Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  

FM Forums | General Gear-talk | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2012 · Tripod heads
  
 
3iron
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · Tripod heads


I'm new to using tripods and recently picked up a Fiesol tripod with a CB-50 ball head. It seems like a good enough unit but I have a problem. Perhaps it is more my technique, but when I use a longer lens ie: 70-200 x.8 there is quite a bit of adjustment necessary to get it set. If I compose the photo through the eyepeice, then lock the ball, the front lense will settle afterward and I actually have to raise the lense above the composition, lock the ball, and let the lens settle.
Am I doing something incorrectly here or is there a better setup for a longer lense like this?
Thanks for your help and best wishes.



Aug 02, 2012 at 12:35 PM
surf monkey
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · Tripod heads


You'll probably have to give more info to get the best input.
What lens specifically?
What camera?

Assuming that you're mounting using the lens mount, not the camera mount, your setup should be as balanced as possible on the ballhead. To do this place the bracket in the ballhead with the clamp loose and the ballhead tension loose. Slide the bracket, lens and camera to get it in the most balanced position.

If your tripod and ballhead are adequate for the gear your using and properly balanced, you should be able to have "minimal" shifting. There has been much debate in other threads whether or not a very slight shift is always present and I would say that it's impossible to have absolutely no shift. In my experience, the better the ballhead, the less the shift. The amount of shift is also determined by focal length. At 24 mm the shift is usually too small to notice, at 200 mm it is usually quite noticeable. The additional weight is also a factor.



Aug 02, 2012 at 04:15 PM
3iron
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · Tripod heads


surf monkey: Thank you for your help. Not being experienced with the tripod I made a stupid mistake which you helped me out. I connected the camera to the tripod, not using the lens mount. Obuiously it was problematic.
I wondered why they included that think with the lens, .
Thanks again and best wishes.



Aug 02, 2012 at 08:52 PM
3iron
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · Tripod heads


surf monkey: Thank you for your help. Not being experienced with the tripod I made a stupid mistake which you helped me out. I connected the camera to the tripod, not using the lens mount. Obuiously it was problematic.
I wondered why they included that think with the lens, .
Thanks again and best wishes.



Aug 02, 2012 at 08:53 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



runamuck
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #5 · Tripod heads


Your ball head is certainly adequate for the lens. Either the tripod is shifting under load (legs not tight) or the ballhead isn't being used properly. There are three knobs on the side. One locks the circular motion. The other two lock the ball. Keep one (the smaller one) snugged enough that it takes a bit of effort to move the camera and lens. THen when you lock the bigger one, there should be very little to no movement when you lock the ball.

A group of us went to Chicago's Adler planetarium to take photos of the Navy Pier fireworks. One woman kept complaining her tripod was too short. Well, it turns out the legs were just snug enough to hold everything, and when she put the weight of her hands on it, well, it started shrinking a bit.



Aug 03, 2012 at 02:13 AM
3iron
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · Tripod heads


runamuck; Thanks for looking. Nothing is shifting on the head or tripod. I think I figued out there was just too much weight on the front of the camera for the setup. I had attatched the camera by it's screw socket and was using a 70-200 which is fairly long and hevy.
When I locked the setup down, the weight of the lense was enough to make it drop about half of the frame. So I had to raise if up a half frame then locke it down. There is aparantly just that much flex in the system.
As indicated earlier, I believe I would have been more successful if I had used the lens mount which would have put less weight out in front of the camera.
What do you think? Was it just bad technique on my part?
Thanks, and best wishes.



Aug 03, 2012 at 02:11 PM
runamuck
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #7 · Tripod heads


ANY time a lens has a tripod foot, use it. A 70-200 is a lot of weight to hang off the lens mount. You are looking at 3.5 pounds at 8 or so inches. That's a lot of pull on those little screws holding the lens mount. I've read horror stories about long lenses ripping the mounts off cameras. Seems usually to happen to consumer grade cams, but it can still be expensive.

Bad technique? lack of knowldege? Now you know a bit more. With everything pretty much balanced, your ballhead is now more stable. Next? Remote shutter release to avoid touching the camera when taking a picture. Believe it or not, is a huge help.




Aug 07, 2012 at 05:40 AM
3iron
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · Tripod heads


Yep, remote is on my list. Thanks.


Aug 07, 2012 at 09:46 AM





FM Forums | General Gear-talk | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Retrive password