Stabilizer for Nikon 200-500? This may have been discussed before but I have not found previous threads. I am prepping for a week-long photo trip to Bosque del Apache, so i will be...

ClarkJohnson Loc: Fort Myers, FL and Cohasset, MA

This may have been discussed before but I have not found previous threads. I am prepping for a week-long photo trip to Bosque del Apache, so i will be shooting a lot of birds. Is there a benefit to using a stabilizer such as the Kirk LS-2 with the Nikon 200-500? I have already replaced the foot with the Kirk version. The lens will be on a “cradle” format gimbal head (i.e., foot on the bottom, not side-mounted). You would think the someone must think it helps for Kirk to go to the trouble of making it, but I am hoping for comments from those with experience.

Thanks for the collective wisdom.

Nalu Loc: Southern Arizona

Just got back last night. Be forewarned, not a lot of birds at Bosque by past standards, at least for me. Local talk is that the birds are on the northern loop of the north loop which is closed. There is talk the refuge might be opening the northern loop fairly soon. You might want to check with them. But, there are lots of Sandhills and a few snow geese at Bernardo, at least over the past few days. Bernardo was suggested by a couple of fellow hogs, and I appreciate their suggestions. It's about 20 or so miles north of Soccoro. Good luck.

tomcat

MrBumps2U wrote:

This may have been discussed before but I have not... (show quote)

I have never used a physical stabilizer for this lens. I shoot a lot of sports and indoor event photography using a gimbal head on my tripod and have never felt the need for anything other than the mount that comes with the gimbal because the images are as sharp as can be. By the way, I do make certain that the VR is turned off.

John Howard Loc: SW Florida and Blue Ridge Mountains of NC.

tomcat wrote:

I have never used a physical stabilizer for this lens. I shoot a lot of sports and indoor event photography using a gimbal head on my tripod and have never felt the need for anything other than the mount that comes with the gimbal because the images are as sharp as can be. By the way, I do make certain that the VR is turned off.

Hmm? VR off when on a loose gimbal head? I typically assume there will be some minor movement so I keep the speed up and use the VR. Only off when I lock down.

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

MrBumps2U wrote:

This may have been discussed before but I have not... (show quote)

Why bother with a cumbersome tripod. Try it hand-held between now and when you leave. The stabilization on that lens is pretty incredible, and it's a pound and a half lighter than my Sigma 150-600 which I use to shoot birds and have never put on a tripod.

ClarkJohnson Loc: Fort Myers, FL and Cohasset, MA

Nalu wrote:

Just got back last night. Be forewarned, not a lo... (show quote)

Thanks for the warning. I heard the same thing a few weeks ago. This trip is organized by Road Scholar, and I trust them to be flexible enough to alter the itinerary as needed.

ClarkJohnson Loc: Fort Myers, FL and Cohasset, MA

John Howard wrote:

Hmm? VR off when on a loose gimbal head? I typically assume there will be some minor movement so I keep the speed up and use the VR. Only off when I lock down.

I generally shoot birds at 1/2000 and keep the VR off, regardless of mounted or HH. But, no harm in leaving it turned on to see what will happen. Thanks for the comments.

ClarkJohnson Loc: Fort Myers, FL and Cohasset, MA

Gene51 wrote:

Why bother with a cumbersome tripod. Try it hand-held between now and when you leave. The stabilization on that lens is pretty incredible, and it's a pound and a half lighter than my Sigma 150-600 which I use to shoot birds and have never put on a tripod.

I can and do handhold this lens for short periods of time, and I appreciate the freedom of movement that handholding provides. On this trip, we’ll be traveling by van and remain in single locations for multiple hours each day. Having a tripod not only makes sense, but is on the “required equipment” list. I can always handhold if appropriate.

kenneil Loc: Jupiter, Fl, Ochlocknee, Ga, Iron Range, Mn

I was there three weeks ago. There was a huge group of Sand Hills in the center of the north loop... about 1/4 mile from the road. '-( U could only tell they were there because of the gray color in the distance. There were a couple hundred near the road on the top of the north loop... good pix ops. The snow geese were all on a pond off the preserve to the north west. Zip on the south loop. Compared to the N California preserves it was very disappointing.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

MrBumps2U wrote:

This may have been discussed before but I have not... (show quote)

Yes, because of the compromised/weak OEM and other long lens collars in general, I recommend a lens stabilizing bracket - especially for the 5/600 zooms. They also serve as a nice carry handle and when hand holding to keep your hands OFF the zoom and focus controls if needed. I also use the bracket with my monopod/bodypod so it does not have to be a tripod only thing.

There are cheaper alternatives, here is but one - which is a universal mounting - https://www.ebay.com/itm/Telephoto-Long-Lens-Support-Holder-Bracket-Quick-Release-Plate-For-Arca-Standard/383144170435?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l9372

I only recommend hand holding for BIF or other fast erratic moving subjects.
.

jimneotech Loc: Michigan

Gene51 wrote:

Why bother with a cumbersome tripod. Try it hand-held between now and when you leave. The stabilization on that lens is pretty incredible, and it's a pound and a half lighter than my Sigma 150-600 which I use to shoot birds and have never put on a tripod.

ClarkJohnson Loc: Fort Myers, FL and Cohasset, MA

Thanks, imagemaster. To your point, i find it interesting that the Kirk LS-2 is designed to use along with the Kirk foot/collar for the 200-500 specifically, as if recognizing that the foot alone is not sufficient. But, as you point out, this is not so high tech that a third party version couldn’t work as well.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

MrBumps2U wrote:

Thanks, imagemaster. To your point, i find it interesting that the Kirk LS-2 is designed to use along with the Kirk foot/collar for the 200-500 specifically, as if recognizing that the foot alone is not sufficient. But, as you point out, this is not so high tech that a third party version couldn’t work as well.

Yes, Kirk makes it to work ONLY with their stuff - that way they SELL More ! RRS makes a version also for a lot more $$$.
.

photoman43

I have been to Bosque three or four times. Each time I had a 500mm f4 on one camera and a 70-200mm on another body. In addition to using a tripod with a good head, have a bean bag with you for shooting out of the car window, or using on the hood of your car as a tripod.

With a 200-500mm lens I would use a high shutter speed like 1/1000 or faster, had held, with VR set to off. With most Nikon tele lenses, VR conflicts with shutter speed at 1/500 or faster.

And on a tripod, I normally shut of VR too unless the lens is set "loose" on the tripod.

Definitely check out Bernardo, north of Bosque. You can get much closer to the birds there, especially Sandhill cranes which are best shot hand held or out the car window. I would email Road Scholar and tell them to be prepared to go there. You want to drive the loop road there. Do not assume they will automatically go there.

http://www.wildlife.state.nm.us/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Bernardo-GAIN-WMA-NMDGF.pdf

ClarkJohnson Loc: Fort Myers, FL and Cohasset, MA

photoman43 wrote:

I have been to Bosque three or four times. Each ti... (show quote)

Good advice. Thanks.