Ballheads; Markins vs RRS vs....

I'm looking to upgrade my tripod and have been reading a lot of threads here. For a pod, I've pretty much settled on Gitzo 2541. Tri-pod research seems easy compared to Ball Heads. The specs are different enough one can chose based on needs. But, Ball Head specs don't seem to vary as much as opinions. Looks like Markin's a favorite around here. More so than the RRS and Gitzo heads in the same price range. From those that have tried different heads, what's the difference?

Seems it would be easier to go with one brand, but that logic doesn't seem to follow here. I've also noticed many seem to like RRS QR system, even with their Markin's heads. Is it better than Markin's plate system? Please help me understand what I would gain by buying multiple brands to complete my tri-pod system.

Markins and RRS heads are both known for their workmanship, fit/finish, and functionality. I preferred the Markins since I do a lot of hiking and prefer the lighter weight. Markins heads have the highest capacity-to-weight ratio of any premium ballhead on the market. Unfortunately, even though their screw clamps are Arca-Swiss compatible, the Markins quick-release system doesn't offer a lot of flexibility (as one example, their lack of an L-bracket).

RRS and Kirk probably have the most expandable A-S system available...they both make similar products, pretty much the same fit/finish and functionality. One limitation with Kirk is that they don't manufacture lever clamps, only the screw type. However, you won't go wrong with either one. I'm using both RRS and Kirk L-brackets with my RRS lever clamps, and have never had any compatibility issues.

I have the Gitzo GT2540, with the Markins M-10 and the RRS lever clamp...I found it to be an ideal setup. You can check the RRS and Kirk sites to see how broad their product lines are.

Can you point me to a source for the Markins product line? I would be interestesd in price options.

MilesW wrote in post #5636460
Can you point me to a source for the Markins product line? I would be interestesd in price options.

http://www.markinsamer​ica.com/MA5/index.php

I've been going through a similar shopping experience for the last few weeks. I've decided upon the 2531 (updated version...due out within days, if not sooner!) over the 2541--stability over portability, so to speak (the 2541 is smaller when collapsed).

With respect to heads, I've also noticed that Markins seems to get more raves on this forum than RRS. On the other hand, when I check some other online resources including NAPP, some photographers' blogs, other websites, etc., I also see a lot of positive comments on the RRS products. In fact, the people at NAPP are crazy about the RRS heads (I've written to them, too).
I have also checked out the weight issue and found (from each website) that with regard to the Markins M10 and RRS BH-40 (comparing both "midsized" heads), the RRS is actually slightly lighter (479 grams to 498 grams). Not sure the load capacity is important for me---both manufacturers recommended their respective mid-sized heads to me, based on my gear, and told me they would be more than fine.
I've called both companies and they are both very proud of their product line....and I'm sure that both are "fine." I am leaning toward the RRS at this point...visceral reaction, I guess. I'm sure it becomes a matter of personal preference where either will be fine--that is, no "wrong" choice here. At this point, I am ready to go with the 2531 and the RRS head once the tripod is available. Of course, this is subject to change!! (A friend of mine got the Markins the other day and he wants me to come over to see it.....oh oh!!)
By the way, I asked Markins why so many people on this forum seem to swap the clamps off their heads and he told me that less than one percent of their users do that. I was surprised, based on what I've read and seen here!

I've gone down the Markins M10 matched to an RRS lever QR plate route. It works extremely well and I'm very happy with it.

But (theres always a but in life): I bought a Markins plate for my 100-400L and it refuses to lock into the RRS clamp. The microscopic differences in dimensions made a tremendous difference. This same plate locks down well on a Markins QR60 clamp on my monopod.

So be wary assuming that all Arca-Swiss compatible kit is truly compatible. RRS have since told me that they have an agreement with Kirk that the two companies kit is really compatible, but they have made no agreements with any other companies.

RRS did offer to replace the offending Markins plate with one of their own free of charge, but it meant sending it from the UK to California, and the costs did not make it a worthwile exercise.

