So, I am in the process of picking out a ball head and have narrowed my choice down to 2 ball heads: the Kirk BH-3 and the Photo Clam 40NS or 44NS. I have considered many other brands, but I have eliminated them mostly because of cost. As it stands, the Kirk is $274 OTD compared to $289/$319 for the Photo Clam, so they are fairly close in price (Photo Clam price includes a camera plate to make it a fair price comparison).

I have Googled to the point where my fingers are now bloody nubs...ok, not really, but almost. I am really having a hard time find any criticisms of the Photo Clam--while it's great to know it's loved by everyone who has it, I'd like to think there is something not 100% perfect about it. The only pseudo-criticism I have found is that it doesn't (or didn't) have as smooth a ball movement as the Markins--that's it.

Most times, I lean towards the Kirk because of price, warranty period, and the fact that it's a US company, which makes warranty turn around fairly quick as opposed to sending it out to South Korea for repairs. On the other hand, I've seen some criticisms of the Kirk (build quality, difficulty in finding a sweet spot) that make me hesitate to push the "Buy" button. Also, I'm not sure how I feel about 3 (Kirk) vs 2 knobs on the AS knock-offs (Markins, Photo Clam)--having less knobs seems like a good idea. I don't have hands-on experience with any type of ball head, so this is probably a moot point and I can't say I have an intuitive preference for one over the other.

Anyone have any hands-on experience comparing the Kirk to the Photo Clam?

My equipment:

I have a Nikon D90 and my 3 heaviest/longest lenses are the 80-200 2.8 AFD, 300 4.5 IF-ED AIS, and the 70-300 VR. I can't imagine getting anything with a longer focal length in the future due to cost, but I could see using a heavier lens if I ever decided to upgrade to the 70-200 VR. I don't have have a flash right now, but will add one in the future (SB600 or SB800). Everything is going to sit on top of a Gitzo 1345 tripod (6.1 lbs). Since the tripod is a bit on the heavy side, I'd like to keep the weight of the ball head at around 1lb or less. I will be shooting mostly wildlife, auto track events, and macro.

Thanks!

I've got the PC-44NS, and it's been very nice. I posted a review a few months back you might want to search for. I also own a BH-40 and Q3, and performance-wise, the PC-44NS hangs right in there.

sumognat wrote:
So, I am in the process of picking out a ball head and have narrowed my choice down to 2 ball heads: the Kirk BH-3 and the Photo Clam 40NS or 44NS. I have considered many other brands, but I have eliminated them mostly because of cost. As it stands, the Kirk is $274 OTD compared to $289/$319 for the Photo Clam, so they are fairly close in price (Photo Clam price includes a camera plate to make it a fair price comparison).

I have Googled to the point where my fingers are now bloody nubs...ok, not really, but almost. I am really having a hard time find any criticisms of the Photo Clam--while it's great to know it's loved by everyone who has it, I'd like to think there is something not 100% perfect about it. The only pseudo-criticism I have found is that it doesn't (or didn't) have as smooth a ball movement as the Markins--that's it.

Most times, I lean towards the Kirk because of price, warranty period, and the fact that it's a US company, which makes warranty turn around fairly quick as opposed to sending it out to South Korea for repairs. On the other hand, I've seen some criticisms of the Kirk (build quality, difficulty in finding a sweet spot) that make me hesitate to push the "Buy" button. Also, I'm not sure how I feel about 3 (Kirk) vs 2 knobs on the AS knock-offs (Markins, Photo Clam)--having less knobs seems like a good idea. I don't have hands-on experience with any type of ball head, so this is probably a moot point and I can't say I have an intuitive preference for one over the other.

Anyone have any hands-on experience comparing the Kirk to the Photo Clam?

The only negative on Photo Clam ballheads that I have seen after my extensive Googleing is that they are too new to judge their durability. I have not seen any negative comments on their performance. I was hoping to get some hard data before i decide between them ,The Markins Q3 or the least expensive Cullman or Giotto

I

The only pseudo-criticism I have found is that it doesn't (or didn't) have as smooth a ball movement as the Markins--that's it.



My Photo Clam PC-33NS is just as smooth as my Markins M-20. IOW - very smooth.

Any opinion as to durability of Photo Clam ball heads

I can only offer an educated guess, having used mine (the PC-44NS) for a few months now, but it looks to be as nicely-made, using similar grade materials, as any high-end ballhead I've owned. There are no indications of the PhotoClam being anything like the "similar in appearance only" Chinese-made knock-off products. In the case of my PC-44NS, the panning base lock is actually better (meaning it doesn't slip), than the same feature on my Markins Q3, which has always annoyed me with that one issue. The ARCA-Swiss clamp on the PhotoClam is nothing special, and I'd like to see the ballheads made available without a clamp (as Markins will do on request), but the clamps are not "Loctited" in place, and are easily removed, if one wanted to install an RRS lever clamp in its place.

I have both the Photoclam 40NS and the Kirk B3. The Photoclam is a better head particularly in the friction control and also in the locking. My Kirk creeps a little bit. I keep meaning to sell the Kirk, just haven't gotten around to it yet