This is a macro shot of the tiny buds of a lantana plant prior to opening into individual flowers. That whole cluster in the picture is about the size of a dime. 5d Mk3, 100mm f/2.8 Macro.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Nice. Where'd you shoot those from? As far as I can remember, nobody is allow to get close to the practice ranges while they're actually using them.
More convenient yes, MORE secure, no. I agree with C. Burch, you are adding another potential failure point, period.
So, a single threaded attachment that is frequently unscrewed and rescrewed and subjected to torsional stress during use is going to be more stable than a threaded attachment with threadlocking applied plus a clamping screw that's not subjected to unintentional torsional stress? Sorry, no. Yes, in theory, two connection points vs. one means two possible failure points rather than one. If you were doing a 350' free rappel (I've done one), would you prefer to hang from a single loosely tied knot, or a pair of 8,000-lb-rated carabiners connected in series? The latter has two possible failure points vs. just one - it must be less safe, right?
I can tell you that I spent over a year with the single lug connection, first as a FastenR-2 then FastenR-3 connected to a tripod socket, then with a FastenR-T1 connected through a Manfrotto RC2 plate. I would frequently find the FastenR slightly loose - probably at least once per week. It never loosened sufficiently for the camera to fall - but that's because I quickly got in the habit of checking the tightness of the lug several times a day. In over a year with the FastenR-3 Loctite'd to a Kirk clamp attached to a body or lens plate, I have never had anything come even slightly loose. I know which sounds more failure-prone to me, and I'm not a fan of letting untested theory outweigh empirical fact.
Thanks. So, basically, unless you loc-tite the BR nut to the QR clamp, you still run a risk of it unscrewing?
Not sure - if you slightly moisten the rubber compression washer and screw the lug in tight (with the solid aluminum, no risk of overtightening), probably not. But I see no reason to remove it routinely, so why not use Loctite? The Blue 242 type is semi-permanent - it's not going to come loose with normal use, but with a vice and a pair of pliers you can unscrew the lug.Adding the Kirk1 clamp seems like a reasonable idea, but it just seems to be adding another point of possible failure. I would think the BR screw in post with the rubber ring would stay tighter than a clamp. Has no one ever had the clamp work its way loose?
I disagree. With the Loctite, I wouldn't classify the lug-clamp connection as a failure point, so you're certainly not adding one. Moreover, if you frequently unscrew and reconnect the lug (which you'd do to attach to a tripod, for example), that makes the lug connection a much more likely failure point. There's no rotational stress on the clamp screw, so it won't come unscrewed unless you turn it. Orientation prevents unintentional turning - on a body plate, attach the clamp so the knob is under the lens, on a lens plate, attach it so the knob is away from your body. I've never had the clamps loosen even a smidgen. So, overall, I'd say the BR lug attached to an AS-type clamp (the Kirk or RRS' new flat-bottom clamp) with Loctite, connected to AS-type body/lens plates, is both more convenient and more secure than directly attaching the lug to a tripod socket.
Thanks all for the replies. I figured the magazines that I grabbed at the airport last week (outdoor photographer and shutter something) wouldn't be mentioned highly as they only had about 1-2 articles each that were of interest, it sounds like its more of the same elsewhere.