Camera strap: lenses without lugs?

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).

M

MatthewK

Well-known member
Supporting Member
Marketplace
Member's gallery
Ok, dead horse beating time...

It's recommended that you don't put excess weight or torsional force on the lens mount. I am probably wrong, but think I read somewhere that Nikon stated 3lbs?

Heavier lenses like the 400/600TC, 180-600, 800PF have strap lugs on the barrel. Guidance for lenses like that is to mount strap to the lens, not the camera, else you will damage the mount.

There are other heavier lenses in the 3lb range that don't have strap lugs on the barrel: 70-200 f/2.8, 100-400, 600PF, 400 4.5. They come with tripod feet, and no means to mount a strap to them. If Nikon had intended for the strap to be mounted to these lenses, they would have provided a means to do so, right? So, is it safe to assume that it's OK to mount the strap to the camera body?

I contacted Nikon about this, and got no response, because I'd really like to hear from them what their guidance is. Has anyone else had this question answered?
 
Member's gallery
StefanSC said:
Blackrapid straps, mount them on the tripod feet. They are nicer, easier to use and make carrying the camera + those lenses much easier in the field.
Click to expand...
Which is a fine solution, as is using QD sockets on aftermarket feet like I am now.

However, let's pretend those aren't available and speak strictly about the Nikon-provided solutions: can these camera bodies handle those lenses if we mount the strap on the camera body? You'd think so since they didn't provide any other means to do so, such including a mounting plate (with slots for a strap) to use on the tripod foot, or a QD socket in the stock foot, etc..
 
Member's gallery
I'd attach the strap to one lug and the other end to a plate on the bottom of the camera, so that the rig would hang pointed downward. That's how I do it with my non-heavy camera/lenses. I'm concerned that with these 3-4lb lenses that don't come with strap lugs on the barrel, that doing it this way would put more stress on the mount.
 
Member's gallery
MatthewK said:
I'd attach the strap to one lug and the other end to a plate on the bottom of the camera, so that the rig would hang pointed downward. That's how I do it with my non-heavy camera/lenses. I'm concerned that with these 3-4lb lenses that don't come with strap lugs on the barrel, that doing it this way would put more stress on the mount.
Click to expand...
I use BR also. I found attaching to the 600PF with the Z8/9 was awkward to get the camera up and shooting. I just attach to the bottom plate of the camera with the safety catch to one of the lugs. I also converted the BR strap to QD.
 
Member's gallery
MatthewK said:
I'd attach the strap to one lug and the other end to a plate on the bottom of the camera, so that the rig would hang pointed downward. That's how I do it with my non-heavy camera/lenses. I'm concerned that with these 3-4lb lenses that don't come with strap lugs on the barrel, that doing it this way would put more stress on the mount.
Click to expand...
If Nikon thought there was an issue, they would have advised consumers about it.

If you are concerned, then mount one end of the strap to the camera lug and the other end to the plate on the lens foot.

If you are still concerned, carry the camera+ lens by the lens foot.
 
Member's gallery
jerrylwatson said:
I use BR also. I found attaching to the 600PF with the Z8/9 was awkward to get the camera up and shooting. I just attach to the bottom plate of the camera with the safety catch to one of the lugs. I also converted the BR strap to QD.
Click to expand...
That's the lens I'm actually regarding. Right now I use the 600PF with a strap QD'd onto a Hejnar foot, and just like you say, it's a placed weirdly enough that it can get in the way at times. Was thinking of moving the strap to the body, but just wanted to make sure I'm not dooming the mount to warping. Thinking the lens is light enough to do it, considering wedding shooters do it all day with a 70-200 2.8, and are probably more rough with their gear than I am.
Butlerkid said:
If Nikon thought there was an issue, they would have advised consumers about it.
Click to expand...
You see my logic as well, Karen ;)

Attaching one end to the camera and the other to the lens is not advisable, as that creates most stress on the mount since you have two sources of force acting on a single pivot point. Best if It's either all on the lens, or all on the camera body.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Uwe
Member's gallery
Nothing is ideal when dangling a camera and long lens by your side on a strap.

The Blackrapid strap in my opinion works that out quite well. It has a slider on the strap that will either secure the lens/camera low by your side, or slide it up and you can pick the camera up and shoot.

I have found that by sliding the slide down far enough it encourages the lens/camera to rest slightly behind at the hop level. This tends to prevent it from swinging too much and also shelters it a bit behind me so it is less likely to get impacted. I can also have my hand by its side to steady and protect it.

I use QD connectors by RRS on the end of the Blackrapid strap. I have not had a problem with security carrying it that way so far, I trust RRS quality and would not risk my expensive Z9 and 800mm lens on something cheaper.

I have thought about having a safety strap but have not done so yet.

