Worred about issue with ball heads...

C

Chumpalot

Messages
669
Edit My Images
Yes
Evening all,

I hope someone could clear something up for me.

I was talking to someone today at work about my tripod choice and he advised me not to go for a ball head as they have trouble staying tilted with heavy cameras on them? And that I would need to ensure I screwed it up tightly if you see what I mean....

Is this true? If so, would a 3-way head be better for me?

Thanks and look forward to your replies.

Dave
 
Generally speaking, 3-way heads are normally preferred when using long, heavy telephoto lenses but each head has certain advantages over the other.

The 3-way allows you to "fine-tune" your compositions as you're able to move vertically and horizontally independently of each other. The ball head only requires one locking lever and the whole unit swivels in all directions which can make it quicker to set up.

Ultimately, it depends on your budget too. Manfrotto, for example, make some heavy duty ball heads which also have quick-release platforms, and these can support quite a lot of weight. Unfortunately, they are very expensive.
 
My Redsnapper ball head is as solid as a rock (I think it depends on the manufacturer, as with all things)
 
The one I have my eye on is the Redsnapper 283 and TB-12 ball head.

If i were to mount a D90 on this and adjust the ball head 90 degrees downwards, would there be any issue there?

I notice also that the 3-way head is around half the price of the ball head.

Thanks for the advice guys

Dave
 
Nothing wrong with ball heads if you get the right one for the job, I hang a 500f4 and 1 series body on mine with no problems at all.
 
malla1962 said:
Nothing wrong with ball heads if you get the right one for the job, I hang a 500f4 and 1 series body on mine with no problems at all.
Click to expand...

:agree:

Arca Swiss, Really Right Stuff, Kirk, Markins all perfectly fine ball heads.
 
Carl V said:
Generally speaking, 3-way heads are normally preferred when using long, heavy telephoto lenses but each head has certain advantages over the other.
Click to expand...

Um, not really

As a user of long, heavy telephoto lenses I can catagorially state that a 3 way head would be very low on my list of head types to use.

They offer nothing but ballache.
 
Yup, ball head advocate here and it's the most versatile of them all. I've used all the heads and will now stick with a ball. No problems with precision and certainly no problem with it dislodging under heavy equipment...
 
I agree with all the comments regarding ball heads.

My first tripod, a Velbon, had a 3-way head which I didn't like very much if I'm being honest. But when I changed to a Manfrotto, I bought a ball head for it (I forget the model number but it was one of the cheaper ones). I have never regretted it as it's a lot more versatile.

I mentioned the 3-way head in my earlier posting because some of the photographers I've hung around with use them and they have much larger lenses than I have, so I was under the impression these were perhaps better for carrying the weight.

I think Manfrotto make ball heads which can hold up to around 10 kg, so I'm sure other manufacturers are the same.
 
Carl V said:
I mentioned the 3-way head in my earlier posting because some of the photographers I've hung around with use them and they have much larger lenses than I have, so I was under the impression these were perhaps better for carrying the weight.
Click to expand...

Wimberley Sidekick and a ball head is the way to go with the longer lenses.
 
Martyn... said:
Wimberley Sidekick and a ball head is the way to go with the longer lenses.
Click to expand...

He speaks the truth
I got a sidekick some months back and I absolutely love it, even use it on a monpod now.
 
Martyn... said:
Wimberley Sidekick and a ball head is the way to go with the longer lenses.
Click to expand...


Out of interest,what do these super expensive heads do that a Manfrotto 393 doesn`t?

I have never seen nor used a wimberly,so am intriuged......:suspect:

Cheers.
 
fracster said:
Out of interest,what do these super expensive heads do that a Manfrotto 393 doesn`t?

I have never seen nor used a wimberly,so am intriuged......:suspect:

Cheers.
Click to expand...

Made with slightly higher tolerances, more adjustable etc, but the 393 is very good value for money when compared with the much more expensive options. One problem with the the 393 though is that it doesn't have Arca fitting.
 
Thanks for the explanation......:thumbs:

Feeling rather idle and not wishing to search here or Google,what is an Arca fitting and what is the posotives of such a thing?
 
For me the sidekick is the perfect choice.
I can have a ballhead on my tripod for general use than in a few seconds I can slip a sidekick on and I have a gimble.
The sidekick easily sits in a pocket in my bag and adds little extra weight.
 
Thank you all for the comments. I'm going to go ahead with the Redsnapper and TB-12 ball head and see how I get on. If weight is an issue I will look for another.

Thanks again
 
I have recently bought the Red Snapper tripod and ball head and i am very pleased with it , it's rock solid as as been mentioned by others and i wouldn't worry about it the ball head to be honest , it is very well made .

btw I've been here for a while and this is my 1st post !That is shocking.
Must make an effort to post more, but usually end up reading the threads for hours . So much good and friendly advice here , it's a great forum.
 
fracster said:
Thanks for the explanation......:thumbs:

Feeling rather idle and not wishing to search here or Google,what is an Arca fitting and what is the posotives of such a thing?
Click to expand...

Its an industry standard quick release dovetail plate, the top end heads all have the QR plate that accepts the same standard plate. The most common available here are the Kirk plates, these will fit Kirk, Arca Swiss, Markins, RSS and Acratech head plates.

