486rc2 vs 488rc2

[alt4852]

i think i have my tripod legs all figured out, but i was wondering if anyone had any guiding opinions on which head to settle with. from the looks of it, my budget will just about accommodate a 190XPROB right now, but i'm trying to figure out whether i should jump on a 486RC2 or a 488RC2 head. i know everyone has rave reviews on the 488RC2, but it really strains my tripod budget quite a bit right now and i was wondering if people have any experiences of inadequacy with the 486RC2. i played with the 055XPROB/488RC2 pairing before, and i really love it.. but it's a little too heavy, too expensive, and too much tripod for my current uses. i'll probably end up purchasing it in a few years if i feel like i need more support, but does anyone have any personal objections to a 190XPROB with a 486RC2 head? it sounds perfect for me right now, but i always consult these forums before i make any significant photography-oriented purchases. =)

(the 190XPROB/486RC2 is already slightly over budget but i'm letting it slide because i've been convinced a manfrotto/bogen is the way to go. i understand that the 055XPROB/488RC2 combination is only $60 or so more, but my self-imposed budget was $200 to begin with and $270 is sounding a lot more painful than $210.)

[SkipD]

You will find that the 486RC2 will slip a little with the heavy 40D/24-70 combination when you use the "portrait" position. The 488RC2 has a larger diameter ball and has enough "beef" to avoid slipping with weights on it that exceed the capability of the 486RC2.

In addition, of course, the 488RC2 has the separate pan release lever that will be extremely handy on a tripod.

How tall are you? I am 5ft 10in tall and find the 190 series tripods (formerly known as the 3001 series in the U.S.) too short for me. I would have to extend the center column virtually every time I used a 190, and that is NOT ACCEPTABLE. Extending the center column reduces the rigidity of a tripod by a very significant amount. While there are situations that will require extending the center column, you really want a tripod that you can use 95% (or more) of the time without extending the center column.

It would be worth the effort to save for another month or two and get the one tripod that will take you for many years rather than spending most of the budget on something that you would be sorry you purchased later on. Many of us have purchased several tripods over the years until we finally found the combination that stops the buying. For me, the Bogen/Manfrotto 3021BPro topped with a Manfrotto 488RC2 is that tripod for most of my work - including all of my field work. The 3021BPro has been replaced by the 055XProB.

[HotFuzz]

Over here the difference between the 486RC2 and the 488RC2 s aout £14 ($28) which isnt that bad considering.
I have the 488RC2 anD find the panning ability very useful.

If you can stretch i think you would not regret it as it is a very good head and you dont want to be left feeling "if only i had the 488RC2"

[Bill Roberts]

There's nothing wrong with the 486RC2 at all. It's not *quite* as substantial as the 488 and doesn't have the separate pan facility but it's a decent head in it's own right. Go for it, you can always get the 488 later if you need to. The trouble is that there's always something that little bit better for a bit more money... only you can answer that one.

[SkipD]

There's nothing wrong with the 486RC2 at all. It's not *quite* as substantial as the 488 and doesn't have the separate pan facility but it's a decent head in it's own right. Go for it, you can always get the 488 later if you need to. The trouble is that there's always something that little bit better for a bit more money... only you can answer that one.Bill, the problem is that he already has the Canon 24-70 f/2.8L and I know from experience that the 486RC2 is not always up to the task of holding that lens on a xxD body (like my 20D) steady without creeping, especially when flipped over into "portrait" position.

[Bill Roberts]

In that case Skip I agree totally, the 488 would be the better choice.

I really should learn to read everything before I post! :oops: but we both know that's never going to happen...

Cheers
Bill

[sharkii]

In my opinnion you should get the 488 as I was trying to do the same choice you are about to make like a month ago! I did tried all of them and deicided on 055xprob and 488rc2 and I am definitely happy about that.. and about 190x its still a stable tripod but if you extend the middle column it will be a bit jiggly and if you dont it will be short.. at least it was too short for me... but 488 is the head you will sooner or later find yourself buying.. so to save yourself from some trouble and save some money just hold on there and buy the 488.. and lastly whichever you choose you will be a Happy photographer! please do tell us what you decide when you get it!

edit: and I gotta thank SkipD helping me decide on my tripod again! thanx SkipD

[tjrenegade]

I have the 486 and the XTi with the 24-70 and have not experienced the "slip" as many other have. Unless they are talking about the slight movement downward you get after tightening the ball head but I have learned to compensate for it as it moves the same amount each time I adjust. ..however if your budget allows go for the 488....

[HotFuzz]

Unless they are talking about the slight movement downward you get after tightening the ball head but I have learned to compensate for it as it moves the same amount each time I adjust.

You get that wit hthe 488 aswell, and spose most reasonbly priced ball heads. The Uber priced ones wont do that.

