sixgun wrote:
After trying **EVERYTHING** out there to avoid the cost of the Arca-Swiss stuff, (and spending a lot more over time) I gave up. There is nothing better than the Z1 Ballhead - NOTHING - it is WELL WORTH the price.




I came to the same conclusion, after wasting a lot of money trying the alternatives. Nothing really compares to the Z1.

I have used the old Arca Swiss B1 and Acratech V2. I am now a big fan of Markins and I opted for the M10 with the RRS lever-type clamp.

My TiltAll has a three way pan/tilt head, and is heavy enough to hold a 4X5.

Larry

I love the RRS stuff. I use the BH-40 and BH-55. I have no experience with the other brands.

A BH-55 will work fine. But, for anything larger or heavier get a Wimberley.

bobbytan wrote:
I am now a big fan of Markins and I opted for the M10 with the RRS lever-type clamp.

<3 Markins

I have had a Benro head for the last 2 years and have not had any problems with it. I mount a 300mm lens with a TC all of the time and it works fine. The answer to your question might depend on just how much you want to spend. If you can afford to spend $300 plus go for the Markins M20 or take alook at the Photo Clam heads. They have received very good reviews and you can see them at www.reallybigcameras.com


Steve

The Arca Swiss Z1 is one of the nicest BH I have ever used. Smooth and locks on solid and is rated very high I believe it is 122 pounds

That is true, No markins , They make one of the finest ballheads... Should be top of the list....

+1 for Markins

loggerhead wrote:
Markin's missing from this list is a shame. I prefer the M20 over the RRS BH-55, but it's a personal thing. You'll find plenty of solid opinions on both.

I agree the Markins are one of the nicest imo they are also very smooth and lock tight

Agree, Markins should be on the list...most likely the 'other' are largely Markins.

If you want more support as well as free movement, then a Wimberley would be great.

Jim
_____________

Wish I had the $$$ for the Wimberley setup (sigh)

Breitling65 wrote:
I read lots of positive reviews about Benro products.

Benro? Positive reviews? Really? Was it from Benro employees?

I wouldn't touch any Benro/Induro product unless there was nothing else available. I'd buy gitzo, Bogen/manfrotto, Slik, or "Uncle Bob's tripod gear" before I'd buy anything from that company, but I know we all have to make choices.

Compare tripod specs and they never measure up, but they do charge 80%-90% of what "real" products cost. Regarding the heads, they're cheap pot-metal construction on the inside and best avoided. IMO, everything you see about the company and their products is a facade...

I've had lots of tripod heads from different mfgs over the years and most are serviceable, but not Benro/Induro. You're requirements are nothing out of the ordinary, but I'd go with Markins as the number one choice and then maybe look at RRS if the Markins were out of stock.

jamesf99 wrote:
Benro? Positive reviews? Really? Was it from Benro employees?

I wouldn't touch any Benro/Induro product unless there was nothing else available. I'd buy gitzo, Bogen/manfrotto, Slik, or "Uncle Bob's tripod gear" before I'd buy anything from that company, but I know we all have to make choices.

Compare tripod specs and they never measure up, but they do charge 80%-90% of what "real" products cost. Regarding the heads, they're cheap pot-metal construction on the inside and best avoided. IMO, everything you see about the company and their products is a facade...

I've had lots of tripod heads from different mfgs over the years and most are serviceable, but not Benro/Induro. You're requirements are nothing out of the ordinary, but I'd go with Markins as the number one choice and then maybe look at RRS if the Markins were out of stock.




The rabid anti-Benro thing is a bit bizarre. A single, old review of a single product from a single product line, and all of a sudden the company makes totally inferior products and will never improve?

All of their heads are "pot metal' on the inside, and everything about the company is a facade?

Give me a break.

There are plenty of very good reviews of Benro products. And, in fact, when I went to B&H looking for a lightweight, compact, stable tripod, guess what brand they directed me to? Benro. What about when I told them that the difference in price between the Benro and the Gitzo didn't matter, and that I had almost decided on the Gitzo (which I was holding)... they still pointed me to Benro.

