Disapointed with the ballheads

[DocFrankenstein]

Disclaimer: Tripod heads are a personal choice and I'm not looking for a flame war. I just want to type out my experience and maybe generate a discussion on what you think is convenient.

I've recently purchased the 486RC2 ballhead and returned it 2 days later. It creeps under the weight of 70-200 f/2.8

Of course it's a cheap small ballhead. So today I visited a store and spent quite an amount of time playing with a few gitzos and manfrottos, also the Acratech Ultimate ballhead and the Arca Swiss monoball.

I don't know if it's me or the load I've put on the ballheads, but NONE of the ballheads seemed to compare in stability to my pan/tilt 3047.

What is more surprising, is that the difference between the Arca Swiss and 120 dollar manfrotto 488 is minimal. 488, Ultimate Ballhead and Arca Swiss sag about the same with the load I have. And AcratechUB has to be tightened rather severely to hold the load.

I am confused and disappointed. I expected more after reading all the marketing materials for the ballheads. Now I like the heavy pan/tilt better and am almost ready to put up with weight because of the stability.

Any thoughts on the matter are appreciated.

[Tsmith]

I just got the Manfrotto 486RC2 also & coupled with my XT/70-200 f/4L/tripod ring didn't notice any drifting although I haven't played with it a whole lot. The f/2.8 is a weighter Lens but one would think this head would be designed for it.

Since I'm new to the ball head experience one thing I did notice is when loosening the adjustment lever you sure better be holding on to the camera/lens combo.

[ssim]

Ask 10 photographers what they think about this subject and you will get differing opinions. Of course they will all think that they are right.

I hunted around for quite awhile before settling on mine. I just never could find one that I was comfortable with until I had the opportunity to try this one on someone else's tripod. I ended up getting a Kirk head which you can find --here-- (http://www.kirkphoto.com/ballheads.html). I have never had any trouble with it and I've shot in extremely hot to extremely cold with it. I highly recommend it but it is a tad expensive.

[lmitch6]

Ballheads may offer a "quicker" ease of use at first glance, but I've always preferred pan/tilt heads personally. I've used the 3047, and it is SOLID, so I know where you're coming from. You may want to look at the 3437 head from Bogen. I'm planning on mating it up with the G1120 legs from Gitzo for my setup.

[DocFrankenstein]

I just got the Manfrotto 486RC2 also & coupled with my XT/70-200 f/4L/tripod ring didn't notice any drifting although I haven't played with it a whole lot. The f/2.8 is a weighter Lens but one would think this head would be designed for it.

Since I'm new to the ball head experience one thing I did notice is when loosing the adjustment lever you sure better be holding on to the camera/lens combo.
If I had 70-200 f/4 then I'd probably keep the 486 since it does a good job with it.

But my heaviest setup is the 70-200 plus flashbracket plus flash... and it's just too small and fiddly for that.

[DocFrankenstein]

ssim - I can't find anybody in Toronto who has the kirk in stock to try out. If you know, of someone - let me know.

lmitch6 - It's funny you should mention 3437. I almost bought it instead of 3047. That head is really smooth and gives you MACRO control of everything. I think I'll end up with it sooner or later.

[Tsmith]

If I had 70-200 f/4 then I'd probably keep the 486 since it does a good job with it.

But my heaviest setup is the 70-200 plus flashbracket plus flash... and it's just too small and fiddly for that.

Curious question Doc: is yours the Mini Ball Head 486 or regular one? Mines the regular.

[DocFrankenstein]

Curious question Doc: is yours the Mini Ball Head 486 or regular one? Mines the regular.
I was not aware about the variations up until you asked me about them. It's a manfrotto 486RC2 with their little quick release plate. The ball is about an inch in diameter.

Here's a link to the one I had:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=272449&is=REG&addedTroughType=search

[Tsmith]

Actually I may be thinking about the 484RC2 which is very similar but listed as a mini ball head. Yours is the same as mine.

[DocFrankenstein]

Actually I may be thinking about the 484RC2 which is very similar but listed as a mini ball head. Yours is the same as mine.
Yeah, I thought so. 484 is really small and would be enough for a pointnshoot or something similar.

