Camera strap: lenses without lugs?

[Butlerkid]

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

Good conversation though. I'll reply back with what Nikon says.

FWIW - I've never used a safety strap..............................

 

[jeffnles1]

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

Good conversation though. I'll reply back with what Nikon says.

I use a safety strap. I had the hook attachment on a strap break (the swivel stud separated from the slide on the strap). Fortunately, I felt it slip and grabbed the camera. However, if I had not felt the stud breaking, my camera and lens would have hit the ground.

The safety strap has slack in it so it's not putting stress on the mount. It may damage the lug on the camera should I have a catastrophic separation; however, replacing a lug on the camera body is probably a whole lot less than replacing a lens or body if it hits the hard ground.

Folks may think it is funny to have a safety strap, right up to the point something fails and their camera is laying on the ground.

Jeff

 

[jeffnles1]

FWIW - I've never used a safety strap..............................

Karen,
After almost having my camera crash to the ground when the mounting part of my strap decided it was a good time to let go, I have always had a safety strap. Foolproof? nope but may keep my camera and lens from laying in pieces on the ground. (sorry, James Taylor song reference).

Jeff

 

[MatthewK]

I use a safety strap. I had the hook attachment on a strap break (the swivel stud separated from the slide on the strap). Fortunately, I felt it slip and grabbed the camera. However, if I had not felt the stud breaking, my camera and lens would have hit the ground.

The safety strap has slack in it so it's not putting stress on the mount. It may damage the lug on the camera should I have a catastrophic separation; however, replacing a lug on the camera body is probably a whole lot less than replacing a lens or body if it hits the hard ground.

Folks may think it is funny to have a safety strap, right up to the point something fails and their camera is laying on the ground.

Jeff

Right on. It's a prudent insurance policy, especially when you've heard reports of the BlackRapid mounts coming unscrewed, QD sockets potentially wearing out, etc. I would never begrudge anyone for being too careful, so please don't think I was poking fun or naysaying the practice. My intention with my statement was to point out the irony to some in here that there are people who want to be as safe with their gear as possible, yet I bring up a question which could have ramifications for a lot of photographers, and I get some flip responses brushing off my concern/question. I never imagined that an innocuous question would get some peoples dander up like this!

 

[Butlerkid]

Karen,
After almost having my camera crash to the ground when the mounting part of my strap decided it was a good time to let go, I have always had a safety strap. Foolproof? nope but may keep my camera and lens from laying in pieces on the ground. (sorry, James Taylor song reference).

Jeff

Right on. It's a prudent insurance policy, especially when you've heard reports of the BlackRapid mounts coming unscrewed, QD sockets potentially wearing out, etc. I would never begrudge anyone for being too careful, so please don't think I was poking fun or naysaying the practice. My intention with my statement was to point out the irony to some in here that there are people who want to be as safe with their gear as possible, yet I bring up a question which could have ramifications for a lot of photographers, and I get some flip responses brushing off my concern/question. I never imagined that an innocuous question would get some peoples dander up like this!

I see no reason to use a safety strap on my 100-400 or 70-200. I never use a strap on my 600mm TC.

 

[jeffnles1]

Right on. It's a prudent insurance policy, especially when you've heard reports of the BlackRapid mounts coming unscrewed, QD sockets potentially wearing out, etc. I would never begrudge anyone for being too careful, so please don't think I was poking fun or naysaying the practice. My intention with my statement was to point out the irony to some in here that there are people who want to be as safe with their gear as possible, yet I bring up a question which could have ramifications for a lot of photographers, and I get some flip responses brushing off my concern/question. I never imagined that an innocuous question would get some peoples dander up like this!

Matthew,
Cool. No worries. I wasn't offended at all. Oh and regarding QD sockets... I had a rifle crash to the ground when one of those wasn't seated properly. Fortunately, rifles are made to take abuse. Dusted some mud off of it, cleaned out the QD socket and went on about my day in the field. (I used to hunt, haven't hunted in years now but the sound a nice wood stocked rifle makes when hitting the ground is something that stays with you. 100% my fault but an easy mistake to make. I never trusted those things after.