And when I bought the Benro, and had questions about replacement parts and buying accessories for the tripod, guess who responded to my emails quickly-- and engaged in a nice back and forth discussion: the Mac Group Benro product manager.

After all that, I'm not going to recommend the Benro head in this case, while it would probably be fine. I think you should check out a Photo Clam, which are rated for very heavy weights, have had great reviews, and seem like a wonderful product.

The needless bashing of a product that one hasn't used, or the bashing of a whole brand and all future models based on a single model, is childish. I mean, there aren't stories about Gitzos failing in horrendous ways (like legs breaking, loose screws, etc)...

It's not rabid, and plenty of us have used them. They make cosmetic copies of Gitzos and other tripods, but have well-documented flaws in their engineering and materials. Of course anything can break, and Gitzo has made errors, but their problems with the Systematic's plate aren't an engineering failure -- they were shipping tripods with an adjustable part that wasn't fully tightened down. That's a long way from Benro's woes. The latest thread about them here is an "upgrade" that required a trip to a machine shop to stabilize a wobbly tripod mount.

I think the biggest reason that Benro gets so much criticism is that they seem fundamentally to be a dishonest company in at least two ways: First, they aggressively relabel their products to sell them at every price level, and not every quality level. You can pay anywhere from $50 to $200+ for the same head, but it's the same damn thing. Second, rather than develop their own distinctive designs, they poach from the established brands, and seem to intentionally promote confusion between their fakes and the originals. I'm honestly surprised they haven't been the target of multiple intellectual property lawsuits.

Fundamentally, the insides don't match up to the outsides. No matter how dressed up they are by US consumer marketing, they come from the same organizational business culture that flavors toothpaste with antifreeze because it's a nickel cheaper per ton. Corner-cutting, cheap, dishonest, and unethical.

As I've said repeatedly, there may be situations where a lower-priced product might perform just fine. That's understandable. I'm really, really cheap, and like to save money where I can. I have owned -- and often recommend -- honest, affordable alternatives, like Manfrotto. They might not be the lightest and slickest, but you don't get cheated.

I'm sure that a store's profit margin on Benro is considerably higher than on Gitzo, and there may well be salesman spiffs to sweeten the incentive, too. I've never assumed that a sales clerk's reasons for selling a product are consistent with my reasons for buying it.

This whole debate is tiresome, and not really worth the energy of replying. Other people can look at the same information and come to different conclusions. Those who are critical of Benro, though, have their legitimate reasons. They're not crazy, "elitist," or rabid.

justruss wrote:
The rabid anti-Benro thing is a bit bizarre. A single, old review of a single product from a single product line, and all of a sudden the company makes totally inferior products and will never improve?

All of their heads are "pot metal' on the inside, and everything about the company is a facade?

Give me a break.

There are plenty of very good reviews of Benro products. And, in fact, when I went to B&H looking for a lightweight, compact, stable tripod, guess what brand they directed me to? Benro. What about when I told them that the difference in price between the Benro and the Gitzo didn't matter, and that I had almost decided on the Gitzo (which I was holding)... they still pointed me to Benro.

Give me a break is right. You're were directed toward a high margin, high profit product and you think that has anything to do with quality or value? You're kidding right?

And when I bought the Benro, and had questions about replacement parts and buying accessories for the tripod, guess who responded to my emails quickly-- and engaged in a nice back and forth discussion: the Mac Group Benro product manager.

Not sure where you live, but I know the sales manager for the MAC group here in New England... So if you want to tell me about the "quality" of Benro products, I'm all ears or eyes...

After all that, I'm not going to recommend the Benro head in this case, while it would probably be fine. I think you should check out a Photo Clam, which are rated for very heavy weights, have had great reviews, and seem like a wonderful product.

The needless bashing of a product that one hasn't used, or the bashing of a whole brand and all future models based on a single model, is childish. I mean, there aren't stories about Gitzos failing in horrendous ways (like legs breaking, loose screws, etc)...

