Review: Gitzo GM2541 Monopod, RRS High Capacity Monopod Head w/ RRS B2 Pro II Clamp [Archive]

View Full Version : Review: Gitzo GM2541 Monopod, RRS High Capacity Monopod Head w/ RRS B2 Pro II Clamp

ben_r_

21st of August 2008 (Thu), 18:52

As promised here is my review of the Gitzo GM2541 Monopod and the Really Right Stuff High Capacity Monopod Head with the Really Right Stuff B2 Pro II Quick Release Clamp.

As usual with my reviews, my main goal is to help any out there who are thinking about, or might think about after reading the review, buying the item(s) I am reviewing. With that being my goal please feel free to ask any additional questions on anything I might have missed or not covered and also feel free to ask for pictures of anything else that you may want to see that I failed to show in the images I did post. I try my best to be very thorough in my reviews but it's impossible to cover EVERYTHING! I do my best and I do it not only to help others but with the hopes that others will see my reviews and be inspired to take the time to write reviews of their own to help others as so many others have helped them!

I also want to add to this an apology... For some reason that is unknown to me, with all the thousands of dollars of equipment I own I still reach for my cheesy $200 point shoot camera to snap quick shots for web use stuff like this. I apologize if the images are sub par, but its just the first thing I grab when I know I'm not looking to win a contest or make any money and just want to emphasize a point with web posted images.

Okay, with those little disclaimers out of the way, on to the good stuff!

After doing a shoot in a very dimly lit art gallery where I was not allowed to use a tripod on account that it was too wide for the amount of people present I rediscovered the need for a monopod. So I began traversing the usual channels of research and landed on the Gitzo GM2541 for its moderately short collapsed length and more than enough extended length, its weight, its max load capacity, its carbon fiber build material and of course the Gtizo brand quality. In case youre wondering, it was mostly the Gitzo quality and carbon fiber that made me chose the GM2541 over something a fraction of the cost like say the Bogen 680B (which I used to own at one point). The selection of the monopod part was fairly easy to decided as the largest lens I have is the 100-400L focal length wise and the 70-200 2.8 IS weight wise, so there would be no need for one of the larger 5 series Gitzo monopods, and the smaller monopods did not offer a high enough max load capacity to make me comfortable enough to trust them with my gear. Here is the info on the monopod from B&H:

Gitzo GM2541 6X Carbon Fiber Monopod - Supports 26.4 lbs (12kg)
B&H LINK (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/553781-REG/Gitzo_GM2541_GM2541_6X_Carbon_Fiber.html), B&H Price: $239.95

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/images/largeimages/553781.jpg

The Gitzo GM2541 Mountaineer 6X Carbon Fiber Monopod is 4 leg-section model that weighs less than one pound, but can still support cameras up to 26.4 lbs. This monopod also incorporates Gitzo's revolutionary 6X technology tube, which reduces overall monopods weight up to 25% without sacrificing strength or stability.

The G-Lock mechanism has been completely redesigned in order to achieve a 20% increase in rigidity, faster operation and stronger, safer locking. G-Lock's special design also provides a "gravity lock" effect: the higher the load applied vertically to the leg, the stronger the lock.
Key Features

• 1mm Gitzo 6X Carbon Fiber Tube
Gitzo was able to develop a six-crossed multilayer carbon fiber 30% lighter than the previous 1.5mm generation that features the same exceptional performance of stability and vibration absorption and unbeatable quality.

• Anti-Rotation Leg (ALR) System
The Anti-Rotation Leg (ALR) system makes it quick and easy to open and close the monopod. Simply turn all of the locking rings at once and the whole leg can be pulled out in seconds.

• Wrist Strap with Belt Clip
Connected to the top plate is a wrist strap, with a handy wide belt clip incorporated. This makes it possible to hang the monopod directly from a belt, strap, or pocket.

Specifications

Maximum Height: 63" (160cm)

Folded Length: 20.9" (53cm)

Load Capacity: 26.4 lbs (12kg)

Leg Sections: 4

Leg Lock Type: Twist

Male Thread Size: 1/4"-20 & 3/8"-16 (reversible stud)

Weight: 1.1 lb (500g)

That same max load capacity issue came up when choosing the right monopod head as well. The way I saw it there are really only two compact and logical types of monopod heads; a ballhead, or a tilt head. I had tried the ballhead on a monopod before in the past and found that once I had loosened the ball head, setting the right angle was a bit awkward and clumsy without three legs to keep the base study like on a tripod. There was simply too much of a range of motion to keep the whole thing study enough for me. With one hand holding the monopod and one hand holding the camera I found it somewhat difficult to tighten the ballhead. Plus a good ballhead would probably cost a bit more than a good tilt head I thought at the time.

So that left me ruling out the ballhead and move towards the tilt head. Now, most know that the most popular out there is the Bogen 3232 (now called the 234) Swivel Tilt Monopod Head or if you are an RC2 quick release user the Bogen 3229 (now call the 234RC) Swivel Tilt Monopod Head.

Heres the info on those two models respectively:

Bogen / Manfrotto 234 Swivel Tilt Monopod Head - Supports 5.5 lbs (2.5kg)
B&H LINK (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/554096-REG/Bogen_Manfrotto_234_234_Swivel_Tilt_Monopod.html), B&H Price: $20.00

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/images/largeimages/554096.jpg

The Bogen/Manfrotto 234 Swivel Tilt Monopod Head is a lightweight and compact head specifically designed for monopods. The swivel tilt head features one-axis movement, which allows the positioning of the camera for a 90° vertical format with the monopod in the upright stance. Includes a 1/4-20" camera screw.

Replaces part number 3232.

Specifications:

Load Capacity: 5.5 lbs (2.5kg)

Height: 2.4" (6.1cm)

Quick Release: No

Spirit Level: No

Tension Control: No

Tripod Mount Thread Size: 3/8"-16

Weight: 9.5 oz (270g)

Bogen / Manfrotto 234RC Swivel/Tilt Head for Monopods, with Quick Release
B&H LINK (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/554098-REG/Bogen_Manfrotto_234RC_234RC_Swivel_Tilt_Head_for.h tml), B&H Price: $34.95

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/images/largeimages/554098.jpg

The Bogen/Manfrotto 234RC Swivel/Tilt Head was specifically designed for monopods. The swivel/tilt head features a one-axis movement which allows the positioning of the camera for a vertical format with the monopod in the upright stance.

Replaces old #3229.

Key Features

• Specifically designed for monopods

• With quick release

Specifications

Load Capacity: 6 lbs (2.7kg)

Height: 2.4" (6.1cm)

Quick Release: Yes

Spirit Level: No

Tension Control: No

Tripod Mount Thread Size: 3/8"-16

Weight: 9.5 oz (270g)

Now I know that many of you here use, have used and trust the Bogen tilt monpod heads with even more expensive gear than what I use. I am by no means knocking your choice in gear nor am I talking it down. What I am going to say though is that for my comfort level I simply did not trust the <6lbs max load capacity for my gear. I also didnt like the idea of putting up to almost $4000 worth of gear on a $20-$35 head. That just deeply bothered me. So long story short I ruled out the Bogen tilt head and didnt know what to try after that.

Then I found out that my good buddy Really Right Stuff made a super expensive but highest available quality solution and thought oh boy here we go again. Super high quality construction, compatibility with my existing quick release system, extremely strong, AND light weight? Oh I knew it was going to cost me big bucks! What I found was the Really Right Stuff High Capacity Monopod Head. Here's the info from Really Right Stuff:

The High Capacity Monopod Solution

http://reallyrightstuff.com/tripods/MH01onGM5540.gif

Don't install some sort of fussy ballhead on your monopod—there's a better answer. You need two parts: a RRS MH-01High Capacity Monopod Head and our B2-Pro clamp (see other clamp options below). Unlike a ballhead, this compact swivel head tilts on only one axis so it's faster to use; less fussy to control.

For a number of years, we’ve been recommending and selling the Manfrotto 234 monopod head combined with our B2-Pro clamp as the “Monopod Solution”. This is still a great economical combination, but with a rated capacity of only 5.6 pounds, it is limited to relatively lighter-weight gear. Many of our customers begged us to develop a more robust, well machined and smooth operating product to use with their largest telephoto lenses.

The MH-01 High Capacity Monopod Head is the answer.

