Suggested; but with Reservations
 |
Really Right Stuff - L-Bracket BOEM5III - Olympus OM-D EM5iii
|
LET ME sum up this purchase in one word: Disappointing! I have blogged about how I believe an L-bracket is a near-indispensable accessory for a serious photographer (if you use a tripod - and I have also blogged a few times my strong belief that you should use a tripod whenever feasible). There are 2 features on my Olympus OM-D5iii "travel" camera that render the RRS L-bracket a "fail" (or maybe, depending on your perspective, a "near-fail"). I am not an engineer, but I personally think the design could be rather easily modified to better address both of these. In fairness, modern digital cameras present issues that older SLR/DSLR bodies didn't; mainly in the area of electronic screens and "connectivity." Because of the changing shape and configuration of newly released camera bodies it seems that a newly designed L-bracket has to be created for each new camera. In my view, however, this particular bracket doesn't quite make the grade.
I am realistic enough to know that technology may someday render a tripod superflous. We are not there yet
TWO MAJOR (though not the only) considerations for my recent switch from the OMD EM-10 series to the OMD EM-5iii were: (1) a fully articulating rear screen, and (2) wired remote release capability. Unfortunately, these directly conflict with the features on the RRS bracket that I am criticizing here.
Remote Release
DESPITE ALL the hype to the contrary, I will continue (though it is probably quixotic - at least in relation to those "why do I need a tripod with my XXX brand's flawless IBIS?" preachers) to say that use of a tripod is still strongly recommended in all cases where its use is feasible; and just a plain-old necessity in some cases. I am realistic enough to know that technology may someday render a tripod superflous. We are not there yet.
One of the reasons I recently "upgraded" to the OM-D5iii was the existence of wired remote release capability
THE OLD saying: "a chain is only as strong as its weakest link" may be an apt analogy here. It does no good to have a sturdy, base if the camera itself is not firmly affixed, and can be triggered without touching it. To me that means you also need a remote triggering device to go hand-in-hand with the tripod. I have used the 2 second delay. I don't like it. It is impossible to "time" your tripping of the shutter - e.g., wind movement of plants and flowers, capturing "the moment" in other instances. Along with that, though this may be my personal peccadillo, it is inconvenient to remember to switch it back and forth. I have always been a little dumbfounded that many manufacturers have discontinued the facility of a simple, wired, remote release. My Sony cameras can only be triggered with a wireless release. I make it work, but it is clunky. The old OMD EM-10iv could only be remotely triggered using a cell phone app. To me that nearly cripples the use of a remote release. One of the reasons I recently "upgraded" to the OMD-EM5iii was the existence of wired remote release capability.
Articulating Rear Screen
I HAVE always been a viewfinder kind of a guy. Even today, purchasing a camera without a viewfinder is a non-starter for me. There is something about isolating all the other factors around you when you are looking through the viewfinder. It is how I have long felt most comfortable composing. Electronics, though, has changed the world. The first Electronic Viewfinders (EV) weren't very good. Probably as a result of mirrorless development, they very quickly got better; so much better that I now prefer them to the older TTL viewfinders for a number of reasons. I still want a viewfinder though. However, toward the end of my SLR/DSLR days, I aquired a "waist-level" viewfinder. I found it not only more comfortable to use when I wanted a composition from a lower perspective than my 6' standing height, but very versatile. Once my cameras began to come with tilting rear screens, I found that they were a pretty good substitute for that waist-level finder. Indeed, these days, I use it quite often and it does save wear and tear on my back. I find the fully articulating rear screens even more versatile. I wanted one - and I wanted to be able to use it.
RRS is really the only manufacturer who currently manufactures and sells a dedicated L-bracket for the EM-5iii body
Why I think RRS dropped the ball on this one
FIRST, I have a confession to make. This item is the first RRS item I have ever purchased. They are a U.S. manufacturer, and say that all of their materials and machining are from and in the U.S. There is something to be said for that. Over the years, I have had no doubt that they are top-drawer in terms of quality. At one time, U.S. manufacturer, Kirk Enterprises also made similar quality pieces (I am not sure what happened with them). I have owned a couple Kirk lens foot accessories. I also think it is fair to RRS to note that they are usually the first to the gate with brackets and accessories for newly released body. There is something to be said for the cost of design and R&D. I have a buddy who purchases from them and says their customer service is as good as any he has ever encountered. The reason, though, that I haven't routinely purchased RRS equipment boils down to one factor: cost. I have deemed their "stuff" (especially L-brackets) to be much too expensive for the purpose they serve. I once worked in a machine shop for a couple years and one of the things we did was milling aluminum parts - like the RRS L-bracket (not L-brackets, but similar machining). I knew in my "gut" that they could be produced much less expensively. That was born out time and again, by the availability of much less expensive good quality functional alternatives. When you have to buy one of these gadgets every time you make a camera change (and for every camera body you have), at prices from $150 and above each, it gets to be a costly (albeit important in my opinion) item for convenience.
