ballhead/monopod recommendation for 300mm 2.8

[tjnaj343]

I recently aquired a Canon 300mm 2.8 IS lens and would like to get a ballhead/monopod combination to accommodate the lens. I appreciate any/all suggestions. I'd like to stay between $300-$400....if possible. Oh, I should mention, panning is key to whatever setup I ultimately choose....as is height (I'm 6'3").

[ANGUS]

No need at all for a ball head on a 300 it would be very awkward. I simply use a Manfrotto 680B Monopod.

[Jon]

No need at all for a ball head on a 300 it would be very awkward. I simply use a Manfrotto 680B Monopod.While a ball head may be awkward, it's less so than locking the lens directly to the monopod if you ever have to get more than a few degrees off the horizontal. Actually, you might be better off getting a Wimberley Sidearm or other similar gimbaling head to handle the weight.

[jhom]

IMO, a ballhead is not necessary when you use a 300 f2.8L IS on a monopod unless you have a very special shooting circumstance. Given its focal length, a few degrees of tilt of the monopod will offer you a significant change in your field of view. Since the monopod sits on a single point, panning is accomplished by pivotting. So turning your gear left or right should give you all the panning you need.

There are many choices of monopods that will do the job quite adequately. I've use several Manfrottos with my 300 including the 679, 680 and 681. I would recommend the 680 or 681 if you want to spend less than $100. I am now using a Gitzo GM5540. It is clearly more expensive but IMO worth it.

[tjnaj343]

Thanks for the responses so far. Part of my interest in a ballhead is trying to capture birds in flight! Where I live I backup to a large pond surrounded by wetlands so I often get birds landing and taking off. For example, I've read the Markins ballhead does a pretty decent job of offering stability with smooth movement. Wimberley would be my first choice but its out of my budget.

That said, feel free to tell me if my logic is crazy. I'm relatively new to photography and completely new to monopod/tripod/ballhead discussions.

The second reason I'm looking for a ballhead is to gain some height to the monopod. I looked at those monopods already recommended (monofrotto 681B) buts is kinda short at 63" for a guy 6'3" (I think?).

Keep the ideas coming. :)

[Jon]

Bingo. Two very good reasons for using some kind of head. Birds in flight, and tall user. If you tilt the monopod, you introduce instability by taking the center of gravity away from the support axis, and you reduce the effective height of the tripod (by 15% at 30 degrees from the vertical). If you're only going maybe 5 deg. away from a horizontal viewpoint, you may not need a head. If you go much more you really do want one.

The Wimberley Sidearm is only around $250 at their store; then you'd need a quick release head to attach it to. B&H also lists some similar-functioning Jobo heads for around that price, and Manfrotto has a 3421 head for under $200.

[PacAce]

Thanks for the responses so far. Part of my interest in a ballhead is trying to capture birds in flight! Where I live I backup to a large pond surrounded by wetlands so I often get birds landing and taking off. For example, I've read the Markins ballhead does a pretty decent job of offering stability with smooth movement. Wimberley would be my first choice but its out of my budget.

That said, feel free to tell me if my logic is crazy. I'm relatively new to photography and completely new to monopod/tripod/ballhead discussions.

The second reason I'm looking for a ballhead is to gain some height to the monopod. I looked at those monopods already recommended (monofrotto 681B) buts is kinda short at 63" for a guy 6'3" (I think?).

Keep the ideas coming. :)
If you're going to be shooting birds in flight, you're going to need more than a ball head to do that efficiently. You'll need an attachment like a Wimberley Sidekick or a similar product from another source.

If you want something specifically for the monopod, a tilt head like the Manfrotto 3229 or 234RC might be a better option.

[RichNY]

I agree with Leo that something like the 3229 is better than a ballhead on a monopod.

I went with the 3232 and have a RRS clamp on it and use it with a 200 f/2 lens. I prefer the lighter weight and the fact that you are only controlling it in one direction rather than on a ballhead where you need to control all directions.

RRS sells them with their clamps already attached and makes things really simple.

[jhom]

Thanks for the responses so far. Part of my interest in a ballhead is trying to capture birds in flight! Where I live I backup to a large pond surrounded by wetlands so I often get birds landing and taking off. For example, I've read the Markins ballhead does a pretty decent job of offering stability with smooth movement. Wimberley would be my first choice but its out of my budget.

That said, feel free to tell me if my logic is crazy. I'm relatively new to photography and completely new to monopod/tripod/ballhead discussions.

The second reason I'm looking for a ballhead is to gain some height to the monopod. I looked at those monopods already recommended (monofrotto 681B) buts is kinda short at 63" for a guy 6'3" (I think?).

Keep the ideas coming. :)

Here is a good link to part 1 of 2 regarding BIF photography written by Moose Peterson. http://www.vividlight.com/Articles/704.htm. You might find it informative as well as discouraging regarding the use of a 300. I'm not a BIFer, but a solid tripod with a Wimberely setup is probably the most recommended support system for BIF shooting.

After learning what you intend on using the monopod and ballhead for, I would suggest you consider a good tripod setup instead of a monopod/ballhead.