•We conservatively rate this monopod head at 75 pounds; more than you will ever possibly require. Yet the MH-01 is only 8.8 ounces and compact enough to fit in a smaller lens compartment in your camera bag.
•It features an RRS-compatible dovetail on the foot to add versatility. For example, see the photos on the right. Carry it along for use with your gimbal head when you need to switch to a non-tripod-collared lens without having to completely remove (and then subsequently replace) the gimbal head from/to the tripod. The MH-01 allows you to conveniently tilt the camera left/right while using the gimbal head for up down tilting.
•B2-Pro II and B2 AS II clamps are easily oriented either parallel or perpendicular to the tilt. The “+” groove on the bottom of the clamp nests securely with bosses on the MH-01. The following clamps can also be mounted on the MH-01, but can only be oriented parallel to the tilt:
B2-Pro, B2-Pro/L, B2 LR II, B2 LLR II.
•Large tilt-lock knob is easy to grip, even with gloves on.

http://reallyrightstuff.com/mmRRS/Images/full/MH01-Canon500mmLens.gif

Now here was a head I could trust my gear on! As you can see from the images the RRS High Capacity Monopod Head comes in three flavors:

MH-01 Really Right Stuff High Capacity Monopod Head
RRS LINK (http://reallyrightstuff.com/rrs/Itemdesc.asp?ic=MH%2D01&eq=&Tp=), RRS Price: $150

http://reallyrightstuff.com/mmRRS/Images/full/MH01.gif

Hi-Capacity Monopod Head with B2 AS II
RRS LINK (http://reallyrightstuff.com/rrs/Itemdesc.asp?ic=MH%2D01%2DLR&eq=&Tp=), RRS Price: $260

http://reallyrightstuff.com/mmRRS/Images/full/MH01LR.gif

Hi-Capacity Monopod Head with B2-Pro II
RRS LINK (http://reallyrightstuff.com/rrs/Itemdesc.asp?ic=MH%2D01%2DPro&eq=&Tp=), RRS Price: $226

http://reallyrightstuff.com/mmRRS/Images/full/MH01Pro.gif

Let's talk about the monopod first though and Ill get to the RRS monopod head afterwards.

First thing I thought after opening the box and removing the monopod from the dust sleeve was "wow, its like 1/3 of a Gitzo carbon fiber tripod"! It literally felt like I was holding onto one leg of a 2 series Gitzo tripod. Same high quality feel, light weight carbon fiber and awesome twist locks. With my love for their tripods fresh in thought, I was instantly in love with the GM2541! And just when you might have thought everything that could be done to improve a monopod has been done and/or tried before, Gitzo comes up with a few cool new features that Ill cover in this review.

The first image shows the whole contents laid out to show all that the monopod comes with. Included in the plastic bag (which you might not be able to see) was a couple allen wrenches for adjusting the various bolts, the usual Gitzo "screen" cleaner and some instructions.

The second image shows one of the new features offered by the GM2541 that was not in the GM2540 model. The integration of a belt clip into the strap. Personally I never leave the straps on my monopods, but if you like the extra security of having the strap on there, now you get both that and the ability to clip the whole rig onto your belt for when its not in use. Kinda of a cool idea I thought, just not something I didnt think I would use. While the whole strap/belt clip is removable, there is no way to just remove the belt clip part and have only the strap in case you were thinking that might be an option.

ben_r_

21st of August 2008 (Thu), 18:52

Heres a couple closer shots of the base plate. Its newly designed and one of the features I mentioned earlier when referring to "just when you thought youd seen it all in a monpod". This base plate (like most of the newer Gitzo tripods) is designed to make removing whatever you have screwed onto it very easy. The whole plate rotates to unscrew the center bolt removing both the both and whatever head you have attached.

ben_r_

21st of August 2008 (Thu), 18:52

Once you have the base plate removed you can see how the bolt/plate relationship works. The center hole in the base plate is actually the same shape as the hex nut in the center of the mount bolt. So when you turn the plate you turn the bolt making everything unscrew nice and easy. The "Safe Lock" is Gitzo's name for the easy removal of the plate and mounted head I was referring to earlier. You can also see in the second image that the bolt is two sided and offers both the 1/4" and 3/8" bolt pattern to increase mounting options. You can also see the set screws (which I will go over later) in the base plate. This whole mount system is ingenious and makes mounting and un-mounting anything incredibly easy.

ben_r_

21st of August 2008 (Thu), 18:53

Once the base plate is removed (shown in image 1) you can easily remove the whole belt clip/hand strap assembly by pushing up on the attachment ring. It just slides right off.

Once the base plate is back on (shown in image 2), the base plate can be locked down onto the monopod itself so that it cant be unscrewed un-mounting anything you might not want to unmount. This is what the inner lock screw is used for.

ben_r_

21st of August 2008 (Thu), 18:53

TO give you an idea of size, image 1 shows the length of the monopod fully extended from the very tip of the foot, while image 2 shows the monopod fully collapsed from the same point.

ben_r_

21st of August 2008 (Thu), 18:54

Now onto the head. Like everything else I have purchased from Really Right Stuff, I was equally impressed just upon opening and holding this head in my hands. Immediately you get the feeling of quality and security that your gear is going to be very safe with this piece of equipment. In fact you may even question whether or not your gear is WORTH of such a finely machined item! Just kidding.

I chose to go with the head with the B2-Pro II screw clamp because it was a little cheaper and I thought it might be a safer idea to have the extra security of a screw clamp with a monopod as I kept having a scary image of the monopod falling and the lever clamp catching on something and opening and me catching the monopod only to watch the camera fall anyway. Perhaps I'm just being paranoid, but I was raised to think you can never be too safe.

Now, weighing in at over 13oz this head is not exactly super super light. However it wasnt designed to be the lightest head available. It was designed to be the strongest head available. And that it excels in! The screws operate super smooth and once a camera/body is mounted on the head it swivels very smoothly. Without the weight of a camera mounted to it however, the swivel motion is a little stiff. Not that it really matters as I didnt buy it to rock it back and forth with no camera on it.

In the second image you can see the bottom of the head as well as the 3/8" mount hole and the fact that the base plate is dovetailed to fit in any Arca-Swiss compatible mount you may want to fit it in. RRS shows this as an example:

http://reallyrightstuff.com/mmRRS/Images/full/MH01-WII-animated.gif

ben_r_

21st of August 2008 (Thu), 18:54

Here are another couple of shots of the side and rear (knob side) of the head. In image 1 you can see the difference in lengths between the clamp screw and swivel screw. Honestly if I did it again I would have paid the little extra and ordered the head with the lever clamp. There really is no way to beat the convenience of the RRS lever clamps. They are plenty secure enough and I think I was just being overly paranoid to have gone this route.

ben_r_

21st of August 2008 (Thu), 18:55

With these two images I wanted to show the complete range of motion the tilt head can offer. Pretty much a full 180 degrees of swivel.

ben_r_

21st of August 2008 (Thu), 18:55

The first image shows a close up of what the head looks like mounted on the monopod. Extremely solid mounting! There is no way any of this is going anywhere but where you move it! There is zero give anywhere. And to further ensure that the second image shows what the second locking screw on the monopod base plate is for. To lock the head onto the base plate. Once thats tightened down, whatever head you chose wont accidentally twist off.

ben_r_

21st of August 2008 (Thu), 18:55

To give a better idea of that youre working with, here some dimensions and specs. The collapsed length of the monopod and head together is just under 24" as shown in image 1. In image 2 the weight is shown in the combo. My postal scale shows just a hair under 2lbs for the total weight of monopod/head/clamp combo.

ben_r_

21st of August 2008 (Thu), 18:56

Here's a couple of shots of the rig with a camera mounted on it. The first one is youre typical telephoto lens mounted by the tripod ring mount with an RRS lens plate on it.

The second image however reveals something a little special though when using this setup with a lens that doesnt have a tripod ring mount and when mounting the camera body directly to the head via an L plate. You can see that due to the perpendicular orientation of the L plate to the lens plate on the tripod ring mount, when you mount the camera body itself to the head you lose the ability to tilt forward and backward and instead can only tilt side to side. Well here is the biggest and IMO only problem with this setup. If you have an L plate then there is literally no need for you need to tilt 90 degrees left or right as you can just unmount the body and remount it in the portrait orientation or vice versa. What you'd really rather have is the ability to retain the tilt forward and backward.

In the orientation shown in image 2 you can also see that the screw knobs are now either going to be facing front under the lens, or facing back toward the user. Neither are ideal.

ben_r_

21st of August 2008 (Thu), 18:56

Image 1 is a shot of what the user would be seeing at this point, and image 2 shows the only tilt offered by the head in this mounting orientation.

ben_r_

21st of August 2008 (Thu), 18:57

So how do we remedy this issue? Well, using an allen wrench as showing in image 2 the clamp has to be removed and rotated 90 degrees (also shown in image 2) so when the camera body is mounted to the head it retains the proper orientation.

Image 1 shows the whole head disassembled. It really is pretty easy to disassemble and reassemble, you just have to remember to keep an allen wrench with you or plan ahead and know what lens you will be shooting with when using the monopod and stick with that.

ben_r_

21st of August 2008 (Thu), 18:57

Once the rotation has been done you can see in image 1 what the whole setup now looks like and in image two what the user now sees with the camera body remounted.

ben_r_

21st of August 2008 (Thu), 18:57

And from the side it can be seen that the forward and backward tilt feature has now been retained after the clamp was rotated.

ben_r_

23rd of August 2008 (Sat), 23:29

Reserved for a leg protection accessory.

ben_r_

23rd of August 2008 (Sat), 23:35

ed rader

23rd of August 2008 (Sat), 23:52

While this solution is not without its issues, it is still without a doubt the most stable, strong and best solution available for the money. The only way it gets and more stable is by upgrading to a 5 series Gitzo monopod. The only ones who will be doing that are those who are fortunate enough to own a large, heavy telephoto lens like a 500mm+ or even the 300mm 2.8 IS.

