Stronger Mount for still camera?

[Kynan1 0]

I'm mounting an XTi w/Canon 10-22mm lens on a Rawa helmet. I'll go with the Flatlock top mount...but what else can I do to strengthen the hold on it? Rubber band?

[DSE 5]

A foam block beneath the lens may help support it better. And/or you can look at putting elastic/bungee over the lens to better secure it/dampen movement.
Someone else may have a better idea

[The111 1]

Quote

I'm mounting an XTi w/Canon 10-22mm lens on a Rawa helmet. I'll go with the Flatlock top mount...but what else can I do to strengthen the hold on it? Rubber band?

You don't need to strengthen it. That quarter inch screw can already hold many many more times the weight of that camera.

Do you think a rubber band will make a quarter inch of alloy metal stronger?

www.WingsuitPhotos.com

[jtval 0]

Quote

I'm mounting an XTi w/Canon 10-22mm lens on a Rawa helmet. I'll go with the Flatlock top mount...but what else can I do to strengthen the hold on it? Rubber band?

Kynan, I think it's best if you let me jump the setup for a season or 2 just to be sure all the kinks are out.

DSE had a good idea with the foam. but if you do that you should be sure NOT to have autofocus on or the friction will wear/break the motor in your lens.
I set my cam so I can use autofocus. So I don't want to tape or jam the free movement of the lens.

By STRENGTHEN I think you meant "more secure"
and by Rubber band I think you meant to help prevent it from spinning/rotating.

You've seen my setupsidedown I use the elastic to prevent the camera from rotating but its more of a precautionary thing. If the thumbscrew is on tightly it won't move...and I haven't yet been kicked so I've had no issues with the focal point/POV
From what I've seen on the flatlock it looks like the rotating won't be an issue.

My photos

My Videos

[Dokeman 0]

I jumped the same setup for a while. Rebel xt with a 10-22 on a rawa. I agree that the metal screw is plenty fine. I had a stroboframe but all the quick releases are the same. The are all attached by the same metal screw. I actually find it kinda funny when people use the metal screw and then out somekind of strap on top for extra security. If the screw doesn't hold it, the little strap sure insn't

[tetra316 0]

Quote

I actually find it kinda funny when people use the metal screw and then out somekind of strap on top for extra security. If the screw doesn't hold it, the little strap sure insn't

I use a strap on top - to keep the screen from coming open in freefall and getting ripped off

[LouDiamond 1]

Quote

I agree that the metal screw is plenty fine. I had a stroboframe but all the quick releases are the same.

That simply is not true. The clamp systems from Really Right Stuff are in a league of their own. Your camera body will break before the bracket comes out of the RRS QR clamp.

While all systems use the tripod screw mount to attach the bracket, it is how the QR clamp holds that bracket in place that is important. A good system will remove the stress placed on the inherently weak tripod screw mount and put it on the bracket instead.

Attached are pictures of a HC-5 that has a RRS bracket installed that was damaged due to a hard opening. Had any other system been used, the tripod screw mount would have given to the stress and the camera would have been lost. In this case, the footage was for a paid job and a lost camera/footage was not an option. I actually noticed that the camera was damaged after downloading the footage. Incredibly, the camera still works. If you have a 15 cent camera, use the 15 cent screw to hold it to your helmet. On the other hand, if you value your gear, you cannot go wrong with the products from Really Right Stuff.

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[jtval 0]

Quote

Quote

I agree that the metal screw is plenty fine. I had a stroboframe but all the quick releases are the same.

That simply is not true. The clamp systems from Really Right Stuff are in a league of their own.

VERY TRUE.

My photos

My Videos

[Kynan1 0]

Thanks all. I think I'll use some kind of rubber band to further secure it down though. Biggest worry, hard opening, camera falls off.

[The111 1]

Quote

While all systems use the tripod screw mount to attach the bracket, it is how the QR clamp holds that bracket in place that is important. A good system will remove the stress placed on the inherently weak tripod screw mount and put it on the bracket instead.

