Creep/sag with Giottos ball head MH-1300 w/ MH-657 plate

[Duluk]

Hello -

I've done some browsing around and googling for what others say about the creep on the Giottos MH-1300. I own this ball head; bought it after purchasing the Manfrotto 486RC2, but not liking the lack of control and features (e.g., panoramic base, bubble levels).

Anyway, one thing that both have in common is sagging after locking down, particularly (or obviously :)) when the camera is pointed downwards. In all fairness, I have a gripped 50D with a 24-70 2.8L lens and sometimes the 580EXII flash. So there is some weight, but not 20 pounds worth.

From what I have found online, I haven't read a lot about creep on the head, so I'm actually thinking perhaps it's user handling (big surprise :)). There is one thing I read though (I believe on this forum) that indicated it could be the MH-657 plate, and that if I had a plate from RRS or Kirk that was made specifically for my camera, the creeping/sagging wouldn't occur.

So, I have two, make that three, questions. Any help on any question would be greatly appreciated.

1) First let me just ask: what, exactly, *is* creep? :) I think of it as what I'm describing above, sagging immediately after lockdown. I suppose, though, it could also mean sagging while it is locked down. As in, it's been locked down and any sagging that would occur immediately has occurred, but it still keeps sagging.

2) Would purchasing a plate tailored for my camera ($$) actually help with creep/sag?

3) Are there any pointers to good articles/videos on how to use the ball head. I've seen some videos on YouTube, but I haven't found a really good one (or article) yet. Just the basic ideas and concepts and 'tips and tricks' to handling a ball head would be nice.


Thanks for your help!


Duluk

[Tsmith]

How could the plate be the cause of the creeping? I'd be more apt to blame on the ball head design myself, kinda like the 486RC2. I had that same one and didn't take me long to get rid of it. The creeping is likely caused my the clamping mechanism not tightening enough onto the ball.

I figured that for the money I would spend buying reselling various ball heads, just buy one that was designed to preform as you'd expect it too. I went with a Markins Q3 at the time and can guarantee you that it'll support a Canon 7D, EF 400mm f/5.6 and Canon Speedlite 430EX without and creep in any position. I also use Kirk plates. Yeah it cost more money up front but you get a reliable product that will last for years and most importantly, no more creep. Its really annoying when doing Macro Photography and your all set to take the photo using a remote shutter release and at the last second realize that the ball head creeped downward.

[Duluk]

How could the plate be the cause of the creeping?

Yeah, that was my reaction. :) I believe the poster said something about the cork on the plate was allowing some sag. Still seemed like a stretch to me, which is why I asked.

I'd be more apt to blame on the ball head design myself, kinda like the 486RC2. I had that same one and didn't take me long to get rid of it. The creeping is likely caused my the clamping mechanism not tightening enough onto the ball.

I figured that for the money I would spend buying reselling various ball heads, just buy one that was designed to preform as you'd expect it too. I went with a Markins Q3 at the time and can guarantee you that it'll support a Canon 7D, EF 400mm f/5.6 and Canon Speedlite 430EX without and creep in any position. I also use Kirk plates. Yeah it cost more money up front but you get a reliable product that will last for years and most importantly, no more creep. Its really annoying when doing Macro Photography and your all set to take the photo using a remote shutter release and at the last second realize that the ball head creeped downward.

Indeed, it is very annoying. I've heard about the Markins Q3 (from lensrentals.com). Soon I will have to start saving for a "real" ball head. I'm looking at either the Really Right Stuff BH-55 or possibly the Markins. Unfortunately I don't live in an area with a decent photography store so it's not like I can try them out, which would be quite helpful.


Thanks,
Duluk

[windpig]

I had the same issue with the 488RC2. I went with the RRS BH40LRII. Nice stuff.

[Tsmith]

Indeed, it is very annoying. I've heard about the Markins Q3 (from lensrentals.com). Soon I will have to start saving for a "real" ball head. I'm looking at either the Really Right Stuff BH-55 or possibly the Markins. Unfortunately I don't live in an area with a decent photography store so it's not like I can try them out, which would be quite helpful.

Thanks,
Duluk

You will get a high quality product with for sure with either RRS, Markins or Kirk.

[QuitePossibly]

It doesn't really matter that you don't live near a decent photography store. You can only buy the Markins and the Really Right Stuff products online. I've been to B&H in New York and they don't carry either brands.

