Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

You can have an extremely stable tripod - like a Gitzo, RRS, Leofoto, etc and still have a stability problem.

Stability is a concern with many mfgr-supplied tripod feet. Balance, rigidity and mounting platform size will absolutely affect stability. There is a strong aftermarket presence for replacements or aids for many that are notoriously bad - like the Nikon 80-200 F2.8 AF-D, the Nikon 300mm F4, Nikon 600mmF4, etc. I cannot imagine why Nikon, or any other company, would not want to provide the most stable mounting for a lens.

Imagemeister's suggestion is a very good one to address these issues.

If you google "long lens support bracket" you will see that there are quite a few products out there to address this. The more successful ones attach to the camera's tripod mount and the lens' mount and also cradle the lens just behind the front element.

newtoyou Loc: Eastport

I live in a three floor condo, concrete and steel. When I set up a 600mm or larger lens I see shake when an outside door slams. Angular disperity. Bigger lenses and increasing distance are against you from the start.

tommy2 Loc: Fort Worth, Texas

Hmmm...wanting to purchase a longer lens and trying to decide between a 400mm and a 600mm. Think I'll go with the 400mm and f2/8 aperture thinking that will work best for a fast capture.

tommy2 Loc: Fort Worth, Texas

Will do, Thank You.

RWR Loc: La Mesa, CA

I wrote that before the OP said he wasn’t using a tripod. As to tripod collars on pro lenses, I would expect Canon’s to be at least as good as any other brand.

newtoyou Loc: Eastport

If time was of an importance to me, being practical, I would try to build a sundial first. Bill

tommy2 Loc: Fort Worth, Texas

Well now that is practical - if time was important.

Me, not so much. Gave my Rolex to my daughter when I left the work-a-day world almost thirty years ago and now she is on the brink of doing that too. Been wondering if she'll pass that watch on to one of her children?

Someone told me today was Friday, had to find a calendar to confirm that. Gee Whizz, every day is Friday for me but it's nice to celebrate the real one every once in a while.

newtoyou Loc: Eastport

Ditto on day of week "problem".

tommy2 Loc: Fort Worth, Texas

Don, the 2nd son Loc: Crowded Florida

Tall buildings DO sway greatly in high winds! If you are doing long exposures only a very still night will work and then only maybe. Building engineers (design level, not janitor) can open your eyes, you may be amazed.

mborn Loc: Massachusetts

RRS makes on for long lens

garygrafic Loc: South Florida

No doubt more cumbersome, but if really rock steady is of PRIME importance......2, yes, two tripods. One for the body and one for the lens. Saw it use many years ago. Tried it myself, it works.

Largobob

That would be my guess, too.

Largobob

I'm guessing you need to increase your shutter speed first. Not being able to visualize your exact mounting conditions....perhaps you need to fabricate some type of enclosure around your camera/lens to block the wind?

dcampbell52 Loc: Clearwater Fl

The Lens stabilizer type of tripod mount is VERY good for large heavy lenses. I have a Nikkor 80-400mm lens and have the Kirk tripod mount. I took the mount off for a couple of weeks and just used the tripod mount on the bottom of my cameras... (Nikon D7100 and Nikon D6100). I found that the heavy lens made the tripod feel like it wobbled when touched and exaggerated any minor softness in the tilt-head of the tripod. When I put the collar back on the lens and attached the lens to the same tripod as before, the camera lens assembly was much more stable. The attached link is for example only as I bought my lens from KEH used and it came with the Kirk mount. I didn't realize how superior it was to the Nikkor mount that would have come with the lens from Nikon. The only semi-real disadvantage to me is that the Nikkor 80-400mm lens with the tripod mount does not fit into the Nikon lens case as easily as the original Nikon mount would have. However, Kirk mount seems more stable and usable. The http ://www.amazon.com/Kirk-Collar-NIKKOR-80-400mm-f4-5-5-6G/dp/B00FR2ZULU
Since I purchased my lens used from KEH, I didn't have the Nikon mount to experiment with, so I borrowed one from NikonUSA to experiment with. Had I purchased the lens with the original Nikkor mount, I probably wouldn't have experimented with it or tried it without, but I have to say that the Kirk mount (to me) seems to be a considerable improvement and better thought out. For long/heavy lenses like the 80-400 zoom, I can see the necessity. And, I even catch myself using a limb, rock, wall, door frame or other structure to help stabilize the 70-300mm lens that my wife has. I don't find it necessary or useful to use an external lens support for short lenses like my 10-24mm, 18-70mm zoom, or 50mm lenses as the tripod mount on the bottom of the camera is fine for these. The 80-400 is heavy and need it, the 70-300 (while not heavy and (unlike the 80-400) does not weigh more than the camera) doesn't require the extra support but it is more convenient. So, like almost everything in photography, the correct answer is that it depends on the photographer, the camera, the subject, and the distance between the camera and the subject. Shooting horse or car races, the 80-400 is easier on a monopod or (the way I usually do it) with the tripod but either only one leg extended or with the 3 legs extended but still folded together as a monopod. Shooting portraits, stars and other subjects that may require long exposures or something, I will use the tripod setup with the lens support and possibly a remote camera release.