pixNW wrote:
sjms, you're right about the aspherical ball. I previously misread something from the RRS literature, it states "Input from many of our heavy/extreme weather-use customers revealed numerous problems (sticky, inconsistent action) in humid or very cold conditions with ballheads that have an aspherical ball, so to ensure smooth operation under adverse conditions we adopted a completely spherical ball. This equates to lower weight-handling capacity, but we are confident our BH-55 capacity of 50 pounds is certainly more weight than required by any sane photographer."
I previously thought it said that they'd switched designs, but it obviously doesn't.
I'm not one to bash others equipment choices. I think we're fortunate to live in a time where there are a lot of great choices from many manufacturers. I don't always believe that spending more will always get you a better product either. I have a Rolex that I've had for years. It's been an okay watch, but has needed some work. I also have Seiko that cost a fraction of what the Rolex did, and it's been flawless, and keeps better time without ever needing any work.
I put a 300 2.8 on my set-up (I know it's not a huge lens) and focused on a point and then tightened the ball knob and didn't get any movement. I leave my drag knob set on 9 though, so even with the ball knob loose, it takes a little effort to move things. With the drag knob set for less friction it may be possible to get some movement when tightening the ball knob, but I couldn't get it to happen....Show more →
just another point of info. the markins line of ballheads surprisingly similar to the AS series also uses a completely spherical ball to instead of the somewhat eliptical type. yet they load up at 90+lb too. imagine?
