely well executed. The 800 PF foot is slightly lower profile and longer so it will balance properly on a gimbal especially with the lighter z8. Edges are rounded and easy to carry.
Click to expand...
And a hidden, often overlooked feature, is the Hejnar foot has 2 QD ports for adding a 2nd safety connection to the foot instead of one to the foot and another to the camera. With the 800pf at 5 pounds, if it fell and the safety cord were on the camera, can't image the mount in the Z9 with only 4 screws would survive or hold up well
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
Another positive vote for the Hejnar foot ... while not as comfortable as the original foot due to the padding, the larger profile of the Hejnar foot makes a lot of difference in 'how confidently' I can handle the lens via the foot ... it's rounded edges make it quite comfortable too ...
 
Member's gallery
ajrmd said:
I’m a big fan of Chris Hejnar’s products. Made in the USA, thoughtfully designed and extremely well executed. The 800 PF foot is slightly lower profile and longer so it will balance properly on a gimbal especially with the lighter z8. Edges are rounded and easy to carry.
Click to expand...
Maybe if you or someone else knows Chris, they can suggest he bring out a padded version of at least the 800 PF foot (for a higher price)? I am also a fan of his feet though would find a padded one worth an increase in price.
 
Member's gallery
Warren D said:
Look at the one from Leophoto. I have one and it's padded like the original, just a tad longer and has the dovetail.
Click to expand...
Do you know how long it is? There are a number of critical reviews, one indicating that they could not balance on a gimbal when they have a TC on? The Hejnar foot has the attachment point to the lens off moved more central than the Leophoto?
 
Member's gallery
Warren D said:
A little longer than the stock one. I don't use a tc on the 800 f6.3 nor a do I use it on a gimbal more than a couple of times a year.
Click to expand...
On my set-up of the 800 + Z8 + Hejnar foot (6.5"), the balance point is close to the front edge of the rail maybe an 1" to an 1" 1/2 back. Obviously, this would shift rearward if a TC is employed. The Leophoto is 144mm or 5.6", has one QD and no rear overhang (the Hejnar's overhang is about an inch). Perhaps someone can share the Leophoto's balance point.
 
Member's gallery
ricardo00 said:
Do you know how long it is? There are a number of critical reviews, one indicating that they could not balance on a gimbal when they have a TC on? The Hejnar foot has the attachment point to the lens off moved more central than the Leophoto?
Click to expand...
144mm, see diagram with dimensions

NF-06 - Leofoto

Leofoto was founded at the beginning of 2014. It is located in Zhongshan, beautiful Pearl River Delta area in China. Leofoto team has been designing and manufacturing series of camera support systems by comparing and studying the high-end photographic accessories made in China and abroad and...
www.leofoto.com
 
Member's gallery
fcotterill said:
144mm, see diagram with dimensions

NF-06 - Leofoto

Leofoto was founded at the beginning of 2014. It is located in Zhongshan, beautiful Pearl River Delta area in China. Leofoto team has been designing and manufacturing series of camera support systems by comparing and studying the high-end photographic accessories made in China and abroad and...
www.leofoto.com
Click to expand...
It would be helpful for some users if you can provide the information with the z8 as well.
 
Member's gallery
fcotterill said:
144mm, see diagram with dimensions

NF-06 - Leofoto

Leofoto was founded at the beginning of 2014. It is located in Zhongshan, beautiful Pearl River Delta area in China. Leofoto team has been designing and manufacturing series of camera support systems by comparing and studying the high-end photographic accessories made in China and abroad and...
www.leofoto.com
Click to expand...
Thanks that is a different website than the one Google led me to where I didn't find the length and which had a couple negative reviews:
leofotousa.com

Leofoto NF-06 Replacement Foot for Nikon Z 800mm f/6.3 VR S, Nikon Z 400 f/2.8 TC VR S, Nikon Z 600mm f/4 TC VR S

Aiming to improve on the default design, the Leofoto NF-6 replaces Nikon's original lens collar foot and provides a lower profile and a lower center of gravity for better balance. Two safety stops are located on the bottom of the foot, which prevents accidental lens release when a quick-release...
leofotousa.com leofotousa.com

One reviewer stated: The quality of the foot is excellent as I have found another leofoto products but the design is a litttle flawed. The plate should extend back about 25mm to allow proper balancing of the lens when using teleconverters on gimbal heads. At the moment, on my 400 f2.8 z tc, the plate is as far forward in the clamp as I would like it but if I add an external teleconverter then I need to push the lens forward and the clamp is then only clamping half the lens foot which isn’t great.
 
Member's gallery
ricardo00 said:
One reviewer stated: The quality of the foot is excellent as I have found another leofoto products but the design is a litttle flawed. The plate should extend back about 25mm to allow proper balancing of the lens when using teleconverters on gimbal heads. At the moment, on my 400 f2.8 z tc, the plate is as far forward in the clamp as I would like it but if I add an external teleconverter then I need to push the lens forward and the clamp is then only clamping half the lens foot which isn’t great.
Click to expand...
Not sure what he was testing with or if he even was using the 800pf. The Z9 with 1.4 TC has the most mass behind the gimbal of any combo with the 800pf. As such, the foot will be the farthest forward with this combo. With this max rear weight, the back of the Leophoto foot is exactly flush with the back of my Wimberly gimbal. Lighter bodies/no tc's result in moving the lens foot to the rear to balance, adding overhang of the lens foot. Since the OP has asked about the 800pf, that has been the focus of my advice/answers. Reviews of other types/focal lengths of lenses don't apply to this discussion..
 
Member's gallery
I have used the Hejnar Photo foot since May of 2022. It is outstanding longer does not raise the profile. I carry it attached to a Black Rapids Strap and rest the foot in the palm of my hand when shooting, target rifle style. I do not grip the foot and that avoids muscle tremor from gripping and also keeps my palm from accidentally activating the control ring and focus ring but my fingers are right there ready to do so when I want them activated. The foot is always in the ready to shoot position and it is quick to place in my left hand when I lift it with my right. In the field when I am expecting a bird to pop up at any moment I am carrying the Z9 and Z800 baby carry style ready to shoot. So I never carry the lens/camera combo by the foot so no reason for any padding.
 
Member's gallery
FWIW... I have the 800PF with the Kirk foot. I like the plate's length and the feel for when I carry the 800PF/Z9 combo by the foot. I have the Hejnar foot on my 600PF. Its quite acceptable, but is a shorter foot in length and therefore does not give the same hand space to carry the 600PF/Z9 combo quite as comfortably.
 
Member's gallery
BillNaiman said:
FWIW... I have the 800PF with the Kirk foot. I like the plate's length and the feel for when I carry the 800PF/Z9 combo by the foot. I have the Hejnar foot on my 600PF. Its quite acceptable, but is a shorter foot in length and therefore does not give the same hand space to carry the 600PF/Z9 combo quite as comfortably.
Click to expand...
I assume you mean height distance from bottom of foot to the lens barrel ... not length of the foot from front to back ? I have a Hejnar foot almost all of my lenses except the Z180-600 which has a lens collar foot assembly and Hejnar elected not to make one so I have a Kirk.

I do not have the 600 pf and do not know if Hejnar makes it in standard and low profile like he does for z100-400 but I have both for the Z100-400 and for hand carry prefer the standard profile.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top