I bought a Leofoto foot when I ordered my 100-400 because none of my Nikon lenses (nor any Sony or Canon lens I’ve seen) has an Arca-Swiss foot. I also attached a Peak Design anchor to the foot so that I can easily move my strap from the two attachment points on the camera to one on the camera and one on the heavy lens. That reduces stress on the lens mount when carrying.
I think I was spoiled by the Tamron lens I had which had an arca-swiss plate for its tripod foot - didn't even know to think differently! It all worked out though. Handy idea for the peak design anchor on the foot!
As I mentioned in my post, this is totally workable but I'm just not a Peak Design fan. However, the QD connection on the LP-70 makes it far more workable than the ¼-20 connection standard on a BlackRapid strap. I'm a longtime fan of the BR strap but I do wish they would get on board with a QD connector. (Yes, I know you can rig one but it requires significant disassembly of the strap. They say they are coming out with a QD - hopefully in my lifetime.)
The only problem I have with the Kirk LP-70 is that the ¼-20 holes are in the front. I carry my camera / lens on a BlackRapid crossbody strap so I need to attach that to the foot. (yes, I can and have attached the strap to the camera but that puts a lot of weight from the lens on the camera ring.) You can attach the strap connection to the front of the LP-70 and that works fine for carry but it does require that you install the lens on the Arca plate front to back. The LP-70 does have a QD connection and it's nearer to the back of the foot so if BlackRapid ever comes out with a QD connection for their straps, this would be a non issue. And if you already have a strap with a QD connection, there's plenty of room on the LP-70 to attach the lens back to front. The Leofoto NF-01 is similar in design but a little shorter and about ½ the price. However, it is even more problematic to use with both a ¼-20 strap attachment and an Arca Swiss plate because it's shorter. Interestingly, both the Leofoto and Kirk ads show the lens/camera hanging upside down from their respective feet but don't call attention to the fact that with the strap connection the way they show it, you would have to completely unscrew the strap connection from the foot each time you want to mount it on your tripod.
You raise some great points! I don't use a neck strap very often, so I hadn't realized those issues existed when trying to use certain straps. Appreciate the comment!
No problem! There were several folks that asked about the tripod foot after that first 100-400 video! I figured people must be curious since that was only a small part of that video - glad it was helpful!
I live in the UK and could only purchase the Kirk LP-70 from America. It was expensive (especially with postage), however if you are spending over £2,000 on a lens you want a good tripod foot and this is really good. I did hear about Leofoto but after so many positive reviews went for the Kirk LP-70 with no regrets.
Glad it worked out well for you! I really like mine - nice and sturdy, quality product. In fact I used my Tamron 70-200 lens late last week and it has a native foot and that foot felt small and harder to grab than the Kirk!
I got this foot for my Sony 70-200mm 2.8 ii and for my Sony 200-600mm and love them on them and they make them for a lot of lenses so look them up and make sure you order for your lens I had to get two different ones for my two lenses because not the same for both of my lenses
Good to hear they have have a solid Sony option as well! I know one of the folks that asked me about the foot after the first video did get a foot for both their Nikon 70-200 and Nikon 100-400 lens. I've been loving mine!
Tripod feet are usually for heavier, telephoto lenses. If you are looking for a quick release plate for your P1000 camera, I found this one on Amazon that might work? www.amazon.com/LIMS-Release-Camera-Tripod-Dovetail/dp/B07KVBCT87 I have not used a P1000, so be sure to read reviews and such to be sure others say it works well. Good luck!
Thanks for the details and the solution. Just wonder why do you switch from Sigma100-400 nikon F to Nikon Z 100-400? Does the sigma have some major flaws driving you to switch? as nikon z 100400 is 4 times more expensive (at least here in UK). I'm intrigued to know
The Sigma 100-400 f-mount was a great lens, great image quality - it was mainly a combination of smaller annoyances that led me to switch. And really, if my budget was tighter, the Sigma would have served me just fine with no real ill-effect in quality of image (i.e. it certainly wasn't the lens holding me back). I did do a video on some of the reasons (small) why I did upgrade to the Nikon 100-400. ruclips.net/video/EdDPVsVSwiE/видео.html
I just checked, and it does not appear the tension screw is swappable. It appears to have a "stop" when you unscrew it to a certain point. With that said, I have not found it obtrusive in my use.
@@JeffreyTadlockPhotography Yes. And the Leofoto just works great. I would'nt mind paying a little extra but Kirk gear here in germany is more than "a little".
Yeah - the 100-400 was my first Nikon lens - I had used Tamron's in the past (whose feet were Arca-Swiss compatible) and of course the Sigma 100-400, which didn't come with a collar and I had to buy aftermarket which was Arca-Swiss compatible. Not a big deal - I do like the foot! And the lens is great!
I bought a Leofoto foot when I ordered my 100-400 because none of my Nikon lenses (nor any Sony or Canon lens I’ve seen) has an Arca-Swiss foot. I also attached a Peak Design anchor to the foot so that I can easily move my strap from the two attachment points on the camera to one on the camera and one on the heavy lens. That reduces stress on the lens mount when carrying.
I think I was spoiled by the Tamron lens I had which had an arca-swiss plate for its tripod foot - didn't even know to think differently! It all worked out though.
