Lens Tripod Mount Stabilizer? Working with lots of wind here has required some thought and some experimentation with locking down my camera/lens better than with only the single 1/4"...

tommy2 Loc: Fort Worth, Texas

Working with lots of wind here has required some thought and some experimentation with locking down my camera/lens better than with only the single 1/4" screw threaded into the foot. The present configuration (see photo) works well enough with the 70-200mm lens and DSLR.

Out of about a dozen images (same subject, same settings) yesterday evening one was acceptable. The wind gusts were occasionally up to 30 mph with 15-20 mph average wind speed.

I want to purchase a larger telephoto lens which will cause the overall set-up to have a much larger wind-loading area and since the present stabilizer configuration seems to work I'll fabricate another to fit.

Sure would like to have more ideas on this project if anyone like to reply with suggestions. Thank you, Tommy

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

tommy2 wrote:

Working with lots of wind here has required some t... (show quote)

https://www.ebay.com/itm/220mm-Y-ty-Telephoto-Lens-Support-Clamp-for-Arca-Hejnar-Benro-Fluid-Video-Head/172143858639?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l9372

..

Morning Star Loc: West coast, North of the 49th N.

Can't see what the support on the camera end of the lens is, or how this stabilizer is attached to your tripod.
I would have expected the stability of the tripod itself to be more important than the way the camera/lens is attached to the tripod.

I also wonder if the one acceptable photo was taken during a moment of relatively low wind-speed.

Bultaco Loc: Aiken, SC

Just curious, what were your settings?

RWR Loc: La Mesa, CA

tommy2 wrote:

Working with lots of wind here has required some t... (show quote)

My thought is, you still have a less-than-sturdy tripod.
Edit: To rephrase, your tripod is still no more stable.

tommy2 Loc: Fort Worth, Texas

imagemeister wrote:

https://www.ebay.com/...

Looked at this one for attaching the lens foot but measured the plate length and found I couldn't twist the camera to use extenders; however, just thought that the lens could be twisted instead of the camera - gee whizz. Will check measurements to see if this would be compatible with the much larger lens. Thank You

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

tommy2 wrote:

Looked at this one for attaching the lens foot but measured the plate length and found I couldn't twist the camera to use extenders; however, just thought that the lens could be twisted instead of the camera - gee whizz. Will check measurements to see if this would be compatible with the much larger lens. Thank You

If you have a hack-saw you could cut it off

..

tommy2 Loc: Fort Worth, Texas

Morning Star wrote:

Can't see what the support on the camera end of the lens is, or how this stabilizer is attached to your tripod.
I would have expected the stability of the tripod itself to be more important than the way the camera/lens is attached to the tripod.

I also wonder if the one acceptable photo was taken during a moment of relatively low wind-speed.

The tripod set-up is a Whimberly WH-200 Gimbal head bolted to a heavy iron railing solidly bolted to a concrete balcony 17 floors up from the ground elevation..

Yes, the camera is "clicked" when there is an anticipated lull in the faster wind gusts. Took a dozen tries to get one fairly good image -better than none as is sometimes the case.

tommy2 Loc: Fort Worth, Texas

imagemeister wrote:

If you have a hack-saw you could cut it off

..

Yep, that'll be part of the re-thinking that'll take place today...

tommy2 Loc: Fort Worth, Texas

Bultaco wrote:

Just curious, what were your settings?

The tricky part here is the sun was being photographed through a piece of Baader Solar Film. That looks like a common piece of aluminum foil used in the kitchen. It cuts out somewhere around 99% of the light.

The settings were: M f/8 1/4s ISO-100 400mm

newtoyou Loc: Eastport

Any possibility the whole building moved with the wind? At 17 floors up, would not have to be much. Most very tall buildings "sway". Bill

Bultaco Loc: Aiken, SC

Have you tried a faster SS 1/4 is slow.

tommy2 Loc: Fort Worth, Texas

Bultaco wrote:

Have you tried a faster SS 1/4 is slow.

That is in the plan. Had to try one time to see what was captured with familiar settings in conjunction with the filter material. First time using that aluminum foil looking stuff. Hope to work ( play!) on this tomorrow.

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

RWR wrote:

My thought is, you still have a less-than-sturdy tripod.
Edit: To rephrase, your tripod is still no more stable.

tommy2 Loc: Fort Worth, Texas

newtoyou wrote:

Any possibility the whole building moved with the wind? At 17 floors up, would not have to be much. Most very tall buildings "sway". Bill

Know what you mean. Worked in a building with reconfigurable walls so offices could be reshaped. The wind caused the 4’ x 10’ panels to slide vertically against one another. First time to notice this I drew a horizontal line across a joint and saw more than an inch between the line halves on occasion.
This building is “L” shaped and only twenty stories tall. My balcony is around the exterior corner ( facing both south and west). Also this is a concrete and brick building that was built in the late seventies. As I’ve heard say, “hell for stout”.
The gimbal mount is bolted to a 1/4” plate bolted diagonally across the outside corner of the balcony’s railing.
I can whack the rail with a 2” x 4” and see some very quickly dampened vibrations.
The wind blows more than half the time I have a few minutes to go out with my camera so will keep trying to build a stable mounting system.
I know, this is more than you asked but being a structural engineer I’ll build you a watch before I’ll tell you the time.