Upload & Sell: On
| p.1 #1 · Another RRS vs. Markins Ballhead Question |
I'm trying to decide between the RRS BH-55 and Markins Q10/Q20 ballheads. I've read quite a bit about these two products here and understand one can't really go wrong with either one. Capacity wise, the heaviest gear I will be using is a gripped 5D2 w/RRS L-Bracket and a 300 f/4L (although I would like to have the option to go a little beyond that).
I prefer the design of the clamp to ball inter-locking mount mechanism of the RRS instead of the Locktite and stud of the Markins. But what is paramount to me is the smoothness of the ball, for which I have read that Markins has the advantage.
I am replacing a Giottos MH1300 ballhead, which seems well built for the price, but the issue I have with it is the "stiction" (coefficient of static vs. dynamic friction for those who recall their physics). It's not too bad if I'm using the 300 with a lens collar as the weight is more balanced, but if I use a somewhat heavy lens (e.g.; 24-70 f/2.8) where I must mount the body to the tripod, then fine tuning the position becomes a chore as once I overcome the force to move the ball, the camera then moves too much. There is a tension knob on the MH1300 as with the RRS, but this does not seem to work too well for me.
If both RRS and Markins were equal in their smoothness, then this would be an easy choice for me as the tie-breaker would be my preference for the RRS style clamp mount. So, for those who have used both, can you provide some feedback on the smoothness (for lack of a better term) of the RRS vs. the Markins. Is the Markins noticeably better? And if I do decide to go with Markins, would I be better off with the Q10 or Q20 for the gear listed above?