Now, as a rather unusual way for me to finalize my review, I have to end by adding that I didnt end up keeping this combo after all. After spending a week or so shooting with it I just decided that I dont do enough of the type of shooting that monpods benefit to justify keeping a $500 monopod setup. Sad to see it go, I have alloted the fund elsewhere to something I hope will be of much great use to me. However I will say for those of you that shoot sports of any kind, or any other telephoto or low light, compact working area type shooting this combo is a definite winner!

Once again thanks for all your support and thank you for taking the time to read all this. I hope I was able to offer you some help or insight into your next purchase! As always feel free to ask anything you like. While I no longer have the gear and cant take any additional pictures I did spend enough time with it to answer or at least help with any questions you might have. Thanks and enjoy!

again a nice write-up Ben. the other day i ordered the kirk/manfrotto tilt head. the more i thought about it i knew i didn't want to be using two different systems so i'm completely arca swiss now :D.

the biggest advantage i see with your tilt head is weight and if you're using big lenses .... say 500f4 and above .... you'll probably want to take a serious look at the RRS tilt head.

but don't let the weight rating of the manfrotto fool you....it will take plenty of weight (more than its rating).

also the markins plate on my camera allows me to mount the camera pointed in any direction. there's no need to remove the QR and reposition it.

with the manfrotto tilt head you can quickly rotate the plate on your camera or lens to accomplish the same thing.

the cost of my benro monopod + kirk/manfrotto head will be like $180 less plates.

ed rader

SYS

24th of August 2008 (Sun), 13:05

ben_r_

24th of August 2008 (Sun), 13:27

Very nice and thorough review -- simply terrific job! I really appreciate the time and effort you put into this.

You did mention the Gitzo 5 series, so you did obviously consider it, but what about the 3 series? What are your reasons for eliminating this as an option?
Oh yea I guess I forgot to talk about the 3 series didnt. Well the main two reasons I didnt go with one of those was because I first felt that the 26lbs max load capacity of the GM2541 would be more than enough for the gear I intended to use the combo with. The weight of my 5D, 70-200 2.8 IS, and 580EX II flash is a little over 8lbs, so the extra max load capacity of the 3 series I felt was not needed. Second I wanted to shave off as much off of the total weight of the rigs as much as possible. The RRS head was already pretty heavy as was the 2 series monopod and I didnt want to add anymore if I didnt have to. In addition to these two factors there was also the fact that the 3 series monopods range in price at around $50 more than the already pricey 2 series. So those are the reason why I didnt go with a 3 series. I just didnt feel I had the gear or requirements that would necessitate a stronger monopod.

jhom

24th of August 2008 (Sun), 13:57

Nice review.

You mentioned you got rid of the combo. Did you send back the head and monopod?

ben_r_

24th of August 2008 (Sun), 14:01

Nice review.

You mentioned you got rid of the combo. Did you send back the head and monopod?
Yea, I returned the head back to RRS, and the monopod to 17th Street Photo both for a full refund. I know there will come a point when I regret it, but for now I need to use the money elsewhere.

ed rader

24th of August 2008 (Sun), 14:49

Yea, I returned the head back to RRS, and the monopod to 17th Street Photo both for a full refund. I know there will come a point when I regret it, but for now I need to use the money elsewhere.

Ben -- what are the weights of the two different RRS tilt heads?

thanx,

ed rader

tomdlgns

24th of August 2008 (Sun), 15:31

great thread.

ben_r_

24th of August 2008 (Sun), 22:34

Ben -- what are the weights of the two different RRS tilt heads?

thanx,

ed rader
Just the head itself: 8.8oz

The head with the lever clamp: 14.4oz

The head with the screw clamp: 13.4oz

René Damkot

25th of August 2008 (Mon), 05:16

Nice writeup.

devil350

25th of August 2008 (Mon), 05:58

Very nice and complete review, thanks a lot.

Laurent.

ben_r_

25th of August 2008 (Mon), 10:29

Nice writeup.

Very nice and complete review, thanks a lot.

Laurent.
Thanks guys!

gixxer_kidd

3rd of September 2008 (Wed), 17:17

Ben, thanks for the excellent and thorough writeup! This was very helpful for me. I'm trying to find a setup for my 1DMKIII & 200 f/2 combo. Do you think this setup will be strong enough? Just like you said I want to keep the rig as light as possible.

Thanks,
Thai

ben_r_

3rd of September 2008 (Wed), 17:49

MDJAK

3rd of September 2008 (Wed), 20:08

excellent review. always appreciate the time, effort and great product pics you provide.

ben_r_

3rd of September 2008 (Wed), 21:10

excellent review. always appreciate the time, effort and great product pics you provide.
Thank you MDJAK!

lsquare

5th of September 2008 (Fri), 18:34

Hi ben_r_,

I'm just wondering if this setup was tall enough for you. I'm 5'8" tall and I'm not sure if the height of the GM2540 would be adequate enough for me. Do you think it is?

JohnJ80

5th of September 2008 (Fri), 20:09

Great review. If I could only get over the cost of the RRS head. I have the 2540 monopod and it is terrific.

I'm going to buying a Markins Q3. While I think that the RRS style solution, if made to work, is a better solution than a ballhead on a monopod (which I think is vastly secondary to the RRS solution), I'm going to try it with the Q3 for the few times I need any articulation on top of the monopod. The Markins has such a great friction control, I think I'm going to try just using that to see if it would work well on monopod.

J.

lsquare

5th of September 2008 (Fri), 22:09

jhom

6th of September 2008 (Sat), 04:31

ben_r_,

If you could answer these questions in addition to my other one above that would be greatly appreciated.

For someone like me that have an RRS L-plate on the camera, how would I benefit from using the RRS monopod head? Can I use my camera with the L-plate like I would with a arca-swiss compatible ballhead? Meaning I can switch the camera from landscape to portrait position on the fly?

If you attach an AS clamp on the monopod, you will be able to use the L bracket same as on an AS equipped ballhead, i.e., go from landscape to portrait. You just don't have the ballhead action.

JohnJ80

6th of September 2008 (Sat), 09:37

ben_r_,

If you could answer these questions in addition to my other one above that would be greatly appreciated.

For someone like me that have an RRS L-plate on the camera, how would I benefit from using the RRS monopod head? Can I use my camera with the L-plate like I would with a arca-swiss compatible ballhead? Meaning I can switch the camera from landscape to portrait position on the fly?

The only time you will need the head is if the subject is considerably over the horizontal plane. For field sports, you do not need the head. Those who shoot BIF would find it useful.

The only time I've really needed the ability to angle the head was in shooting alpine ski racing in shooting up a steep headwall from the bottom.

J

lsquare

8th of September 2008 (Mon), 05:24

If you guys had the choice, would you go with the lever clamp or with the screw-knob style clamp? Which is more convenient? I think Ben was saying that the lever clamp isn't any less secure, but it's just more expensive. Why?

JohnJ80

8th of September 2008 (Mon), 10:59

Lever clamp all the way. I've converted all mine over from knobs to levers even on monopods and been much happier that way.

The lever clamp holds the plate very firmly and maybe more firmly than a knob unless you really reef on it. The worry is that the lever will get snagged and cause a release. Hasn't happened in my experience and also has a more positive locking than the knob. It's easy to misalign the dovetails and the believe you actually have it loaded. This is much more difficult on the lever.

The convenience of the lever is really much better.

J.

ed rader

8th of September 2008 (Mon), 11:09

ben_r_

8th of September 2008 (Mon), 23:42

Sorry guys, was out of town camping in South Lake Tahoe, CA shooting the whole weekend. It was awesome!
Hi ben_r_,

I'm just wondering if this setup was tall enough for you. I'm 5'8" tall and I'm not sure if the height of the GM2540 would be adequate enough for me. Do you think it is?
I am also 5'8" and fully extended this setup is way taller than me. So yes, for someone our height this setup should work perfect.

For someone like me that have an RRS L-plate on the camera, how would I benefit from using the RRS monopod head? Can I use my camera with the L-plate like I would with a arca-swiss compatible ballhead? Meaning I can switch the camera from landscape to portrait position on the fly?
The RRS monopod head does allow you to use the RRS L plate in either the portrait or landscape orientation and the benefit comes whenever you need to angle the camera to shoot something closer to the ground or higher in the sky than you can realistically tilt the whole rig. Or if you want to shoot something up close and are looking to gain that extra stability...

If you guys had the choice, would you go with the lever clamp or with the screw-knob style clamp? Which is more convenient? I think Ben was saying that the lever clamp isn't any less secure, but it's just more expensive. Why?
Lever clamp all the way, the screw clamp takes WAY too long IMO. Its well worth the added cost.

lsquare

9th of September 2008 (Tue), 01:58

Sorry guys, was out of town camping in South Lake Tahoe, CA shooting the whole weekend. It was awesome!

I am also 5'8" and fully extended this setup is way taller than me. So yes, for someone our height this setup should work perfect.

So when you had this setup, did you usually extend this monopod all the way?

The RRS monopod head does allow you to use the RRS L plate in either the portrait or landscape orientation and the benefit comes whenever you need to angle the camera to shoot something closer to the ground or higher in the sky than you can realistically tilt the whole rig. Or if you want to shoot something up close and are looking to gain that extra stability...

Lever clamp all the way, the screw clamp takes WAY too long IMO. Its well worth the added cost.

