Wimberley or Hejnar foot for the Nikon 500mm PF VR?

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

Mr. Meows

Member
Member's gallery
Hello all. I just bought a Nikon 500mm PF to replace my 200-500mm.
I watched Steve's video about the 500mm PF and saw how bad the stock foot is.
I was wondering what replacement foot should i get.

I saw many positive comments about the Wimberley and Hejnar.
They cost about the same.
Which one should i get?
 
Member's gallery
Mr. Meows said:
Hello all. I just bought a Nikon 500mm PF to replace my 200-500mm.
I watched Steve's video about the 500mm PF and saw how bad the stock foot is.
I was wondering what replacement foot should i get.

I saw many positive comments about the Wimberley and Hejnar.
They cost about the same.
Which one should i get?
Click to expand...
I use the Henjar foot on both my 500PF and 100-400S. I do not want a removable foot. If you like to carry your lens by the foot and do not need a removable mechanism, save yourself some dollars and buy the Hejnar. I have no doubt that the Wimberley foot would be just as good, I just do not have any experience with it.

regards,
Bruce
 
Member's gallery
I have the Wimberley and am 100% satisfied with it. American made and excellent quality and price. Don’t be put off by the naysayers who try to create a problem with the roll pin. Once installed, you’ll never know it’s there..
 
Member's gallery
Tens of thousands of bird photos with this lens, 100% handheld. Having said that, both options you mentioned make excellent products, either should serve you well. Enjoy your new lens, it’s my favorite lens of all time!
 
Member's gallery
The only foot I have ever replaced are the ones on the 500mm f/4 and 600mm f/4 lenses. 90% of the time with a lightweight lens like the 500mm PF the foot is off the lens as I am shooting handheld and it gets in the way. I add a 100mm lens plate to get the adjustment range that is 50% greater than I can get with a lens foot of any type.

No idea why people are having problems with these feet as it is trivial to check and tighten the knob and even with the knob loose the release tab needs to be pushed in to release the foot from the lens.

Overall the best aftermarket designs are coming from Kirk and they are usually my choice.
 
Member's gallery
Calson said:
The only foot I have ever replaced are the ones on the 500mm f/4 and 600mm f/4 lenses. 90% of the time with a lightweight lens like the 500mm PF the foot is off the lens as I am shooting handheld and it gets in the way. I add a 100mm lens plate to get the adjustment range that is 50% greater than I can get with a lens foot of any type.

No idea why people are having problems with these feet as it is trivial to check and tighten the knob and even with the knob loose the release tab needs to be pushed in to release the foot from the lens.

Overall the best aftermarket designs are coming from Kirk and they are usually my choice.
Click to expand...
First, it is clear that you are unaware of the history related to the OEM foot and the 500PF. Many people who bought the 500PF in 2018 experienced a malfunction where the foot would slide off the ring... even when the foot was tightened. @Steve (Perry) was among these. I experienced early production issues with my lens collar and foot as well. After sending my lens back for a defect repair, I immediately attached an Henjar foot to my lens. Furthermore, many people use Arca-Swiss style tripod feet to mount their lenses to a head/gimbal or black-rapid style straps. Attaching a plate to the OEM foot adds bulk and one more point where a bolt can come loose. Regardless of manufacturer (Henjar, Wimberley, RRS, or Kirk) these non-OEM feet are manufactured with better/lighter materials and with great precision than the OEM foot. While it is likely that Nikon would need to pay a royalty to ArcaSwiss, it would be nice if they designed their lens feet with this "universal" plate included.

bruce
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
Mr. Meows said:
Hello all. I just bought a Nikon 500mm PF to replace my 200-500mm.
I watched Steve's video about the 500mm PF and saw how bad the stock foot is.
I was wondering what replacement foot should i get.

I saw many positive comments about the Wimberley and Hejnar.
They cost about the same.
Which one should i get?
Click to expand...
Wimberley. Period. Make sure you attach it correctly. I added a drop of "Locktite" to a screw. Besides, I use Wimberley gimbal head, it's rock solid.
 
Member's gallery
The lens plates I attach are fastened with two 1/4"-20 screws with hex heads. I have never had these loosen in my 40 plus years of photography. If I have a problem with a foot I would try to understand what aspect is not working correctly. With the Nikon factory foot the knob needs to be loosened and a catch then needs to be pressed and then the foot needs to be pulled parallel to the lens. If the foot simply falls off the lens then there is a problem with both the catch and with the tighening knob on the foot.

Steve Perry in his review of the lens mentions having accidentally pushed in the release with his fingers. To me this is operator error. If I am not using a monopod or tripod there is nothing to be gained with having the foot on the lens where it gets in the way or could be accidentally released if one is not paying attention. The RRS also has a release catch and so one needs to pay attention with their foot as well.

