jeetsukumaran
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.1 #18 · Loving the Acratech GXP Ballhead! | |
IndyFab wrote:
Had a Acratech Ball head, just wasn't a big fan of it. Wonkey release, I much prefer the RRS release, and the ball didn't hold like my Markin's , Sorry !! Just didn't compare to my Markin's . However If I wanted to try another one it would be either the Long Lens or Pano Head by Acratech
Hi IndyFab! Thanks for sharing your experience. To avoid confusion, it probably helps to clarify the specific Acratech model you mean, as the differences in design between the Ultimate and GP series make for not just different ballheads but different ballhead performance. Further, even within the series, the GXP here is rated (for whatever that's worth) quite a bit higher than the others in the GP series (2x as much IIRC).
As for comparisons with Markins, as I noted above, I have used the Markins Q-20i for the last decade plus. It replaced (and was a significant upgrade from) the BH-40 for me. I love the Markins. Smooth and precise movement under tension, no shift when locking up, and locks up solid like part of the earth's bedrock with no creep. I started looking for a replacement for the Markins some six months ago. I tried many ballheads, including specifically the FLM 48 and 58, and the RRS BH-55. When I say "tried", I mean not just extensive testing for creep etc. in comfort (e.g., putting on a long lens at an awkward angle so there is high torque and then measuring creep), but also out in the my actual shooting conditions in the field --- nowadays deserts, mountains, and oceansides (previously rainforests and swamps, though hopefully I will see some of these again in the future). They all worked measurably well enough within reason, but each had issues that made me stick to my Markins.
I had not considered the Acratech at all as a replacement candidate, because it was a size class smaller than the ballheads I was looking at, with a 38mm ball. But I decided to try it on a whim. And, despite every intuition to the contrary, I loved it!
It passed my "office" tests with flying colors. Solid hold when locked. Like bedrock. Even with a 100-400 at an awkward high-torque angle over half-an-hour. So if by "didn't hold like my Markins", you are referring to the strength of the lock in terms of post-lock creep, as far as the GXP model is concerned and my Markins Q-20i goes, I feel confident enough to respond, "it actually does hold as well as the Markins"! In fact, I feel confident enough in my results to say, perhaps not too diplomatically, that this conclusion is not just an opinion, but measured fact. I could not, despite trying my best, see any shortcoming in "holding strength", as I understand it, vs the Markins. But perhaps you mean something else? Of course, it's also quite possible that I was not stressing either ballhead to the extent you have or to the performance standards you subscribe to or need. In which case, I defer to your reality globally, but will stick to my "good enough for my needs" for myself!
DaveTCC at https://thecentercolumn.com/ does show with measured evidence quite a bit of difference in a different metric --- "stiffness" --- between the Markins and the older/smaller GP model. I believe his tests and results. This is beyond my capability to measure (and this is why we are all fortunate to have someone with the dedication and interests to carry out these tests and the kindess to share the results), and while as yet he does not have the GPX results, I imagine the GPX will probably come up to similar numbers, i.e. significantly less stiff than the Markins. This was one of the reasons that I did not think I would take to the Acratech ballhead as a replacement for the Markins. But, stiffness differential or not, like I said above, shooting 10-15 sec exposures in 30-35 MPH winds on a mountain ridge at 40F with a 100-400 and getting tack sharp rock (all the vegetation was, of course, a blur!) convinced me beyond any doubt that whatever the tested numbers say, the Acratech GPX meets the standards to do whatever I need it to do. It not only did what I told it to do superbly, but did it without complaint or fuss, so much so that I felt like I was using a comfortable tool that I had been using for decades rather than a new ballhead going through its trials.
As for the clamp? I have no issues with it, and I, too, prefer the Acratech to the RRS one (at least right now). This I concede is a subjective issue. The RRS one is has a major "activation energy" to open AND to close. This is, presumably, for security reasons. And works well. It's strength is its simplicity. Acratech has opted for engineering to achieve the same security (a safety lock). It is admittedly another point of potential failure. Time will tell to be sure, but I've been using the Acratech swift clamp for a while now and long enough to have enough confidence to trust it. And like, harter, appreciate the ergonomics of the Acratech approach.
Finally, I will freely admit this --- there is a strong subjective aspect to my choice. I am sure I could have gotten used to any of the "rock stars", the FLM 48/58 and the RRS BH-55 etc., that I "interviewed" as my Markins replacement, despite their shortcomings. But not only did the Acratech measure up in every way to the Markins, and not only did it perform outstandingly in the field in all ways that counted, but I absolutely LOVED using it! Folks may pooh-pooh or dismiss this "je ne se quois" fluffy-duffy fuzzy-wuzzy type of assessment, but I truly believe we must love our tools to use them well. And just a like a carpenter may have a favorite hammer or spirit level that they like, or a cyclist a favorite pair of gloves, above and beyond any functional criteria, so to, IMHO with our craft. And in this intangible respect, in addition to all the measurables and objectiveness above, the Acratech won me (and the moment it truly won me was on that cold and wet mountain ridge in 35mph winds!) But, in this, obviously, YMMV. So I completely get you (or anyone else) not liking the Acratech for various reasons, regardless of what the numbers or any measurable performance says.
|
