Sweaty palms, dry mouth, trembling...the Great White has arrived....

[Mike Buckley]

I've never broken expensive glass, only cheap glass. Even so, I do plead guilty to all of your other accusations. Hopefully admitting guilt works more effectively with you than my wife.

[Bobobird]

Nah, just making a "correction".

We all have different ways but parting with that $$$ we will.

[tbob]

Matt. Is this your Xmas present to yourself? You must have been a good boy this year.

[FlyingSquirrel]

Guys, thanks for all the comments, congrats, suggestions, jokes, etc. This has been one exciting thread...

Colin, you really had me there for a while! I was in my car getting ready to head off to work and I read your comment on my phone. I was in no time and place to research said comment, so I posted my reply and then went off to work. Your later admission that it was a joke was quite a relief. Apparently I am rather suggestible after spending over $10K. The good news is that the little scare you gave me taught me a valuable lesson, the easy way, and that is that I actually should do a bit more careful research in the future just to be sure the next model really isn't on the horizon.

FYI to anyone that doesn't know, the lens only weights 7lbs. For such a large item, that really is not very much weight. The older model weighs 8.5lbs. Quite a difference. This is not a joke: I have gone back to lifting weights a little bit. Not only do I want to be strong enough to hand hold this things a good amount, but with all the gear I will be carrying, I'm going to need to be in good shape.

This will be used with my 7D. I am not interested in a pro body at this time. The 7D suits me just great for now. I hear they are releasing a 7D mkII in the first half of 2014. Supposed to have more MP, better noise performance, and some other goodies. I read it will be considered a "PRO APS-C" body. If this is the case, I will be so in on that.

I have already set up an insurance plan for most of my gear, including, of course, this lens. Should any of my stuff get stolen, broken, dropped in a lake, etc, it will be replaced. Nice peace of mind there.

Thanks for the links to the gear sites. I have a wimberley v2 head, and I also have the RRS replacement foot. I also got the RRS lever clamp cradle to replace the screw clamp on the wimberley. Although the lever clamp from RRS is over priced (as all of their stuff is), it is worth the money IMO because if some kind of animal action is happening (e.g. a hawk flies over me) I can have the lens off the gimbal and handheld in about 3 seconds vs 10 with the screw clamp. The difference between awesome shots and missed shots.

Hey, I'm going to go replace the lens foot and put on the lens coat cover and what not. I'll update the thread with the pics of everything, in case anyone is interested.

One more note. I am hoping I can make a bunch of you feel much less jealous by telling you, I went the less ideal route by getting a loan for this. That means I will be paying for it (and interest) for 4 years. Now I bet you aren't so jealous, right? I'd love to have had the $$$$$ to lay out all at once and own it outright, but I simply don't have that kind of $ and I am not willing to save up for 4 years. I'd rather make payments and take the interest hit, to be able to use the lens now and start building up my portfolio and having some darn fun while I'm at it. I know a lot of people don't agree, but it works for me.

[tbob]

I don't think your rationale (or justification?) is in any way flawed. You will get the joy from using the lens immediately. Food and shelter are overrated as necessities anyway.

If it is any consolation then consider the situation of any number of men around my hometown. They finance a huge pickup truck, a trailer and a snowmobile. Conservatively this can be around $80,000.

[Mike Buckley]

I can have the lens off the gimbal and handheld in about 3 seconds vs 10 with the screw clamp. The difference between awesome shots and missed shots.

My Nikon 300 f/4 lens has a soft hood. I'm thrilled that I've got taking it off down to under 5. That's minutes.

I'd rather make payments and take the interest hit, to be able to use the lens now and start building up my portfolio and having some darn fun while I'm at it. I know a lot of people don't agree, but it works for me.

I wonder how many people buy a lens, spend 10% of what you did, put it on their credit card...and never pay it off...and don't know they've never paid it off. Probably the very same people who would criticize you.

[Bobobird]

...Conservatively this can be around $80,000.

That sounds on the cheap side. Surely those 3 together should easily go over 100k!

@Matt - I should have thought of your financing method. Grrrr. For that recent acquisition of mine all in cash. Safely invested could easily cover the interest costs or close. Bigger GRRRRRR.....

Oh, and 1 question - what will you be paying for the insurance. Our gear is different of course but a ballpark figure would be nice to know before I talk to anyone. According to my broker, she says that the home insurance covers a lot of things but I have to swallow the first 500 or thereabouts and that there is also a maximum. I have not asked for an independent policy but is there such a thing?

