486 RC2 on a tripod?

[Valleyboy]

I'm looking into getting a tripod, and need some advice in regards to a ballhead, specifically, whether to get a 486 head or a 488. My local shop has both in stock, with the 488 being approx. $60 CAN more than the 486, and budget is a slight concern here (broke college student), so keep that in mind.

other relevant stuff

-I've settled on the 055XPROB legs
-heaviest combination (now and in the foreseeable future): 40D + 70-200 F4 + 430ex
-panning control on 488 is not a huge advantage for me, as I'm not too big on panoramas
-lightweight/compact is nice, but not essential
-055 legs have a built-in level, so no need for the one on the 488.

basically, would the 486 be able to comfortably handle the weight, or is the 488 needed? I don't really need the extra features the 488 offers (panning etc.) so would the 486 be adequate? The salesman at the shop (whom i trust, he's a friend) highly recommended the 486 over the 488 based on the fact that I don't need the panning (plus its quite a bit cheaper).

thoughts?

[ed rader]

I'm looking into getting a tripod, and need some advice in regards to a ballhead, specifically, whether to get a 486 head or a 488. My local shop has both in stock, with the 488 being approx. $60 CAN more than the 486, and budget is a slight concern here (broke college student), so keep that in mind.

other relevant stuff

-I've settled on the 055XPROB legs
-heaviest combination (now and in the foreseeable future): 40D + 70-200 F4 + 430ex
-panning control on 488 is not a huge advantage for me, as I'm not too big on panoramas
-lightweight/compact is nice, but not essential
-055 legs have a built-in level, so no need for the one on the 488.

basically, would the 486 be able to comfortably handle the weight, or is the 488 needed? I don't really need the extra features the 488 offers (panning etc.) so would the 486 be adequate? The salesman at the shop (whom i trust, he's a friend) highly recommended the 486 over the 488 based on the fact that I don't need the panning (plus its quite a bit cheaper).

thoughts?


i've owned both. the 488 is a MUCH better head. much easier to to adjust and tighten and doesn't suffer from droop like the 486. the 488 and 055 are excellent choices :D.

ed rader

[krb]

i've owned both. the 488 is a MUCH better head. much easier to to adjust and tighten and doesn't suffer from droop like the 486.
+1

I have both and the 488 is much better.

[Rimwalker]

While I don't have the 488, and believe it's much better (I'm a believer in you get what you pay for), the 486 holds my heaviest combo (40D and 400mm 5.6) without "droop" and does everything I want. I guess I paid just enough.

[SkipD]

I own the 484RC2, 486RC2, and 488RC2, so I have experience with all three. The ONLY one of the three that I would use on a tripod is the 488RC2. I use the 486RC2 on my monopod and limit the use of the 484RC2 to our point-n-shoot.

[ToddR]

I have only owned my 488RC2 for about three weeks, but I really like it. It gets high praise around POTN, and that was a major reason I got one.

I just got my 70-200 yesterday, and I'm looking forward to trying out this heavier lens on the 488. I don't anticipate any problems.

It may be a little front heavy, but that wouldn't be the 488's fault. Maybe I'll pick up one of the Ebay tripod ring knock-offs so that it can sit on the head with better balance.

A 486 on a monopod is sort of on my radar, too.

[kelstar]

The 488RC2 is much better - the separate pan lock is very useful.

[krb]

While I don't have the 488, and believe it's much better (I'm a believer in you get what you pay for), the 486 holds my heaviest combo (40D and 400mm 5.6) without "droop" and does everything I want. I guess I paid just enough.
The 486 and 488 both have the same ball and about the same resistance to drooping. The big difference is that the wheel on the 488 gives finer control so it is much easier to loosen it just a enough to adjust without going too loose and having the whole thing flop around.

[Phut]

I just upgraded to the 488RC2. Mines just came in this past Wednesday and I'm glad I made the change from the 486RC2. The separate pan adjustment is very handy. I'm currently using the 488 on a 3021PROB and my viewfinder is at a perfect height for me.

[SkipD]

The 486 and 488 both have the same ball and about the same resistance to drooping. The big difference is that the wheel on the 488 gives finer control so it is much easier to loosen it just a enough to adjust without going too loose and having the whole thing flop around.Even though the ball size looks about the same on the Manfrotto 486RC2 and 488RC2 ball heads, my experience (owning both) is that creep is definitely less with the 488RC2 with an off-center weight load.

[SMP_Homer]

I have a 488RC2 on my tripod, and it's great!
I was hunting for a 486RC2 for my monopod, but then stumbled on a pretty good deal for another 488RC2, and I couldn't pass it up.
If you need it right now, get what you can afford. If you can wait and keep hunting, get the 488

[TheFloridaShooter]

What about the 488RC4? IS there any benefit to the RC4 over the RC2???

Thanks

[SkipD]

What about the 488RC4? IS there any benefit to the RC4 over the RC2???Manfrotto's ...RC4 quick release system is designed for much larger cameras than the Canon EOS family. The quick release plates are much too large to leave on an EOS SLR and use handheld. The RC2 system, on the other hand, is properly sized to leave the QR plate on each EOS body and associated lens that you would put on a tripod or monopod.

There are some heads such as the Manfrotto 410 junior geared head that are only supplied with the RC4 system. On mine, I use a 323 adapter kit (attached on top of the RC4 QR plate) so that I still use the RC2 QR plates on my cameras and lenses.