I just purchased a Benro KJ-2 ballhead ($185) and the Benro C-22r tripod ($217) and have to say they exceeded my expectations. It’s a 3-way ballhead, smooth while panning, and it has a quick release. I too use the Canon 20D w/100-400mm lens; this setup has no problem supporting both camera and lens, rock solid. The tripod has a bubble level and a compass built in. I plan to use it while shooting nature and wildlife and see know problem attaching it to my backpack. The tripod also comes with a padded case, which accommodates the tripod with the ballhead attached.
I have never ordered anything directly from Hong Kong so I was a little leery at first. In addition, the package arrived in about a week. I ordered it from Chris Chan at hkcarris.com. I would order from them again. I found them on eBay but you can go directly to their web site as well and they use pay pal, which made it nice.
I have been looking for a good quality ballhead and tripod and I know I could have easily spent $400 on the ballhead alone. Now I have both a great tripod and ballhead and I’m all set. Yosemite here I come.
I first read about the Benro company right here on the FM Forum, so a thank you goes out to the people that recommended it in the first place. I am very happy with my purchase and wanted to pass the info along. Fred you have an awesome website, it has become one of my favorite sites; keep up the good work.
BeeMan458 wrote:
Benro and Feisol "are" making themselves hard to be ignored when compared to the price of a Gitzo.
I just checked out some of Benro's product advertisements... it looks like they reverse-engineered every Gitzo tripod out there, then used Chinese labour and reduced the cost by 30-50%.
Unethical yes, but great price. Not sure I'll take a chance on one of these, but it deserves serious consideration...
\why can't Feisol & Benro get decent North American distribution?
"Unethical yes, but great price. Not sure I'll take a chance on one of these, but it deserves serious consideration..."
Unethical..... isn't that what every other shop is doing these days Sigma reverse engineers their Canon mounts, for our benefit
Assuming the unethical nature of the above behavior, is it unethical for the consumer to notice and even buy these unethically designed and manufactured "knockoff" products
BeeMan458 wrote:
Unethical..... isn't that what every other shop is doing these days Sigma reverse engineers their Canon mounts, for our benefit
Assuming the unethical nature of the above behavior, is it unethical for the consumer to notice and even buy these unethically designed and manufactured "knockoff" products
I see reverse-engineering of a camera mount as a slightly different kettle of fish... the camera is owned by a user, the manufacturer (Canon, Nikon, whoever) attempts to 'lock in' the user into their proprietary design. Courts in north america at least have consistently ruled that after-market components or alterations are acceptable (e.g. cars, clothing, electrionics). As long as Sigma reverse engineers, vs directly copies, the mount, then more power to them.
My 'unethical' stance is built on a foundation of quicksand , but its clear that the Benro products are directly targeted at Gitzo.
Model names (e.g. "228G" vs "G1228"), and the designs are VERY similar as well. Most of the ebay auctions for Benro products are "BENRO 228G CARBON FIBRE NOT GITZO G1228).
This is fairly common for nascent chinese manufacturing industries...copy a design and build it fast/cheaper than anyone else. DVD,mpeg, mp3 patents have long since been ignored in China, for example.
I want to keep on enjoying the fruits of creativity and quality products at a FAIR price. Call me an elitist, but Gitzo has done it's job and deserves my $$. Benro does not. If "Benro" (typical name, lol) wants my $$, they should play fairly and do like everyone and develop something new.
OH I know what's next coming out of China, the Super Simple Gear CJ-55 Ballhead...
I know I'm way late to the thread, but I'll second Rico's vote for the Gitzo 1277M ballhead, as I've got one of my own. Without a clamp it weighs just over a pound, and the action is much smoother than any of the lower-end Bogen/Manfrotto's that seem to always be recommended (e.g. the 488RC2). The teflon-coated magnesium ball slides in teflon blocks without lubrication, and while it doesn't have a drag control per se, the clamping knob allows fine enough control to behave like one. It's also only around $140, which means the Arca-Swiss type clamp of your choice can be added, and you'll end up at right around $200 for the package (and still be under 1.5 pounds). Gitzo stuff is always beautifully finished, too, and while that's secondary to operation, it's important to many of us.
I was going to start a thread, but seeing as this is the mother of all ballhead threads I'll jump in here.
I'm planning on the M-10 ballhead, To go with my currentlegs, manfrotto 055, and for use with my Cannon 1dMII with various lenses. I want to get an L bracket for the camera, and a few plates for the lenses I have that have collars.
My questions is, what L bracket and Quick releases do I go for, given the above selection of ballhead, legs and camera? The RRS stuff gets great reviews, but I'd like to see comments from those that may even have this combo.
I got the M-10 a couple of weeks ago and love it. Incredibly smooth. And by coincidence I was moving up from a Benro, which was fine when I got it, but the ball started getting rough with use and wasn't smooth anymore. The Markins is very lightweight and smooth as silk to use.
Anyway I also picked up the Markins Q-20 quick release and it works great with my Arca plates. I like the rounded edges on the Q-20.
I've decided that my tripod is going to be either a) 1297 Basalt Gitzo, or b) Feisol 3301N (newer model) based on price and weight rating. I almost took a bite at a Gitzo 1227 but its a bit short and aluminum only, although the weight rating was decent. Hiking is a serious consideration for me, although I won't be rock climbing/going more than 10km at a stretch for hte foreseeable future (e.g. i have kids).