[Glenn NK]

It would not seem as big if you put a larger camera on it

I was going to ask him what that little black thing was on the small end of the lens.

[Bobobird]

I've never broken expensive glass, only cheap glass.

Like they say - a penny a day adds up.

That is why we give kids piggy banks (though we finance whatever goes inside as well).

[FlyingSquirrel]

Good evening, once again. Thanks for the continued comments. Call me crazy (which I am), but this thread is making the experience even more fun that I thought it could be! Here I'll post more info, answers to questions, a link to a tutorial I wrote on how to replace a lens foot, and photos of the setup w/ info that may be of use to others interested in similar rigs.

@Matt - I should have thought of your financing method. Grrrr. For that recent acquisition of mine all in cash. Safely invested could easily cover the interest costs or close. Bigger GRRRRRR.....

It is my impression, from having researched this lens (and other expensive gear) a lot, that most people save up for it and then purchase it outright. I believe few people are willing to take the hit of the interest, and/or the risk of what could happen if they can't pay it off. I've explained my reasoning, which for me is valid. Also, my credit is superb, so I was approved for the lowest available interest rate. I am glad I asked for a much higher loan amount, because I was able to purchase additional equipment and accessories. On the other hand, because of all of my expenses in addition to this loan payment, it will be very difficult for me to safely purchase anything else directly out of pocket. The 7D mkII, should it actually be released soon, will be a challenge to work into my budget. (Knowing me, I'll find a way )

Oh, and 1 question - what will you be paying for the insurance. Our gear is different of course but a ballpark figure would be nice to know before I talk to anyone. According to my broker, she says that the home insurance covers a lot of things but I have to swallow the first 500 or thereabouts and that there is also a maximum. I have not asked for an independent policy but is there such a thing?

I'm glad you asked, because I may be able to help you avoid some real trouble. Please take my advice, and do not put any of your gear on any kind of home insurance or anything remotely tied to your policy or carrier. The problem is, if you put in a claim on your equipment (broken, stolen etc) it will probably affect your other insurance plan (cost, premium, etc etc). I wouldn't trust them if they say otherwise. Risk is risk, and they don't like it when things cost them money. Furthermore, insurance plans from companies like that, are typically not designed ideally for what photographers need. The coverage would probably not be all encompassing or flexible.

On to the positive aspect of my advice: You will want to get insurance through some other carrier, definitely one that specializes in this kind of insurance. They will have the kind of coverage, flexibility, limit, rate, etc that you need. I am a paying member of NANPA.ORG. Therefore, I have special access to a nature photographer's insurance plan, through joint partners, Rand/Chubb companies. After much research, I am certain that their policy is quite good in many different ways, and their service is very good as well. PLEASE NOTE, you MUST be a paying member of NANPA.ORG to be able to apply for the policy. For reference, below is a link to the website, and if you click the link at the bottom of the page which this links to, you can download and view the application for the insurance. Should you be interested, you can joing NANPA.ORG and then go from there. http://www.randinsurance.com/Site/581886336/Nanpa.asp

Moving on to the rig I now have, here are the details and pics are below this. The setup is as follows:

Canon 7D
Canon 7D battery grip (official, not a knockoff)
Canon 500mm f4 IS II
Really Right Stuff lens foot replacement for the new Canon 500 IS II
Wimberley WH200 gimbal head
Really Right Stuff Cradle Clamp (replaces wimberley screw clamp)
Gitzo 4542LS systematic series carbon fiber tripod
Lens Coat cover for the 500
Lens Coat Hoodie for the 500
Lens Coat cover for wimberley gimbal
Lens Coat leg coats for the gitzo tripod
Not shown: Other equipment, in particular a lowepro pro trekker 600 aw ii equipment backpack.
Value of all of the above: Priceless

The Lowepro backpack is ENORMOUS. One might say cavernous. I have a Tamrac Expedition 7x which I thought was huge; after getting the lowepro, I would now say the tamrac is just a large backpack. By comparison, the Pro Trekker 600 AW ii is like a suitcase for your back. If it were half full of gear I probably couldn't bear the weight. It's perfect for what I need, because it will fit the 500mm f4 + body (lens hood in stow position), tons of other equipment, accessories, personal items, maybe a light fleece and jacket, has a water bladder pocket, and much more. It's great for hiking with big gear. I am excited to get into the wilderness with this stuff and try for some epic wildlife shots.

I have written and posted a thread which is a tutorial on how I replaced the lens foot. You can read it here.

