I Need a New Tripod Head

Quaker

Quaker

Messages
972
Name
Quaker
Edit My Images
Yes
Got my tripod out last night to take images of the supermoon to discover my 3-way pan head was broken. One of the brackets has snapped in half, obviously down to being squashed in my suitcase on a recent flight.

The tripod is an OEM standard one I picked up in Malaysia, over here they are called Redsnapper. I am more than happy with the legs so I just need to get a new head on it. I am looking at Manfrotto 494RC2 /496RC2 I think the 496 may be a bit of an overkill, I have the D300s and my heaviest lens is my 70-300mm.

Would the 494 suffice or am I cutting it fine?

Any input would be appreciated, Thanks in advance.
 
a lot depends on what camera/lens you are using it with - what's the weight of the gear you are using/
 
As stated above the D300s (2.3kg) and my heaviest lens is a 70-300mm (745grms)

The 494 states a max load of 4 kg so I am inside that but is it sturdy enough?
 
No I have a Manfrotto 496RC2 Compact Ball Head

Quaker said:
As stated above the D300s (2.3kg) and my heaviest lens is a 70-300mm (745grms)

The 494 states a max load of 4 kg so I am inside that but is it sturdy enough?
Click to expand...

You asked would the 494 was sturdy enough seems so :thumbs:
 
Last edited:
I wouldn't pay too much attention to the rated weight. It might technically be capable of holding 4kg, but in reality a sturdier head will do a better job of holding your camera. Buy the best one you can afford; it won't be overkill.
 
Thanks Sam.

The 494 is ok for what I have now but I have gone for the 496 in case my kit changes in the future.
 
Go for the biggest ball you can.

Rated weight is what it will hold in place without giving way (In reality the can hold more.

However if you even go to 50% of the rated weight on a lot of heads you get some movement (lens drops down) after the head has been tightened - which is an sod for framing!
 
I use a 498rc2 and would definitely recommend getting the biggest you can. Even the 498 dropped slightly with just my old 50D and Sigma 10-20mm so I no longer use it for landscapes or anything else where I want to position precisely, but then I suppose ball heads arent really designed to hold position precisely.

For landscapes I now use a Manfrotto 410 geared head and its far better for positioning than any ball head - I can adjust any axis independently and theres absolutely no movement once set.
 
Last edited:
Thank you everyone for taking the time to respond.

I went for the 496 in the end, it was delivered yesterday and I am really happy with it.
 
RichardtheSane said:
Rated weight is what it will hold in place without giving way (In reality the can hold more
Click to expand...

Rated weight means nothing, zip, zero, nada, b****r all.

There is no standard for what the ratings for tripods and heads means, nor how to measure it. Some companies seem to quote the weight that you can stick on their gear without it crumpling under the strain - even if the whole thing droops and shakes like a viagraless alkie. Other companies seem to quote a maximum weight that their gear can handle and remian usable.

I've always made sure that I have at least a factor of two leeway between quoted limits and what I plan to stick on top of the stuff I buy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top