Ballheads and Big Glass

[Scottes]

I'm waiting for the weather to warm up, and for my tax return check to arrive. When Mr. Taxman does his part I'll be purchasing a new lens, probably the 400mm L. I'm also planning on a 3021PRO for a tripod, and had a 488RC2 ballhead planned. The whole rig would be the aforementioned gear attached to a 10D and sometimes a 1.4 TC to boot.

But I made the mistake of reading a book by some wildlife photog who stated his hatred of ballheads with big glass. He uses a pan-tilt of some sort because he's had ballheads loosen up - which isn't very nice with a big lens attached.

So now I'm wondering if the 488RC2 is the right choice. A pan-tilt does make more sense for landscapes, and I do many of these. But my first priority is wildlife, and a ballhead makes more sense. I don't look forward to lugging a pan-tilt through the woods - too many levers sticking all different ways.

Any suggestions?

PS: A 400 L and 3021PRO is about the limit of current spending. The PRO version supports my desire for macro and close-ups, and it's tall enough for me. But of course I need a head.

[Belmondo]

But of course I need a head.

Don't we all.

I wouldn't worry about the 488RC2. I'm currently using one, and although the largest lens I've had on it is my 100-400, it's been quite steady. The reason I really like it is that it uses that same plates as the 486RC2 which is the head/quick disconnect on my monopod.

There might be a longevity issue. I haven't owned it long enough to be sure of that, but so far, so good.

Tom

[scottbergerphoto]

I recently bought the Wimberly from www.tripodhead.com. It uses Arca-Swiss type quick release plates. I bought it to use with my Sigma 500mm 4.5 EX. The head is well made, well balanced and has a smooth action. They also make the Sidekick as a less expensive solution.
I had been using an Ultimate Ballhead by www.acratech.net. I found that the ballhead did not give me a free range of motion while trying to catch moving birds. It also was not well balanced with a long lens.
The 100-400 is alot lighter and shorter then the long primes. I use a regular ballhead with it without a problem.
Can't wait for it to get above freezing,
Scott

[CyberDyneSystems]

Scottes,

Which 400mm "L" are you talking about.. (there's three of them :) )

Scottbergers Wimberly is by far the best solution for the "Monster Primes"

But if you are thinking of the 400mm f/5.6 "L" which is quite lightweight compared to the others.. or even the 400mm f/4 "DO" L,.. you will probably do fine with a decent Balll head...

If you are looking at the 400mm f/2.8 "L" well,. then,... A gimble mount like the Wimberly, Kirk "cobra" ,. or the Manfrotto 3421 will be an absolute neccesity.

[Scottes]

Wimberley? My, that would go fine with my 600mm L IS and also seems right for my 400mm L DO....

Boy, do I wish.

The 400 is (will be) the 5.6, so it sounds like the 488RC2 will be OK. I can't afford the expense for the Wimberley or Acratech stuff. Wish I could, but I just can't right now. I do love the Wimberley - I once got to play with one for about 10 seconds - 10 seconds being my own choice, because by then it had released a pleasurable toxin into my blood stream, heading for my brain in an attempt to flip the "Think" and "Buy" switches to positions which are not conducive to a successful marriage. I was very proud of my self-control, but when I mentioned it the wife still forbade conversations with other photographers.

Thanks guys.

[DaveG]

I'm waiting for the weather to warm up, and for my tax return check to arrive. When Mr. Taxman does his part I'll be purchasing a new lens, probably the 400mm L. I'm also planning on a 3021PRO for a tripod, and had a 488RC2 ballhead planned. The whole rig would be the aforementioned gear attached to a 10D and sometimes a 1.4 TC to boot.

But I made the mistake of reading a book by some wildlife photog who stated his hatred of ballheads with big glass. He uses a pan-tilt of some sort because he's had ballheads loosen up - which isn't very nice with a big lens attached.

So now I'm wondering if the 488RC2 is the right choice. A pan-tilt does make more sense for landscapes, and I do many of these. But my first priority is wildlife, and a ballhead makes more sense. I don't look forward to lugging a pan-tilt through the woods - too many levers sticking all different ways.

Any suggestions?

PS: A 400 L and 3021PRO is about the limit of current spending. The PRO version supports my desire for macro and close-ups, and it's tall enough for me. But of course I need a head.

My 70-200 and 300 mm f2.8 both have tripod collars and using those collars makes flipping from horizontal to vertical a joy.
With a ball head - and I have both the largest Manfroto and the magnesium Gitzo - I've introduced another "joint" into the "limb". If you think of how you'll use a lens with a tripod collar you realize that you just want it to pan, and tilt up and down. A pan and tilt head (not surprisingly) works much better in this case because it only allows the lens to move in one plane at a time. With a ball head loosened the lens and camera become very unstable; and if you don't have the head tension just right, and the collar locked, it could easily slip and jam a finger.

I routinely use these lenses with a monopod with no head at all and they work just fine. I don't do a lot of work with either lens on a tripod, but if I did I think that I might have a decent pan and tilt head available too.

[PacAce]

I'm waiting for the weather to warm up, and for my tax return check to arrive. When Mr. Taxman does his part I'll be purchasing a new lens, probably the 400mm L. I'm also planning on a 3021PRO for a tripod, and had a 488RC2 ballhead planned. The whole rig would be the aforementioned gear attached to a 10D and sometimes a 1.4 TC to boot.

But I made the mistake of reading a book by some wildlife photog who stated his hatred of ballheads with big glass. He uses a pan-tilt of some sort because he's had ballheads loosen up - which isn't very nice with a big lens attached.

So now I'm wondering if the 488RC2 is the right choice. A pan-tilt does make more sense for landscapes, and I do many of these. But my first priority is wildlife, and a ballhead makes more sense. I don't look forward to lugging a pan-tilt through the woods - too many levers sticking all different ways.

Any suggestions?

PS: A 400 L and 3021PRO is about the limit of current spending. The PRO version supports my desire for macro and close-ups, and it's tall enough for me. But of course I need a head.

I have the 488RC2's somewhat smaller sibling, the 486RC2, and it's a great ball head once it's set up and locked in place but when it comes to using it for tracking wildlife or birds, forget it! It's a disaster!!!! It's too unstable to be of any practical use. A Wimberly or something like it would be the best solution. But that solution can be expensive so a cheaper alternative would be to get a pan head that will give you independent lateral and up-and-down movements.

Just my 2 cents from having worked with both the ball heads and the pan heads.

[sparty314]

For what it's worth, I am using a Manfrotto 322RC2 with my 10D/BG-ED/Sigma 50-500mm. The lens itself weighs 4.10 lbs, and the set-up seems to handle it fine. In fact, I have the friction wheel adjusted to the lowest setting right now.

The head is rated for a load of 11 lbs. The head is adjustable to either a horizontal grip or to a vertical grip. It seems to handle the set-up just fine in the horizontal configuration, but the weight is just too much to try to use in the vertical.