Register · Software · Search · Image Upload · Buy & Sell · Reviews · Hosting

	Moderated by: guardian
	Username   Password Visit the FM Store · Image Upload · Buy & Sell FM Forum Rules FM Forums | General Gear-talk | Join Image Upload end

Marco Offline Image Upload: On p.1 #1 · Ball Head suggestion Hi all, I've ordered a Nikon D3 and I'm looking to find a good deal on a 200-400 (just sold my 300 VR) so that will be the haviest lens of my setup. I sold my Gitzo 2540LVL w/Arca B1 and I decided to get the Gitzo 3540XLS but I'm still undecided regarding the ball head (I'll get a Wimberley Sidekick for panning). I narrowed the choice between: Markins M-20 Burzynski (no Sidekick with this one I believe) RRS BH-55 Which is the best one in your opinion ? Also, is the quick release clamp on the BH-55 adequate also for heavy weight (200-400 with or without sidekick) or is it better to get it with the screw knob clamp ? Thanks in advance Edited on Dec 05, 2007 at 02:30 AM Dec 03, 2007 at 11:56 PM

Forrest Egan Offline Image Upload: On p.1 #2 · Ball Head suggestion RRS BH-55 It's recommended to NOT get a quick release clamp if you're going to use a Sidekick. I think there's an adapter you can buy to get around that limitation...check the Wimberley website (I'm having some internet issues and can't the the direct link for you). Edited on Dec 05, 2007 at 02:30 AM Dec 04, 2007 at 01:44 AM

KFG1 Offline Buy and Sell: On p.1 #3 · Ball Head suggestion The RRS BH-55 is fantastic, very highly recommended! Edited on Dec 05, 2007 at 02:30 AM Dec 04, 2007 at 03:07 AM

Steve Spencer Online Image Upload: On p.1 #4 · Ball Head suggestion The BH-55 is a very nice head, but it is significantly heavier than the Markins M20 and the Arca Swiss Z1. All three are great ballheads, but if you care about weight looks at the other two as well. Edited on Dec 05, 2007 at 02:30 AM Dec 04, 2007 at 03:11 AM

Forrest Egan Offline Image Upload: On p.1 #5 · Ball Head suggestion "The AK-100 also provides a stop-screw to insure that the Sidekick cannot accidentally slide out of your ball head’s quick-release clamp, if it has safety stop screw grooves (Wimberley, RRS, and Kirk clamps). " Here's the link . . . http://www.tripodhead.com/products/AK-100.cfm Edited on Dec 05, 2007 at 02:30 AM Dec 04, 2007 at 03:30 AM

JohnJ80 Offline Image Upload: Off p.1 #6 · Ball Head suggestion The BH55 is nice but it seems a bit criminal, almost, to put a 2lb ballhead on top of that tripod. The amazing thing about the 3540 is the terrific stability it gives at such a very low weight. The M20, on the other hand, weights almost half of what the BH55 does. Ask yourself how happy you are going to be with a rig that is almost 20% heavier for no gain in functionality. The BH55 needs to go on a serious diet. While I don't know if this happens on the BH55, my BH40 has an ever so slight hitch (movement) when I lock the ball. I think it is inherent in their locking design. The M20, on the other hand, does not - as in zero movement. Not a big deal, but annoying when using big glass or shooting macro. I used to be a RRS ballhead fan, but my experience with the M20 has changed all that for me. I think the M10 and the BH40 are a wash, but the Q3 vs the BH25 is absolutely no contest - Q3 all the way. That all said, if you do get any ballhead - whatever brand - put a RRS QR lever clamp on it. J. Edited on Dec 05, 2007 at 02:30 AM Dec 04, 2007 at 03:59 AM

widget_13 Offline Image Upload: Off p.1 #7 · Ball Head suggestion What about an Acratech V2 or GV2? Edited on Dec 05, 2007 at 02:30 AM Dec 04, 2007 at 04:13 AM

Marco Offline Image Upload: On p.1 #8 · Ball Head suggestion Thank you all, my concern with the lever clamp is its stability with heavy lenses, I fear it could have a slight movement under heavy pressure. What's the heaviest setup you comfortably use with it ? Btw, thank you Forrest for the link to the AK-100, this suggests the quick lever clamp could be used indeed wth heavy lenses. As for the Markins vs RRS, I have a Gitzo 1128 + Q3 and I love that little sturdy head, this is why I thought about the bigger M20 for the heavier setup. The Q3 is indeed nicer (smoother) than my B1 and I found it doesn't creep when you lock it with the supported weights (i.e. D200 + 70-200 VR), while the B1, despite they say it supports 40kg, does hitch a bit with my D200 + 300/2.8 VR, which is really annoying. I'd love to go with the lighter M20 as I believe, owning the Q3, that it is very smooth, but I want the sturdiest ball head to mate to the 3540XLS for my heaviest and longest setup (D3 + 200-400 + 1.4x) without any movement when I lock it. Edited on Dec 05, 2007 at 02:30 AM Dec 04, 2007 at 12:13 PM