I couldn't wait for your response so I placed an order today. However, RRS is sold out and they told me they should receive a shipment tomorrow. If so, they'll mail it out to me tomorrow.

ben_r_

9th of September 2008 (Tue), 08:59

So when you had this setup, did you usually extend this monopod all the way?

Nope, it was way too tall.

And dont worry about them being out of stock, theyll get more in soon. Those heads sell fast thats all.

JohnJ80

9th of September 2008 (Tue), 20:13

i think that's debatable.

http://www.tripodhead.com/products/AK-100.cfm

but yeah the lever is more convenient. i'll be field testing my new monopod set-up in monterey this week to decide which QR works better for me.

ed rader

Boy, I can't remember where I saw the comparison, but the lever clamp provides 50lbs of clamping force (that's from RRS website). The comparison I saw showed them to be about the same but it was more problematic with the knob depending on how hard one torques the knob. I just can't find the link right now.

The QR lever is less tolerant of variations in plates and how they are made. RRS recommends using wimberly and RRS plates only but I'd be ok with kirk too. The ebay knockoff's I'd pass on for the lever clamp.

Either one is more than adequate to hold pretty much any photo gear. The QR Lever is just much more (as in lots more) convenient.

J.

ed rader

9th of September 2008 (Tue), 20:18

Boy, I can't remember where I saw the comparison, but the lever clamp provides 50lbs of clamping force (that's from RRS website). The comparison I saw showed them to be about the same but it was more problematic with the knob depending on how hard one torques the knob. I just can't find the link right now.

The QR lever is less tolerant of variations in plates and how they are made. RRS recommends using wimberly and RRS plates only but I'd be ok with kirk too. The ebay knockoff's I'd pass on for the lever clamp.

Either one is more than adequate to hold pretty much any photo gear. The QR Lever is just much more (as in lots more) convenient.

J.

i can tell you the guy i talked to at Kirk had higher praise for the manfrotto QR than the RRS QR.

ed rader

ben_r_

9th of September 2008 (Tue), 20:21

i can tell you the guy i talked to at Kirk had higher praise for the manfrotto QR than the RRS QR.

ed rader
Ed, you have to be kidding right?

ed rader

9th of September 2008 (Tue), 20:27

Ed, you have to be kidding right?

no i'm not. i'm talking about the flip lever QR. he said the arca plate design was not the best for a flip lever QR.

ed rader

ben_r_

9th of September 2008 (Tue), 20:30

no i'm not. i'm talking about the flip lever QR.

ed rader
Wow. I have owned the RC2 and RC4 Bogen systems and IMO they dont come ANYWHERE close to the RRS ANYTHING, let alone anything Arca-Swiss! What the heck was that guy thinking??? He WORKS for Kirk for goodness sake!

ed rader

9th of September 2008 (Tue), 20:40

Wow. I have owned the RC2 and RC4 Bogen systems and IMO they dont come ANYWHERE close to the RRS ANYTHING, let alone anything Arca-Swiss! What the heck was that guy thinking??? He WORKS for Kirk for goodness sake!

Ben -- what the guy said was the manfrotto plate is a better design for a flip lever QR.

that's all he said.

fwiw i would use the RRS QR but i'd make certain that whatever plate i was using "fits".

ed rader

JohnJ80

9th of September 2008 (Tue), 21:04

ed rader

9th of September 2008 (Tue), 21:26

well, what do you expect? If he doesn't control the dimensions of his plate, then he has a problem. Given the popularity of the RRS lever clamps, and that there are really not any other lever clamps (and LOTS of knob ones), that is a problem for them.

J

what the guy meant was the plate would be different if the original QR was designed with a flip lever.

ed rader

JohnJ80

9th of September 2008 (Tue), 23:21

what the guy meant was the plate would be different if the original QR was designed with a flip lever.

ed rader

so... the point was what? The RRS QR Lever doesn't work well?

You're not actually going to defend that as a point, are you?

J

ed rader

9th of September 2008 (Tue), 23:31

so... the point was what? The RRS QR Lever doesn't work well?

You're not actually going to defend that as a point, are you?

J

hey John -- i'm done. call kirk and ask them. just note that both wimberley and RRS have warnings about which plates than can be used with this head.

ed rader

lsquare

9th of September 2008 (Tue), 23:45

Nope, it was way too tall.

And dont worry about them being out of stock, theyll get more in soon. Those heads sell fast thats all.

How much taller was your setup when the monopod was fully extended? Was the viewfinder at least 10 inches above eye level? I'm tempted to buy the GM3551 simply because of the extra height and the fact that it's only $50 more.

Oh and here's an update on the monopod head. RRS got it in stock today and just shipped out my order. I should get it by Friday.

ben_r_

10th of September 2008 (Wed), 00:09

How much taller was your setup when the monopod was fully extended? Was the viewfinder at least 10 inches above eye level? I'm tempted to buy the GM3551 simply because of the extra height and the fact that it's only $50 more.

Oh and here's an update on the monopod head. RRS got it in stock today and just shipped out my order. I should get it by Friday.
Well figure it this way:
63" for the fully extended monopod
~3" for the RRS head
~3" from the bottom of the camera to the eyepiece (without a grip)
-------------------------------------
Totals somewhere around 70" or 5'10". How much higher were you looking for and why?

HarrisonClicks

16th of September 2008 (Tue), 20:03

Hi all,

A very big THANK YOU to the OP for his review. Based entirely on this review, I purchased the same Gitzo monopod and the RRS mount with the QR. It just arrived today and I will be out tomorrow shooting my daughters soccer match with my MIII and 70-200 2.8L IS lens. Of course, when I save up $7000 I will get the lens I really want for this assignment!

Point being, what a GREAT review and Giz and RRS owe you a commission because I was shopping, saw your write-up, and basically said that is EXACTLY what i want and it was done. That simple.

Adam

ben_r_

16th of September 2008 (Tue), 23:08

milorad

29th of September 2008 (Mon), 12:18

JohnJ80

29th of September 2008 (Mon), 13:20

milorad

29th of September 2008 (Mon), 13:54

yes, it's a rail, but it allows you to clamp one end of it to the camera plate... and then insert the rail into the tilting monopod head in exactly the same way that a lens plate would be oriented.

what that does is allow you to fore/aft tilt using either a camera or a lens collar, without changing the orientation of the quick release clamp on the tilting head.

does that make sense?

JohnJ80

29th of September 2008 (Mon), 16:25

Oh, I see but you don't need the whole rail for that. I think RRS makes a clamp that you can put on a A-S dovetail to make it work.

J.

milorad

30th of September 2008 (Tue), 00:11

link? price?... anyway, I think the rail might be better for those with slightly heavier lenses to maintain the centre of gravity. Plus, that particular rail comes as part of a number of packages, like the pano package and the portrait perfect package, all of which are quite popular, so if you have the rail anyway, this is another way to use it.

MikeV99

16th of November 2008 (Sun), 10:45

again a nice write-up Ben. the other day i ordered the kirk/manfrotto tilt head. the more i thought about it i knew i didn't want to be using two different systems so i'm completely arca swiss now :D.

but don't let the weight rating of the manfrotto fool you....it will take plenty of weight (more than its rating).

also the markins plate on my camera allows me to mount the camera pointed in any direction. there's no need to remove the QR and reposition it.

with the manfrotto tilt head you can quickly rotate the plate on your camera or lens to accomplish the same thing.

the cost of my benro monopod + kirk/manfrotto head will be like $180 less plates.

ed rader

Would you expand on your comments please. I too do not want to have to remove the QR when switching between a camera and a lens tripod collar. Which monopod head, camera plate, and lens plate are you using?

Thanks.

MikeV99

16th of November 2008 (Sun), 11:08

I was just reading your review here and wanted to note for future readers...

a (relatively) small investment in one of these http://reallyrightstuff.com/rrs/Itemdesc.asp?ic=MPR%2DCL&eq=&Tp= will solve the camera mounting issue for people who want to maintain fore/aft tilt with just a body plate.

If you've already got an RRS investment like say the portrait package, then you already have one of these.
Pardon me, but I am having a senior moment trying to visualize this ...

The tripod lens collar L84 lens plate would still connect to the MH-01-Pro Monopod Head w/ B2-Pro II quick release clamp as before?

However, to use just the camera, the MPR-CL: MPR with integral clamp would connect to the MH-01-Pro Monopod Head w/ B2-Pro II quick release clamp first and then the B40D-L Camera L-Plate would connect to the MPR-CL at a 90% angle? Am I anywhere near correct??

Thanks

Mike

MikeV99

16th of November 2008 (Sun), 11:14

Oh, I see but you don't need the whole rail for that. I think RRS makes a clamp that you can put on a A-S dovetail to make it work.

J.
Do you have a part number?

JohnJ80

16th of November 2008 (Sun), 12:32

All you are really asking for is a clamp that changes the orientation by 90 degrees in the horizontal. If so, I think this does it:

http://reallyrightstuff.com/rrs/Itemdesc.asp?ic=B2-FAB&eq=&Tp=

http://reallyrightstuff.com/mmRRS/Images/full/MiniClampPkg.gif

J.

ben_r_

16th of November 2008 (Sun), 14:23

^^^ How would that attach to the monopod head though?

malla1962

16th of November 2008 (Sun), 15:12

hey John -- i'm done. call kirk and ask them. just note that both wimberley and RRS have warnings about which plates than can be used with this head.

ed raderI have the rrs lever clamp and a wimberly
lens plate on my 500 and a kirk plate on my 300 and both fit very well.:D

René Damkot

17th of November 2008 (Mon), 16:43

^^^ How would that attach to the monopod head though?