I'll admit that no product is perfect and I never claimed any were. Suggesting my perspective is childish because I see behind the facade does little more than confirm your gullibility and naivete. Do I need to own a GM car to know that they are, and have been for 30+ years, pieces of @#@#? The bottom finally fell out of the rotten apple cart. What a surprise. Here's another surprise. They've finally admitted they made absolute c@ap. Gosh, I never knew that..

Induro is re-badged "retail" version of the the ebay Benro stuff for those that don't know. I don't need to own a Benro/Induro product to confirm the impression I formed when they were first imported to this country, and that's long before they were sold at B&H, Adorama, etc. and probably before you knew they existed.. I've seen the inside of the heads. I've seen the quality and held several, as parts fell off in my hands. I'm able to read the specs to compare features (Benro/Induro is not competitive on weight/strength), Enough users have related negative experiences for me to interpret what those things mean. Feel free to interpret them differently

I'd assume MAC is making a lot of money on this, as are the retailers that steer gulible people to high profit items. A Benro/Induro at 40%-50% of Gitzo prices? Maybe.... A Benro/Induro at 80%-90% of Gitzo prices? I don't think so... Sometimes a Chinese rip off is just a Chinese rip off...

I'm in NYC.

I'll save most of this for another thread, but, a few points:

Mac Group carries great brands, like: Leaf, Mamiya, Eizo, Sekonic, Profoto, etc. I find it interesting that Mac Group would sully their reputation by starting to import total crap if that's what Benro/Induro is.

I'm not sure what information you're using to claim that Benro/Induro are owned by the same company that makes dynatran, flashpoint, or whatever other brands you claim. I can point out notable differences in engineering and models, including the "upgrade" thread you mentioned.

I'm not sure what firsthand evidence you have that everything that Benro/Induro make and will make in the future is trash, or that they all have engineering flaws. I've seen that same, old tripod head breakdown. And I have seen and met people with Gitzo legs that have broken off with normal use (it's by no means the standard, but it happens, like, you said, with all companies).

I find it funny that people ascribe to a country the size of China, with one fifth of the world's population, a single business culture. That shows naivete. People used to say the same thing about products coming out of Japan.

I'll post a review of a Benro tripod shortly-- including a specs comparison with Gitzo and Feisol, and a leg breakdown-- so I'll keep this to a minimum. As I said in my first post: for a ballhead, I think the Photo Clam is something interesting to look at, but as someone who has done a lot of first hand comparison, I think that Benro does make a product (I won't say all they have ever made or will continue to make) that is worth considering. Hell, as ballheads are concerned, I don't actually think Gitzo is very compelling at all; while I do think Gitzo legs are great.

I suspect Amvona buys whatever is cheap. They'll probably put their name on anything. The Amvona/Dynatran head I bought, though, was absolutely, positively identical to Induro/Benro. Firsthand.

China has lots of different business cultures, and plenty of good stuff is made in China. Unfortunately, some of the world's worst stuff comes from there, too -- it's the site of choice for cheap-at-all-costs garbage that would be shut down for patent violations virtually anywhere else in the industrialized world. THAT is the particular business culture that I'm talking about, and it thrives in China. The matter of Chinese environmental and labor conditions is also troubling, but not really germane to this conversation.

My expectations about Benro's future quality come from their past performance. They're not trustworthy.

Smiert Spionam wrote:
I suspect Amvona buys whatever is cheap. They'll probably put their name on anything. The Amvona/Dynatran head I bought, though, was absolutely, positively identical to Induro/Benro. Firsthand.

China has lots of different business cultures, and plenty of good stuff is made in China. Unfortunately, some of the world's worst stuff comes from there, too -- it's the site of choice for cheap-at-all-costs garbage that would be shut down for patent violations virtually anywhere else in the industrialized world. THAT is the particular business culture that I'm talking about, and it thrives in China. The matter of Chinese environmental and labor conditions is also troubling, but not really germane to this conversation.

My expectations about Benro's future quality come from their past performance. They're not trustworthy.

