Tripod Heads...

specialman

specialman

Messages
8,193
Name
Pat MacInnes
Edit My Images
Yes
I know there are a few tripod threads on here but mine is specifically relating to what heads people recommend.

I currently use a much loved (and much battered) Manfrotto 190SS that came out when the Ark was asail and have an old 229 three-way head fitted to handle a DSLR with a range of lenses up to 300mm.

Thing is, it's my works' tripod and isn't available all the time so I might as well bite the bullet and buy my own.

I like the fact that there are three large handles that control pan, tilt etc on the 229. What's everyone's views on the cheaper heads like the 056 junior (or those on the Velbon, Slik tripods) that have smaller thumbscrews to lock angles? Good? Bad?

What about ball heads? Any good for supporting larger lenses?

I ask this as I doubt I'll be able to justify (at the moment) the £129 price of the 229 head, plus the £100 or so for the 190 tripod.

I need things to be relativly light (my current tripod setup must weigh a good 4.5kg), as it'll be slung on my backpack for long hikes. Not too fussed about carbon, as it's very expensive.

Suggestions?
 
specialman said:
I currently use a much loved (and much battered) Manfrotto 190SS that came out when the Ark was asail and have an old 229 three-way head fitted to handle a DSLR with a range of lenses up to 300mm.

I like the fact that there are three large handles that control pan, tilt etc on the 229. What's everyone's views on the cheaper heads like the 056 junior (or those on the Velbon, Slik tripods) that have smaller thumbscrews to lock angles? Good? Bad?

Suggestions?
Click to expand...

I went for the Manfrotto 460MG head (http://www.manfrotto.com/Jahia/site/manfrotto/cache/offonce/pid/2332?livid=80|81&lsf=81&child=1). 3-way pan, tilt etc but it has knobs on rather than long panning handles. For me it had a number of advantages, not the least of which was that there were no long handles to poke you in the eye or prevent you getting your eye right up to the viewfinder. Unfortunately I've always found that long panning handles always get in the way, for me at least.

Also, for panning you can guide the motion of the head with just your thumbs on the head itself (instead of 6 inches or more away) while looking through the viewfinder. It has an immediacy about it which I didn't get with a 3-way head with longer handles.

And it comes in at 460g and under £50. Stuck on the top of my 190XPROB the whole thing weighs just over 2.2kg. However, the maximum recommended weight on this head is only 3kg, so if you regularly use heavy lenses it may not be the one for you.
 
Woadrage, tht was one fo the ehad I was considering because of the three-way adjustment and the price. Are the knobs easy to tighten when you have the camera in place? That's one reason I like my 229, because the handles give you plenty of leverage to lock it up. The eye-poking thing is a problem though, agreed.

2.2kg is great. I've purposely bought a lightweight Kata bag that I can't carry too much stuff in (fed up of lugging excess kit around in huge bags) but it doesn't have a vertical tripod carry bit on the back, just side straps to slide a tripod into. A light tripod setup is therefore essential.

I was also looking at the Slik 500 DX because it seems light, compact and tough. http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI....m=120217613070&ssPageName=STRK:MEWA:IT&ih=002

With a 460 head though, a 190X wouldn't be much more. Not as much max load as the Slik though.
 
specialman said:
Are the knobs easy to tighten when you have the camera in place?
Click to expand...

Yes, they are. All three knobs are below the level of the plate. The up-down tilt knob is situated in front of the head but since everything's so compact it's easy to get to. The knobs are well-grooved so you can tighten or loosen them even with wet hands, which may be a consideration for outdoor folks.

As to the maximum load, yes, it is lower than for most other heads, but as a hiker how often are you going to put 3kg of kit on top of the head? A D300 and a 70-200 f2.8 come in at well under that.
 
Sounds good. You're right - 70-200 with the D200 will be the maximum I'll load it up with. Looks like a nice piece of kit. Still quite tempted by the SLIK though...

...decisions, decisions :)
 
What about ball heads? Never used one (have always had mega-huge tripods since my 5x4" days) but read a lot about them being beter suited to landscape work because they're lighter yet still offer convential '3D' movement?
 
The first thing you need to decide is if you want to go for the cheaper and arguably not as well made Manfrotto quick release system, or the more expensive, but better made AS system.

I currently use a Manfrotto ball head. The thing is that non tension ball heads can be a bit figgity to use if you are trying to level a bubble level. The thing is that most of the tension ball heads use AS quick release system.

Here is a link to a range of ball heads are are really well made, and are tension ball heads (which means you don't actually have to release the ball head to move the camera - this is kind of hard to explain).
 
specialman said:
What about ball heads? Never used one (have always had mega-huge tripods since my 5x4" days) but read a lot about them being beter suited to landscape work because they're lighter yet still offer convential '3D' movement?
Click to expand...

I've never used a ball head either so have no experience with them. For landscape work, though, I expect a 3-way head to be more suitable if only because you can lock the horizon level and adjust the landscape/portrait format and the up-down bit of the composition separately. I don't think you can do that with a ball head but no doubt someone will tell me I'm wrong if I am. At least with a 3-way head, when you have locked off the horizon it's locked off.
 
woadrage said:
I've never used a ball head either so have no experience with them. For landscape work, though, I expect a 3-way head to be more suitable if only because you can lock the horizon level and adjust the landscape/portrait format and the up-down bit of the composition separately. I don't think you can do that with a ball head but no doubt someone will tell me I'm wrong if I am. At least with a 3-way head, when you have locked off the horizon it's locked off.
Click to expand...

Actually this is not the case, as in many cases if you are shooting in the wilderness you can't find stable ground to place the tripod on, so you are going to be at an angle. In this case your going to need a pano attachment for any panos, and the leveling of the horizon is going to be a little tricky with either a 3 way or ball head. At least with a ball head you can free adjust, and not have to bother with 3 nobs.
 
FranchiseJuan said:
Actually this is not the case, as in many cases if you are shooting in the wilderness you can't find stable ground to place the tripod on, so you are going to be at an angle. In this case your going to need a pano attachment for any panos, and the leveling of the horizon is going to be a little tricky with either a 3 way or ball head. At least with a ball head you can free adjust, and not have to bother with 3 nobs.
Click to expand...

I hope you can find stable ground even if you can't find flat ground! Otherwise you have an earthquake/mine shaft collapse or similar :eek:

But seriously, with a modern middle-range tripood or better, with legs adjustable for both height and angle and an angle-adjustable head of any type, I would have thought it possible to position the head horizontal to the horizon on pretty much any ground. However I'd have thought that under those circumstances, when one's own stance on uneven ground may be unstable, I would have thought panning easier with only one direction of movement to deal with than with all three at the same time.

Never tried it though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top