If I did a safety strap I might explore having something that attaches to the camera body as long as it had plenty of slack. I agree that stress on both the lens and camera puts too much pressure on the mount.
 
Member's gallery
MatthewK said:
I contacted Nikon about this, and got no response, because I'd really like to hear from them what their guidance is. Has anyone else had this question answered?
Click to expand...
If you continue to have concerns about this, I suggest you call Nikon USA Product Support at (800) 645-6687. I think that's the only way you're going to get a definitive answer.
 
Member's gallery
i think you're going to get a wishy-washy answer, or different answers with different calls.

this has come up before and it has been pointed out there are conflicting statements from nikon in the documentation.

but personally, i think this is all cya stuff and considering a z9 and a 70-200 2.8 weigh about the same, you're hanging a similar amount from the mount either way, and i would be very surprised if the mount engineers didn't account for this and i'd be very surprised if they didn't build in a bit of margin of safety.

personally, i don't sweat hanging a 70-200 or similar weight lens from my z9, or my z9 from a 180-600. that is to say, if it has a lug, i use the lug, if not, i use the body.
 
Member's gallery
I think the answer is fairly obvious.

If the lens has either a foot or strap lugs on it you should use either of those to support the lens and NOT rely on a strap on the camera to do this.

Some lenses have both lugs and a foot. I suspect the lugs are there so you can provide an extra safety strap to help prevent the lens from falling if something went wrong. You are dealing with a super expensive lens that is also very heavy.

I would simply never support a lens/camera setup by the camera body if the lens has a foot. I would always use the foot.

Interestingly the Nikon Z9 body without a lens weighs slightly under 3 lbs. Whatever you attach to the body the weight on the camera side is going to be 3 lbs or perhaps slightly more if you have accessories attached. That is the most weight that will ever be attached to provide torque force on the camera/lens mount from that side.

Maybe that is where the three lb limit came from.

Put your support straps on the heavier side.
 
Member's gallery
I agree with wotan1. Also, there's more to it than the weight as a primary concern is bending which is the force multiplied by the distance to the CG. The Z9 is heavy, but the weight is close to the mount. Finally, I think what bends mounts is more about impact load which increases the effective weight of the lens (including bouncing on a strap).
 
Member's gallery
Here is what I use. I've been using this set up for about 4 or 5 years now. Used it on the Nikon 200-500 and now on the Canon 100-500. Works well.
fpgear.com

Arca-Swiss Compatible Fusion Lens Plate - 3.75

The Fusion Lens Plate is an Arca-Swiss Style quick release plate that has a deployable attachment loop. The attachment loop allows the photographer to connect a sling-style shoulder strap such as those made by BlackRapid. The Fusion Lens Plate is compatible with Arca-Swiss style quick release...
fpgear.com fpgear.com

Jeff
 
Member's gallery
wotan1 said:
I think the answer is fairly obvious.

If the lens has either a foot or strap lugs on it you should use either of those to support the lens and NOT rely on a strap on the camera to do this.

Some lenses have both lugs and a foot. I suspect the lugs are there so you can provide an extra safety strap to help prevent the lens from falling if something went wrong. You are dealing with a super expensive lens that is also very heavy.

I would simply never support a lens/camera setup by the camera body if the lens has a foot. I would always use the foot.

Interestingly the Nikon Z9 body without a lens weighs slightly under 3 lbs. Whatever you attach to the body the weight on the camera side is going to be 3 lbs or perhaps slightly more if you have accessories attached. That is the most weight that will ever be attached to provide torque force on the camera/lens mount from that side.

Maybe that is where the three lb limit came from.

Put your support straps on the heavier side.
Click to expand...
Well, it’s not quite obvious, because Nikon doesn’t directly advise how to mount a strap to a heavier lens without lugs, and it isn’t readily evident out of the box how you mount a strap to a lens foot. If a lens is heavier than the camera, why would Nikon leave it up to chance that a customer might mount the strap to the camera instead?
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
MatthewK said:
Well, it’s not quite obvious, because Nikon doesn’t directly advise how to mount a strap to a lens without strap lugs, and it isn’t readily evident out of the box how you mount a strap to a lens foot. If a lens is heavier than the camera, why would Nikon leave it up to chance that a customer might mount the strap to the camera instead?
Click to expand...
Nikon has been making cameras and lenses for a long, long time. Maybe this just isn't an issue.............
 
Member's gallery
I'm a "by the book" type of person, I want documentation and proof of something, so maybe common sense sometimes goes over my head 🤷‍♂️

I find it funny... members here have their straps attached to their lenses (QD, Blackrapid, Peak Design anchors, etc), and then safety straps for backup because they're afraid of the main strap failing. Can't be too careful, you know? Yet, for the question I ask regarding potential damage to our cameras... nah, it's fine, common sense, just go with your gut on it :ROFLMAO:

Good conversation though. I'll reply back with what Nikon says.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top