Amvona is not a manufacturer, they're a retailer. They're based in Massachusetts. They sell Dynatran tripods-- as Dynatran tripods. They have a decent "About Us" page.

http://www.amvona.com/about

As far as I know, Dynatran does not have a set-screw to hold the center column ballhead mounting mechanism in place... hence the "upgrade" thread on here. At least one Benro model does (I own it).

There's plenty of misinformation out there.

I believe that there was a press release from MAC that Induro was Benro made. The claim they did make though was that it was an "all new design." Probably because they were worried about patent infringement because some of the parts were identical to Gitzo parts (interchangeable). I never did the comparison to Benro branded vs Induro branded, but I'd be surprised if there was much (if any) difference other than the stickers.

These arguments never end because the industry doesn't have common methods for testing to specs. That needs to happen because until it does, someone has to take them all and test them and it's hard to do. That means that the majority of decisions are made by those who buy them based on the paint job of the tripod or head and not on its actual performance. As well further confusing the situaton, it is possible to get a good - even fantastic result - out of the biggest piece of garbage tripod/head in the absence of vibration. That, however, is the one case that is a complete don't care in tripod evaluation.

If you read the study done by Markins and the Leica test of tripods, you can really see how impossible it is to evaluate a tripod and head by inspection.

Markins paper: http://markins.com/charlie/report4e6.pdf
Leica Mag article: http://www.giottos.com/News-MT-awards.htm

I did some testing of tripods using a similar methodology to Leica's and I found huge variation in performance between brands of tripods leading me to believe that design and materials are hugely important to the execution of the design. I haven't tested a Benro but would be happy to do so if someone sent me one.

For sure, Benro has been caught out playing the game of a great paint job covering up some serious issues inside. The infamous Tom Webster article details that for sure. Do they continue to do the same thing? Who knows? Is it worth the risk to put money into a company that makes products that are hard to verify in their performance (quantitatively) if they have a checkered past? That's for each to decide - my vote is to not do that. I've already done my tripod spending the hard way - buying stuff that didn't work great before I bought the good stuff. I'm not rich enough to buy the questionable stuff. I would be richer had I not done that too.

Tom Webster article: http://www.tomwebsterphoto.com/Essays/Benro/benroks2.htm

The Asian tripod supplier that has impressed me is Feisol. They continue to upgrade their products, they do their own engineering (not knock offs) and they have great customer service. I'm admittedly impressed with Gitzo, but Feisol has some traveler tripods that have really caught my eye and have me interested.

J.

I'm not questioning that Benro and Induro are made by the same manufacturer (or that one owns the other). That seems clear via their marketing and service teams.

Take a look at my review of the C-068m8 Travel Angel I just posted on this board:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/797199

I have the RRS BH-55. The action is not exactly silky-smooth, but not a significant problem for recomposing with lenses I use, i.e. up to 300mm. The overall craftsmanship is excellent. I had a chance to play with ArcaTech and Kirk and I think it is only a matter of personal taste and your particular needs which one you choose. I don't have experience with any other serious contenders, sorry.

I would never buy Benro, but my reasons are not photographic.

justruss wrote:
I'm not questioning that Benro and Induro are made by the same manufacturer (or that one owns the other). That seems clear via their marketing and service teams.

Take a look at my review of the C-068m8 Travel Angel I just posted on this board:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/797199

I appreciate your review, it was well done.

Simultaneously it also exhibits the whole problem (and it's not a criticism of your review). Your review centers on the fit, finish and appearance of the tripod - all things which have little, if any bearing on the performance of this tripod. There are no performance measurements, no measurement of the ability of the tripod to damp vibration, no rigidity measurements on the spider or leg locks etc... There is no measurement or evaluation on the percent of CF fiber to epoxy in the legs (for example). All these things matter much more than what you reviewed and should be inherent in specifications and their underlying industry standard test methods (which do not exist).