[JWright]

I had a horrible creep problem with my 488RC2 when it was flopped over into the portrait orientation. No matter what I did, I couldn't get it to hold firmly. I finally converted my entire tripod mounting system over to the Arca-Swiss style. I replaced the clamp on the 488 with one from Kirk, added RRS L brackets to all my cameras and plates to my lenses. As much as I'd like to get an RRS BH-55, I just can't afford it. The Kirk clamp on the 488RC2 head works just fine for my purposes.

[hyt]

Yeah, that was my reaction. :) I believe the poster said something about the cork on the plate was allowing some sag. Still seemed like a stretch to me, which is why I asked.

It's not a stretch. Rubber and cork are compressible and therefore do not allow a solid connection between camera and tripod, no matter how much you tighten down. This is the reason why top brands of custom (not universal) A-S plates do not use cork or rubber. Universal plates do not have lips, so they rely instead on cork or rubber to provide the friction that prevents rotation (often unsuccessfully). The advantage of the universal plates, such as your MH-657, is that they fit many different cameras and therefore you save yourself the expense and hassle of buying a new custom plate for each brand/model of camera you own. The downside is that it's not as solid as an all-metal custom plate, and you will get some sag after you let go of your camera, with the problem being more apparent the more off-center the weight relative to the plate.


Indeed, it is very annoying. I've heard about the Markins Q3 (from lensrentals.com). Soon I will have to start saving for a "real" ball head. I'm looking at either the Really Right Stuff BH-55 or possibly the Markins. Unfortunately I don't live in an area with a decent photography store so it's not like I can try them out, which would be quite helpful.

Creep or drift is another issue altogether, and has to do with the design of the head's tension and locking systems. Even "real" ball heads aren't exempt from this problem. I had a Acratech GV2 which I returned because of unacceptable creep. The Arca-Swiss Z1 I had was much better, and Markins are also known to be better than average in this area (I have a Q3).

http://www.keysolutions.com/blogs/kenyee.nsf/d6plinks/KKYE-7LQ4XX

[Lowner]

One of the problems with choosing a ballhead is the lack of independent and unbiassed information available. Like many others I started with the 486RC2 and, again like many others, finally lost patience with the "droop", "creep, call it what you will.

I struck lucky with the Markins M10 and A-S quick release clamps. But in truth it really was dumb luck, and thats the problem. Just as with tripods, the choice is extremely difficult unless one can try the kit out for oneself. How do the Markins products rate against the Kirks, RRS's, Arca-Swisses, etc etc?

Yes, I will sing the praises of my M10 and its sweet spot which I really love but I've never used any of the other quality (expensive) products so am in absolutely no position to judge. Forums like this can only go so far before the research hits the problem that users tend to either rave about a product or slag it off, with little middle ground.

[Duluk]

It's not a stretch. Rubber and cork are compressible and therefore do not allow a solid connection between camera and tripod, no matter how much you tighten down. This is the reason why top brands of custom (not universal) A-S plates do not use cork or rubber. Universal plates do not have lips, so they rely instead on cork or rubber to provide the friction that prevents rotation (often unsuccessfully). The advantage of the universal plates, such as your MH-657, is that they fit many different cameras and therefore you save yourself the expense and hassle of buying a new custom plate for each brand/model of camera you own. The downside is that it's not as solid as an all-metal custom plate, and you will get some sag after you let go of your camera, with the problem being more apparent the more off-center the weight relative to the plate.



Creep or drift is another issue altogether, and has to do with the design of the head's tension and locking systems. Even "real" ball heads aren't exempt from this problem. I had a Acratech GV2 which I returned because of unacceptable creep. The Arca-Swiss Z1 I had was much better, and Markins are also known to be better than average in this area (I have a Q3).

http://www.keysolutions.com/blogs/kenyee.nsf/d6plinks/KKYE-7LQ4XX

Thanks for the information Hyt. Your response, though, still leaves me confused about what "creep" or "drift" refers to. It seems your two paragraphs are talking about two different things, which leads me to believe (at least in your case and usage) that "sag" happens when you let go of the camera and "drift/creep" happen after the camera has been locked down for a bit - that is, it slowly moves for its duration of being locked down.

And it seems that you are saying a new, custom fitted plate (well, a plate designed for my camera or grip) will help with the sagging I experience after letting go of the camera.

If I am correct about how you are using the terms, I would say I have a problem with sag but not with creep. Once it sags after I remove my hand, it stays there.

So perhaps I should just consider springing for a camera-fitted plate, such as from RRS?


Thanks again,
Duluk

[Al_at_MMO]

The sagging after lock down, especially if you are using a grip is caused by the connection between the camera body and the grip.

You have two molded plastic parts, held together by one single small screw. No matter how tight you make it, there is always going to be some play.