I'm not sure exactly what you mean, and I can't figure out what's going on in the pics, but in general it's not possible to "remove stress from the screw" unless there is something else other than the screw holding the camera in place. I've played with RRS brackets and no matter how solid they are, the screw is still the final link holding the camera down. That means the screw is taking all the stress from the camera's inertial load. There's no way to "remove" that.

www.WingsuitPhotos.com

[The111 1]

Quote

Thanks all. I think I'll use some kind of rubber band to further secure it down though.

Seriously? Did you read all the replies? A rubber band will not hold against an immense force that would break a 1/4" metal screw. Might as well wrap toilet paper around it.

www.WingsuitPhotos.com

[stratostar 5]

And you've been flying cameras for how long now....

you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

[Icon134 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

I agree that the metal screw is plenty fine. I had a stroboframe but all the quick releases are the same.

That simply is not true. The clamp systems from Really Right Stuff are in a league of their own.

VERY TRUE.

I agree that not all QR systems are the same but the 1/4 inch screw is not the weak link in most quickrelease systems and probably purely from load limit standpoint the plastic housing on the camera itself (which appears to be what failed on the pictured camera) is more then likely the weakest link in most mounts.

Of course I use manfroto mounts... although I have considered switching to RRS mounts which I should be able to do without actually having to change anything on my top plate (other then the position of my hypeye pro D switch position.)

Livin' on the Edge... sleeping with my rigger's wife...

[LouDiamond 1]

Notice that the plate/bracket is still firmly attached to the base of the camera's tripod mount despite the failure of the camera body. The way the RRS QR clamp and the plate/bracket integrate creates a stronger attachment than any system that just relies on a screw holding the device in place or bracket systems like the stroboframe,etc that can easily twist off under force. The way the plate and clamp work together to form one solid platform when locked down removes the levering stress off of the tripod mount screw. Had there been stress on the tripod mount screw in the photos I attached, you would have seen the screw mount as the failure point and not the camera body. To see how the 2 work together click here

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[The111 1]

Quote

Had there been stress on the tripod mount screw in the photos I attached, you would have seen the screw mount as the failure point and not the camera body.

There is still stress on the screw. The fact that you've made the bracket stronger than the screw does not "remove stress from the screw." The fact that the camera body is weaker than the screw does not "remove stress from the screw." The only thing that would cause the screw to break is if both the bracket and the camera body were stronger than it. Clearly, the camera body is the weak link in your example... but the only way it was able to break was that stress was transmitted through the screw, to the camera body. Meaning, the screw was stressed. That is not a bad thing... screws are designed to be stressed.

EDIT: A more on-topic comment, back to the whole "skydiving" thing. Speaking of "weak links" in mechanical systems... no matter how robust your brackets, screws, or camera bodies are, the weak link in every setup we use is our NECKS. If you are seriously worried about ramming your head into something so hard that it tears your camera off your helmet you should:

1) Find ways to avoid doing that in the first place
2) Think about the fact that the stronger you make those metal mounts, the more stress you will place on your neck BEFORE the metal mounts fail. We recommend putting nylon screws on ringsight mounts ($250 hardware), but when it comes to cameras we apparently want their attachments able to withstand a terminal impact. A camera's a lot more than $250, so I guess you gotta ask yourself: at what dollar value of mounted hardware does YOUR desire for a rigidly mounted system outweigh your desire to use your neck for the rest of your life? I've examined most of the quick release systems on the market and they all work. Sure, some are stronger than others, but there is such a thing as over-engineering, and in this case it can actually be a dangerous thing (the very reason we recommend people use nylon screws on ringsight mounts). I used the old cheap Stroboframe for years before I built my CCM and no it's not the strongest system in the world, but I never lost a camera, and if I hit my head hard enough to make that system fail, I would have been thankful for it failing and relieving the stress of the impact from my neck.

www.WingsuitPhotos.com

[Dokeman 0]

Everyone is forgetting that its not about the screw being strong enough. All the quick release's work the same. 2 metal parts that lock together with other metal parts. I can see any opening being bad enough to break metal in half. The weakest link will ALWAYS break first. That would be the inside the camera itself where the metal meets plastic, or the paper thin carbon fiber/plastic that its attached on top of your helmet. In other words, the whole top of the helmet would break off before the screw would. Same goes for your neck, I think your neck would break before metal. Thats why we use nylon screws for our ringsights. Because if we get a line around it, it would simply break off.