With my heavy 600mm f/4 and 800mm lenses I use the Kirk Safety Strap that clamps on to any Arca-Swiss compatible foot if I need to have a hand free for my tripod or monopod. Many years ago I came to appreciate the cushioning effect of a neoprene camera strap. With a 70-200mm f/2.8 or 80-40mm lens mounted to a camera the stretch of the strap made it more comfortable to use to support the roughly 5 lb rig. An OP/Tech neoprene camera strap and a Kirk Security Strap provide a complete solution that has worked with all my telephoto lenses.
 
Member's gallery
Calson said:
The lens plates I attach are fastened with two 1/4"-20 screws with hex heads. I have never had these loosen in my 40 plus years of photography. If I have a problem with a foot I would try to understand what aspect is not working correctly. With the Nikon factory foot the knob needs to be loosened and a catch then needs to be pressed and then the foot needs to be pulled parallel to the lens. If the foot simply falls off the lens then there is a problem with both the catch and with the tighening knob on the foot.

Steve Perry in his review of the lens mentions having accidentally pushed in the release with his fingers. To me this is operator error. If I am not using a monopod or tripod there is nothing to be gained with having the foot on the lens where it gets in the way or could be accidentally released if one is not paying attention. The RRS also has a release catch and so one needs to pay attention with their foot as well.

With my heavy 600mm f/4 and 800mm lenses I use the Kirk Safety Strap that clamps on to any Arca-Swiss compatible foot if I need to have a hand free for my tripod or monopod. Many years ago I came to appreciate the cushioning effect of a neoprene camera strap. With a 70-200mm f/2.8 or 80-40mm lens mounted to a camera the stretch of the strap made it more comfortable to use to support the roughly 5 lb rig. An OP/Tech neoprene camera strap and a Kirk Security Strap provide a complete solution that has worked with all my telephoto lenses.
Click to expand...
I respectfully disagree that it is “operator error “. It’s a design flaw. If the foot can accidentally come loose (which the Wimberley cannot by the way) it’s a bad design.
 
Member's gallery
The Wimberley and Hejnar feet address the main issue but I still prefer the option to remove the foot.
After I purchased a 500 PF I started by trying to understand what is fundamentally wrong with the Nikon foot. I discovered that the spring for the push button release is particularly weak and that it only needs to be depressed a very small amount to release. The button is just slightly proud of the mount and isn’t really obvious you gave your finger against it. There would be no hope with gloves.

Despite both the Kirk and the RRS feet having a similar operating method to the Nikon I figured that they must have done something a little different. I finally settled for the Kirk. The difference between it and the OEM is night and day.
It’s lighter than the original, the foot is longer and Arca to boot. The knob seems to tighten more firmly, The spring in the release lever is significantly stronger and the lever needs to be depressed much further before it releases, right into the cavity in the foot itself actually.
When holding it, it’s much more obvious where the release is but, as the lever needs to be pushed so far, it’s impossible to release by simply carrying it. In fact, if you had heavy gloves on, you might need to take them off to release.
 
Member's gallery
Mr. Meows said:
I watched Steve's video about the 500mm PF and saw how bad the stock foot is.
Click to expand...
There is nothing wrong with the stock foot. Just tighten the knob properly. And that also does not mean you need to be the Hulk to do that.
Never came loose, I check it occasionally, not that often, and never had the idea it worked itself loose even just a little.

The only reason I see to go with a replacement is the obvious advantage of Arca Swiss, provided the back of the foot is longer that the stock one. Else, with a back-heavy rig like a Z9, D6, probably also D850 with grip, and especially if you add a TC, you wouldn't be able to mount a short foot on your tripod as the foot would sit completely at the front of your clamp.

So take care not to go for any foot designed for the 70-200, it wouldn't be long enough.
 
Member's gallery
Mr. Meows said:
Hello all. I just bought a Nikon 500mm PF to replace my 200-500mm.
I watched Steve's video about the 500mm PF and saw how bad the stock foot is.
I was wondering what replacement foot should i get.

I saw many positive comments about the Wimberley and Hejnar.
They cost about the same.
Which one should i get?
Click to expand...
Did you already bought one? i got a wimberley and a nice lenscover if you are interested
 
Member's gallery
I prefer to go away from a removable foot completely because even if there are safer alternatives to avoid accidently dropping the lens I find the removable ones lesss comfortable for carrying. When I am out with the 500Pf it means that I am moving and walking around a lot and I carry the camera holding at the tripod foot of the 500PF like a brief case with the "pole" of the foot between my fingers. The Wimberley is manufactured really well and has smooth surface that make it easy and comfortable to carry the lens like I do it even for longer time. With the removable ones it is more likely to get pressure marks or even scratches between the fingers.
 
Member's gallery
The RRS foot for the 70-200 fits the 500 pf so (I thought I'd switch back and forth but have found I'm unlikely to ever put the 500 on a tripod; have it precisely to easily cart about handheld).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top