[Mike K]

I have had good luck doing large panos with a Pan/Tilt head, but I hated moving to portrait mode by flipping up the camera base as it made the whole tripod unsteady and uncentered the entire tilt/pan functionality. Secondly I found the long handles very ungainly for tripod transport. The first Aha I had was when I got a Really Right Stuff L bracket for my 1DII (a very large and heavy dSLR) along with Arca Swiss style clamps. Now the camera stays centered in portrait orientation, kind of like rotating a telephoto lens in a lens ring mount. All of the pros seem to use the Arca Swiss plates/clamps, and for good reason, for quick release they are far more versitile than the Manifrotto sytem. The Arca system can be put on a long focusing or pano rail, flash brackets added, and of course the L bracket system used. It is far more generic than the proprietary quick release plates/clamps.
I have had an Acratech for a few years now, the complaints I have is that it doesn't have a friction system to limit movement when the head is loose, so the camera can flop over unexpectedly. As you pointed out, with a long, unbalanced load it sags a tiny bit after being tightened. If you use the Arca Swiss style plates, you try to get a lens foot plate that is long enough so that your mounting location will balance your lens/camera combination to minimize this issue. I have been thinking of the Really Right Stuff BH 55 which is used by several prominent dSLR pros like M. Reichmann, M. Peterson and G. Lepp. There are many reviews on the web, here is one.
http://luminous-landscape.com/reviews/accessories/rrs-bh55.shtml
and another that really puts a tripod head into perspective:
http://www.outbackphoto.com/the_bag/pauls_rrs_bh55/essay.html
Other than the relatively slow initial delivery during the first few months of production, I have NEVER heard of anyone complaining about this ball head.
Mike K

[condyk]

Surprised you found problems with the 488 RC2 set up. I think the heaviest lens I used was the Sigma 100-300 f4 and TCon combo which isn't light by any means, and the 300mm f4 IS L and 100-400 IS L. All very happy and all secured with a tripod mount. I've never had a seconds worth of doubt it was doing the job.

[IanD]

ssim - I can't find anybody in Toronto who has the kirk in stock to try out. If you know, of someone - let me know.

lmitch6 - It's funny you should mention 3437. I almost bought it instead of 3047. That head is really smooth and gives you MACRO control of everything. I think I'll end up with it sooner or later.
Doc,
Kirk sells direct. If you are ever in the Montreal ares I'd be happy to let you try my BH-1.
Once they are properly set up with the right amount of pretension, they are rock solid. They will hold MKII and 300 f/2.8 without a hair of slip.

[blue_max]

I have the 488 RC2. I have a 10d with the battery grip and I think that is the problem - it's plastic and adds a good deal of flex to the thing. Also I find I have to keep tightening the bracket to the base of the grip, but don't want to run the risk of over-tightening it.

I find that the thing sags about 1cm or so, whatever lens I put on. You do get used to it and allow for it, but coming from three-way heads, I was not expecting it.

You do gain flexibility and it can be very quick to adjust. I find I am shifting it up to focus on the eyes on a portrait and shifting it down to adjust crop.

It's just a tool and you will find a way of using it that suits you. It's very compact, so easier to leave on the end of the tripod.

Graham

[Jack W.]

I use the 486RC on a monopod to use with a 300f/4 IS and a Sigma 80-400OS. The Sigma is my heaviest lens. The ballhead works great for me with either lens.

[MDJAK]

Reallyrightstuff has finally come out with their middle of the line ballhead, the 40. I have the big daddy, the 55 with quick release clamp. I couldn't imagine a better one. I have the 1dsmkII and 70-200 f2.8 as my heaviest setup and it DON'T move. Has great friction knob and the other controls are perfect. The quick release clamps they sell are second to none.

[kram]

Doc, by creeping - do you mean a gradual movement or the first initial jerk down after tightening the lens. I have not seen any further movement with my 70-200 F4, but there is an initial downward shift. I adjust for it when I am setting up the lens.

Dont know if the 70-200 2.8 has substantially more weight to cause continuous gradual dropping - which is what I call creeping.

[Scottes]

Every tool has a job it does well, and other job it can do. A ballhead is not the right tool if you're worried about framing and creep. I spent a long time doing landscapes and macros with my ballhead and it worked, but the creep drove me nuts, as did my desire for perfect framing. I got a 3-way and that was much better for landscapes. But even that wan't perfect in my eyes, so I got a gear-head and I love it. One day I'll probably get a $500 gear head for a real precision instrument.

Granted though, the better the tool the better it will do all jobs. If I had purchased a BH-55 or similar then I might never have purchased the other heads - AND it would have cost only slightly more. But I do love my gear-head. One day I'll get one of the prime ballheads and I'll be very happy.

[vjack]

For what its worth, I have been very happy with my Kirk BH-1. I regularly use my 100-400 extended to 400 on my 20D and experience no creep at all. Best of all, by setting the ballhead to allow a little movement, I can get stable shots in almost any direction very quickly. Everyone is going to have their own preferences, but I can't imagine not having a ballhead.

[lmitch6]

ssim - I can't find anybody in Toronto who has the kirk in stock to try out. If you know, of someone - let me know.

lmitch6 - It's funny you should mention 3437. I almost bought it instead of 3047. That head is really smooth and gives you MACRO control of everything. I think I'll end up with it sooner or later.