I use a strap on top - to keep the screen from coming open in freefall and getting ripped off ***

Thats certainly one way to do it, but I have found it much easier to just wrap a small rubberband around the camera instead of drilling extra holes and having a plastic buckle scratch up my cam.

[LouDiamond 1]

It's not the screw strength thats in question. It's the 4-5 threads in the camera body that holds your camera to the helmet if you just use a screw through the helmet or a less robust clamp device. If the force can be spread over a larger durable surface that is less susceptible to torque and not pinpointed like it is when a single screw is used, the attachment is going to stronger.

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[The111 1]

Quote

A good system will remove the stress placed on the inherently weak tripod screw mount and put it on the bracket instead.

If you have a 15 cent camera, use the 15 cent screw

Quote

The way the plate and clamp work together to form one solid platform when locked down removes the levering stress off of the tripod mount screw.

Quote

It's not the screw strength thats in question.

You've said twice that we need to "remove stress from the screw" and also that "15 cent screws" aren't enough.

And now you say it's not the screw strength in question.

Honestly, it's not making any sense.

Keep in mind that I design mounting hardware for a living.

www.WingsuitPhotos.com

[Icon134 0]

Quote

It's not the screw strength thats in question. It's the 4-5 threads in the camera body that holds your camera to the helmet if you just use a screw through the helmet or a less robust clamp device. If the force can be spread over a larger durable surface that is less susceptible to torque and not pinpointed like it is when a single screw is used, the attachment is going to stronger.

I think I understand what you are saying... on idea that is simlar to what you are suggesting would to put a screw through the helmet and attach it directly to the camera with a plate of aircraft aluminum between the camera helmet and the camera (or steel would be fine as well) as well as on the back of the helmet (which I sort of do by using a large diameter washer on the back of the mount for my manfroto mounts)

as has been said before the plastic housing on the camera itself is probably the weekest link in most quick release systems.

btw: I enjoy thinking about this sort of thing as it reminds me of when I designed aircraft repairs (as well as when I was a failure analyst)... which is about determining where the weak link in any design is.

Livin' on the Edge... sleeping with my rigger's wife...

[LouDiamond 1]

Quote

the inherently weak tripod screw mount

Ok, let me break it down into the most basic terms since it appears the point is being missed. Ya know that hole on the bottom of your camera that has threads in it that is usually used to mount a camera to a tripod? That's what I am speaking about. When that single point of contact is the fulcrum point for the camera, with the average 6-8 Gs of opening force, there is a very good chance that the torque generated on a severe opening will cause failure at that point. Some mounts , like the Strobframe which tend to have wiggle in them, have a anti twist plate but most don't use it. While better than a screw alone, the plate with cork on it allows the camera to be torqued against that mounting point as well, which either causes the clamp to release the camera or to pull the screw out of the hole in the camera. On 2 occasions I have seen people land with a Strobo frame that had the clamp and plate still together and no camera on top after what was said to be a normal opening.

Conversely, I witnessed JC Colclasure, who also uses RRS clamps, have 4 lines snap on opening and land under his reserve with the plate/ clamp and the tripod mount with bread board still attached to his helmet, the rest of the camera was gone. The point being that the point of failure is no longer that single point of attachment that all cameras have because the clamp better distributes the forces. When you have cameras like a 5D or ones with a lot of lens on them that weigh a bit more, having a stronger mounting system is a good idea.

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[The111 1]

What you appear to be talking about now is the simple act of a camera screw unthreading, and the camera falling off. If that's what you were talking about all along, then I indeed misinterpreted, largely because of the words you used.

When you said "failure" you meant "unthreading." To a structural engineer, failure actually means destructively breaking. A screw unthreading is a not a screw failing. It's actually performing its intended purpose by unthreading under applied torque... although the system may be failing its intended purpose now (not mechanically though).

