Could be the worst ever

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).

R

RockvilleBob

Well-known member
Supporting Member
Marketplace
Member's gallery
..... the foot and collar on the Nikon 180-600. I have never experienced a worse collar on a lens.

Looks like I will need to 🤞 that someone comes out with a replacement. I will be forced to pay dearly for a replacement.

Great lens in other respects.
 
Member's gallery
RockvilleBob said:
..... the foot and collar on the Nikon 180-600. I have never experienced a worse collar on a lens.

Looks like I will need to 🤞 that someone comes out with a replacement. I will be forced to pay dearly for a replacement.

Great lens in other respects.
Click to expand...
Emailed Kirk and this past Sunday they wrote back and said 4-6 weeks and they will have one ready!
 
Member's gallery
gdecamp said:
Emailed Kirk and this past Sunday they wrote back and said 4-6 weeks and they will have one ready!
Click to expand...
Great news George. I know it will be expensive relative to the cost of the lens but it is a must have. On the plus side Nikon did keep the price down. The hood is not bad. I already lost the flimsy lens cap but that was very easy to replace with a sturdy cap. I am guessing the lens foot and collar with be a couple hundred bucks.
 
Member's gallery
When I owned the 200-500mm lens the only time I used the collar and foot was when doing autofocus fine tuning with my cameras. The remainder of the time I left the foot behind as it only added weight and got in the way when hand holding the lens. This is still true with my 100-400mm and 400mm f/4.5 lenses for the Z camera.
 
Member's gallery
RockvilleBob said:
Great news George. I know it will be expensive relative to the cost of the lens but it is a must have. On the plus side Nikon did keep the price down. The hood is not bad. I already lost the flimsy lens cap but that was very easy to replace with a sturdy cap. I am guessing the lens foot and collar with be a couple hundred bucks.
Click to expand...
It was $250 for the 200-500, not cheap but it is what it is!
 
Member's gallery
RockvilleBob said:
..... the foot and collar on the Nikon 180-600. I have never experienced a worse collar on a lens.

Looks like I will need to 🤞 that someone comes out with a replacement. I will be forced to pay dearly for a replacement.

Great lens in other respects.
Click to expand...
You must not have used the 80-400 AFS VRII lens... This was by far the worst tripod collar closely followed by the 300mm f4 AFS lens where I used to stick a film canister between the lens and foot to keep lens rigid. I would say that the 180-600 and 200-500 have equally miserable feet... the 200-500 would bend if you tried to stabilize the lens and the 180-600 has a tiny miserable knob that needs to be twisted forever.
I am looking forward to someone designing a better collar. As I mentioned in a previous thread, Nikon should have charged $150 more and used the collar they have on the 400 f4.5/600PF etc, as many of us will now spend $250 for a collar from Kirk or RRS... money that will never be recovered.

bruce
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
RockvilleBob said:
..... the foot and collar on the Nikon 180-600. I have never experienced a worse collar on a lens.

Looks like I will need to 🤞 that someone comes out with a replacement. I will be forced to pay dearly for a replacement.

Great lens in other respects.
Click to expand...
I've got a friend who was using the then brand new Nikon 80-400 VR II. His comment was that the companies best engineers designs the lens, and then turned it over to the intern for the lens foot. That lens foot literally trampolined up and down with the slightest tap. The OEM foot was laughable - once you had a replacement foot.
 
Member's gallery
EricBowles said:
I've got a friend who was using the then brand new Nikon 80-400 VR II. His comment was that the companies best engineers designs the lens, and then turned it over to the intern for the lens foot. That lens foot literally trampolined up and down with the slightest tap. The OEM foot was laughable - once you had a replacement foot.
Click to expand...
Eric, seriously !? I only hand-held the lens but did not notice this.