Here are the pics. Sometimes I find that I am researching some equipment and I have trouble finding detailed or close up pictures showing what I am wanting to see. I hope these pics help someone that is interested in the gear. And for those that just want to ogle, they can do that as well. Note that there is a bit of the lens that isn't covered with the lens coat. I need to finish it by cutting the pieces and applying them (the lens coat doesn't come with specific pre-cut pieces for the lens collar section. I find that rather annoying considering how much I paid for it. Also, it's bogus that the collar section pieces need to be applied with the adhesive backing.) Final note, the black straps which you see on the gimbal arm are velcro wraps which I added. I didn't like the way the lens coat wimberley cover was attached; it seemed like the velcro edge was sticking out a bit and I wanted a more secure attachment.

[Colin Southern]

Couple of random thoughts ...

- Some insurance policies require items over a certain amount to be specified.

- Make sure you record the serial number somewhere (and a copy of the receipt).

- Some people try to be clever by insuring an item on their domestic insurance, even though they're making money from it. Be careful -they'll take your premium, but possibly not pay out in the event of a claim.

I HATE the price of RRS products - only problem is it's so damned good

[Bobobird]

Thanks Matt.
NANPA etc US residents only.
Need to look around for Canadian.

[Bobobird]

I HATE the price of RRS products - only problem is it's so damned good

Well, there are alternatives. I saw recently L-brackets made in China and those things are solid, just as light and about a quarter of RRS prices. I wanted one for the 5D3 but they had run out.

Same goes for tripods and heads. I put the new camera and lens on one and they did not budge even when I pulled up or down at the ends. There was no dropping whatsoever after leaning it down or facing up. It just stayed put. Then I leaned it forward by loosening the latch a tiny bit to allow up/down movement and the gear remained in whatever position i had put it without slipping.

The shop assistant was trying to sell be a Gitzo He opened it up and started swinging from it. Solid. I took out the "other" brand which was similarly built and did the same and I am at least 50lbs heavier. Did not budge either.

So my friend ---- the world is changing. The only question now would be how durable in the long run?

[FlyingSquirrel]

In my opinion, one of the things about RRS that makes it so good, aside from the quality, is the DESIGN and usability of their products. Quality is one thing, but design is a whole different animal, but just as important. Most of the time, cheaper brands don't have the design down.

[Bobobird]

That L-bracket I mentioned, was lighter, less bulky and a fraction of the cost. The RRS did not come close. But that particular manufacturer makes brackets only so RRS need not fear.

Having experienced the tripod foot and the protruding screw heads - I am starting to have doubts about their design standards. What they did to this one was way too unprofessional. The Canon foot is better designed but of course much heavier.

Mind you, that foot is new and came out specifically for the 200-400....

[Andrew1]

You got me thinking. If I bought that setup now I could pay it off with cash in a few months with my half of the settlement. Hmmmmmmmm.

[Mike Buckley]

The only question now would be how durable in the long run?

At one-fourth the cost, that is a manageable risk. You can buy four of them over your life if you have to and still spend no more money.

[FlyingSquirrel]

Having experienced the tripod foot and the protruding screw heads - I am starting to have doubts about their design standards. What they did to this one was way too unprofessional. The Canon foot is better designed but of course much heavier.

I must admit that I was being a hypocrite when I talked about RRS design in my post. Because, actually, I 100% agree with your doubts. It occurs to me just the other day I was thinking how terrible the design is of the RRS foot for my 500 II. If you look at their foot for the v1 of that lens, it is very nicely designed. Now you look at the v2 foot, and it is garbage. I can't help but think that when v2 of the lens came out, they did a quick and dirty design and went into production as fast as possible to make money off the release. I am kind of disappointed that I purchased it now. There might have been something better. But I can't return it now.

Mind you, that foot is new and came out specifically for the 200-400....

WAIT. Are you saying you got the 200-400 with built in TC ?!

[Colin Southern]

The shop assistant was trying to sell be a Gitzo He opened it up and started swinging from it.

Been there, done that

[Bobobird]

You did'nt read my post a while back with pics? Hmmmmm.

Yes that one and the 1D-X. Then just a couple of days before returning, friend wanted me to bring him a 2xIII TC. Not to let the opportunity pass, tried it in the field and IQ seems ok, so went and got one for myself.

So as you can see, there was no way to get a Gitzo and that Sachtler fluid head. Maybe next trip but that is another 3k and this time will surely look into what you did.