mR_CaESaR wrote:ic, i for some reason thought it slides over, i think i saw some sports photographers on tv having one that slides over, i think they are higher end heads/brackets.
Well, depending on how you have it set up you can very quickly slide it out in one orientation and slide it in rotated 90 degrees.
But it's not really the speed of rotating that's I'm important to me: it's the fact that after you've rotated, the lens is still in almost the same position (without having to raise/lower/move the tripod&head).
So it pretty much has one of those standard plates that most tripods come with, only reason i ask about the 70-200 series is because that lens will one day be the heaviest lens i have on my tripod (can't see myself getting anything bigger in the near future, i'm sure the 227 & kb2 will take those easily, actually by the looks of the specs it looks like it'll take up to 500f4L, maybe stuggling a little)
With these bigger lenses the L-plate on the camera body is superfluous. All these lenses have their own tripod collars (which you would attach a plate to) which the lens can rotate in. Given the size of these lenses it's better for the camera to hang off the back of the lens rather than vice versa (not just for reasons of stress: it's more stable).
The Canon 70-200mm/4 does not come with the collar by default: for some reason they decided to make it an optional extra. I would not consider using it without the collar. On the 70-200mm/2.8 lenses it's standard.
L-plates on camera bodies are wonderful things, but only relevant when you're using a short lens that does not have its own mounting collar.