My concerns would be with the leg bolts as you mentioned, the leg locks for rigidity etc... Since we are trying to damp out vibration that are on the order of 100um amplitudes - too small for you to see or sense - we really don't know any more about the performance of this tripod than when we started. These things could be quite significant in tripod performance and vibration damping.

J.

JohnJ80 wrote:
I appreciate our review, it was well done.

Simultaneously it also exhibits the whole problem (and it's not a criticism of your review). Your review centers on the fit, finish and appearance of the tripod - all things which have little, if any bearing on the performance of this tripod. There are no performance measurements, no measurement of the ability of the tripod to damp vibration, no rigidity measurements on the spider or leg locks etc... There is no measurement or evaluation on the percent of CF fiber to epoxy in the legs (for example). All these things matter much more than what you reviewed and should be inherent in specifications and their underlying industry standard test methods (which do not exist).

My concerns would be with the leg bolts as you mentioned, the leg locks for rigidity etc... Since we are trying to damp out vibration that are on the order of 100um amplitudes - too small for you to see or sense - we really don't know any more about the performance of this tripod than when we started. These things could be quite significant in tripod performance and vibration damping.

J.


I agree with you John that we need some kind of standardized testing for tripod vibration damping.

Outside of a very few number of tests (I've read them; Leica, for instance, and a few people who repeated similar experiments with lasers or accelerometers), all we have at this point is using the gear we're talking about and reporting what we find.

You'll notice that I actually did discuss stability, with different lenses, in different positions. Not only that, but I clearly set out limits: I said that the 5D + 135L combo was not ideal with the tripod fully extended and the camera at a deep angle. I'm not making any far-out claims when I said that this was stable with 5D + 35L and that it was clearly a niche product. I tried out the Gitzos and found them comparable. The 1550 actually felt less stable. I did not try the Feisol... since I didn't have one to put my hands on.

The whole review is NOT about fit and finish. And I did take apart the legs, and did the best I could (without doing analysis of the materials using some fancy technology) to judge the workmanship, material consistency, and precision of the parts. Those are not simply fit and finish questions.

But, I'll stand by what I said: Benro wouldn't be the first place I look for a ballhead (I'd like to replace mine with something else). Nor would Gitzo for this matter. Check out Photo Clam. And of course, Markins and RRS are also both wonderful.

You're making my case for me.

You see, you can't tell how the 5D plus 135L is functioning in the presence of a vibration of known amplitude that matters. The mfgs won't tell you and it's hard to test. You, and almost every photographer out, thinks they can but they simply can't sense these levels of image softening vibration without applying a known stimulus and measuring. The mfgs ought to do that but don't. The closest that they come is that Gitzo will specify a max focal length for an "acceptable sharp" image. Whatever that means (they don't say). However that is a better guide than anyone else.

Saying it is stable means what? It doesn't fall over? One couldn't observe any vibration with the naked eye(that would be orders of magnitude more than it would take to ruin an image)? You see, that's the point and what matters and you are not able to discuss it through no fault of your own. To put it in context, the vibration you see compared to the vibration levels at which the image suffers is like dropping 3/4 tons from 100' up into the back of a 3/4 ton Chevy pickup truck and wondering why the tires blew because they are supposed to be ok with a load in the back. It's a several order of magnitude (i.e. powers of 10) difference.

So then someone uses (pick one) tripod and gets a good image out of it, heck even a great one. Then to them that becomes full justification for the supposed magnificent performance of the tripod they reviewed even though it is a bona fide P.O.S. Only problem was that (suppose) there was no vibration for the tripod to damp. Then the arguments begin and we go round and round about this stuff.

This whole thing is a game of microns. So when someone tells me that the leg bolts maybe need tightening or it now feels looser, that is a red flag for me. At that point, I really, really want to see some good performance data before a device is blessed as "stable" under a wide range of conditions.

I've done the actual testing with lasers, and I found huge differences between brands and models in performance even with my crude testing. So, I tend to be skeptical and I tend to buy the top end stuff because of that same testing.

That all said, vis a vis your review, the weakest part of Gitzo's line are the travel tripods and the most room for the competition.

J.