Jeff

 

[jeffnles1]

I see no reason to use a safety strap on my 100-400 or 70-200. I never use a strap on my 600mm TC.

Karen,
I would never want to be in a position to tell someone else what to do. Only thing I would say is strap attachments can and do break. I am retired and buying new gear because I dropped my existing gear would hurt badly.

I can for sure understand not wanting to carry a 600mm TC around on a strap, those critters are heavy.

Jeff

 

[EricKlees]

Hmm, i just saw this post. For me i have never put any strap on the camera lugs, no matter the size or weight of the lens. I've never felt it was a good idea to put the stress on the mount.

It's there a lens foot, I use a shoulder strap with a QD swivel on it. If no foot, i just hold the camera

 

[jerrylwatson]

Camera manufacturers put lugs on their cameras and a free strap to connect to it. I do not think using the lugs should be a problem.

 

[seh]

As a general rule of thumb, if a lens has no tripod foot, the camera can support it, else if the lens has a foot, then it can support the camera.
Never have one end of a strap on the camera and the other on the lens…that’s a big stress on the mount itself.

My intuition was that one end of the strap on the camera and the other on the lens would distribute the weight and reduce mount stress. Shows the fallacy of intuition and not paying attention in secondary school physics. Thanks for getting me to think it through.

 

[wotan1]

Right on. It's a prudent insurance policy, especially when you've heard reports of the BlackRapid mounts coming unscrewed, QD sockets potentially wearing out, etc. I would never begrudge anyone for being too careful, so please don't think I was poking fun or naysaying the practice. My intention with my statement was to point out the irony to some in here that there are people who want to be as safe with their gear as possible, yet I bring up a question which could have ramifications for a lot of photographers, and I get some flip responses brushing off my concern/question. I never imagined that an innocuous question would get some peoples dander up like this!

I don't think anyone intended criticism of you or anyone else for bringing up a question. These questions are always excellent for stimulating discussion. I participated in this discussion because I am learning things.

Already once in my recent career I sustained damage to a lens that fell unexpectedly. In that case I was changing a lens and left a 70-200 on a park seat. It rolled of and landed on concrete. Fortunately the damage was not severe and it was quickly fixed.

Now, with a more expensive $6000 800mm lens attached to a $5500 Z9 I worry that much more for something to fall. I worry about an arca swiss clamp not tight enough. I worry about a strap breaking or a tripod fitting come loose and send a lens and camera falling. Or I trip on something, drop a camera I am carrying and it goes off a cliff or into water. I could get robbed and assaulted walking in a park.

So I listen and learn from others and adopt safety practices that seem sound to me.

So I do what I can and don't let fear stop me.

I think it was Mark Twain who said I spent my life worrying about things 90 percent of which did not happen.

 

[bleirer]

My intuition was that one end of the strap on the camera and the other on the lens would distribute the weight and reduce mount stress. Shows the fallacy of intuition and not paying attention in secondary school physics. Thanks for getting me to think it through.

I can't think of any physics reason why your way is wrong.

 

[jeffnles1]

I can't think of any physics reason why your way is wrong.

the lens mount can become the fulcrum in a lever and thus a force multiplier depending on the distances from one attachment point to the mount and the other mounting point to the mound.

 

[dabhand16]

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.

I've seen that doing this will put stress on the camera mount but just in a different direction from if you attach a strap the the camera itself. You can't beat attaching to the lens foot. if you want minimal stress on the camera mount.

 

[Asafser]

On my 800pf I always use the QD connection AND a safety tether strap on one of the lugs . And definitely would want to use some kind of safety with one of the smaller lug less footed lenses ( which I currently don’t have) just for peace of mind . Looking at the 600mm pf Kirk lens foot web pic I think a small tether safety strap /para cord can be installed on its side. It’s not ideal but could work:

 

[Calson]

The weight of shorter and lighter lenses is a vertical load on the camera mount and should not be a concern. I would be far more worried about using a QD type connection to a foot in terms of loss of the connection and damage to the lens and camera.