Good question... Double dovetail plate probably.
I'd rather get a MPR-CL then. Or maybe attach a QR to a square QR plate.

JohnJ80

17th of November 2008 (Mon), 20:32

I was suggesting that on a shorter rail. I thought you wanted it on a rail and wanted to be able to adjust 90 degrees quickly.

j.

MikeV99

18th of November 2008 (Tue), 08:08

I sent an email to rrs asking them about the issue, no reply yet. Not quite sure how well the MPR-CL would work.

Are there any other products that would work almost as well as the MH-01-Pro Monopod Head and still be Arca compatible with the rrs B50D-L Camera L-Plate?

ben_r_

18th of November 2008 (Tue), 08:33

You know this piece might also be an option as well: LINK (http://reallyrightstuff.com/rrs/Itemdesc.asp?ic=LMT&eq=&Tp=)

http://reallyrightstuff.com/mmRRS/Images/thumb/LMTB2FAB.gif

MikeV99

18th of November 2008 (Tue), 09:06

You know this piece might also be an option as well: LINK (http://reallyrightstuff.com/rrs/Itemdesc.asp?ic=LMT&eq=&Tp=)

Um, it looks like the head is getting larger and larger ... Maybe just a small head instead??

320816 (http://reallyrightstuff.com/rrs/Customkititems.asp?kc=BH%2D25%2DLR&eq=)

ben_r_

18th of November 2008 (Tue), 12:47

MikeV99

18th of November 2008 (Tue), 14:46

JohnJ80

18th of November 2008 (Tue), 14:55

Oops, missed the load specification. I'd like to know a 100-400 would be safe as well.

I am puzzled. One would think this issue would have been resolved a long time ago. Would not everyone that uses a monopod run into this problem? Maybe one is not suppose to use a monopod with only a camera, but I would think it would help with arm fatigue?

One issue is that most people don't use a head on their monopods. With long lenses, the need for a head is even less. I would estimate (although I'm sure someone will contradict me) that 90% of shots don't require a head. Notice that sports shooters, one of those that use monopods a lot do not use a head.

J.

MikeV99

19th of November 2008 (Wed), 18:31

^^^^^ Only problem with that is that people looking at the RRS High Cap Monopod head are looking for something stable and strong enough to hold say something like a 500L which I def would not trust a mini ball head on.

This one has promise? Very light and small, yet rated at 65 lbs.

321111 (http://www.markinsamerica.com/MA5/Q3.php)

ben_r_

19th of November 2008 (Wed), 21:28

This one has promise? Very light and small, yet rated at 65 lbs.

321111 (http://www.markinsamerica.com/MA5/Q3.php)

Yes, I own that one (well a version of it anyway), it is very strong but still Im not sure its the right tool for the job so to speak...

MikeV99

20th of November 2008 (Thu), 08:09

I think I will try to find one to look at. This article (http://www.nikonians.org/monopods/what_monopod_2.html) is fairly high on its use on a monopod or light tripod.

cfibanez

25th of January 2009 (Sun), 16:52

I think I will try to find one to look at. This article (http://www.nikonians.org/monopods/what_monopod_2.html) is fairly high on its use on a monopod or light tripod.

Hi MikeV99, did you solved the issue with the ball head? I am also shopping for this gear and found the Q3 Emille interesting. Let me know.

MikeV99

25th of January 2009 (Sun), 18:45

Hi MikeV99, did you solved the issue with the ball head? I am also shopping for this gear and found the Q3 Emille interesting. Let me know.I just spent a few days in Gulf Shores, AL wondering around the various bird areas (did not see hardly a thing). I started out with the Q3T and a RRS quick release clamp. It became more and more obvious to me that the ball head was over kill for my needs. I was just using the ball head in a locked position. I took the ball head off and just put the RRS quick release clamp directly on the monopod. Much lighter, less bulk, and I did not need any type of tilt or ball head. Worked great for me. Also, I used a Manfrotto monopod belt pouch a lot too. It added support to the camera with a 100-400 mm lens as I was traipsing through the tulips and helped steady it (although I did use the monopod on the ground on occasion - I gotta learn how to steady the monopod to keep the camera from going back and forth).

I am going to use the Q3T on a Gitzo travel tripod I plan to buy.

HTHs

Mike

funhouse69

31st of January 2009 (Sat), 23:07

Did anyone ever figure out the best solution to mount your camera directly to the RRS Monopod Head? I have this head and can see myself wanting to mount my camera as well as lenses to it so I don't want to change the orientation of the clamp on the head itself every time I want to do this.

I've been looking through the RRS Site and don't really see anything that will work other than the MPR-CL but I think that a 6" Rail / Clamp Combo is way to much for this solution. I thought the Double Clamp solution that was listed was going to work as well but after thinking about it and as someone else mentioned it doesn't have a way to attach it to the Monopod Head. It seems like this is quite a common question and I'm surprised that RRS hasn't addressed it.

ben_r_

1st of February 2009 (Sun), 10:16

Im actually rather shocked RRS hasnt done anything about this.... Perhaps they havent seen the issue in forums or heard it enough from their customers...

René Damkot

2nd of February 2009 (Mon), 04:48

That's the reason I use a bidirectional plate on my 80-200L ;)

MikeV99

2nd of February 2009 (Mon), 09:10

That's the reason I use a bidirectional plate on my 80-200L ;)
Which one from where?

funhouse69

2nd of February 2009 (Mon), 09:42

I ended up buying the RRS Portrait Perfect Package B87-B, I originally picked up their Wedding Pro WPF-1 bracket originally but didn't like how the flash was oriented when in portrait mode as I tend to use different modifiers like a Lumiquest.

You are probably asking what the heck that has to do with this thread well the Portrait Perfect Package comes with one of their Rails that has a clamp on it (MPR-CL). This looks like it would work for me and if I was going to buy the rail itself it would have cost me $110 so it just seemed to make sense to return the Wedding Bracket (even thought it was really cool) and get the other one for a little extra cash. Kind of a two birds / one stone thing. If however someone else has any ideas I would love to hear it as this still isn't the best solution.

René Damkot

2nd of February 2009 (Mon), 13:33

Which one from where?

I use a Novoflex. Slightly cheaper here then getting an RRS, and easier, since I can buy in a store.
Won't fit a RRS lever release clamp though.

RRS makes bidirectional plates as well.

IIRC Markins (or Kirk?) makes bidirectional camera plates.

ben_r_

2nd of February 2009 (Mon), 17:30

I use a Novoflex. Slightly cheaper here then getting an RRS, and easier, since I can buy in a store.
Won't fit a RRS lever release clamp though.

RRS makes bidirectional plates as well.

IIRC Markins (or Kirk?) makes bidirectional camera plates.
WHOA! Rene! SIX more posts and the big 20K!

René Damkot

3rd of February 2009 (Tue), 07:44

Now six over ;)

ben_r_

3rd of February 2009 (Tue), 11:00

Now six over ;)
HA HA! Congrats!

JohnJ80

3rd of February 2009 (Tue), 21:50

Number of post counts are somewhat a mixed bag. On one had, it's nice to see how many posts you have. On the other hand, you think about all the hours in front of the computer posting instead of shooting.... http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-ashamed001.gif (http://www.freesmileys.org)

J.

lsquare

3rd of February 2009 (Tue), 23:16

Im actually rather shocked RRS hasnt done anything about this.... Perhaps they havent seen the issue in forums or heard it enough from their customers...

Ben,

What issues are you talking about here?

funhouse69

3rd of February 2009 (Tue), 23:28

Ben,

What issues are you talking about here?

We are talking about using the RRS High Capacity Head with both a lens that has a Tripod Ring and then mounting a camera directly to the head.

The orientation goes from Tilt to a Landscape / Portrait. This can be resolved by psychically changing the orientation of the Clamp on the head but this is not ideal in the field for me anyway.

I have this exact solution that I am using with a Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS Lens and an "L" Plate on my camera. I want to keep the tilt function of the head when I switch between the two.

This has been a common question here over the last several threads (well before the ones about the Mod's #'s of posts).

I e-mailed RRS and never heard back from them which is RARE. I haven't been able to take the time to call them. I can't imagine that this isn't something that they haven't heard before.

René Damkot

4th of February 2009 (Wed), 04:25

On the other hand, you think about all the hours in front of the computer posting instead of shooting....

:lol:
Can think of it that way...
Then again, It's better to browse POTN then to watch an hourglass when LR or PS is busy ;)

MikeV99

4th of February 2009 (Wed), 09:09

RRS reply to my message some time back,

I certainly understand your needs. But, no, the only way to convert the clamp orientation is with the included hex key. Of course, an alternate solution is to simply stack a small bidirectional plate underneath your existing camera body plate. This way your camera body plate now has fore/aft orientation instead of left/right.

funhouse69

5th of February 2009 (Thu), 21:53

So I was in the market for a new Flash Bracket after trying the RRS Wedding Package and realizing that it wasn't going to work for me I picked up the RRS Perfect Portrait Package B87-B which includes a Rail with a Clamp on the end of it.

