RRS L bracket for D300+MB-D10--first impressions

[mikeseb]

Received the RRS L-bracket for the D300+MB-D10 battery grip this week. Got a chance to take it out to play yesterday, mounted atop Gitzo 1548 legs and RRS BH-55 ballhead. (Disclaimer: I have no affiliation with RRS or Nikon other than as a mostly-satisfied customer of both.)

RRS told me they received samples of camera and/or grip only when they shipped out to the rest of us, so it took them about ten weeks or so to design, prototype, and manufacture the bracket. Perhaps someone more knowledgeable about machining and manufacture can comment on whether that is a fast job of design and build. Seems pretty quick to me!

The bracket looks to be made to RRS's usual high standard of workmanship. Nicely finished and ?forged, if that's the right word.

The bracket cups the bottom of the battery grip, and attaches via its tripod screw, as expected, with the usual RRS hex-socket captive screw. It's about as low-profile as it can get without obstructing camera functions, and it nowhere touches the camera body--hard to see how it could, given that the camera's exterior is everywhere covered with knobs, ports, and controls. There is sufficient clearance around the battery chamber door to allow battery changes without difficulty. The input/output ports and ten-pin socket on the D300's left-hand (literally) side are likewise not obstructed. I do not find the bracket obtrusive in my hands; I wouldn't have a problem leaving it on the camera all the time. I have found this to be the case with each of the RRS brackets I've used.

Only one possible wrinkle: since the bracket attaches only to the battery grip, and makes no contact anywhere with the camera body, the bracket-grip-body assembly is only as rigid as the least rigid of the connections between the three components. Obvious, since the bracket doesn't "bridge" both grip and camera, which from a rigidity standpoint would be the ideal.

The union of bracket and grip is fairly firm--it embraces the grip's undersurface nicely and the screw pulls things together firmly. However, I noticed some definite play between the battery grip and the body. Inasmuch as this can be attributed, it would seem more a Nikon "problem" than a RRS one. The battery grip is not the sturdiest affair; and its screw, even when tightened as far as one's strength and risk tolerance will allow, still does not prevent some rocking fore and aft of the grip on the body. This tendency would be exacerbated with a longer, heavier lens acting as a lever.

As it happens I was mounting the 14-24 and 24-70 lenses; both of these are long and heavy, and the 14-24's CG is especially far out in front with its bulbous, large, and heavy front element. I first noticed the wobble because my finger happened to fall along the junction of body and battery grip, and I felt it flex. Not surprisingly, the wobble was more pronounced with the 14-24.

Is this a problem? Time will tell. It would only be a problem if the wobble somehow affected the contacts between grip and body, or if continued flexing caused the grip-body union to progressively loosen, or if this movement had a discernible negative effect on image quality. I could not tell that it made any difference in the quality of the images I shot; just having the camera (finally) on a tripod made such a noticeable improvement that I'm not sure how I'd detect any decrement in IQ from this anomaly per se.

Thanks in advance for your comments.

[JeffKohn]

I also received mine on Friday, and I'm a little disappointed.

There are some nice touches on this bracket. I like the center-point markers for alignment. They've also added a slot on bottom for threading a hand-strap through.

I was a bit disappointed to see that they've used much less aluminum on the bottom plate compared to my D2 bracket. The D300 bracket doesn't fully cradle the bottom of the camera as there is only a lip in back.

Unfortunately I feel that the core functionality of the bracket has been compromised by the fact that RRS felt they had to make the I/O door accessible. By moving the vertical mount back to accomdate the I/O door, it is no longer in alignment with the horizontal mount. This means that if you take measurements to determine the "nodal point" of your lenses for shooting panoramics, you'll need two sets of measurements, one for the horizontal mount and one for the vertical. Another consequence of shifting the vertical mount is that the weight balance of the camera is slightly more forward than it ideally should be. Finally, since they wanted to leave space for your finger to get under and open the I/O door, the vertical mount isn't contoured to the camera which would have added an additional support point.

I almost never need access to the I/O panel, so I would prefer a bracket that is designed for optimal fit and stability even if it means removing the bracket on those rare occasions when I do need access. Some  people may want to shoot tethered, but they would be better served by a regular camera plate anyways, because you can't shoot verticals while tethered using this bracket (there's no slot to allow sliding the bracket away from the side of the camera like there is on the D3).

Here are a few pictures of the bracket, including a comparison shot with the D2x bracket: http://www.pbase.com/jkohn/d300_bracket

[Tony Beach]

Thank you for the review Michael.

Your observations confirm my suspicions.  My own inclination is that the MB-D10 is best used for handheld sports or on the back of the camera mounted on a longer lens with its own tripod collar.  The L bracket itself is compromised when used in the vertical orientation and that this is compounded with a non-integrated vertical grip in the camera.  That's why I will buy the smaller L bracket and the MB-D10 separately for my D300.

Since I can get my Kirk BL-D200 bracket to work on my D300, I will definitely get the MB-D10 first.  I had to remove the plastic cover on the rear LCD to make my temporary solution work though; anyone considering this should be forewarned that the glass on the D300's rear LCD screen is not as hard as the glass on the D3's rear LCD screen -- my D300 already has a small nick in it, on the other hand I know that Bjorn Rorslett took a knife to his D3 screen and couldn't scratch it.

[DarkPenguin]

Did you consider the Kirk bracket?  On my 40D I went with RRS just because they had better access to the IO stuff.  But I was concerned about lost stability.

[JeffKohn]

Did you consider the Kirk bracket?  On my 40D I went with RRS just because they had better access to the IO stuff.  But I was concerned about lost stability.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=173757\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The Kirk bracket for D300+grip seems to be just about identical in design to the RRS bracket.