With heavy lenses I use a Kirk Security Strap that clamps securely on the Arca-Swiss compatible foot or lens plate and is 100% secure. With the strap across my back the lens and camera hang down at my waist and is easy to control completely. No need for a second safety tether when the primary connection is 100% secure.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[Jeffrey Davidson]

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?

Generally speaking, if the lens has a foot, attach any carrying straps, etc. via the lens and not the camera body.

 

[Guido Bee]

I use the lugs on the lens (s) when they are there. I have changed several feet to Arca-Swill compatible units partly because I am not happy with Nikon's releases on some of their tripod feet / handles (clamp plus button release). I have become convinced that the amount of motion / movement required to release the lens is so small as to release at a bare touch. Two times now I have had the factory's foot on the 500 PF release from the lens. So far the worst was a shattered lens hood. I replaced the factory foot with Kirk's which has a greater displacement required to achieve release.
There is not much that gets my attention more than having the lens mounted to a D500 (first time) and then a Z9 (the second time) suddenly part from the foot. I am pretty deliberate about checking tightness of mounts and clamps, but I have only survived by pure luck on this so far.
On the other hand I can confirm that a 600 mm f/4.0 (DII) attached to a D750 (slowly falling onto grass from a collapsing tripod) will rip the lens mount off of the 750 ($$ to Nikon LA for repair). Old Gitzo aluminum tripod in cold weather had a leg compress and fall over. No damage to the lens, just my self confidence, the body and my bank account.
My experience so far, over 60+ years did include one strap breaking a long time ago. Broke another lens mount; totaled the camera body on that one, too. All the best.

 

[GG1]

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?

Don't know about others but my Tamron 70-200 2.8 has a tripod foot. I have no problems carry my 15-30 or 24-70 with my black rapid strap.

 

[MatthewK]

Here is what I wrote to Nikon:

• I have a Nikon Z8. I have a strap attached to the Z8's two strap lugs, like you would any camera you intended to carry around your neck and/or shoulder.
• I mount a Nikkor Z 100-400, which weighs 3.2 lbs. There are no strap lugs on this lens.
• Can I safely carry the Z8 by the strap with this lens mounted, or am I risking damage to the mount?
• Is there a suggested weight limit to expose the camera mount to before I am risking damage?

Here is Nikon's response:

"We do not have a suggested weight limit for the Z8's bayonet mount. We do recommend supporting the lens with your hand while shooting. The best practice is to remove the lens and put the body cap on when not actively shooting so as to eliminate even the smallest chance of damage to the camera or lens that could be incurred. Look at page 89-90 in the Z8 manually on how to properly support a lens during shooting operations."

Whoever said that Nikon would give a word salad, vague response, wins the prize. In essence, they say: "support the lens when actively shooting; when not shooting, unmount it."

No one is understanding what I'm trying to ask, guess my question is coming across as Greek? I'm tired of trying to phrase it, and no one seems to care anyway. Carry your stuff however you want.

 

[John Navitsky]

Whoever said that Nikon would give a word salad, vague response, wins the prize.

i'll send you my paypal account

 

[jerrylwatson]

Here is what I wrote to Nikon:



Here is Nikon's response:



Whoever said that Nikon would give a word salad, vague response, wins the prize. In essence, they say: "support the lens when actively shooting; when not shooting, unmount it."

No one is understanding what I'm trying to ask, guess my question is coming across as Greek? I'm tired of trying to phrase it, and no one seems to care anyway. Carry your stuff however you want.

Liability

 

[MatthewK]

Liability

100% intentionally vague. Either you use a hand to fully support a lens, or you unmount it from your camera and store it in a protective case (inside a safe, in a bunker with walls no less than 6" thick concrete and Faraday-shielded from EM pulses). Anything in between