JohnJ80 Offline Image Upload: Off p.1 #9 · Ball Head suggestion IMO, the M20 is the sturdiest and it definitely doesn't move - at all - when the lock is applied. I did some testing on my 3540LS/M20 set up where I put on about 672mm of lens (TC's etc...) and was not able to discern any "droop" or movement when locked at all. The Bh40 shift did as the lock was applied and it was directly related to the locking mechanism - not a lot, but it was definitely there and repeatable. When Gitzo came out with the new 3 series tripods with the new 6X CF layup, they really did create a problem for the ballhead manufacturers. Because these tripods were now considerably lighter and had such terrific stability, it seems really foolish to put such a heavy dead weight ballhead on top. If the weight contributed something to the equation, it would be defensible - but it doesn't. In my opinion, that really cuts down the choices on ballhead choices and gives some very large advantages to the lighter heads. In the case of Markins, since they are clearly one of, if not the, top performing ballhead and at a weight that is only 60% or so of what the BH55 and the heavier ones are, then for a ballhead for the lighter more stable new 3 series, the choice is much clearer and kind of obvious. If you don't put a lighter version of the top end ballheads on the new 3 series, there is some question of why pay the premium for the reduced weight that the 3 series has. You should probably give RRS a call. From what I understand, the cam lever clamp actually provides as much or more locking force than the knob but it is just easier to apply and remove it. I could be wrong on this, but I seem to remember that being the case. If so, then the lever is actually the better lock in terms of stability. J. Edited on Dec 05, 2007 at 02:30 AM Dec 04, 2007 at 03:17 PM

Marco Offline Image Upload: On p.1 #10 · Ball Head suggestion Thank you John, I guess I'll go with the Markins M20 then. I suppose I could also get the quick release lever clamp from RRS and mount it on the M20, but I read that the quick lever clamp needs RRS own plates... like the AK100 for the Sidekick... another 43 $.... I use a Kirk replacement foot for my 70-200, so I need to ask RRS if their quick release clamp accepts it. Edited on Dec 05, 2007 at 02:30 AM Dec 04, 2007 at 05:02 PM

JohnJ80 Offline Image Upload: Off p.1 #11 · Ball Head suggestion RRS's position on the plates is that only Wimberly and RRS provide plates that are tightly controlled enough dimensionally to not have a problem. That said, I think this was discussed around here a bit ago and no one has noted a problem, so it is very likely that your Kirk plate would be just fine. You could order the QR clamp and test it and then send it back if there is an issue. From what I understand, you have only a small chance that it won't work. Maybe someone has some more experience with that than I do. I don't have a Markins clamp for my ballhead, it has the RRS QR lever on it - but I have all RRS plates too. If you were worried about security, you could also pick what you think best clamp for the head would be and just put that on there. The Kirk "quick release" knob clamp might be a good idea as an alternative to the RRS lever clamp. A-S has out a lever clamp that has an adjustable tension - that would get around the dimension issue - but I believe there was a problem with it loosening too. BTW, here is a picture of my 3540LS with the M20 on top with the RRS QR lever clamp. Hope that all helps. J. Edited on Dec 05, 2007 at 02:30 AM Dec 04, 2007 at 05:21 PM

Marco Offline Image Upload: On p.1 #12 · Ball Head suggestion I'll probably get the RRS L-plate for my D3 and their replacement foot (shorter) for the 200-400 to use with the Sidekick, so the only other plate would be that of the 70-200. I just sent an email to RRS asking for its compatibility. Thanks for the image, it seems a very nice setup indeed Anyway, after more evaluations on prices and weights I'm still undecided if going with the M20 or BH-55. M20 is lighter but if you use the same RRS quick release clamp it's actually only 220g lighter, the naked ballheads plus the same RRS quick release weight respectively 658g (M20) and 878g (BH-55). On the other hand BH-55 has two apertures for 90° shooting and it's less expensive, particularly if I decide to get the quick release and other RRS items (plates, etc.) as I have to pay only one shipping overseas. mumble mumble... Edited on Dec 05, 2007 at 02:30 AM Dec 04, 2007 at 06:31 PM

