| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
Double camera mount system for field sports - monopod
Samuel Freeman, Photographer
 |
Mukilteo | Wa | USA | Posted: 4:18 AM on 08.30.07 |
| ->> Has anyone come out with or seen a double camera mount for use on a monopod so I can have my 400 2.8 and 200 1.8 or some similiar lens combo so I dont have to have my big lens on monopod and second camera around neck? |
|
Chuck Steenburgh, Photographer
|
Brad Moore, Assistant, Photographer
|
Scott Mussell, Student/Intern, Photographer
|
Kenosha | WI | United States | Posted: 9:17 AM on 08.30.07 |
| ->> I have seen a couple of photographers use a super clamp with a ball head attached that they just clamped onto their monopod. The only things about that is you have to A. have a very strong monopod and B. the second camera won't be level with the first so there is a lot of bending. The 200 1.8 is pretty heavy, most of the time I've seen this done with 70-200's. Other than that I haven't seen an efficient way of achieving your goal. Good Luck. |
|
Samuel Freeman, Photographer
|
Mukilteo | Wa | USA | Posted: 10:16 AM on 08.30.07 |
->> Thanks all, I guess I will have to engineer one. I need something stout enough to take the weight as well as adjustable enough to move the lens foots so as to achieve
balance. If I get it figured out, I'll post a pic |
|
Jeffrey Haderthauer, Photographer
|
Wichita Falls | TX | USA | Posted: 10:43 AM on 08.30.07 |
->> Don't get me wrong, but why would anyone want to do this? I can see using it when shooting a static scene, like Hanashiro's 3x600mm rig, but it just seems impractical for much else.
Couldn't you just hang the 200 from your shoulder? I do this with a 300 2.8 all the time when I'm not shooting with a monopod (i.e news situations, volleyball, etc.) |
|
Robert Hanashiro, Photographer
 |
Los Angeles | CA | | Posted: 10:47 AM on 08.30.07 |
->> A 400mm AND a 200 1.8?
On a monopod?
It will be very heavy. Very unwieldy. And a little dangerous (to you, the people working around it and to the gear itself).
I have a Slik and a Gitzo "double plate". What I used here, is the Slik (meant for two cameras, but has the ability to mount three):
http://www.sportsshooter.com/special_feature/30fps/index.html
http://www.sportsshooter.com/funpix_view.html?id=7016
You will have to be very, very careful in using a rig like this on a monopod because of the weight, bulk and it will probably not be very balanced.
Trust me. |
|
Mike Shepherd, Photographer
|
Wichita | KS | USA | Posted: 11:53 AM on 08.30.07 |
->> ask sportsshooter member marc browning. i've seen him mount two cameras on a single monopod before. i can't tell you which two lenses he had. i agree that a 400/2.8 and 200/1.8 would be too heavy and too much of a hassle, though. i think he might have been using a 300/2.8 and 80-200/2.8.
marc's member page: http://www.sportsshooter.com/members.html?id=4274 |
|
John Plassenthal, Photographer
|
Vandalia | OH | USA | Posted: 12:22 PM on 08.30.07 |
->> I made something similar to the Gitzo/Manfroto units listed above. I use it primarily for dual static video cameras, but once mounted 300 2.8 and a video camera together. I'm guessing that if you've got a strong enough mono/tri-pod it would work for you as well.
I got all of the parts at Lowes.
1 ft long 1/4 inch by 1 1/8 inch steel flat bar
2 thumb screws
rubber
tap set
drill & bits
I started with a short piece of 1/4 thick by 1 1/8 inch wide steel bar. Cut to length. Drill two holes 1/2 inch from the outer edge and tap to the threads of the lens mount. rill a center hole and tap to the thread diameter of your mono/tri-pod. If you have significantly different weights you may want to drill the middle hole off center to put the it at the center of gravity.
I put the thumbscrews in a drill press and used a file to file down the threads near the thumb part so that after screwing it into the hole far enough it would turn freely but won't fall out. I was lucky enough to have a file the same thickness of the bar, the trick is to be as wide as the bar and just a hair smaller than the hole drilled. Make sure you use steel screws and be careful not to file it down much smaller than the core so it doesn't get so weak it wants to snap on you. That would be bad.
I also glued some rubber to the top so that it would provide friction to reduce twisting.
All of the mounts for the one I did were 1/4-20 thread, but you could just as easily do a 3/8-16 thread. |
|
Randy Janoski, Photographer
|
Washington DC & Nashville | TN | USA | Posted: 12:36 PM on 08.30.07 |
->> Samuel,
When required to carry several bodies with large lenses my solution has always been...an assistant, let them be by your side and lug the stuff around! |
|
David Minton, Photographer, Student/Intern
|
Humble | TX | USA | Posted: 4:58 PM on 08.30.07 |
->> I've thought of this for a few years...