Handy idea for the peak design anchor on the foot!
As I mentioned in my post, this is totally workable but I'm just not a Peak Design fan. However, the QD connection on the LP-70 makes it far more workable than the ¼-20 connection standard on a BlackRapid strap. I'm a longtime fan of the BR strap but I do wish they would get on board with a QD connector. (Yes, I know you can rig one but it requires significant disassembly of the strap. They say they are coming out with a QD - hopefully in my lifetime.)
The only problem I have with the Kirk LP-70 is that the ¼-20 holes are in the front. I carry my camera / lens on a BlackRapid crossbody strap so I need to attach that to the foot. (yes, I can and have attached the strap to the camera but that puts a lot of weight from the lens on the camera ring.) You can attach the strap connection to the front of the LP-70 and that works fine for carry but it does require that you install the lens on the Arca plate front to back. The LP-70 does have a QD connection and it's nearer to the back of the foot so if BlackRapid ever comes out with a QD connection for their straps, this would be a non issue. And if you already have a strap with a QD connection, there's plenty of room on the LP-70 to attach the lens back to front.
The Leofoto NF-01 is similar in design but a little shorter and about ½ the price. However, it is even more problematic to use with both a ¼-20 strap attachment and an Arca Swiss plate because it's shorter. Interestingly, both the Leofoto and Kirk ads show the lens/camera hanging upside down from their respective feet but don't call attention to the fact that with the strap connection the way they show it, you would have to completely unscrew the strap connection from the foot each time you want to mount it on your tripod.
You raise some great points! I don't use a neck strap very often, so I hadn't realized those issues existed when trying to use certain straps. Appreciate the comment!
Thanks for all your help on this Jeff! 💙
No problem! There were several folks that asked about the tripod foot after that first 100-400 video! I figured people must be curious since that was only a small part of that video - glad it was helpful!
I live in the UK and could only purchase the Kirk LP-70 from America. It was expensive (especially with postage), however if you are spending over £2,000 on a lens you want a good tripod foot and this is really good. I did hear about Leofoto but after so many positive reviews went for the Kirk LP-70 with no regrets.
Glad it worked out well for you! I really like mine - nice and sturdy, quality product.
In fact I used my Tamron 70-200 lens late last week and it has a native foot and that foot felt small and harder to grab than the Kirk!
I got this foot for my Sony 70-200mm 2.8 ii and for my Sony 200-600mm and love them on them and they make them for a lot of lenses so look them up and make sure you order for your lens I had to get two different ones for my two lenses because not the same for both of my lenses
Good to hear they have have a solid Sony option as well! I know one of the folks that asked me about the foot after the first video did get a foot for both their Nikon 70-200 and Nikon 100-400 lens. I've been loving mine!
Hello Jeffrey. What tripod foot would you recommend for the Nikon P1000 ?.
Tripod feet are usually for heavier, telephoto lenses. If you are looking for a quick release plate for your P1000 camera, I found this one on Amazon that might work?
www.amazon.com/LIMS-Release-Camera-Tripod-Dovetail/dp/B07KVBCT87
I have not used a P1000, so be sure to read reviews and such to be sure others say it works well.
Good luck!
I also have the Kirk foot on my Nikkor Z 100-400z
It seems a near perfect combination for me!
Thanks for the details and the solution. Just wonder why do you switch from Sigma100-400 nikon F to Nikon Z 100-400?
Does the sigma have some major flaws driving you to switch? as nikon z 100400 is 4 times more expensive (at least here in UK).
I'm intrigued to know
The Sigma 100-400 f-mount was a great lens, great image quality - it was mainly a combination of smaller annoyances that led me to switch. And really, if my budget was tighter, the Sigma would have served me just fine with no real ill-effect in quality of image (i.e. it certainly wasn't the lens holding me back).
I did do a video on some of the reasons (small) why I did upgrade to the Nikon 100-400.
ruclips.net/video/EdDPVsVSwiE/видео.html
@@JeffreyTadlockPhotography thanks, let me check it out. Enjoy the new toy :)
Can you swap the tension screw? That replacement one looks huge compared to the Nikon.
I just checked, and it does not appear the tension screw is swappable. It appears to have a "stop" when you unscrew it to a certain point.
With that said, I have not found it obtrusive in my use.
@@JeffreyTadlockPhotographythanks for checking.
Thinking of getting this lens next.
Good review.
@@edwardekman9832 The lens has been great! Super happy with it!
Like others i decided for the Leofoto foot for my Nikon Z 100-400 lens. The kirk foot is simply overpriced at least here in europe.
The Kirk is definitely on the pricey side, no doubt there. The Leofoto foot looks pretty similar in size and shape!
@@JeffreyTadlockPhotography Yes. And the Leofoto just works great. I would'nt mind paying a little extra but Kirk gear here in germany is more than "a little".
FYI - Nikon has never made a lens that is Arca-Swiss compatible.
Yeah - the 100-400 was my first Nikon lens - I had used Tamron's in the past (whose feet were Arca-Swiss compatible) and of course the Sigma 100-400, which didn't come with a collar and I had to buy aftermarket which was Arca-Swiss compatible.
Not a big deal - I do like the foot! And the lens is great!