JohnJ80 Offline Image Upload: Off p.1 #13 · Ball Head suggestion Looks like RRS changed the numbers. They did list the no clamp version 6 mo ago at 2.0lbs. Their new website lists it at 1.6lbs on the bottom of the page and 2.4lbs on the top (maybe in the box?). Either that or they made it lighter. Interesting. The Markins M20 without clamp is 1.25lb. So the difference is about 6 ozs. Better but it still needs to be lighter. For that matter, I'd like to see them both lighter - it is time to do some engineering. Thanks for noting that. That would make my rig roughly 5.5lbs instead of 5lbs (rounding). Actually, if you are going to do portrait mode shooting - seriously consider an L plate for a several of reasons: 1. You keep the mass of the camera over the center of gravity of the tripod. Not a great idea to spend all this money on support and then give away a lot of the benefit by cantilevering the camera mass out over the side where it is more prone to effects of vibration. 2. If you go from portrait to landscape, you don't need to reposition the ballhead. 3. If you go to portrait mode in the drop slots, you are giving up much of why you use a ballhead - for the universal joint adjustment. You are not constrained to up and down on the ballhead part and then using the panning control or side to side control - similar to a pan tilt head. J. Edited on Dec 05, 2007 at 02:30 AM Dec 04, 2007 at 07:08 PM

BeeMan458 Offline Image Upload: On p.1 #14 · Ball Head suggestion "...it's actually only 220g lighter,..." Thass a half a pound Only 220g's he mumbles as he walks away into the fog of the night. Here's a pic of a wine red M20L. I settled on another ballhead but that's another short story I'm guilty of making far to long. Edited on Dec 05, 2007 at 02:30 AM Dec 04, 2007 at 07:16 PM

Marco Offline Image Upload: On p.1 #15 · Ball Head suggestion John, I always use an L-plate (RRS on my previous 1Ds, Kirk now on my D200, probably RRS on the D3) for the exact reasons you mentioned But sometimes with a lighter setup (i.e. for macro) it's nice to have the abilty to rotate 90° just because it allows different framing without moving the tripod, which is exactly why it's better to use the L-plate if you intend to keep the same framing while change portrait/landscape orientation... Sound strange I know, but this is indeed the reason why I decided to leave out the Burzynski (max 45°). As for the "weighting" of 220g, well... it depends on the weight of the whole system. 3540XLS + BH55 + quick release = 2.88 Kg 3540XLS + M20 + quick release = 2.66 Kg I'm sure I'll hardly feel the difference... Great answers so far guys, thank you so much Edited on Dec 05, 2007 at 02:30 AM Dec 04, 2007 at 11:35 PM

84FJ60 Offline Image Upload: Off p.1 #16 · Ball Head suggestion In October I went through the same decision process. It took me a month, weighing out pros and cons - and I eventually settled on the Markins M20L and a Gitzo 3540LS. I couldn't be happier. Take a look at www.nikonians.org in the tripods forum. There are some great comparisons between the 3 major player (Markins, Kirk & RRS). It seems that most folks are leaning toward RRS or Markins, but the lighter weight of the Markins and the opportunity to play with one owned by a friend won me over. David - an Atlanta Nikonian Edited on Dec 05, 2007 at 02:30 AM Dec 04, 2007 at 11:54 PM

BeeMan458 Offline Image Upload: On p.1 #17 · Ball Head suggestion Let us not forget the oft forgotten 468MG by Bogen/Manfrotto with an added RRS lever clamp. Edited on Dec 05, 2007 at 02:30 AM Dec 05, 2007 at 12:50 AM

Roland W Offline Image Upload: On p.1 #18 · Ball Head suggestion The BH-55 does not have any problem at all with movement when clamping it down. I really like the large knob that I can set and release clamping with my fingertips if I want, when I have a balanced load on the head. And note that between L plates and lens plates, your load should be fairly well balanced for most camera/lens combinations and close to level shooting. If you have unbalance, you can easily clamp the BH-55 down to a very tight condition, but not just with your fingertips. I do like the whole concept of a low profile head, which the BH-55 executes well. There is no question about the BH-55 weighing more, but it delivers very well in the performance department, with great rigidity, very tight clamping, and no shift when clamping. The BH-55 also has a strong and smooth operating pan base, which helps if you want to use it with a Sidekick. An RSS lever release can work fine for a Sidekick, but you should make sure you have an adapter plate on the Sidekick for best fit in the clamp, and a bar stop on the adapter plate that rests againist the lever clamp edge to prevent downward sliding of the side kick while clamped and while clamping. The ease and speed of use, and the excelent clamping strength, combine with a camera L plate, to make an RSS lever clamp one of the best things I have ever purchased for ball head use. If your primary use is camera clamping or direct lens foot clamping, a lever clamp is wonderful, and I would recomend it highly. If your primary use is gimbal mount tracking, I would not consider the Sidekick, and would go for a full Wimberly. If the use is mixed, the Sidekick is useful, but you can not get perfect balance with it because it lacks adjustment in one direction. Keep the lever release for the mixed use including with a Sidekick, because of how lovely it is to use. Edited on Dec 05, 2007 at 02:30 AM Dec 05, 2007 at 12:58 AM

runamuck Offline Image Upload: Off p.1 #19 · Ball Head suggestion Just buy one of each--then you will have a choice of which to use for any and all situations you may encounter. Dec 05, 2007 at 02:30 AM

	FM Forums | General Gear-talk | Join Image Upload end

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password   Lost password?