What happens is, when you put your camera on the ball head, and then adjust the camera like we all do by using the hand grip on the side to position the camera, you are using the camera as a lever, and that lever is attached FIRST to the grip, and then the head. Any amount of play in the connection between the grip and the camera will create tension, and once you lock down the ball head, and let go of the camera, that tension is released and you get "SAG"

Here's a technique to reduce or eliminate that sag.

Instead of using your hand on the camera to adjust it into position, use your hand under the camera, with your palm down on the top of the ball head, with your fingers around the shaft that connects to the plate. Use you hand to adjust the camera into position and then lock down, and see if you get any sag. This should eliminate all or nearly all of the sag you are now experiencing.

Ball head make doesn't matter here, I have a Kirk BH 1 and any camera with a grip on it will appear to sag when the camera itself is used to position it if I am using a grip, and it is rated at 50 pounds capacity.

Hope that helps some. Try it. You have a nice ball head. It should work well for you.

Al

[Duluk]

Here's a technique to reduce or eliminate that sag.

Instead of using your hand on the camera to adjust it into position, use your hand under the camera, with your palm down on the top of the ball head, with your fingers around the shaft that connects to the plate. Use you hand to adjust the camera into position and then lock down, and see if you get any sag. This should eliminate all or nearly all of the sag you are now experiencing.

Holy moly it worked. :) Seriously, that technique pretty much eliminated it. I haven't done lots of tests, but there was only one time where I noticed a little sag. But I tried again and with different angles, and it significantly reduces sag, virtually eliminating it - even aiming about as "downward" as possible without resting on the frame.

THANK YOU. :D Thanks for the explanation also. I actually did wonder about the grip, and I even want to say I tried it without the grip with similar results, though perhaps not as bad. I really was wondering if it was a user handling problem, which I mentioned in my original post. And I thought it may have something to do with holding the camera. In fact, I saw a video of Moose Peterson handling his RRS head and noticed he used his left hand under the camera. Well, I thought he was holding the lens underneath and thought maybe that would help so I switched to that method. It didn't help much, but I never thought to put my had on the ball head only (which is probably what Moose was doing).

Anyway, to be honest I can't believe it worked that well. And again, I could still have small problems "in the field" or when I'm doing macro shots (I could have problems), but with the few tests I did in the house it really does appear to eliminate the sag - at least the majority of it. I'm still in shock. :)


Thanks again - and thanks to everyone who answered. All the info was helpful.


-Duluk

[bohdank]

All my cameras have been gripped. All of them drooped on the 488RC2. I now use an RRS plate for my camera on a Markins M10 with RRS lever clamp. I get no droop and I still use the same technique, or at least I think I do.

Oh, and the pan knob on the 488 also has an affect on the final framing. Tighten it down before you tighten down the main ball tension since, on mine, tightening the pan knob afterwards would raise the framing.

I think hyt has "hit" upon the reason for the problem with the 488. It's the mounting system they use with the cork lined plates. I know there is at least 1 poster here that has replaced the clamp on the 488 and I wonder if that solved the dropping problem.

[Lowner]

bohdank,

I agree, droop has been completely eliminated with the M10. However it needs to be used as Markins designed it, using the "sweet spot" technique. I have tried using it locked down and still see a faint memory of "droop". My 30D has a grip and I purposely do not overtighten it, yet still don't see any flex on the tripod. Any lens heavy enough to do that needs a lens collar.

To the OP. Whatever we all call it, I think we are all talking about the same effect. Any head that allowed the camera to slowly collapse after locking down is fit for the bin and even the 486 was not that bad.

[JWright]

So perhaps I should just consider springing for a camera-fitted plate, such as from RRS?


Thanks again,
Duluk

It sounds like you've solved the problem, at least for now, but if you ever decide to add an RRS L bracket to your camera keep in mind you will have to either buy a new, compatible ballhead or replace the clamp on your existing head.

If you have the Manfrotto 486RC2 or 488RC2 (or the newer versions) it's a simple matter of unscrewing the clamp assembly from the post that goes into the ball and screwing on a A/S compatible clamp with a 3/8X16 threaded hole in the middle.

[res]

I am using the 1300 and I must have a very good copy since I can hang my 400 5.6 off the front of my 40d using a grip with no creep. Now, there is a lot of sag from the grip moving etc. I just went and put this on my system to see if it would creep. I have the side kick for shooting with this lens and obviously attach with a plate and the lens ring. Now, using the side kick I have noticed the same issue Bohdank mentioned, the panning portion of the head has some slop when the tension knob is loosened. I have not had issues with anything else. Again, I may be fortunate and have a good copy.