RRS has some very smart engineers. I find it hard to believe they couldn't/didn't design around these issues
UNFORTUNATELY, AND I think this is largely due to the IBIS hype I alluded to, these brackets are not being made/sold for Olympus cameras (at least not the tripod based L-bracket). I think it is currenly a matter of demand, and it is just not there. It turns out that RRS is really the only manufacturer who currently manufactures and sells a dedicated L-bracket for the EM-5iii body. There are several "grips" being sold (mostly and eBay and those Chinese sites - which I will not participate in), but they really focus on the grip part and not the "L" in the L-bracket that I think is a critical piece. One competitor, who appears to be out of business, did have a pretty good looking alternative. I think you can find them (obviously used - but that shouldn't be an issue here) on eBay. Here is an example.
GIVEN THE niche that RRS occupies as the "best of the best," and essentially having a monopoly on this part, I paid the price because I thought it was that important to my photography, even though with this camera, I shoot very little from a tripod. But when I do, I want to be ready for it.
 |
RRS L-Bracket for Olympus OM-D EM5iii Conventional position for vertical bracket member (obstructs articulating rear screen) |
THAT JUST makes it all that much more disappointing to me. The RRS bracket "designed" specifically to fit my model fits the camera base nicely, but has a critical shortcoming. The bracket has two positions (they are more or less permanent - you choose between them when you install the vertical member of the bracket - see the positioning screw in the photos above and below). The "normal" postition (see first photo below) leaves access to the three port access points on the same side of the camera. Great, but it also largely interferes with the articulating rear screen mechanics (and I should also note, even though accessible, access to the "doors" on each port are essentially impossible without very long fingernails, or some "tool" to pry them open). It doesn't completely block the screen, but it does (as shown in the illustration) block the screen hinge, severely limiting the use of the screen.
THE SECOND position shifts the vertical member forward just enough to clear the screen hinge (see second illustration below). Problem solved, one would think, except that in that position it completely blocks all of the access ports. Oops. I didn't realize this when I bought it. I had read RRS's own description and a few online comments and reviews. Nobody brought that little detail up. Upon receipt, I was soon "palming" my forehead. I bought my copy from the venerable B&H folks. I did not, however, read the reviews on their site - which clearly pointed out this problem. My bad. Usable, but not completely acceptable for my purposes - especially for a $150 item.
My personal solution to make an alteration which, though it doesn't fully solve the problem, will work for my needs
I THINK there are several possible design solutions here. I can think of two. The first involves just moving the upright member a little further forward (looks like about 3/8" would clear the ports and doors). I realize that makes it stick out in front of the body further - and might even interfere with handholding comfort (for me, easy answer; I only install the bracket when I am going to mount it on a tripod. Takes 2 minutes). A second solution would be to shim it out away from the side of the camera body to make the ports accessible (some manufacturers have even made an adjustable, sliding mechanism for this). RRS has some very smart engineers. I find it hard to believe they couldn't/didn't design around these issues.
 |
RRS L- Bracket for Olympus OM-D EM5iii Forward position for vertical bracket member (obstructs all connection ports) |
MY PERSONAL solution was a "DIY" alteration which, I think will work for my needs. I don't do tethered shooting, so the only thing I need from that covered-up access port array is the single pin port for the wired remote. I calculated that I could gain access to this port with the upright in the forward position by cutting approximately 7/16" off the top of the rear upper (as they say on the TV commercials, "don't try this at home"). I used a grinder to first make a rough cut and then to carefully polish the rough edges as smooth as I could. I didn't attempt to mimic the pre-existing nicely rounded finish. The bad news is that I made a nicely finished piece looked less "nicely finished" - I have no way to replace the anodized black aluminum finish with anything durable. I painted it. Time will tell how that holds up. It is mainly for a nicer look and won't effect the functionality either way. My solution unfortunately removed some of the dovetailed metal designed to hold the camera firmly. I think there is enough left though, particularly with the very light load on this setup. I doubt most readers will feel confident about trying my "DIY" approach, but without it, if you are needing the lower ports while mounted vertically on a tripod, and you want use of the articulating rear screen, you are "SOL" - at least with the RRS model. 😒
 |
RRS L-Bracket for Olympus OM-D M5iii Modified to reveal Remote Release Port |
as they say on the TV commercials, "don't try this at home"
Suggested; but with Reservations
[You may note that I have slightly deviated from my rating/recommendation system by adding a new phrase: "with reservations." I bought it. I will probably keep it. But I need to modify it to fulfill its intended purpose. So I have serious reservations about whether you should buy it. If you don't need access to the ports, you may be good to go. If you do need that access, but are not confident in your ability to make the alteration I did, then it would definitely be "not recommended"]