I went with / upgraded to this solution for a few reasons. First and foremost the flash orientation is the same in both landscape and portrait modes, it is easy to store and it comes with the rail with the clamp on it which will I realized would serve double duty for me.

So this is what I came up with utilizing the new Rail with Clamp on it. Sorry for the image quality - these were taken with my Happy Snap (At least its a Canon).

Here is the "Normal" use / orientation of the RRS High Capacity Monopod Head
http://funhouse69.smugmug.com/photos/468366356_vRALp-L.jpg
Now with a camera mounted directly to the RRS head
http://funhouse69.smugmug.com/photos/468366417_DUDxy-L.jpg
Now with the RRS Rail / Clamp on the RRS Head
http://funhouse69.smugmug.com/photos/468366332_ZXzEy-L.jpg
Finally with the camera mounted to the rail / clamp
http://funhouse69.smugmug.com/photos/468366454_a6tvx-L.jpg

lsquare

6th of February 2009 (Fri), 00:47

We are talking about using the RRS High Capacity Head with both a lens that has a Tripod Ring and then mounting a camera directly to the head.

The orientation goes from Tilt to a Landscape / Portrait. This can be resolved by psychically changing the orientation of the Clamp on the head but this is not ideal in the field for me anyway.

I have this exact solution that I am using with a Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS Lens and an "L" Plate on my camera. I want to keep the tilt function of the head when I switch between the two.

This has been a common question here over the last several threads (well before the ones about the Mod's #'s of posts).

I e-mailed RRS and never heard back from them which is RARE. I haven't been able to take the time to call them. I can't imagine that this isn't something that they haven't heard before.

Yea, I know exactly what you mean. It's a shame, but I see that you have came up with a solution. I'm not sure if buying another rail is going to be worth it for me.

funhouse69

6th of February 2009 (Fri), 05:42

Yea, I know exactly what you mean. It's a shame, but I see that you have came up with a solution. I'm not sure if buying another rail is going to be worth it for me.

I agree that this isn't the ideal solution especially with such an expensive initial investment for the head itself. Some people would probably choose to switch the clamp orientation in the field but to me that is just asking for trouble. I can see myself dropping the mounting screw and not being able to find it.

It would be nice and seemingly entirely possible for RRS to come up with a way for the clamp orientation to be changed without having to remove the screw.

So after a lot of research I went with the RRS B87-B Flash Bracket, it came with the new rail with the clamp on it which is the proverbial two birds / one stone thing for me. I needed a flash bracket and settled on this one because it came with the rail / clamp.

René Damkot

6th of February 2009 (Fri), 09:06

Now with a camera mounted directly to the RRS head
http://funhouse69.smugmug.com/photos/468366417_DUDxy-L.jpg

Tip: Rotate the camera 180 degrees, so the fastening screw is underneath the lens. Otherwise it'll poke you in the chin ;)

JohnJ80

6th of February 2009 (Fri), 10:53

:lol:
Can think of it that way...
Then again, It's better to browse POTN then to watch an hourglass when LR or PS is busy ;)

Amen to that.

J.

ben_r_

6th of February 2009 (Fri), 12:04

That looks pretty good with the rail on there. I actually have both the RRS nodal rails already, so its good to know Ill be covered should I ever get this monopod setup again.

lsquare

19th of March 2009 (Thu), 02:00

We are talking about using the RRS High Capacity Head with both a lens that has a Tripod Ring and then mounting a camera directly to the head.

The orientation goes from Tilt to a Landscape / Portrait. This can be resolved by psychically changing the orientation of the Clamp on the head but this is not ideal in the field for me anyway.

I have this exact solution that I am using with a Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS Lens and an "L" Plate on my camera. I want to keep the tilt function of the head when I switch between the two.

This has been a common question here over the last several threads (well before the ones about the Mod's #'s of posts).

I e-mailed RRS and never heard back from them which is RARE. I haven't been able to take the time to call them. I can't imagine that this isn't something that they haven't heard before.

Funhouse,

I know this may be dumb to ask, but can I manually change the orientation of the head? What do I need to do it?

ben_r_

19th of March 2009 (Thu), 09:56

Funhouse,

I know this may be dumb to ask, but can I manually change the orientation of the head? What do I need to do it?
You have to chance the orientation of the clamp that mounts to the head. All that requires is an Allen wrench.

funhouse69

19th of March 2009 (Thu), 10:09

As Ben mentioned you can switch the orientation of the head without an issue (kind of hard the first time due to the thread lock on it) but then you can change it with little effort. It would be nice if RRS came up with a way to change it without having to do that. Maybe some kind of locking mechanism.

No matter what this is a great VERY high capacity head that I am happy I bought. Even though I had to sell my 500L recently I still use it for all my other equipment.

ben_r_

19th of March 2009 (Thu), 11:38

lsquare

21st of March 2009 (Sat), 22:11

You have to chance the orientation of the clamp that mounts to the head. All that requires is an Allen wrench.

So the screw is the big hexagonal screw on the top of the clamp right? So I just unscrew it and just reorient the clamp?

funhouse69

21st of March 2009 (Sat), 22:22

So the screw is the big hexagonal screw on the top of the clamp right? So I just unscrew it and just reorient the clamp?

That is correct... The head has alignment pins if you will that will align it in either orientation but nothing in between.

lsquare

22nd of March 2009 (Sun), 01:38

That is correct... The head has alignment pins if you will that will align it in either orientation but nothing in between.

Ok, I had to ask because I was afraid I might not figure out how to put it back together afterwards. Is there anything else that I need to know before I proceed to change the orientation of the clamp?

ben_r_

22nd of March 2009 (Sun), 15:12

Ok, I had to ask because I was afraid I might not figure out how to put it back together afterwards. Is there anything else that I need to know before I proceed to change the orientation of the clamp?
Nope, should be pretty straight forward, just one bolt and turn it, then bolt it back down.

gslusher

29th of April 2009 (Wed), 00:12

Great review, interesting comments. Here's a few other things to consider;

You could cut the cost by quite a bit by going to a different monopod. Gitzo monopods, like their tripods, are a bit overpriced. For example, check out the Feisol monopods (http://reallybigcameras.com/Feisol/Monopods). The heavier monopod, CM-1471, has a max load of 24 lbs, more than enough for just about anything you'd want to carry. It weighs 1.52 lbs, a little bit more than some Gitzos, but it costs only $99. Why spend $150 more on a Gitzo? I have the lighter Feisol CM-1401 monopod (max load 15 lbs, again more than I'd want to carry around) and the heaviest-duty Feisol CT-3371 tripod (http://reallybigcameras.com/Feisol/Tripods)--max load 26.5 lbs. I've compared both to Gitzo products. I'm not an expert on tripods/monopods (though I now own 4 monopods and 7 full-sized tripods), but, as a mechanical engineer, I'd say that the product quality of the Feisol gear is better than the Gitzo. (For example, my Feisol's base plate, hinges, etc, are CNC milled, rather than sand cast, as Gitzo's--and the older/cheaper Feisols'--are.)

As for using a head on a monopod, there are some good reasons. One is stability. The "traditional" method of using a monopod--the monopod vertical--is actually the least stable way to use it. (Try it sometime: it will tilt with almost no force.) It doesn't form much of a "tripod" with your feet, either.

There are several more stable methods, but they require some sort of head on the monopod. For example:

1. Put the monopod foot out in front of you. (Slightly more stable, as if forms a larger footprint.)
2. Put the foot of the monopod against the inside of your foot. This helps keep the monopod from slipping, which can be a real problem on a hard floor. I saw a photographer at an indoor horse show a month ago using a Canon 1D & 70-200mm f/2.8L IS lens on a monopod with one of those hideous "pistol grip" heads. (Now, just why she had a monopod with an IS lens, I don't know. Any shutter speed fast enough to stop the horses' motion would also be quite fast enough, with the IS, to not worry about camera shake and the monopod limits flexibility.) Anyway, she tracked a horse and the monopod foot slipped. Fortunately, the monopod caught on a seat in the stands as it fell, slowing the fall enough for her to grab the camera before it hit the concrete floor, though it sounded like the lens hood was cracked. (Now, why she didn't make use of the wriststrap, I also don't know.) That was almost a $5,000+ goof.

The second reason is flexibility . The #2 method above will let you easily track a moving subject (race car, horse, cyclist, soccer player, etc) IF you use a good ballhead with adjustable friction, like a Markins, RRS, Kirk, Arca-Swiss, Acra-Tech, etc. Set the friction so that the lens and camera don't move (or move very slowly) if you let go (hold onto the monopod!) and release the panning base. In shooting horses and riders, I may have to tilt up or down--they may be going up/down slopes or, if I'm above them (as in the stands), the downward tilt will change with their distance from me. One trick I use is to change which foot the monopod is braced against, depending upon the direction I'm likely to be panning.

In contrast, if you try panning rapidly with a vertical monopod rigidly attached to the camera, you'll find that YOU have to move, yourself, around the monopod--just as you would with a tripod. The monopod of necessity becomes the fixed axis. If you use a friction ball head, you can make yourself the center of rotation.

