First up, big thank you to squiress for doing the teardown. Your tone comes across as very much more professional and objective. Indeed, even if one had something negative to say, saying it in a professional manner actually lends credibility.
bungee wrote in post #2819788
I'd rather hear actual experiences of people who own Benro heads than the assumptions of those who don't.
I'll address this.. many of my favorite shots, some of which as long as 30 seconds, have been shot on my KS-1. Not even the -2, the -1 is rated for substantially less weight. I put a fair bit of mileage on it shooting for 9 months with it, and I don't regret my purchase in the least.
Ballhead load ratings are always very, VERY optimistic. I agree that one should derate them to 1/3rd of their officially spec'ed capacity for smooth, stable and creep-free operation. When this is taken into account, the KS-1 delivered. I put a 100-400 with tripod collar onto the KS-1 and then mounted a Canon 1D on the back. That's a six pound setup. Only minor creep was observed and the lock knobs had to be tightened down to absolute maximum settings.
I upgraded to a Markins Q3 eventually, not because the Benro was ineffective, but rather that someone bought my KS-1 off me and my dealer talked me into the Q3 (yes, I am weak
). So yes, I do have some experience with quality ballheads. I have also used the Benro in the field alongside a real, honest-to-goodness Arca Swiss B1 on a Gitzo tripod setup. 100% the real deal.
The most important part however, was that the Benro offers a real Arca-compatible QR system. I have a big problem with proprietary QR systems because if you do choose to upgrade, your entire QR plate investment is nullified. The Arca standard is the closest we have to an 'open' standard. When I upgraded to the Q3, ALL my accessories remained relevant because the Q3 is also an Arca-compatible mount. NOBODY ELSE offers an Arca-compatible mount at the KS-1's price point. (if I am wrong, I would be very keen to hear about the alternatives available)
I'd like to end by stating that in no way am I related to Benro, just a very satisfied user who feels that they are often not given the credit they deserve. There is a very strong mentality that says "because it's made in China it must suck". Go back half a century; change that to "because it's made in Japan it must suck". Well guess where all the nice Canon glass is made..
(note, 18-55 - made in Taiwan, and the exception).
From the first day I looked at their hardware, in no way did they ever endeavor to pass themselves off as a real Arca or Gitzo. Never. Many of the inferences have been made by us - and they remain just that, inferences. The price is not comparable, neither is the performance. If you want a real Gitzo, feel free to shell out the $500 for it. But for everybody else looking for a midrange tripod that is not going to slap a 300/2.8 IS USM L onto it, it's good value. Yes, the huge supertele users need exceptional stability and top notch engineering that can only come with some of the ultra-premium tripods. How many of us here own the 300/2.8?
I have always been very candid about that too - I specifically said that by the time comes where I can afford a 300/2.8 ISL, I can damn well pony up for a better tripod, maybe a Gitzo Series 3 or something like that. And that day is a LONG time coming.
BTW, I still have my A127n6 legset (with the Q3 on top) because it is tremendously good value. Carbon fiber would increase max loading capacity by a couple of pounds, decrease weight by half a pound, and lighten my wallet by 3X more. Can't justify that.
In the meantime, use it in good health and fret less. You know what? I certainly will use mine and see absolutely no need to worry about it, nor any indication that it is affecting my image quality when I shoot the 5D and 17-40 or 24-105 on it. In fact, it's going up this weekend with me on a fireworks shoot. 