Richard

I'm going down the same road. My ball head actually broke on me at the zoo so I just ordered a m10 and it will be paired up with my rss QR plate. I went for it because of the weight and cost.

No one will go wrong with either the BH-40 or the Markins M-10. Both are top-notch quality products. The deciding factor for me was the weight/capacity ratio...

argyle wrote in post #5636453
Markins and RRS heads are both known for their workmanship, fit/finish, and functionality. I preferred the Markins since I do a lot of hiking and prefer the lighter weight. Markins heads have the highest capacity-to-weight ratio of any premium ballhead on the market. Unfortunately, even though their screw clamps are Arca-Swiss compatible, the Markins quick-release system doesn't offer a lot of flexibility (as one example, their lack of an L-bracket).

So don't buy Markins plates. I have all Kirk plates with my Markins M10 head and I'm considering getting an RRS quick release clamp and giving it a shot (I hope it will work with the Kirk plates, I read of compatibility issues from time to time). I just need to figure out how to get my current clamp off the head.

I still don't understand the "weight" issue. As I pointed out, the BH-40 actually weighs less than the M10. With regard to the load capacity, the RRS site explains that they calculate that and promote the information in a different manner than other companies. And the photographers who use the RRS gear are using the same "heavy gear" that the rest of us use....maybe more so.
Again, I think they're both high quality pieces, but I'm just confused about this persistent reference to RRS weighing more than Markins when it's not true--at least when you compare the Markins M10 to the comparable RRS model (BH-40)...it seems to be used as a factor for Markins quite a bit.
The RRS is also shorter---3.0 inches to 3.86 for the comparable Markins head.
Just wondering....

sml, all you have to do is look at the Markins and RRS websites and compare:

Markins M10:
weight - 498g (w/clamp)
load capacity - 90 lbs

RRS BH40 LRII:
weight - 519g (don't know if it includes clamp)
load capacity - 18 lbs

Markins M10's 90 lbs. load capacity vs. RRS BH40's 18 lbs.

An ounce or two either way doesn't matter, to me, as long as the wight/capacity is close. So, it sounds like I'd probably be good with either Markin's or RSS. The smaller size of the RSS sounds like a plus, especially on the 2541, but only a small plus. Compatibility sounds like RSS is a better choice for the QR. Has anyone used both heads? Are they both smooth, with good controls/locks?

I hadn't visited the Kirk site before. Nice assortment of plates. Compatibility with RSS QR sounds good. The Snap Collars looked useful as well, but only with Kirk or Markins heads, not RSS. hmmm

I've done my share of cheap tri-pods and trying to get it right this time. I want my next purchase to be my last(at least for a while), and don't want to fight compatibility issues. Too bad the company that makes the best legs, doesn't make the best heads and QR systems, or visa-versa.

I'm leaning toward the RSS head, to keep it down to 2 brands, unless someone who's used both says Markins is significantly better.

Ball4 wrote in post #5638080
Markins M10:
weight - 498g (w/clamp)
load capacity - 90 lbs

Numbers like that don't make things easy. Obviously You'd never sling 90lbs of camera/lens on an M10. So what does 90lbs mean? Its a worthless number. They just say its good for a large SLR w/ fast telephoto lenses. At least RSS tries to explain their rating, stating 300 f/4, and an occasional 300 2.8...

edit...
The Q3 is rated at 65lbs, but Markins says for a small SLR + 70-200 lens. So where's the 65lbs? Unless a 20d(their example) is a lot heavier than I thought. Not picking on Markin's, I'm sure from all the praise on this forum they're a top-of the line product. But, why does such a quality company need to use such an arbitrary rating to prove their heads have a higher load to weight ratio?

They're rating it for how much it could absolutely hold, but wouldn't be ideal for. The advantage of a higher rating being that if you tilt the camera off center it's less likely to creep.

emorphien wrote in post #5638230
They're rating it for how much it could absolutely hold, but wouldn't be ideal for. The advantage of a higher rating being that if you tilt the camera off center it's less likely to creep.

I'd read that more as the max torque rating, which Markins also offers. That's of value.(if other provided it to compare).