Upgrade your 488 - nice for landscapes!

The Manfrotto 488 RC2 is the mopst popular ballhead recommendation here and its value is reinforced when you realise that the next ballhead worth buying, the 468 Hydrostatic range IMO, costs 3-4 times the price. Then tthe next step up to the big boy RRS and Markins gear is even more.

I didn't want to pay out for a head I will not use that much, just mainly for landscapes with ND Grads during my next Africa trip. But I did want a super steady platform for the camera with long exposures and maybe panoramics and then a simple, flexible QR system.

I decided to get the 488 without a QRand then add a Manfrotto 577 eBay clone QR and plate. Screws together great, super steady, no movement, strong, nice QR, safety catch, plate runs full length of the body and you can slide the plate along the QR base as needed. Very nice indeed

Cost around £75 delivered for the pair. Maybe you can replace your existing QR - I've never tried to unscrew it on previous models. Sweet ...

I have been thinking about doing the same thing and like you wish I could afford the Hydrostatic ballhead, even if I could find a way of sealing the ball on my 488 with the rubber bellows that comes with the Hydro.
I have the 488 RC4 and recently got the Canon 100-400 lens,
I was wanting to get this additional set up to help balance out that lens.

This would be a better solution for the 100-400mm IMO

Click

Yeah I have been toying with the idea of the side kick etc but I don't want to spend that kind of money on a rig designated purely for a big lens and I want to have the diversity of a modular system, Side kick is perfect if they only offered a version that would fit a bogen manfrotto ball head, but this requires changing the RC system to a Kirk or something, this and the QR plate is the cost of my 488 ballhead.
I seriously can't afford to drop $200 - $600 just for a ball head.
I would rather spend that towards another body or lenses.

What is that Immitation Wimberley tested for weight wise?
and how is it attached to the tripod?

Well ya just need to look at the pictures and read the text It screws straight on, i.e. it is a clone Kirk King Cobra not Wimberley Sidekick so doesn't need a baldyhead and it weighs around 900gms.

Ok I followed the link and read the associated text.
Seems like a pretty good deal.
I commented quickly yesterday as I was heading out the door for work.
But you did a great write up.
I might have to get one.

Well.....

I have always looked at the 468MG as an upgraded 488. Where the 488 is a nice solid performer, the 468MG adds a control and smoothness that you just cannot obtain with the 488.

The main areas of difference are the hydrostatic function, where a sealed/selfcontained "bladder" applies even pressure across the bottom of the entire ball. This allow for a much firmer lock and a locking action without any initial shift. The other difference is the friction or drag control, where you can progressively put "drag" on the ballhead, so you can still move the camera/lens, but when you stop, it stops...no floppiness. Once you have experienced these differences it will be difficult to go back.

I can only speak for the USA. However, their only use to be ~3:1 price difference between the 488RC2 and the 468MGRC2. Today, which an apparent Bogen drop in price, the 468RC2 @ $245 (B&H) is not that much more than the 488RC2 @ $107.

Personally, the Bogen RC2 system is quite functional. I used it for years on both the 488 and 468MG. Howeven, if you want a more robust/functional QR system, the *ONLY* other pathm IMO, are the Arca-Swiss clamps (from RRS, Kirk, Jobu, Wimberly, Markins, Acratech, A-S, etc). This can get pricey. However, since both the 488 and 468MG are easily converted, the steps can be made incrementally.

I have never used, much less touched a 577 so I cannot address it's function or worth. It does, however, appear to be a non-mainstream, side step away from two other widespread, fucntional QR systems....the low cost RC2 and the more functional, robust A-S system.

I had a 468 and it is a definate UG over the 488 in terms of subtle use and locking.

The 577 is a step away from your mentioned standards but a very simple and cheap solution for the very specific use I have. I use the Arca plates for long lens use on a gimbal head. The 577 plate secures the body in a notably firmer way than my RC2's ever did, and it's not like I need multiple plates or there is any problem with doing this adaption.

jrsforums wrote in post #5332113
Well.....

I have always looked at the 468MG as an upgraded 488. Where the 488 is a nice solid performer, the 468MG adds a control and smoothness that you just cannot obtain with the 488.

The main areas of difference are the hydrostatic function, where a sealed/selfcontained "bladder" applies even pressure across the bottom of the entire ball. This allow for a much firmer lock and a locking action without any initial shift. The other difference is the friction or drag control, where you can progressively put "drag" on the ballhead, so you can still move the camera/lens, but when you stop, it stops...no floppiness. Once you have experienced these differences it will be difficult to go back.

I can only speak for the USA. However, their only use to be ~3:1 price difference between the 488RC2 and the 468MGRC2. Today, which an apparent Bogen drop in price, the 468RC2 @ $245 (B&H) is not that much more than the 488RC2 @ $107.

Personally, the Bogen RC2 system is quite functional. I used it for years on both the 488 and 468MG. Howeven, if you want a more robust/functional QR system, the *ONLY* other pathm IMO, are the Arca-Swiss clamps (from RRS, Kirk, Jobu, Wimberly, Markins, Acratech, A-S, etc). This can get pricey. However, since both the 488 and 468MG are easily converted, the steps can be made incrementally.

I have never used, much less touched a 577 so I cannot address it's function or worth. It does, however, appear to be a non-mainstream, side step away from two other widespread, fucntional QR systems....the low cost RC2 and the more functional, robust A-S system.

Condyk,

have you tried that set-up in vertical? Will it be stable in vertical with my 40D + 70-200mm F2.8 L IS?

It works fine with my 70-200mm 4.0 IS L but the 2.8 is obviously heavier. The head will be fine, it's just stability on the legs with the weight to one side. My guess is no problem unless ya got a very crummy tripod and ya bump into it