recommend ballhead for 70-200 2.8L on XTi/400D

[sneakerpimp]

i'm thinking about this
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v312/pvincent/156564.jpg

rated for 5.5 lbs. i don't know anything about ballheads, please help me out. it will be mounted onto an Induro monopod. i wasn't sure if i needed a larger mount area or whatnot. not interested in quick release. trying to stay under $50 and want something very light (under 9 oz). thanks.

[patrick835]

my opinion is, when you already invested you money in suck a lens like that, you shouldn't put it on risk. :D
you need something that can hold up to at least 11 pounds, not 5.5. :p and don't buy anything under 100 'cause you're gonna throw it away to get a better one soon.

[lanz4]

I have this lens and a 30D. I just bought the Giottos MH1302 w/the MH655 QR plate which supports 18 lbs. Your camera and lens weight about 5.3 lbs. This is a light ballhead that will do the trick and bear the valuable load. This combo is $120 from B&H. Here's the link:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/490021-REG/Giottos_MH1302_655_MH_1302_Pro_Series_II.html

[SkipD]

The Manfrotto 488RC2 will also do quite well at about $100. It is a little heavier, but works quite well with the heavier lenses.

To get lightweight equipment that performs like a heavyweight, expect at least the pricing to be heavyweight. You cannot get something for nothing.

[kchau]

The Manfrotto 488RC2 will also do quite well at about $100. It is a little heavier, but works quite well with the heavier lenses.

To get lightweight equipment that performs like a heavyweight, expect at least the pricing to be heavyweight. You cannot get something for nothing.

i second that motion, i have a 488rc2, and the thing is a tank. the midi (panning?) base makes it great for panoramas as well.

[agedbriar]

I opted for the Manfrotto 488RC2 as well.

I was first thinking about the 486RC2 (RC2 stands for the rapid connect system) as being sturdy enough, but then I felt that having one single lock for both the ball and the panorama movement would not be very practical. Setting the drag with the main lock on the 488 is fast and confortable.

Ballheads with a separate thumbwheel for the drag setting are generally more expensive and I suppose you have to reset the drag when you change lenses anyway.

The rapid connect system is a fine thing to have.

[Eagle Eye]

I agree, 488RC2 all the way. Skip doesn't know it but I also bought mine from reading the posts he has recommended it on. I figured by this one now and then when the bigger lenses are bought I still have a ballhead I can use on monopod as well as tripod with just changing the head since I already would have the quick release. Just my 2 cents.

[sneakerpimp]

i forgot to mention i'm new at using a monopod, so i don't know if i'll even need a ballhead and after looking up several sports shooter setups i decided to try going without. thanks for all the replies.

[tgara]

i forgot to mention i'm new at using a monopod, so i don't know if i'll even need a ballhead and after looking up several sports shooter setups i decided to try going without. thanks for all the replies.

I was going to ask that. Why do you want a ball head on a monopod? I have a Gitzo monopod with a Manfrotto 3232 tilt head, and its great. A ball head is too much for a monopod, in my opinion.

[argyle]

I was going to ask that. Why do you want a ball head on a monopod? I have a Gitzo monopod with a Manfrotto 3232 tilt head, and its great. A ball head is too much for a monopod, in my opinion.

Yep...I'm using the 3232 also, with a RRS lever clamp attached. Didn't see the need for a ballhead...

[Scott-LYP]

Agreed. The ballhead on a monopod is overkill...

[Ultimate CC]

arca swiss z1

[Familiaphoto]

Some like to use ballheads on monopods as they might put the monopod horizontal and the ballhead would allow them to keep the camera oriented as they like. All depends on your needs.

[Eagle Eye]

Plus when things are tight you can get by with one (488RC2) and then use it on Mono or Tri as needed. Works for me.

[GaterMan]

is the 3232 on a monopod strong enough for the 70-200 2.8L ?

[smcclelland]

The 3232 says it will support 5.5lbs which seems like it would just barely hold the combination. I'm in the same situation trying to find a head to support my Sigma 120-300 2.8 on my Manfrotto 679B mono.

[René Damkot]

trying to stay under $50

arca swiss z1

Hahahaha :p


The 3232 says it will support 5.5lbs which seems like it would just barely hold the combination. I'm in the same situation trying to find a head to support my Sigma 120-300 2.8 on my Manfrotto 679B mono.

The 3232 will support the 70-200L just fine on a monopod.
Have a look here (http://reallyrightstuff.com/tripods/03.html) to see how it'll look.
I can't think of a good reason not to use a QR. If you don't need the up/down swing, I'd just mount the tripod ring to the tripod (QR)....

[iacas]

is the 3232 on a monopod strong enough for the 70-200 2.8L ?

It's rated for well below what it'll hold. I put my 300/2.8L IS on it and it was fine. If you call and ask the RRS people, they'll tell you the same thing. It's a bit of a mystery why the rating is so low. The RRS person I talked to when I bought it speculated that perhaps they were assuming you were mounting the camera to the lens and not using tripod collars.

rated for 5.5 lbs. i don't know anything about ballheads, please help me out. it will be mounted onto an Induro monopod. i wasn't sure if i needed a larger mount area or whatnot. not interested in quick release. trying to stay under $50 and want something very light (under 9 oz). thanks.

Or you could spend a lot more money now and not have to re-buy a new ball head later on. A good ballhead runs $400 to $600 and will last a looooooooooong time.