Ball Head shift after tightening?

[Miyamoto Musashi]

I just had the Manfrotto 488RC2, but I returned it because every time I framed a shot and tightened it, it would "shift" with the weight of the camera. I would have to frame my shot at least three or four times, before I could correctly compensate for the amount of "shift".

I was not overloading it with my 20D & 70-200 f/4L either. I found this unacceptable. I am curious if these Arca Swiss and/or ACRATECH ball heads have this problem.

I returned the 488RC2, because I don't want to keep buying ball-heads. I just want to buy one ONCE and it be all I ever need. I guess I shouldn't have tried to save $ on this purchase.

From reading these forums, I guess it's down to these two contenders, the ARCA SWISS and the ACRATECH.

What is the ACRATECH ball made out of? And What is the ARCA SWISS ball made of? Any opinions on either will be much help, thanks.

[wareseeker]

I used to have the Manfrotto 468. I bought it used. I worked so great. I loaded it with my 20D attached with 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM or 70-200mm f/2.8 L USM with no problem.

I think the Arca Swiss or one of the ballhead at The Really Right Stuff.com is the best but it is kind of pricey.

I am looking at Manfrotto 468MGRC0 or 468MGRC4 at the moment.

[condyk]

I have a 488 RC2 and it carries a 300d and 100-300mm f4 Sigma (not small or light!) perfectly secure. No movement at all. I'm delighted with it in every single way.

The RRS ballheads look superb.

[wareseeker]

I have a 488 RC2 and it carries a 300d and 100-300mm f4 Sigma (not small or light!) perfectly secure. No movement at all. I'm delighted with it in every single way.

The RRS ballheads look superb.

I would like to ask you about the quick release system. Is it really tight when you have your heavy lense on? Even when you tilt your camera vertically. Does it make any tiny move or anything? I never used quick release system before and tempting to buy one. Thanks!

[lostdoggy]

I just had the Manfrotto 488RC2, but I returned it because every time I framed a shot and tightened it, it would "shift" with the weight of the camera. I would have to frame my shot at least three or four times, before I could correctly compensate for the amount of "shift".

I was not overloading it with my 20D & 70-200 f/4L either. I found this unacceptable. I am curious if these Arca Swiss and/or ACRATECH ball heads have this problem.

I returned the 488RC2, because I don't want to keep buying ball-heads. I just want to buy one ONCE and it be all I ever need. I guess I shouldn't have tried to save $ on this purchase.

From reading these forums, I guess it's down to these two contenders, the ARCA SWISS and the ACRATECH.

What is the ACRATECH ball made out of? And What is the ARCA SWISS ball made of? Any opinions on either will be much help, thanks.

One Question:

Are you using the lens mount or are you mounting directly to the camera???

[Miyamoto Musashi]

Okay, you got me, I don't have the lens mount, BUT it "shifts" or "migrates" even with my 50mm f/1.8 mk I! (almost just as bad)

The lens mount on my 70-200 f/4L is considered unecessesary by many since this is the lightest of these zooms. Besides, $119.50 for a 70-200mm F/4.0L lens tripod ring mount ('http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=cart&A=details&Q=&sku=186247&is=REG&addedTroughValue=183198_USA&addedTroughType=accessory) Is money That could go towards buying me a better Ball-Head, thus not needing this perfect balance.

The 488RC2 was rock solid once you let it "migrate" into the settled position, but this makes me have to frame the shot over and over to compensate for this ball-head "creep" - unacceptable. Very likely to miss the shot or forced to zoom out and crop later just to get the subject in the frame!

On top of that, with the lens mount, I would have to buy another quick-release plate to go with it. This is all adding up rather quickly to compensate for "saving" money on the ball-head.

To summarize, $119.50 for the tripod mount, $11.95 for another

quick release plate (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=cart&A=details&Q=&sku=179175&is=REG&addedTroughValue=368325_REG&addedTroughType=accessory), and the $95.95 for the original inadequate Manfrotto 488RC2, I am up to $227.40!

Considering the Acratech is $269.99 and would make all these other "accessories" unneccessary, and be a better ball-head over-all, I am leaning toward that route. Besides, I strongly believe (read - know) that buying a tripod collar would not stop the 488RC2 from "migrating" or "shifting" once tightened, since it happens just as badly with the EF 50mm f/1.8 mk I.