Remember that, often, sports photographers are shooting level--they're on the sidelines, at the same level as the players. They don't need to tilt up or down very much. (I suspect that they use monopods not so much for stability as to avoid having to support those heavy lenses, like the Canon 400mm f/2.8L IS--nearly 12 lbs, just for the lens!) Also, most sports photographers are tracking fairly slow subjects compared to a galloping horse (15-20 mph) over up-and-down terrain. (Focussing is another issue.)

A third reason is to avoid/correct side-to-side tilting. It's not easy to pan with a monopod rigidly attached to a camera without tilting the camera and it's hard to correct without moving, yourself, or picking up the monopod. (Try panning through at least 90-120 degrees, like following the action on a basketball court from close in.) With a ballhead, you can level the camera the same way you would normally or on a tripod.

ed rader

29th of April 2009 (Wed), 00:19

Great review, interesting comments. Here's a few other things to consider;

You could cut the cost by quite a bit by going to a different monopod. Gitzo monopods, like their tripods, are a bit overpriced. For example, check out the Feisol monopods (http://reallybigcameras.com/Feisol/Monopods). The heavier monopod, CM-1471, has a max load of 24 lbs, more than enough for just about anything you'd want to carry. It weighs 1.52 lbs, a little bit more than some Gitzos, but it costs only $99. Why spend $150 more on a Gitzo? I have the lighter Feisol CM-1401 monopod (max load 15 lbs, again more than I'd want to carry around) and the heaviest-duty Feisol CT-3371 tripod (http://reallybigcameras.com/Feisol/Tripods)--max load 26.5 lbs. I've compared both to Gitzo products. I'm not an expert on tripods/monopods (though I now own 4 monopods and 7 full-sized tripods), but, as a mechanical engineer, I'd say that the product quality of the Feisol gear is better than the Gitzo. (For example, my Feisol's base plate, hinges, etc, are CNC milled, rather than sand cast, as Gitzo's--and the older/cheaper Feisols'--are.)

As for using a head on a monopod, there are some good reasons. One is stability. The "traditional" method of using a monopod--the monopod vertical--is actually the least stable way to use it. (Try it sometime: it will tilt with almost no force.) It doesn't form much of a "tripod" with your feet, either.

There are several more stable methods, but they require some sort of head on the monopod. For example:

1. Put the monopod foot out in front of you. (Slightly more stable, as if forms a larger footprint.)
2. Put the foot of the monopod against the inside of your foot. This helps keep the monopod from slipping, which can be a real problem on a hard floor. I saw a photographer at an indoor horse show a month ago using a Canon 1D & 70-200mm f/2.8L IS lens on a monopod with one of those hideous "pistol grip" heads. (Now, just why she had a monopod with an IS lens, I don't know. Any shutter speed fast enough to stop the horses' motion would also be quite fast enough, with the IS, to not worry about camera shake and the monopod limits flexibility.) Anyway, she tracked a horse and the monopod foot slipped. Fortunately, the monopod caught on a seat in the stands as it fell, slowing the fall enough for her to grab the camera before it hit the concrete floor, though it sounded like the lens hood was cracked. (Now, why she didn't make use of the wriststrap, I also don't know.) That was almost a $5,000+ goof.

The second method will also let you easily track a moving subject (race car, horse, cyclist, soccer player, etc) IF you use a good ballhead with adjustable friction, like a Markins, RRS, Kirk, Arca-Swiss, Acra-Tech, etc. Set the friction so that the lens and camera don't move (or move very slowly) if you let go (hold onto the monopod!) and release the panning base. In shooting horses and riders, I may have to tilt up or down--they may be going up/down slopes or, if I'm above them (as in the stands), the downward tilt will change with their distance from me.

Remember that, often, "sports photographers" are shooting level--they're on the sidelines, at the same level as the players. They don't need to tilt up or down very much. (I suspect that they use monopods not so much for stability as to avoid having to support those heavy lenses, like the Canon 400mm f/2.8L IS--nearly 12 lbs, just for the lens!)

why do all that when you can pivot the monopod?

ed rader

gslusher

29th of April 2009 (Wed), 00:29

why do all that when you can pivot the monopod?

ed rader

If you pivot the monopod, you have to move AROUND the monopod. The monopod becomes the axis of motion. If you're panning a small amount, it's not a problem, but try panning 90-120 degrees, quickly. (See my edited post--I added a bit after you replied.) Also, it's very easy to tilt the monopod (right-left) as you move--it's hard NOT to tilt it.

Try this: stand beside a street with your camera on a monopod. Track a car as it comes toward you, then passes you, then goes away from you--you'll track through probably 120-150 degrees.

ed rader

29th of April 2009 (Wed), 00:40

If you pivot the monopod, you have to move AROUND the monopod. The monopod becomes the axis of motion. If you're panning a small amount, it's not a problem, but try panning 90-120 degrees, quickly. (See my edited post--I added a bit after you replied.) Also, it's very easy to tilt the monopod (right-left) as you move--it's hard NOT to tilt it.

Try this: stand beside a street with your camera on a monopod. Track a car as it comes toward you, then passes you, then goes away from you--you'll track through probably 120-150 degrees.

i'm not following you....whether i turn the camera or the whole monopod my head still has to move with the camera.

and no i don't have to move my body around the monopod as i pivot; i can easily turn my head and upper body 120 degrees and then some....

ed rader

gslusher

29th of April 2009 (Wed), 01:32

i'm not following you....whether i turn the camera or the whole monopod my head still has to move with the camera.

and no i don't have to move my body around the monopod as i pivot; i can easily turn my head and upper body 120 degrees and then some....

ed rader

I didn't say (or mean to say!) that you have to move your whole body, just that the monopod locks you into a particular axis of rotation. In handholding a camera, your body is the axis of rotation. Put the camera on a tripod or monopod and the tripod or monopod becomes the axis of rotation in front of you. Try that bit of following a car. If you really want to see the problem, use a very long (physically) lens so that you're well behind the monopod's axis.

I've watched dozens of horse show and eventing photographers. Few use a monopod when shooting moving horses for the very reasons I stated unless they are using a very heavy lens or they use "set" shots, where they set up a shot and wait for the horse to be in the right position, so they don't have to track the horse. That's fine for shooting a horse going over a jump, for example--the jump doesn't move, so you know where the horse will be. You still need to track a bit to get the timing right and, perhaps, to stop the horse while letting the background blur a bit if you can't get a high enough shutter speed. (That was all too common with film and f/4.5-6.3 zooms in the mid-80s.) However, you can miss interesting shots that don't happen in the frame you've set up, like a fall after the jump. You can't use set shots for a horse galloping on.

Consider this, which I just posted elsewhere: ever seen a videographer with his/her camera on a monopod?

ed rader

29th of April 2009 (Wed), 01:56

JohnJ80

29th of April 2009 (Wed), 11:45

I didn't say (or mean to say!) that you have to move your whole body, just that the monopod locks you into a particular axis of rotation. In handholding a camera, your body is the axis of rotation. Put the camera on a tripod or monopod and the tripod or monopod becomes the axis of rotation in front of you. Try that bit of following a car. If you really want to see the problem, use a very long (physically) lens so that you're well behind the monopod's axis.

I've watched dozens of horse show and eventing photographers. Few use a monopod when shooting moving horses for the very reasons I stated unless they are using a very heavy lens or they use "set" shots, where they set up a shot and wait for the horse to be in the right position, so they don't have to track the horse. That's fine for shooting a horse going over a jump, for example--the jump doesn't move, so you know where the horse will be. You still need to track a bit to get the timing right and, perhaps, to stop the horse while letting the background blur a bit if you can't get a high enough shutter speed. (That was all too common with film and f/4.5-6.3 zooms in the mid-80s.) However, you can miss interesting shots that don't happen in the frame you've set up, like a fall after the jump. You can't use set shots for a horse galloping on.

Consider this, which I just posted elsewhere: ever seen a videographer with his/her camera on a monopod?

no i haven't. i can't recall ever seeing any sport shooter using any kind of head on their monopod either.

ed rader

Ed's right. You don't need it.

I put my Q3 on my monopod to shoot my son in a band concert last night. I needed to be seated and angle the camera up at the stage from the front row. I needed stability in poor lighting shooting with my 135 f/2 at ISO 800. Not too many ways to do that with the space available - and it was a royal PITA no matter how I adjusted the tension or friction. A ballhead on a monopod is not fun IMO and there are few applications where it is needed. For sports, it simply is not.

I've probably shot a couple hundred thousand shots of a variety of sports and there is only one application where I need a head - shooting alpine skiing up a steep headwall. In that case, it was set the angle and lock it down. Other than that, no way - and it fact, it would be more of a problem.

My bet is that it is the amateurs who are shooting the horse events without a monopod. I've shot subjects that move a whole lot faster than a horse with a monopod with no problems. For one, holding a long lens of any size, I don't get as sharp of an image as I do when I use a monopod. Secondly, holding a heavy long lens is not something I'm willing to do for any significant time anyhow.

Finally, I shoot a lot of alpine skiing. There are a few photogs (pros) that will shoot without support (i.e. monopod) but most of us use a monopod (80%). When I compare my images to those that don't use it, mine are better - which is good for me because I get more per image and I don't have to beg for business.