I did a lot of research and recalling my experiences, and the 3437 seemed to me the best of both worlds. You get the compactness of a ball head with the knobs versus the arms, and the precision of a pan-tilt head. And it fits my requirements for weight too.

[CoolToolGuy]

I've always liked pan/tilt or 3-way heads on my tripods. I like and use the 486RC2 on my monopod, and it works well for me.

Last year I started regularly using long telephotos (600mm) on my 3-way head for motorsports, and I found I was getting a lot of chattering when I tried to pan and/or tilt to frame a shot. I'm using manual focus lenses without IS, and by the time the chattering stopped, the shot was different, or maybe gone. I have solved that problem with a Manfrotto 501 Fluid head that is smooth as a baby's behind. I'm trying to figure out whether I should take the plunge into the land of Wimberley.

The points are that I don't like ballheads on a tripod, and if you are using long lenses, look out for the chattering issue. As suggested above, there are as many opinions on this subject as there are photographers, and you need to solve the problems in a way that satisfies you. Good luck and let us know how it works out.

Have Fun,

[DocFrankenstein]

I'd want to clarify what I meant by creep. They don't sag gradually... even the small 486 locks and holds the load. I think it would lock 300/2.8 or something similar no problem.

What happens is that I frame, tighten the ballhead and when I release the camera the framing changes a little. But this little sag would drive me nuts I think.

Of course I can tighten it a little less, and holding the camera with both hands get the framing and shoot... but then I might as well use a monopod which is much lighter.

If I'm shooting with a tripod, I want to get the perfect framing down to a pixel and I have the time to do it. I want to frame, get my hands off the camera and use a cable release with MLU. Having both of my hands on the lens and tripod at the time of exposure defeats the purpose of having a tripod because of the vibrations I'm transmitting to the camera by triggering it.

With the ballhead, both of my hands have to be pushing the camera setup just a little bit to get the framing right! If that's the case, I might just use a monopod with manfrotto 3434 head.

Of course I only experience this if I have an unbalanced load on the camera... which potentially can be corrected with a long Arca plate.

Mike K - I'd love to have the Acra releases on all of the cameras because they got the concept right. But the prices are simply insane on those things. If I could get access to a milling machine I'd make a ton of generic plates, a few L brackets and clamps in less than 2 hours... but I'm having trouble finding someone who has it.

condyk - I actually think 488 is the best value... since it performed just as well as Acra Ultimate and ArcaSwiss, but for a fraction of a cost.

IanD - I just might take you up on the offer. How far away do you live from Montreal Intl Airport?

BlueMax - I guess ballheads are just about that: "finding a way of using them that suits you" I'll probably get one and try it for the return period. Maybe I'll keep it because the 3 way is just too cumbersome. That or the geared head.

Jack W. - for a tripod - absollutely. I'm pretty sure you can tie down 400/2.8 on it.

kram - what I described on top of this post. It's not the gradual sag. I think 2.8 is about 2x as heavy as f/4 and I had a vivitar on it too.

Scottes - I can't test any of the cooler ballheads. Nobody has kirk or bh-55 in stock... and since I didn't like arcaswiss that much, it just might be that ballheads don't work for me in general.

vjack - do you keep both of your hands on the camera when shooting?

lmitch6 - There's a very good chance I'm gonna end up with 3437, especially since I like doint macros more and more.

CoolToolGuy - that 501 is also on the future purchase list, but for my 13 year old bro who got bit by a videography bug. But that's for later, cause he has enough to learn without pans/tilts :D

[Tom W]

I'd want to clarify what I meant by creep. They don't sag gradually... even the small 486 locks and holds the load. I think it would lock 300/2.8 or something similar no problem.

What happens is that I frame, tighten the ballhead and when I release the camera the framing changes a little. But this little sag would drive me nuts I think.

That is exactly the problem I've had with tripod heads in general. That little sag with a few hundred mm of lens translates into a significant change in framing.

Of course I can tighten it a little less, and holding the camera with both hands get the framing and shoot... but then I might as well use a monopod which is much lighter.

And, if you happen to be shooting at a fairly long shutter speed, it will not be possible to hold things steady enough. That's where the problem can affect me, and it will be even worse when the heavy lens arrives.

If I'm shooting with a tripod, I want to get the perfect framing down to a pixel and I have the time to do it. I want to frame, get my hands off the camera and use a cable release with MLU. Having both of my hands on the lens and tripod at the time of exposure defeats the purpose of having a tripod because of the vibrations I'm transmitting to the camera by triggering it.

Yep!

With the ballhead, both of my hands have to be pushing the camera setup just a little bit to get the framing right! If that's the case, I might just use a monopod with manfrotto 3434 head.

Of course I only experience this if I have an unbalanced load on the camera... which potentially can be corrected with a long Arca plate.

