Weight Capacity:Ball Heads vs Tripod legs

ok Ive wondered about this.Would it be wise to get a tripod head with a lower weight cap. than the actual tripod legs?Example a Bogen 484RC2 is at 8.80lbs where the 3021 Pro tripod has a capacity set at 13.20lbs.

thekid24 wrote in post #2521115
ok Ive wondered about this.Would it be wise to get a tripod head with a lower weight cap. than the actual tripod legs?Example a Bogen 484RC2 is at 8.80lbs where the 3021 Pro tripod has a capacity set at 13.20lbs.

.......i wouldnt.....i have those legs and the 486 head and im not happy with the head....looking to get something bigger as we speak....

nodoubt wrote in post #2521141
.......i wouldnt.....i have those legs and the 486 head and im not happy with the head....looking to get something bigger as we speak....

Ah good info.Some of the time people give their advice/opinion without actually having the items,at least you said you have both and are not happy with the setup.Was the problem due to it being a ball head or just the differences in weight capacity?Are you looking for a pan and tilt head or still going for the ball heads?

thekid24 wrote in post #2521115
ok Ive wondered about this.Would it be wise to get a tripod head with a lower weight cap. than the actual tripod legs?Example a Bogen 484RC2 is at 8.80lbs where the 3021 Pro tripod has a capacity set at 13.20lbs.

The answer to your question really should be based on what you intend to support with the tripod.

For larger cameras with larger lenses such as the 70-200 f/2.8L, the 484RC2 is way too small. The 486RC2 is even lacking a little ability to eliminate creep. The 488RC2, on the other hand, works very well with lenses such as this one.

SkipD wrote in post #2521187
The answer to your question really should be based on what you intend to support with the tripod.

For larger cameras with larger lenses such as the 70-200 f/2.8L, the 484RC2 is way too small. The 486RC2 is even lacking a little ability to eliminate creep. The 488RC2, on the other hand, works very well with lenses such as this one.

As of now I do not own a large lens such as the 70-200L but in time I will and would rather buy now and once than have to keep buying.Also I plan on having a Mk II N in the future as well.So lets say I have both Mk II N and the L lens,would the 488RC2 with the 3021Pro be sturdy enough?

thekid24 wrote in post #2521220
As of now I do not own a large lens such as the 70-200L but in time I will and would rather buy now and once than have to keep buying.Also I plan on having a Mk II N in the future as well.So lets say I have both Mk II N and the L lens,would the 488RC2 with the 3021Pro be sturdy enough?

That's the combination I use all the time. It has always done everything I have wanted it to - and quite well at that. You would not be disappointed even with the high-end gear.

I have the 3021BPro, though. The difference is that it's got a black finish. That's what the B is in the model designation.

You will never want to risk gear that's heavier than the head/leg capacity. To that extent, you will only be carrying around dead weight.

So, the 3021BPro with the 488RC2 or the 3001 with the 486....

But I think most legs have higher capacity than the heads they are used with??

The amount of weight that a tripod or head is rated for can be very deceiving. I wonder if all manufacturers use the same method for arriving at those numbers. My suspicion is that the better tripod/head manufacturers tend to rate their equipment more for what can be held steady (without creep) than the manufacturers of cheap equipment.

Regardless of how the manufacturers rate their equipment, there are two factors involved. One is how much weight a tripod (or light stand, etc.) can support without failing - risking the equipment supported on it. Another is how much weight can be supported with rigidity and no tendency to creep or change position by itself.

For tripod use, I strongly recommend the Bogen/Manfrotto 488RC2 head over their smaller ball heads for the simple reason that with heavier loads (such as my 20D with the 70-200 f/2.8L IS), the smaller heads do not have enough clamping force to resist creep.

On a monopod, though, the 486RC2 is great because any creep would be compensated for by simply moving the monopod a little.

As of right now I figure the 484RC2 would be enough to hold my XT but Ive read an article that was linked somewhere here on the forums about a guy that wasted money on continually buying tripods.And Ive heard on these threads as well about buy once,meaning no need to buy a cheap tripod because it is cheap.Spend the extra money and buy your 'last tripod' first.Which is usually what I do in any circumstance.Not every time because I did buy a 55 cent tripod off of ebay but at the time it was for my S3 which was not heavy at all.Now that Ive gotten my XT and plan on having bigger lenses and a heavier body(Mk IIN),a more rigid and sturdy tripod is amoung the top of my 'need-to-have' list.Thanks for all the help that was provided here.

thekid24 wrote in post #2521174
Ah good info.Some of the time people give their advice/opinion without actually having the items,at least you said you have both and are not happy with the setup.Was the problem due to it being a ball head or just the differences in weight capacity?Are you looking for a pan and tilt head or still going for the ball heads?

....it just didnt seem sturdy enough.....im still looking at ballheads....

The 3021B Pro and the 488 head is a wonderful combo. Thats what I am using right now, and It seems to match up perfect.

I havent owned too many different combos, but im very happy with what I got. I came to this combo by research and advise of forum members, it seems to be a very popular set.