Don't get me wrong, the 488RC2 is nice, solid, and well-built. It just has a major flaw as far as I'm concerned. It's rated at 17.6 lbs and my set-up WITHOUT the tripod collar weighes in at less than 8 lbs! It SHOULD work without the $119.50 collar! (IMHO, the collar is just for better balance in this set-up)

[J Rabin]

Ballheads of many prices will sag shift a little bit after tightening, depending on where the lens is pointing.

People rave about the AcraTech, but I found sagging of the AcraTech Ultimate with a top Really Right Stuff clamp completely UNACCEPTABLE for use in my situation: 20D with Canon 180mm macro and 24EX macro flash clamped to the lens front. Tests a ballhead by throwing the fulcrum point way out! The AcraTech has as much sag as my $90 Giottos. AcraTech's claim is as a light backpacking head, not critical stability.

People buy and sell ballheads on the Forums. There are only three ballheads I rarely see "For Sale:" the Really Right Stuff 55, the Markins, and the Kirk. That says something about those in comparison against all others. Either the Markins or the RRS is next on my try list. I've been waiting for RRS to release their mid-size head. The Kirk appears best priced?
J.

[ed2day]

I have the Acratech ball head. There is some shifting with a heavy telephoto lens, 2-3 lbs., but not enough to bother me. It's not the ball shifting, that's lock tight, just a slight deformation of the material. I don't think I'd see any shifting with a 50 mm. But that's why I say you shouldn't go by the weight ratings of tripods/ballheads. That's just the rating at which the thing won't break or flop over. One of the heavier ballheads like Kirk or Arca is probably better in this regard I'm guessing.

[lostdoggy]

It may true that the 70-200f/4 is not that heavy, it must be assume that the heavier lens elements is located in the front. Being that the lens is172mm long it would act like a lever and the ball would be the fulcrum. You could do the math, I been out of school too long. Remember the principle but don't remember how to calculate it anymore.

[condyk]

I would like to ask you about the quick release system. Is it really tight when you have your heavy lense on? Even when you tilt your camera vertically. Does it make any tiny move or anything? I never used quick release system before and tempting to buy one. Thanks!

Ok, the 100-300mm f4 is much longer and a bit heavier than the 70-200mm f4, which I used to own. My 1.4x adds about 2cm or so to the length.

So, to test ... I have an old cheap as chips QR plate and my original Manfrotto metal plate to compare. With the Manfrotto plate on the lens mount it is absolutely secure. If I release the panning lock then there is some small amount of play if I tip the lens at the front, but that is at the panning base. Lock the panning base again and no play at all. But why would I want to push the front of the lens up in normal usage?

Now ... if I put my cheap plastic plate on the camera then there is clearly some play, but it is because the plate is cheap and not built to the same tight tolerences as the original so it doesn't fit too well. The play is in the plate not the ballhead.

If I now put the Manfrotto plate on the camera body then again there is only play when the panning lock is release and that again at the base, not the plate. There is a tad now between the plate and the camera body but I actually have to push up the end of the lens. The ballhead is secure throughout when all is locked. Only the body moves a little As I say, any tiny amount of play is to do with the body/plate interface and it ONLY happens if I actually push the end of the lens up with some force.

In normal operation with the Manfrotto plate there is no play throughout unless the panning lock is off, even then you have make an effort to shift it by pushing the front of the lens up. In normal use you wouldn't do that. Play is thus not an issue at all with this ballhead and QR plate as I am using it.

[Miyamoto Musashi]

I think I am sold on the RRS BH-55, Whew! Thats a pricey ball! I hope this thing is rock-solid. Anybody using one of these?

[MDJAK]

I just got mine today. It is amazing. I think I could sit on it and it will not move or sag when in use.


I am having a problem, though. I've never used a ballhead before. I can't get it to drop into one of the cutouts for a vertical picture. What am I doing wrong?

EDIT: I had the screw that comes out of the top of the tripod to which the head attaches to far into the bottom of the ballhead. It was stopping the ball from moving freely.

[wareseeker]

Congrat! Maybe the friction knob. Sorry I don't have it.