J.

scot079

16th of June 2009 (Tue), 05:11

Ben, all, any reason the GM2541 couldn't hold a 500L? Just ordered the head last night, and my current pod's load cap. is being pushed HAHA.

You know how they say a 3 series tripod will stabilize up to a 500mm, well I can't find any of that information for Gitzo monopods...is there a hard fast rule about focal length or do we just pay attention to load capacity?

funhouse69

16th of June 2009 (Tue), 05:17

I don't think you will have any problems whatsoever. I personally like the 3500 and 5500 series better and they aren't a whole lot more money. The 2541 shows a capacity of 26 pounds and since its a monopod you aren't using it as much for it vibration dampening capabilities.

I was forced to liquidate some of my equipment recently and ended up with the same monopod, believe me it is certainly well within its limits.

scot079

16th of June 2009 (Tue), 05:25

I personally like the 3500 and 5500 series better and they aren't a whole lot more money.

I was forced to liquidate some of my equipment recently and ended up with the same monopod, believe me it is certainly well within its limits.

Sorry to hear that...I sold almost everything but my firstborn to get the 500 haha, oh and all the expensive support stuff it requires.

What do you like more about 3 and 5 series. Trying to decide on either the GM2541 or the GM3551.

funhouse69

16th of June 2009 (Tue), 05:38

Sorry to hear that...I sold almost everything but my firstborn to get the 500 haha, oh and all the expensive support stuff it requires.

What do you like more about 3 and 5 series. Trying to decide on either the GM2541 or the GM3551.

They are much beefier and have a much sturdier feel to them. Don't misunderstand me the 2500 series is also great and more than enough for what I have now. I would go with the 3500 or 5500 series monopod if I were to get another 500L though. This is just personal opinion but go somewhere and check them out, you will see the difference and for the minimal weight difference I'd go with the largest I could afford.

I also pretty much sold my first born to get the 500L and all of the accessories like Lens Coat, Replacement Foot, 2 Different Backpacks, Gitzo 3500 Series Tripod & 5500 Series Monopod, Kirk BH-1 Ballhead, Wimberly Sidekick, RRS High Capacity Monopod Clamp and I'm sure there is more. That was like $2k on top of the lens itself :-)

I was somewhat lucky, the original lens I got had focus issues so I returned it for a replacement, two weeks after I got the replacement I got laid off. Thankfully the company I bought it from took it back, they even picked it up for me and issued me a full refund!!! I was also able to return the Monopod to B&H. The rest I got off e-bay when the Live Cashback was like 30% so I kept it all and hopefully will never have to sell it.

scot079

16th of June 2009 (Tue), 06:16

Thanks for the info dude, I'll try out my manfrotto 694 for a couple shoots and see how it goes, but I know I'm teetering on the 11 lb limit w/ that.

ben_r_

16th of June 2009 (Tue), 11:58

Oh gosh... I really wouldnt trust that 694 with something as precious as a 500L on it, but okay... You should get a gitzo! Im not sure about shich series as I have never played with the others nor have I ever had the pleasure of shooting with a 500L, but I would personally get a 3 series.

scot079

16th of June 2009 (Tue), 14:00

You're right Ben, I'll probably end up buying at least the 2541, and thanks for the review!

scot079

16th of June 2009 (Tue), 16:41

Ben you spent alot of people's money w/ this review, chalk me up on that list HAHA just ordered the 2541

ben_r_

16th of June 2009 (Tue), 18:03

Ben you spent alot of people's money w/ this review, chalk me up on that list HAHA just ordered the 2541
Ha ha! And even more from the 1541T thread!

No, I like to think of it more like I SAVE people money by showing them the benefits of higer quality gear. This way they buy good equipment upfront and dont waste money going through two or three iterations of equipment in increasing quality before they get what they should have just bought in the beginning.

scot079

16th of June 2009 (Tue), 18:25

Ha ha! And even more from the 1541T thread!

No, I like to think of it more like I SAVE people money by showing them the benefits of higer quality gear. This way they buy good equipment upfront and dont waste money going through two or three iterations of equipment in increasing quality before they get what they should have just bought in the beginning.

Good on you! And truer words have not been spoken

Roland J

8th of October 2009 (Thu), 15:13

Well Ben...

It's nearly 2 years down the line... but I have to say this is a fantastic review... especially highlighting the final point about retaining forward-tilt with an L-Brkt

Well done!!

Roland J

ben_r_

8th of October 2009 (Thu), 17:10

FreshJam

20th of June 2010 (Sun), 17:55

Sorry to revive an old topic, first time user with my first post don't shoot! :p

Thanks to the OP for giving us a comprehensive post.

I am in the process of ordering the Gitzo pod, however I'm pretty much stuck on which head to get. B&H recommend I buy the Manfrotto 496RC2, however the weight is what is putting me off. Looked at the 494 but weight loading an issue? Looking at the 234 tilt head, but again weight loading is a bit of a problem perhaps..

My issue with the RRS is of course price. $260US + a plate... bit ridiculous IMO. I've read most of this thread but still can't make my mind. Any feedback on head suggestions appreciated.

FYI, my main rig is a 7D + 24-70 2.8L (which will pair with the pod) Not too heavy but have used a mates pod for studio and outdoor shots and is so convenient and makes shooting easier.

Thanks

Jon

20th of June 2010 (Sun), 18:49

Weight's somewhat less an issue on monopods. Ask yourself though whether you want the head to let you put your camera in Portrait orientation or to tilt it forward or back. If you want both, you'll need either a ball head or the RRS tilt head and an L plate. If you're absolutely sure you only need one or the other, ever, then go with the Manfrotto tilt head. If you'll want portrait orientation some times and will want to have your camera off the vertical at times, get the ball head, or do it right and spend the big bucks for the RRS tilt head and an L plate. The RRS stuff is solid.

FreshJam

20th of June 2010 (Sun), 19:12

Thanks Jon.

See the ironic thing, is that the RRS head is PERFECT for what I need. I use a ball head for my tripod set up, and I find this fine, but on a monopod it would just be too flimsy. I can certainly appreciate the design and quality of the RRS.

What would have been a deal sealer for me, is if I just bought the head for $150, then pair it with my spare RC2 QR system. Best of both worlds.. I can't believe the RRS QR ends up being double with their system.

I know I'll be using it a lot, just contemplating a $500+ pod setup :( I'll do some further research and see what options I can play with.

Jon

20th of June 2010 (Sun), 19:53

I started out (and went for a number of years) with the RC2 system from Manfrotto. Until I had a day when I was constantly popping between Portrait and Landscape orientation. Flipping the ball head over and back decided me in pretty short order that the L plates were the way to go. Yep, it costs. I think someone else makes basically a Manfrotto 234 with A-S head though, as a short-cut.

FreshJam

20th of June 2010 (Sun), 20:21

I know the RC2 system isn't the most elegant, but its pretty cheap :)

I may change my system, and I've learnt not to buy cheap stuff anymore. I'm usually attracted to buying mid-range for a top of the line brand if that makes sense.
The GM2541 fits the bill for me. I think if B&H sold RRS, I might be swayed a little easier so I don't have to wear the shipping costs twice (I live in Sydney.)

Yep, the L bracket looks to be a very nice addition. Do you feel it adds a significant amount of difference in weight? I'm assuming your L bracket stays on per what body you put it on?

Jon

20th of June 2010 (Sun), 20:53

Nope - no noticeable weight difference. I have the appropriate L brackets on all my camera bodies. I don't remove QR brackets unless there's some overwhelming reason to (and I haven't yet found one).

FreshJam

20th of June 2010 (Sun), 22:43

lol thanks Jon for putting in my head the L bracket system.. Maybe later perhaps :)

What about this set up from Custom Brackets? LINK (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/488148-REG/Custom_Brackets_DIGITALPROSVKIT.html#reviews)

They sell this as a kit, so was curious if this bolts on to the Gitzo straight up? Or do I still need to buy some form of head?

I'd be more attracted to the quick vertical/horizontal as opposed to any tilting, incase anyone asks if tilting is important. i did see some Pro with a similar set up on YouTube.

Sorry for all the questions!

JohnJ80

21st of June 2010 (Mon), 07:14

For a monopod, you usually don't need a head - try it first. Just mount a QR clamp right to the head. If you do need one, there is the RRS head as mentioned or the Manfrotto cheaper alternative. Directions for both are on the RRS website.

That contraption you showed, I have no idea what it does or how to use it. If you are going to spend that sort of money, get the RRS head and be done with it.

In my view, L plates are an absolute necessity. You get one when you get the camera.

j.

Jon

21st of June 2010 (Mon), 11:32

I've got a Custom Brackets flash bracket, and the rig does work, but seriously, the RRS L bracket and an A-S clamp will do you better, for less weight and bulk. Plus, RRS has a very compact flash bracket that works with their L plates. If all you're concerned about is going between portrait and landscape, get an L plate and a basic A-S clamp. IIRC, Adorama has some clamps (http://www.adorama.com/TPQC.html) in their Flashpoint line.

Lester Wareham

22nd of June 2010 (Tue), 04:51

Just to add to John's comments if the RSS plate is a little pricy you could also look at Kirk who produce perfectly usable AS compatible kit, depending on your country Kirk can be a lot cheaper.