Manfrotto have a multitude of different size and design plates, so are not interchangeable with different Manfrotto heads, which seems ridiculous that they do not stick to a standard design and fitting to make the things interchangeable.

With regard to what makes the Arca Swiss et al better than Manfrotto is when I tighten my Arca Swiss there is no lens drop, with the cheaper heads there is.
 
Martyn... said:
when I tighten my Arca Swiss there is no lens drop, with the cheaper heads there is.
Click to expand...

This is what I'm concerned about. I'm worred that if I have the camera + lens tilted at all it'll slide down when I tighten it and I'll have to prop it up somehow whilst I do this.
 
Chumpalot said:
This is what I'm concerned about. I'm worred that if I have the camera + lens tilted at all it'll slide down when I tighten it and I'll have to prop it up somehow whilst I do this.
Click to expand...

They do not drop that much, but enough to lose composition in Macro shooting as an example, for the record cheap pan and tilt would do the same thing.
 
For studio work I have paired a sturdy old set of second-hand Linhof legs (£20 clear out from local photographic shop), with a Fomei MH-0110 Grip Action ball Head (£35 complete with two quick release plates). The arrangement is rock solid and all for silly money. I understand that the head is as good as the much more expensive Manfrotto equivalent.

You can get the Fomei from ...
http://www.photomart.co.uk/ProductDe...roductID=28861

Sam-D
 
:thumbs: Another vote for the ball head here Manfrotto 322RC2 does all I want it to do and is rock solid.
 
Galaxy66 said:
:thumbs: Another vote for the ball head here Manfrotto 322RC2 does all I want it to do and is rock solid.
Click to expand...

I want to swap my 322RC2 for a decent standard ballhead like a RRS BH-55. Although good, I find the 322RC2 not adjustable enough and not strong enough for a heavy camera.
 
I Started out with a three way head and It was a pain in the backside, soon moved over to a Giottos MH1000-652 Ballhead, much better than the three way.

The offer of a Manfrotto 332RC2 came up and I snapped it up, but tbh even though its a good bit of kit, I sometimes miss the Giottos!

It mostly boils down to personal preference more than anything as there are ballheads out there that will but 3 way heads to shame :)
 
Messiah Khan said:
I want to swap my 322RC2 for a decent standard ballhead like a RRS BH-55. Although good, I find the 322RC2 not adjustable enough and not strong enough for a heavy camera.
Click to expand...
I have a Kirk BH-3 ballhead and it is an awesome piece of kit - when I lock it off it stays very firmly locked - there is no flex at all even with a heavy lens on tos (for example, the 120-300)
 
RichardtheSane said:
I have a Kirk BH-3 ballhead and it is an awesome piece of kit - when I lock it off it stays very firmly locked - there is no flex at all even with a heavy lens on tos (for example, the 120-300)
Click to expand...

I looked at most of the top end ball heads a while ago, and I think I've narrowed it down to the RRS BH-55 even though it is expensive and would need to be imported from the US. Just need to save up for it now.
 
Messiah Khan said:
I looked at most of the top end ball heads a while ago, and I think I've narrowed it down to the RRS BH-55 even though it is expensive and would need to be imported from the US.
Click to expand...
A very good choice. :thumbs:
I, too, did a lot of homework before buying an RSS BH-40, and I can promise that you won't regret it at all. It just oozes quality, and it really makes a difference to how the camera handles on the tripod (the "subtle adjuster" drag-set knob helps!).

Due to a postal foul-up I actually have a spare which may be for sale shortly, if you're prepared to consider the smaller size.

Stroller.
 
I'm using a Kood ballhead, innexpensive, well made, solid as a rock even with my heaviest lens the bigma.
 
The reason that there are so many types of heads. is that there is an equal divergent opinion as to which is the best.
I have a few ball heads and in general don't care for them, I find it difficult to be precise with them but they are quick.
Three way heads have the advantage that you can set each axis separately, but they have more controls to set.

All heads come in sizes to suit different weights of kit. so it is easy to chose the right one.
 
Messiah Khan said:
I looked at most of the top end ball heads a while ago, and I think I've narrowed it down to the RRS BH-55 even though it is expensive and would need to be imported from the US. Just need to save up for it now.
Click to expand...

I have one and IMHO it's an awesome ballhead!

With a low $/£ ratio at the mo, you're looking at about £350, including import duty and tax :(. No idea when the exchange rate'll be better though...

I don't think you'll regret getting one. Shame they don't have UK distributors, last time I spoke to RRS, they were contemplating it (about a year ago)....
 
Chumpalot said:
This is what I'm concerned about. I'm worred that if I have the camera + lens tilted at all it'll slide down when I tighten it and I'll have to prop it up somehow whilst I do this.
Click to expand...

did you buy the redsnapper?
i have the d90 (am a total newb) and was interested in your views?
 
oldson said:
did you buy the redsnapper?
i have the d90 (am a total newb) and was interested in your views?
Click to expand...

No, but I'm on the verge. My money recently has gone on 2 lenses instead....:naughty:

I still have my eye on the TRI283 (can't justify the extra for the carbon version and it's not THAT much lighter imo) and 3-way head. Can't go wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top