I don't think any of my Kirk plates have the extra 1/4 x 20 hole. They have
a hole used to mount a flash bracket and of course they have the hole to
attach the plate to the lens or camera but I don't think any of them have
any other holes.
The RRS plates have an additional threaded hole that a non-quick release
tripod head or the 1/4 x 20 screw on a flash bracket can screw into (allows
the plate to be left on the camera when using it with a non-quick release
head/bracket) The extra hole also allows a rail to be screwed to the plate
providing a macro focusing rail. Notice the extra hole near the screw that
attaches the plate to the camera ...
http://www.reallyrightstuff.com/body_plates/canon/index.html#
One of the "unfortunate" changes is that RRS has gone to is a double
dovetail design which is apparently deeper than several other brands. Their
lever release quick release may not work with other brands.
http://www.reallyrightstuff.com/clamps/index.html#
RRS used to put small screws into the end of the dovetail to prevent the
plate from sliding all of the way through the head. They've switched to
putting screws in the bottom of the plate. Unfortunately the screws in the
bottom of the plate don't reliably prevent the plate from sliding through my
Acratech head. They just leave marks on the clamp.
The RRS plate for the E1 uses a pin to prevent the plate form rotating. It
does not have a lip. The Kirk uses a lip that curves up around the bottom of
the camera.
Sometimes Kirk or sometimes RRS has the more appealing way of preventing
rotation. I don't think any of their plates are poorly designed nor poorly
made. Some of the changes RRS has made, makes the plates less
interchangeable.
I would agree that for most people the camera rotation device is massive
overkill. When a person's income depends upon quick relieable work, the
equation can quickly get changed.
http://www.reallyrightstuff.com/CRD/index.html
-jeff
----Original Message Follows----
From: Winsor Crosby <wincros@xxxxxxxxxxx>
All the Kirks I have bought have had the 1/4 x 20 hole in the plate.
But you are right generally they are of similar quality. What I have
liked about the Kirks is that sometimes they fit a little better. For
instance when I looked for a plate for my D100, the RRR plate had a
flat face to the front, handy for the logo, and it was machined out
behind it to fit the compound curve of the body. Kirk went the extra
step of machining the front to match the curve as well. Elegant and
unobtrusive. Another time I was looking for a plate, I don't remember
what it was for now, and the RRR plate surface for the camera was
flat with just the screw and a single lip to hold it in place and the
Kirk had a lip on each edge cradling the camera body. Another time I
looked for something for a Coolpix. Kirk had it and RRR did not. Hey
those bridge cameras needed a tripod too. Course this was all with
the original owner and not the new one. Things change. But if you
look at the L plate for a Nikon D2X, the Kirk one fits closer to the
camera and looks to be more comfortable to grab onto.
Winsor
Long Beach, California, USA
On Aug 20, 2006, at 12:45 PM, Jeff Keller wrote:
>
> When I first started with the Arca Swiss style quick release, I
> didn't see
> much difference betweeen RRS and Kirk. Some of the little features
> that RRS
> has such as the 1/4 x 20 hole in the plate are definitely worthwhile.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|