[alt4852]

first and foremost, thanks so much for all the great advice. switching to a dSLR has really scared the living daylights out of me since i've been reaching so much and it seems to have a severe if-you-give-a-mouse-a-cookie effect. after deciding a few months ago to get a XTi and a 17-85mm, four months and almost $2000 over-budget later, i'm putting the last nails into my financial coffin by buying a nice tripod to complement my 40D setup. c'est la vie.

it really wasn't the answer i was fishing for here (i was crossing my fingers to hear words of support for the 190XPROB/486RC2) but given the fact that i really trust the words of wisdom i receive here, i'll hold off and see if i can go the extra distance and make sure i get a support system i won't be disappointed with. as for future updates, the tripod/head combination that you see in my signature in a few weeks will probably be a good measure of what i ended up pulling the trigger on. once again, thanks a bunch to everyone for their help.

PS: and yes, SkipD, i'm also 5'10-5'11 so your comment about height was icing on the cake to save for the 055XPROB. thanks. =)

[blackshadow]

I went through exactly the same decision making process in the last week.

I had a long hard look at the 190XPROB/486RC2 kit and knew I wouldn't be happy with it for the reasons skip especially articulated above. I went for the 055XPROB/488RC2 and I know I now have a tripod and head that will give me many years of reliable service.

[ed rader]

if weight is a concern the 488 is .75 lbs heavier (i have the 486).

ed rader

[jrsforums]

if weight is a concern the 488 is .75 lbs heavier (i have the 486).

ed rader

It's a nit, but per B&H specs the delta is 0.5 lbs

[irishman]

Does the 24-70 weigh more than the 70-200 2.8 IS? I have that very tripod/head combo, and the 70-200 doesn't slip.

[SkipD]

Does the 24-70 weigh more than the 70-200 2.8 IS? I have that very tripod/head combo, and the 70-200 doesn't slip.When using the 70-200, you don't need to flop the ball head 90° over to the side to get the camera into "portrait" position. You just rotate the lens in the tripod ring.

With a 24-70, however, you need to put all the weight of the camera and lens off-axis from the head. That is what puts the strain on a Manfrotto 486RC2 ball head and sometimes (though not all the time) causes creep. You can stop the creep by over-tightening the locking knob, but I prefer to avoid damaging my equipment and resolve this problem by using a larger ball head - the Manfrotto 488RC2.

[Jon]

Also the 70-200 2.8 has a tripod mounting ring, which the 24-70 doesn't. So no matter which orientation you've got the camera/24-70, the load will be off-center, while it'll be more evenly balanced with the 70-200 when mounted to the ring.

[alt4852]

a musing question since i have an idle mind right now: since ballheads have an exposed self-lubricating ball-section on top, are they harder to maintain and/or clean than three way pan heads like the 3437? a curious thought i've been toying in my mind since i'll be traveling and i plan on only having a tripod carrying strap as opposed to a bag which would protect the ballhead more effectively. does anyone ever get dirt/dust in that area, or need to re lubricate the ball often?

[SkipD]

a musing question since i have an idle mind right now: since ballheads have an exposed self-lubricating ball-section on top, are they harder to maintain and/or clean than three way pan heads like the 3437? a curious thought i've been toying in my mind since i'll be traveling and i plan on only having a tripod carrying strap as opposed to a bag which would protect the ballhead more effectively. does anyone ever get dirt/dust in that area, or need to re lubricate the ball often?All you need to do with the Manfrotto ball heads is occasionally wipe the ball clean. Their manual says to NOT lubricate the ball.

[Meaty0]

a musing question since i have an idle mind right now: since ballheads have an exposed self-lubricating ball-section on top, are they harder to maintain and/or clean than three way pan heads like the 3437? a curious thought i've been toying in my mind since i'll be traveling and i plan on only having a tripod carrying strap as opposed to a bag which would protect the ballhead more effectively. does anyone ever get dirt/dust in that area, or need to re lubricate the ball often?

I've had the 190 + 488RC2 for two years now and I've not been kind to it at all. It's performed superbly and I've never had to clean or lubricate the ball head..other than to brush a bit of sand out of it or hose mud off it:D And it handled my 40D + 100-400 + 1.4TC easily.

[alt4852]

have you ever gotten sand, dirt, or mud in the head while carrying it?

(and if yes, did it adversely affect performance or require cleaning that affected performance?)

thanks in advance. =)

[pixel_junkie]

I went through exactly the same decision making process in the last week.

I had a long hard look at the 190XPROB/486RC2 kit and knew I wouldn't be happy with it for the reasons skip especially articulated above. I went for the 055XPROB/488RC2 and I know I now have a tripod and head that will give me many years of reliable service.

Same here.

[tjrenegade]

I sent my 190XB back to BH (it was a christmas gift) and ordered the 055XPROB/488RC2...although I thought the 190 and the 486 where a good match I alread had a "light weight" tripod and wanted something sturdy and weight wasn't really an issue. So it should arrive today assuming UPS doesn't screw up. I think I made the right choice...at least I hope I did...