Sometimes, it's hard to get balance even with that type of setup. I'm almost ready to look at telescope mounts and tripods with their large counterweights. :)

[IanD]

IanD - I just might take you up on the offer. How far away do you live from Montreal Intl Airport?
Doc,
I live all of ten minutes away, a little West, off of St Charles.
Let me know.

[DocFrankenstein]

Doc,
I live all of ten minutes away, a little West, off of St Charles.
Let me know.
I might fly by sometime, but I'm not sure when at all. :D

If this happens I'll shoot you a PM. Thanks. :)

[vjack]

vjack - do you keep both of your hands on the camera when shooting?


It depends on what I'm trying to do. If I have the camera locked into position, I generally just use my right hand on the shutter. If I simply have it set to provide a little tension but still be highly movable, I use both hands.

[drookie]

I just in an order for the Kirk BH-1 last week after researching the competition. They recommend their smaller ball head for this size of lens but I like to play it safe. They take about 2 weeks to ship per their website.

[Tsmith]

I gave my 486RC2 a pretty good work out yesterday attached to my 680B monopod & XT/70-200 f/4L ... never did I notice any drifting shooting vertical or horizontal. I love its ease of use as well as the build quality.

[vjack]

I just in an order for the Kirk BH-1 last week after researching the competition. They recommend their smaller ball head for this size of lens but I like to play it safe. They take about 2 weeks to ship per their website.

I remember that I initially ordered the BH-3 but then changed my order to the BH-1 after I decided that I didn't want to have to buy another ballhead if I got into heavier lenses. I think you'll be happy with it.

[malla1962]

Try the 468rc2 It holds over 10kg.I use it a lot with 1dmk2 and 70-200Lis with no sag at all.:D

[Scottes]

What happens is that I frame, tighten the ballhead and when I release the camera the framing changes a little. But this little sag would drive me nuts I think.
That's why I finally stopped shooting landscapes with a ballhead and bought a 3-way. I quickly ditched that and bought a gearhead, the Bogen 410.
If I'm shooting with a tripod, I want to get the perfect framing down to a pixel and I have the time to do it.
You should really try a gearhead.

It's a shame I didn't read this earlier - CDS & I were in Montreal all weekend visiting IanD and SSim. You could have tried Ian's BH-1 and my gear-head at the same time. Bummer.

[DocFrankenstein]

You should really try a gearhead.
I'm thinking about focusing... for landscapes it's ok, but for portraits I focus and recompose just too often.

It's a shame I didn't read this earlier - CDS & I were in Montreal all weekend visiting IanD and SSim. You could have tried Ian's BH-1 and my gear-head at the same time. Bummer.
Bummer indeed.:confused:

[kram]

Yes, I have to agree that there is a one time slight change in framing. I have not had a shot where it made that much of a diff. though it is very irritating.

I just assumed there would be a way out once I learn how to use the head better. But looks like its something to adjust for always. Hmmm :)

[Scottes]

I'm thinking about focusing... for landscapes it's ok, but for portraits I focus and recompose just too often.
Well if you want speedy movements for re-framing then I'd suspect that you're stuck with a high-quality ballhead. No gearhead or 3-way will let you re-frame quickly, and anything but the best ballheads will creep.

Time to cough up $500 or more. :-(

[drews578]

I use the 322RC2 with a 10D and 70-200 2.8L. I dont have any problems with that set up.

[Tom W]

I use the 322RC2 with a 10D and 70-200 2.8L. I dont have any problems with that set up.

The 322RC2 is a nice ball head. I use mine quite frequently, but it has its limitations. With a 300/4, a teleconverter, and a 1-series, it has a little initial sag (it doesn't creep), and it can exhibit some vibration problems with that combination. The 1-series is a pretty heavy weight to be hanging on the end of a lens, and it does tug a bit on the lens.

[jrsforums]

I have both the 488RC2 and the 3437 3D. The 3437 rarely comes off my tripod. It is great; easy to use; stable; and light.

john

[Scubarob639]

Try the Markins, excellent quality, good priced right

[DavidEB]

Doc -- try lightening up your grip on the camera gradually as you tighten up on the ballhead. It's like driving a car with a clutch.


I have the acratech, and a 70-200. with extension tubes, 20D and flash, the ballhead holds fine, but it does take a light touch to frame accurately.

Also pay attention to balancing the lens/camera in the clamp (as Mike mentioned)

[fetching]

What happens is that I frame, tighten the ballhead and when I release the camera the framing changes a little. But this little sag would drive me nuts I think.




i just got a Giottos MH1001 ballhead that was recommended to me and I am returning it for this reason. it seems insane to me that I just spent over $400. on a tripod and head and I can't accurately frame up a shot without compensating or tinkering with it.