When you said "stress" you meant "torque." Stress doesn't cause a screw to unthread, stress is what causes metal to fail (break), force over area. Of course torque on a screw will cause it to unthread.

That having something in place to counter-act camera twist/torque is a good idea... I agree.

That something as incredibly beefy and heavy as the RRS bracket is the most suitable way to accomplish that task in freefall applications... I disagree. Not saying it's a horribly bad idea, but it's not the only one or the best.

www.WingsuitPhotos.com

[tetra316 0]

Quote

I use a strap on top - to keep the screen from coming open in freefall and getting ripped off ***

Thats certainly one way to do it, but I have found it much easier to just wrap a small rubberband around the camera instead of drilling extra holes and having a plastic buckle scratch up my cam.

No extra holes. The strap goes underneath the mounting bracket and is held in place once the bracket is secured to the helmet. And the buckle does not scratch my camera

[LouDiamond 1]

Quote

When you said "failure" you meant "unthreading."

No, I am not talking about a screw backing it's way out or coming loose but failure in the way that you interpreted it. Not necessarily the screw itself but the mounting hole on the camera that the screw threads into.

Quote

That something as incredibly beefy and heavy as the RRS bracket is the most suitable way to accomplish that task in freefall applications... I disagree. Not saying it's a horribly bad idea, but it's not the only one or the best.

The difference in actual weight of a RRS clamp and plate compared to other alternatives is marginal. It's not like the RRS stuff weighs say a pound compared to several ounces of another clamp/plate combination. It may be a few ounces heavier than some combinations but given it's milled from solid blocks and not pressed metal it is significantly stronger. RRS also makes the mount specific to the camera it is to be used on so fit and function tolerances are very high. I agree it's not the only way to mount a camera. However, if someone wants to put several thousand dollars of camera equipment on their head,especially if its heavy, it makes sense that they would want to use a strong, high quality mount. IMO, the clear choice is RRS. With that said, RRS isn't for everyone as it is not cheap either and another product may better fit into that persons budget range.

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[The111 1]

Quote

No, I am not talking about a screw backing it's way out or coming loose but failure in the way that you interpreted it. Not necessarily the screw itself but the mounting hole on the camera that the screw threads into.

Then your contention is still that one bracket can make a 1/4" screw stronger than another bracket? A 1/4" screw is a 1/4" screw is a 1/4" screw. If you want to make it stronger spend $5 on a good alloy metal screw. The plate below the screw has no control over when the screw will fail.

No matter WHAT your camera is mounted to, the screw is the final load path. You cannot "take stress off of the screw," unless you are externally clamping the camera in place, which is not the case here. Ripping a camera baseplate off is not evidence of "no stress on the screw"... the screw had to carry an immense amount of stress in order for that failure of the baseplate to happen.

www.WingsuitPhotos.com

[Fast 0]

I don't see how the mounting plate can dramatically affect how the forces are applied inside the camera. To me, most of that has to do with how the attachments inside the camera are made to the piece of metal that the screw goes into. If you are suggesting that its because the plate covers a good portion of the bottom of the camera and keeps it from bending (like it could if the screw was just a big long rod with threads) then I don't see how most mounts are different. All the mounts I have seen are pretty adequate in that regards. At least in comparison to how the insides of most cameras are constructed.

I would hazard a guess that, most of the people you have seen with cameras completely broken off still have the metal part from the bottom of the camera attached. I would also hazard a guess that they are the people who are jumping the lower end cameras. Not 5Ds and the like.

I think most of it has to do with how the camera is constructed, not the mount. The mount does play a role for sure, so long as they are tight up against one another though, I don't see there being that much of a difference. It still all comes back to how that little metal piece in the bottom of the camera is designed to distribute load throughout the plastic body of the camera. Which, my point being, the PRO cameras most likely do a better job of.

~D
Where troubles melt like lemon drops Away above the chimney tops That's where you'll find me.
Swooping is taking one last poke at the bear before escaping it's cave - davelepka