Manfrotto 468MGRC2 or 468MGRC4?

I've done pretty much all my research, using Google and the POTN search, and have just ordered a Manfrotto 055MF3 tripod. I also need a new head and have narrowed the choice down to the Manfrotto hydrostatic ball heads - 468MGRC2 or 468MGRC4. The difference in price is trivial and not a factor. I favour the RC4 mount because it includes two built in levels and offers a larger support platform than the RC2. But I have seen a couple of comments where people say the RC4 is too big and the RC2 (without level indicators ) is a better choice.

I found dimensions for the RC4 (410PL) plate here - http://www.missnumeriq​ue.com …0pl-1-4-et-3-8-p-854.html - to be 65mm x 85mm.

I have a 30D with grip and a 70-200f/2.8 IS and a 100-400 IS plus Kenko 1.4X extender. Measuring the base of the grip, the dimensions of the 410PL seem ideal to me and the 65mm depth is perfect for the tripod mounts on the lenses, although the 85mm width is a tad over-generous. By comparison, the RC2 (200PL) mount, which I have on my monopod, is tiddly and I do have a concern that the plastic grip is not well supported on that, and it and and the grip's tripod thread may be subject to needless stress. I may also throw a 580EX into the mix, at times, for good measure, so that's a bit more load to consider. All up weight is about 3Kg, perhaps a tad more.

So, is the RC4/410PL really too big for a D-SLR? I don't see it myself but would like to know why others seem to think it is. Please help. The legs are on their way and I want to order the head today if poss. Thanks.

I have two pods, one a rc2 for my stills, and one a rc4 for videos. The rc4 is a hex shaped plate that is larger than the body on the 5D and 20D, made for video cams or large format cams. It definitely gets in the way when using the Canon still cams. If you go with the rc4, I have several plates I will sell cheap, as I converted my 488 to rc2 with an adaptor plate from B&H.

RC2 is definately big enough and strong enough to take whatever you can throw at it SLR wise. And RC4 will get in the way if left on for normal shooting.

I'd say get RC2 and for your level get a hot shoe mount spirit level.

Thanks Tom. The RC4 is not hex shaped in my part of the world (UK). It's pretty oblongish/rectangular, but with one end curved....

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Oh crap Sorry about that You are right I have the RC0 on the video pod. Guess I posted with brain in neutral.However the rc2 is still the plate I am using on the still cameras.

I'd still stick with an RC2 system, it's more than strong enough, the RC4 is pushing it size wise on the grip and is much larger than the tripod mount on the lenses.

Also another couple of points you say you've already got an RC2 system so that'd be one less QR plate to buy and less hastle if your QR for your tripod is the same as the monopod that keeps everything easier too.

Also one other point to note how do you handhold the lenses you're planning to attach these two, many people including myself support the 70-200 f2.8 by the tripod ring and having a large QR plate attached would make this unnecesarily awkward to do.

Cheers, Simwells. I guess the RC2 is obviously the right choice. Thanks for your help I've missed the cutoff to order today so I may as well wait till Monday and ponder further over the weekend. Of course, the ideal thing to do would be to get a hands on look at the things but my local camera stores are all completely useless and stock practically nothing in the "specialist" market like £150+ tripod heads.

OK, RC2 it is for certain. I just found a picture that puts the size of the RC4 plate into context against human hands - it's a whopper! I've also included a similar picture of the 488RC2....

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

tdodd wrote in post #3468361
OK, RC2 it is for certain. Now just before I finally commit to purchase, is the 468MGRC2 hydrostatic head definitely worth a £100 premium, or almost three times the price, of the 488RC2? UK prices below....

I have used a 488RC2 for quite some time and have never found a situation where I felt I needed more in a ball head. I definitely would not suggest paying three times the price for the hydrostatic.

If I felt like paying three times the price, I would probably consider a totally different system such as the Arca-Swiss style of head. However, I don't feel like I want to put my money there either.

SkipD wrote in post #3468393
I have used a 488RC2 for quite some time and have never found a situation where I felt I needed more in a ball head. I definitely would not suggest paying three times the price for the hydrostatic.

If I felt like paying three times the price, I would probably consider a totally different system such as the Arca-Swiss style of head. However, I don't feel like I want to put my money there either.

I've gotta agree with that, 488RC2 is more than enough. If you want to spend more you'd probably be better spending that £119 (488 without QR clamp is £57.00 through morris photographic) extra towards getting an arca swiss QR clamp and a pair of QR plates, the price difference wouldn't be huge in difference.

Thanks for your input guys. In the end, having done a bit more research, I decided to go for the 468MGRC2. Although I ordered my 055MF3 tripod and the head from different companies on different days they both arrived together on the same van today . As there seem to be so few photos that show the relative sizes of these things I thought I'd post some shots for future reference.

Kudos to Tecno in the UK for getting the tripod to me on the third business day after I placed my order, even though they were out of stock when I ordered and phoned me to let me know. They also had the best UK price by a margin - £185.25 inc VAT and delivery - using a 5% discount code.

Kudos also to Morris Photographic in the UK for having the best price, free delivery and next day service

EDIT : the old photos I had here have long disappeared. Here are some more recent ones....

40D and WFT-E3 plus 100-400.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Byte size: ZERO