Looking to buy a ball-head for a set of sticks that I got for Xmas. It appears that the Manfrotto 498 models replaced the 488's. The 488's are on sale right now for short money, compared to the 498s. From my research, it appears that the difference is that the 498 offers stiffness/resistance control while the 488s doesn't. Am I right in this or not? If anyone knows what improvements were made, I'd appreciate your insight.
Craig Gillette wrote:
There seem to be some nominal size differences as well. Haven't seen any discussion of the tension control as to how well it works, etc.
This new crop of Manfroto's with tension control is very competive in price with Giotto and several other popular priced ball heads . Is too soon to know if they are better ? There are quite a few makers of these and I would like to know which of them is considered to be the best .
I took a look at the Giottos at my local camera shop but was not happy with the way they worked, specifically the plate release and safety button. I think that Manfrotto's RC2 is a better design, but I really want tension adjustment... hopefully the 498 is the ticket. I'll post a review once I use it for a bit.
i used 498 for couple days last week and returned it right away. the friction control doesn't do much and panning isn't very smooth. it's chunky and heavy. so i did some research and ordered photoclam ball head directly from korea. about the same price as 498 but much better and smoother.
I bought my 488RC2 a week ago and was actually deciding between that and the new 498RC2. The latter is $30 more expensive and I figured I could do without the friction control so I went with the smaller and well-recommended 488RC2.
Despite its frequent recommendation, the 488 comes with a basic flaw -- lens droop. I found this to be a very annoying feature. Set your frame. Lock the 488. The frame has changed. As a result, I had to constantly adjust my initial framing to account for the shift when the 488 was locked. Very inconvenient. Given the price and review of some newer ballheads, I think you can do better.
Despite its frequent recommendation, the 488 comes with a basic flaw -- lens droop. I found this to be a very annoying feature. Set your frame. Lock the 488. The frame has changed. As a result, I had to constantly adjust my initial framing to account for the shift when the 488 was locked. Very inconvenient. Given the price and review of some newer ballheads, I think you can do better. Jim
I agree. I have the 488 and although it's a solid head, the droop is very annoying. A separate tension control would be nice as well. I've been contemplating for some time putting an RRS lever release clamp on top of my 488 and just as I was ready to pull the trigger I read Jim's post, reminding me about the droop. Now I feel the need to save up some money for a better performing head.
nikonem wrote:
I agree. I have the 488 and although it's a solid head, the droop is very annoying. A separate tension control would be nice as well. I've been contemplating for some time putting an RRS lever release clamp on top of my 488 and just as I was ready to pull the trigger I read Jim's post, reminding me about the droop. Now I feel the need to save up some money for a better performing head.
Believe me, putting the RRS QR won't solve the basic problem with the Manfrottos. Save your money and buy a good ballhead. You won't regret it.
jhom wrote:
Despite its frequent recommendation, the 488 comes with a basic flaw -- lens droop. I found this to be a very annoying feature. Set your frame. Lock the 488. The frame has changed. As a result, I had to constantly adjust my initial framing to account for the shift when the 488 was locked. Very inconvenient. Given the price and review of some newer ballheads, I think you can do better.
Jim
+1
I had a 488RC2 for about one year, and I could never understand why it is recommended so frequently. IMO it is a very poor performer compared to some other heads. I replaced mine with a Photo Clam PC-33NS which, although more expensive, is truly a high quality ballhead.
Despite its frequent recommendation, the 488 comes with a basic flaw -- lens droop.
*********
I have three Manfrotto ball heads and they all have lens droop. I would have saved money in the long run if I had gotten a BH-55 (or equivalent) in the beginning. The RC2 quick release system is also not stable.
I got the Manfrotto 498RC2 via UPS today from B and H. Mounted it on my tripod and tossed on my camera. The friction adjust works really well, I can get it to the point where it holds my camera in place without the locking lever engaged. So, once positioned, it really doesn't droop. Granted, I've got a Tamron 17-50 on it so I don't know what would happen with something longer. Honestly, I don't think I would have liked this head if it hadnt had the friction adjust.
For $120, it seems like a pretty good deal. I'm not going to compare it to the Really Right Stuff ballheads, as I haven't touched them and the pricepoint is completely different, but for someone who is watching his camera budget and isn't making money from photography, this ballhead seems to be just the ticket.
I have to add that while it may have some droop(not that i have noticed) and the rc2 plate is not the most substantial, i use a tripod less than once a month and when i do its nice to have a ball head at all not something where im deciding that the one i have is inadequate
Found this thread while cruising for information, so don't mind if I bring it back to life. At any rate, I currently own a 055XPROB and 488RC2, and due to back problems, etc., I've decided I need to go carbon. Adorama has a sweet $460 deal for the 055CXPRO3 + 498RC2, but I'm hesitant to jump on it based on my experience with the 488RC2. My main two beefs with it are: (a) it droops (as has been pointed out) and (b) the quick release plate wiggles, even with the pin engaged. I am wondering whether anyone can tell me if these issues are lessened or eliminated with the 498RC2. I see one somewhat unclear reference to non-droop above, but not much else.
I can`t speak for the 498 but I do have it`s little brother the 496 and I am not impressed. The tension control is worse than useless, being sticky, jerky, unpredictable and prone to moving out of adjustment of it`s own accord. The design of the body with the 2 drop slots gives restricted movement of the ball. Depending on how the head is oriented you can have good fore-and-aft movement or good side to side movement but not both at the same time without rotating the whole head by 90 degrees. Ballhead droop appears to be more prevalent in heads without separate tension control, the exception being my current favourite,the Gitzo 1277, now no longer made. The RC2 doesn`t help the lens droop as it has too much play. All it takes is a little "give" in the build of your telezoom, a little play at the lens mount, a little play in the camera/plate junction, a little play between plate and clamp and a little flex in the tripod legs and ballhead droop becomes almost inevitable unless you are using the highest quality components to minimize all these factors.