[Meaty0]

have you ever gotten sand, dirt, or mud in the head while carrying it?

(and if yes, did it adversely affect performance or require cleaning that affected performance?)

thanks in advance. =)

I dropped it in the sand when I was walking along a beach once. I just hosed the sand out later...no problemo!

And yes, I was standing in mud about 12" deep with the tripod setup in front of me (taking photos of fishing boats). When I disconnected the camera, the tripod overbalanced and went "headfirst" into the mud:oops: Again, I just rinsed the mud off at a tap in a nearby park (and off my legs too)..no problemo.

[alt4852]

well, you guys have just put the last nail in my tripod decision making coffin. i know what i'm going to get. thanks. =)

[SkipD]

well, you guys have just put the last nail in my tripod decision making coffin. i know what i'm going to get. thanks. =)Yeah? Don't be so secretive about your decision ;). Let us all know.

[Meaty0]

well, you guys have just put the last nail in my tripod decision making coffin. i know what i'm going to get. thanks. =)
A Gitzo with a RRS BallHead?

[alt4852]

hahaha, i'm not quite in gitzo territory just yet. but once the payment for the lens clears (i just sold my 28-135mm kit lens), i'll have the $300 to drop on a manfrotto 055XPROB with a 488RC2 ballhead. you know you're in over your head when you're spending all your money as it comes in, and scavenging through your house to find things to sell on ebay in order to feed your photography fix. i also just sold two old textbooks that i misplaced from three semesters ago, landing me an extra $80. can anyone say 70-200mm f/2.8L fund? :D

(as i've said earlier, this hobby is going to be the death of me. ;))

[eelnoraa]

Is "light weight" important to you? If yes, get 486, if not get 488. 488 is a lot beefier and have pan control but it is quick large and heavy. It will be a pita to have a nice 3lb CF tripod and a 2 lb ball head, especially if you use it as a travel tripod.

eel

[ed rader]

Is "light weight" important to you? If yes, get 486, if not get 488. 488 is a lot beefier and have pan control but it is quick large and heavy. It will be a pita to have a nice 3lb CF tripod and a 2 lb ball head, especially if you use it as a travel tripod.

eel

1.5 lbs.

ed rader

[thoreau]

Bill, the problem is that he already has the Canon 24-70 f/2.8L and I know from experience that the 486RC2 is not always up to the task of holding that lens on a xxD body (like my 20D) steady without creeping, especially when flipped over into "portrait" position.

Maybe it's because my 486RC2 is still just about brand new, but with my 40D and 24-70L I have yet to experience any creep in *any* position or orientation. But as they say, YMMV.

[ed rader]

Maybe it's because my 486RC2 is still just about brand new, but with my 40D and 24-70L I have yet to experience any creep in *any* position or orientation. But as they say, YMMV.


with the 24-70L mine doesn't creep but i do have to compensate for sag.

ed rader

[jptsr1]

with the 24-70L mine doesn't creep but i do have to compensate for sag.

ed rader

i experience sag with both my 488 and 486. i always attributed it to play at the connection points of my rig (lens to camera, camera to grip, grip to plate). i based my guess on the fact that i see it less when i remove the connections. for example it is worse with my 70-200, tc, and grip than it is with the same lens mounted directly to the camera and no grip. interesting to hear its actually the head that's responsible.

J.

Edit: I forgot, OP get the 488. its much beefier and the pan feature is worth the extra dough.

J.

[alt4852]

thanks, that certainly seems to be the general consensus here. i love how POTN can make me feel so good about committing financial suicide. ;)

[Meaty0]

with the 24-70L mine doesn't creep but i do have to compensate for sag.

ed rader

Hmmm...I have more sagging bits on my body than I do on my tripod. The 488RC2 is rock steady.

[ed rader]

Hmmm...I have more sagging bits on my body than I do on my tripod. The 488RC2 is rock steady.


i was talking about the 486. i have the 488 on the way :D.

ed rader

[TitusvilleSurfer]

How will a 055XPROB/488RC2 stand up to a 100-400/40D? I am assuming well if it stacks against the 70-200 f/2.8 IS (I plan to purchase both lenses...the 70-200 within the week)

[SkipD]

How will a 055XPROB/488RC2 stand up to a 100-400/40D? I am assuming well if it stacks against the 70-200 f/2.8 IS (I plan to purchase both lenses...the 70-200 within the week)You will find that the 055XPROB/488RC2 will do extremely well with that camera/lens combination.

[delhi]

Too bad neither has the leveler.

[SkipD]

Too bad neither has the leveler.Except for a level in the tripod leg set (to make sure the column is vertical), I have never needed or even wanted a level for the camera in all the 40+ years I've been shooting off tripods. I merely make sure that vertical elements in the subject are parallel to the sides of the viewfinder and/or horizontal elements are parallel to the top and/or bottom of the viewfinder.