Oliver
 
Member's gallery
Calson said:
When I owned the 200-500mm lens the only time I used the collar and foot was when doing autofocus fine tuning with my cameras. The remainder of the time I left the foot behind as it only added weight and got in the way when hand holding the lens. This is still true with my 100-400mm and 400mm f/4.5 lenses for the Z camera.
Click to expand...
Very true Carlson. My expectation is that I will handhold the 180-600 most of the time. That's the case with a Z9 and the 180-600 in a kayak. However, I hike with two cameras on a Cotton Carrier: Nikon Z9 with the 180-600 on my chest and a Nikon Z7 with a 14-30 lens on the side holster. It is a very easy carry with the Cotton Carrier but the Cotton Carrier mount needs to go on the lens foot of the 180-600. I went on my first hike with this setup and a couple of miles through Bombay Hook trails was no problem - except for the lens foot/collar of the 180-600. I am 78 and my bones work better in sub zero weather than that collar.
If not for the way I hike I would not need a collar or foot.
 
Member's gallery
For me, the worst Nikon lens foot has to be for the 200mm f/2. I'd love to have a replacement with more offset in order to be able to get my fingers between the lens barrel and the foot.
 
Member's gallery
Calson said:
When I owned the 200-500mm lens the only time I used the collar and foot was when doing autofocus fine tuning with my cameras. The remainder of the time I left the foot behind as it only added weight and got in the way when hand holding the lens. This is still true with my 100-400mm and 400mm f/4.5 lenses for the Z camera.
Click to expand...
Hi. Do you use a camera strap at all ? If so, how do you attach it to the Z8 with no collar on the Z 180-600 ? Thanks.
 
Member's gallery
Dmacfarl said:
Hi. Do you use a camera strap at all ? If so, how do you attach it to the Z8 with no collar on the Z 180-600 ? Thanks.
Click to expand...
He was referencing the 400 f/4.5 and 100-400 not the 180-600. With those lighter lenses one could use a body strap though with the 180-600, I wouldn’t want to subject the mount to all of that stress. Unfortunately, Nikon did not place anchor points on the 180-600 body, only the collar.
 
Member's gallery
ajrmd said:
He was referencing the 400 f/4.5 and 100-400 not the 180-600. With those lighter lenses one could use a body strap though with the 180-600, I wouldn’t want to subject the mount to all of that stress. Unfortunately, Nikon did not place anchor points on the 180-600 body, only the collar.
Click to expand...
Yeah. But he did refer to the 200-500. Which I owned and it was pretty heavy. Never really understood the logic behind Nikon’s tripod/collar foot design…
 
Member's gallery
BLev65 said:
You must not have used the 80-400 AFS VRII lens... This was by far the worst tripod collar closely followed by the 300mm f4 AFS lens where I used to stick a film canister between the lens and foot to keep lens rigid. I would say that the 180-600 and 200-500 have equally miserable feet... the 200-500 would bend if you tried to stabilize the lens and the 180-600 has a tiny miserable knob that needs to be twisted forever.
I am looking forward to someone designing a better collar. As I mentioned in a previous thread, Nikon should have charged $150 more and used the collar they have on the 400 f4.5/600PF etc, as many of us will now spend $250 for a collar from Kirk or RRS... money that will never be recovered.

bruce
Click to expand...
You think you’ve had miserable feet? Not compared to me… and you definitely don’t want to see my collar! 🥴

IMG_0806.jpeg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 
Member's gallery
I’ve said many times , that the collar of the z180-600 is a real let down. I’ve been shot down so many times….I’m sure by folks that don’t own one.
On ships, in Antarctica especially , I used the f 200-500 on a monogimbel…see Steve’s video, as that was what got me into using it… it was brilliant. Other photographers on the exploration vessel were well impressed by the degree of flexibility it offered. The new collar simply doesn’t work as a rotational devise in the same way.
So I can’t wait to see what comes from Kirk etc.
 
Member's gallery
Patrick M said:
Kirk and iShoot now have replacement collars. Both appear robust and offer the arca plate, neither are much smoother rotating the Camera . Sname.

kirkphoto.com

Replacement collar for Nikon Z 180-600 f5.6-6.3 VR with LS-1 lens support

Kirk replacement collar with lens support for the Nikon Z 180-600mm f5.6-6.3 VR lens.
kirkphoto.com kirkphoto.com
Click to expand...
I am using the iShoot. The collar did not improve the rotation on my copy of the lens. Perhaps it is just a design anomaly of the lens design - a lopsided lens exterior at the collar attachment point??
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top