What if, somehow, you could have a stud on the top of the tripd ring of the 400, and then put the 200 f1.8 or a 70-200 on that. So that the smaller lens is piggybacked vertically on the 400. Someone would have to, if it's even practical, machine a new tripod ring for the 400 with the stud on it. Make it high enough off of the 400 so you attach a body. (The key I think to making it practical would be to have the two bodies directly above and beneath each other, so that you're not bumping into one or the other.) Then there's a 400 for shooting down field, and when it gets close, a 70-200 ready to go pointing at the same thing already. It could work for soccer, where there's not a whole lot of moving around once you've claimed a shooting position.
Wimberly makes a bracket the allows you to put a flash above a super tele.
http://www.birdsasart.com/accs.html#The%20Wimberley%20Arca-Swiss%20Flash%20...
Here's Moose Peterson using it.
http://www.birdsasart.com/baaimage/vb1.jpg |
|
Donald Montague, Photographer
|
Orlando | FL | | Posted: 1:05 PM on 09.05.07 |
->> I personally use a Reinholder too. While it is best for a 24-70 or similar size wide angle lens. I have found that it works great while in the back of the end zone. Its also much safer than just laying it on the ground.
http://www.orlandofreelance.com/thereinholder.html |
|
Chuck Steenburgh, Photographer
|
Lexington | VA | USA | Posted: 8:19 PM on 09.05.07 |
| ->> I've since received my Reinholder, and can confirm that it is indeed an excellent solution - and it works just fine with my D200 w/MB-D200 and 80-200 AF-S. It's very easy to switch lenses - honestly, less clumsy than one on the pod and one on the shoulder. It's like having a midget standing next to you holding your second body/lens, ready to hand it to you. |
|
Samuel Freeman, Photographer
|
Mukilteo | Wa | USA | Posted: 11:38 AM on 09.26.07 |
->> This is more what I had in mind, another photographer took this pic. Its a little fuzzy(new mark3 user) but you can see it holds a 400 2.8 and a 200 1.8 so I can switch hit in the middle of a play and not loose track of subject. If I can only focus and shoot both cameras at same time:)
http://www.nwphotoinc.com/sportshooter/twinlens/_46T1377.jpg
Any one seen anything like this? |
|
Chuck Liddy, Photographer
|
Durham | NC | USA | Posted: 5:07 PM on 09.26.07 |
| ->> samuel, I cannot begin to even imagine trying to run the sidelines with that outfit. if a shooter thought they had back troubles before imagine the chiropractor bill after using that misbalanced arrangement. and of course this is just my own personal opinion but I have my doubt I could switch from one to the other and keep everything balanced and get the shot if it was a quick play into the end zone.....I think chuck is onto something.....with all the friggin passes they give out at ball games why don't they start handing out "midget widget holder passes"? the wee one could hold those bulky pesky extra bodies and lenses and be made to go fetch a cooling beverage when needed. |
|
Samuel Freeman, Photographer
|
Mukilteo | Wa | USA | Posted: 5:14 PM on 09.26.07 |
| ->> I like the beverage idea:), however it is very balanced and with the loss at football games of most of the sidelines I can stak out the endzone or corner and shoot way down the field and close up. |
|
Wally Nell, Photographer
 |
CAIRO | EG | EGYPT | Posted: 2:57 PM on 09.27.07 |
->> Samuel, "If I can only focus and shoot both cameras at same time:) "
You could always use a Pocket Wizard and fire the one off the other camera. You would just have to make sure you are perfectly aligned. But I have a feeling you spoke rhetorical. |
|
David Stluka, Photographer
|
Oregon | WI | USA | Posted: 4:49 PM on 10.10.07 |
| ->> I've been using a 2 camera set-up on one monopod for 3 years now... I do it because I can't stand a camera around my neck. If you are sitting in the endzone and not running around a lot, it's awesome. I have a 400 f2.8 on top and I mount a 2nd camera using a bogen tri-head with a super clamp. The biggest lens I use on the bottom is a 300 f4... I only use that combo for shooting soccer. 400 with 1.4 converter on top with 300 f4 on the bottom for soccer is a great combination, as long as you don't move around a lot. For football I use the 400 with a 70-200 f4 for day games (70-200 f2.8 for night games) or 16-35 f2.8. I also use a quick release in case I need to take the camera off. I shot Brett Favre scoring a touchdown with 400 and 24-70 when he did his one and only Lambeau Leap, all while never setting either camera down on the ground. I can switch between the 2 faster than having one around my neck. It is heavy, though, but I like it better than having one around my neck. I'll try to dig up a photo of my set-up. |
|
Jeff Mills, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Columbus | OH | USA | Posted: 10:49 PM on 10.10.07 |
->> Maybe just go with that Sigma monster 200-500 f2.8 (if it really is even going to go into production)
I'm sure as unweildly as it would be, it would beat trying to have a 400 and 200 both on a single monopod |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|