Next I need to pick a head. I've considered, and disregarded, the Acra-tech Ultimate Ballhead. I also know that I will never shoot a 500mm f/4, but I might get a 400L f/5.6 or a 100-400L 4-5.6 down the road, so i want some ball headroom.
I've come up with the following choices:
1) Markins M10. Only knock against this is its got a weaker-panning base than others, and its a bit pricey ($399 USD) for us Canadians.
2) RSS B40Pro. $350 USD but it also comes with the RSS clamp, which is the best clamp available.
3) Kirk BH3, comes with clamp and is a very reasonable $255 USD. I wish they'd provide a weight rating on their site -- is 300mm f/2.8 too much or the limit? Its my current front runner. The current 2 week backorder is disappointing too.
Questions:
In your option, given my _guaranteed_ lense limitations, is the $150 more for the Markins M10 really worth it? What about $100 more for the B40?
If I'm getting an RSS clamp, is it really worth it to go for the proprietary RSS lever clamp, or should I stick with the screw clamp? I'm guessing screw clamp.
Finally, who has used the Kirk BH3 and what are your experiences? If you replaced the BH3, why?
I have both screw and clamps from RRS. I like the lever.... a lot. I'd say its worth it since is about the most often used part of your ballhead.
I have the BH40 from RRS and highly recommend it. However, I'm not sure it is better than the BH3 which was my second choice. The BH3 is the choice of many professional nature photogs for their backpacked set up (i.e. John Shaw). I think it is a VERY good choice.
The Gitzo 1227 is CF not aluminum. However, you should look at the new 6X CF legs that are replacing the 1227/8. Look for the 1257/8. The difference is that they are significantly lighter and have the same not rotating legs that the Basalt series have. I own the 1258 and am very happy with it. The 1257/8 with the BH40 or Kirk BH3 on it would be a terrific combination. Very light, very sturdy.
The 1257/8 height works fine for me at 6'. I have never extended the center post and find it very comfortable to use with little bending over.
JohnJ80 wrote:
I have both screw and clamps from RRS. I like the lever.... a lot. I'd say its worth it since is about the most often used part of your ballhead.
I have the BH40 from RRS and highly recommend it. However, I'm not sure it is better than the BH3 which was my second choice. The BH3 is the choice of many professional nature photogs for their backpacked set up (i.e. John Shaw). I think it is a VERY good choice.
The Gitzo 1227 is CF not aluminum. However, you should look at the new 6X CF legs that are replacing the 1227/8. Look for the 1257/8. The difference is that they are significantly lighter and have the same not rotating legs that the Basalt series have. I own the 1258 and am very happy with it. The 1257/8 with the BH40 or Kirk BH3 on it would be a terrific combination. Very light, very sturdy.
J....Show more →
A 1257, or even worse (better?) 1257 w/ levelling post is about $750 CAD, and I just can't justify that expense when i still have to factor in a head. But it would be my first choice otherwise!
My mistake, i was looking at a 1127, not the 1227. I gather the 1127 is at least a generation back in terms of models...very end of line-ish. A Feisol sounds stronger and lighter than a 1297 Basalt, and is also shorter. Barring manufacturing defects, probalby much better.
Glad to hear the BH3 is well regarded. Barring any horror stories I hear from this point on, its probably my final choice.
Get a Arca-Swiss B-1 and be done. If you get a cheaper one, you waste money later. I started with a Bogen but soon ditched it and settled on the B-1. Just no comparison.
Don't get the Fiesol ballhead or plate! It's very tricky to use and the plate has sharp edge that cut my friend's finger when he used it the first time. Very bloody and unpleasant experience.
fighterace,
thanks for the advice on the Feisol ballhead. it looks very tempting given its price, but given the physical properties i suspect ballheads are alot harder to manufacture. there's not alot of feedback out there on their ballheads (yet).
anyone have any experience with the benros? RCicala above indicates he had to upgrade so I'm guessing these fall in the same 'good but not great' lot.
DavidJB wrote: fighterace,
thanks for the advice on the Feisol ballhead. it looks very tempting given its price, but given the physical properties i suspect ballheads are alot harder to manufacture. there's not alot of feedback out there on their ballheads (yet).
anyone have any experience with the benros? RCicala above indicates he had to upgrade so I'm guessing these fall in the same 'good but not great' lot.
there is a really good reason NOT to buy the benro or feisol ballhead, the clamps are proprietary. They clamps have a spring loaded pin to prevent them from falling out, but you have to buy their plates to have this work properly. Wimberley initiated a format several years ago to have stops on the bottom of the lens plates so that the pates could be adjusted fore/aft without fear of them falling out. Kirk and RRS have now taken up this format of plate stops and have incorporated the appropriate clamp grooves. Even without the clamp groves the stops work, you just don't get as much travel. To see what I mean you really need to work a RRS lever clamp with a long lens plate with stops. half way acutation of the lever allows the lens plate to feely slide in the clamp, but cannot come out. great for lbalancing ong lenses with different cameras and/teleconverters. Full actuation of the lever and its tight as can be.
Mike K
, but its clear that the Benro products are directly targeted at Gitzo.