RRS panning clamps: PCL-1 vs. PC-LR or PC-PRO: Your experiences?

[Ellis Vener]

I am thinking about updating my venerable PCL-1 clamps to either the new PC-LR (Lever) or PC-Pro (knob) panning clamps.

1) Does anyone have experience with the newer clamps? 

2) Do the new ones have even less play between the stationary and rotating parts than the PCL-1? i recognize this is not an issue if your shoot landscapes but it is one when photographing architecture and cityscapes.

3) Without considering an Arca-Swiss or RRS ball type head where the clamp mounts directly to the stem of the ball, I'm not sure I like the idea of having a built-in dovetail on the bottom of the newer panning clamps since it reduces the area of the clamp to head interface unless there is a receiving clamp screwed on to your head of choice. That is an issue for me as I like to use either a leveling base or a very heavy duty double-tilt head (a Foba ASMIA to be precise) when shooting high resolution pans and prefer the panning clamp to stay on the head. 

I look forward to your responses, thank you.

[Ellis Vener]

Well... I guess Im going to find out for myself what the real world differences are later this week.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Well... I guess Im going to find out for myself what the real world differences are later this week.

Hi Ellis,

Sorry I can't help, I'm equipped with PCL-1's and have no immediate need to add more of them, or new ones.

Cheers,
Bart

[Ellis Vener]

Bart: I will report back and let you know if it's an improvement or not worth switching too. On the RRS front, the new two piece  L-bracket design used for the Canon EOS-1D X is definitely an improvement over the older one piece design.

[Chris_Brown]

Ellis, I've used the lever clamp on my BH-55 head for about five years without any problems. During a shoot I remove my camera frequently and the lever action is more convenient than the clamp version. Over the years there has been no increase in slop or looseness in its clamping pressure. I have their PC-Pro on my RRS pano rail and it doesn't budge.

My guess is, since you shoot a lot of architecture, the PC-Pro is the better solution. Once your camera is on the 'pod, it doesn't come off too frequently, eh?

[Ellis Vener]

While I  shoot a lot of architecture I also shoot a lot of industry and portraits. I ordered the PC-LR ans will work with it as the replacement clamp on a late model Arca-Swiss B1 head, a job a PCL-1 is currently doing.

On a related note: does anyone know if Gitzo  changed the diameter interchangable platform size between older (like early or mid  '80s)  and newer Series 3 tripods?

[Chris_Brown]

On a related note: does anyone know if Gitzo  changed the diameter interchangable platform size between older (like early or mid  '80s)  and newer Series 3 tripods?

How new? I've got an ancient 5-section Gitzo and a 7-year old carbon and the platform of the column is the same diameter.

[Alto]

While I  shoot a lot of architecture I also shoot a lot of industry and portraits. I ordered the PC-LR ans will work with it as the replacement clamp on a late model Arca-Swiss B1 head, a job a PCL-1 is currently doing.

On a related note: does anyone know if Gitzo  changed the diameter interchangable platform size between older (like early or mid  '80s)  and newer Series 3 tripods?

Hi Ellis I have changed the circular plate on my gitzo to match the diameter of RRS ball head/ pan clamp I think i went down a size .

Regards

Jon

[Ellis Vener]

Thanks Jon and Chris!

John I've got a 28 year old Gitzo 410C that takes the same size as the Gitzo 5 series. I bought as a straight for 410 with a sliding center column when I bought my first view camera, a 4x5 Sinar C, back in '86.  At some  point in the '90s  I  bought a used geared center column assembly ( the "C" portion) and later,  the panning side arm collar. Glad to know they haven't changed that part.

[Chris_Brown]

Gitzo's naming convention is a confusing as dealing with medical insurance.

I just remembered my old Gitzo was called something like "giant tele studex". I have no idea what the carbon model was called.

[Miles]

I have used the lever clamp for years and prefer it.  It is designed in such a way that I have never had an instance where it accidentally came unlocked. 

[Ellis Vener]

I have used the lever clamp for years and prefer it.  It is designed in such a way that I have never had an instance where it accidentally came unlocked. 

what interested me about the PC-LR is that RRS redesigned the lever clamping mechanism so that it can accomodate  rails and plates from other manufacturers. Since RRS's implementation of the Arca-Swiss dovetail design is actually slightly wider than the original Arca-Swiss specification and I believe the bevel angle to be very slightly different as well, RRS has naturally built their lever clamps to match their specs.

About the new lever clamp design used in the PC-LR  according to RRS the -"New robust lever-release mechanism adjusts to accept all Arca-Swiss/Really Right Stuff-style plates except Arca-Swiss P0 Slidefix plates and plates made by Novoflex.
"
From both my experience, and measurement of the the Novoflex dovetail, the base width of their dovetail  is definitely narrower  than the RRS, Arca-Swiss, Sunwayfoto, Kirk, Foba and Jobu plates I also own.

The alos point out that for both the PC-LR and PC-PRO the "Integral dovetail base fits all Arca-Swiss/Really Right Stuff-style clamps (except Markins clamps)." I do not've have any direct knowledge of the Markins heads or clamps so I will take RRS at their word for that. 

I imagine that this may also mean that standard RRS plates and rails do not fit Markins' clamps either. Does anyone have experience of that?

[Mark Muse]

Ellis, you might have answered this for yourself by now. I have the PC-PRO. No slop at all, and the movement is very well damped. My criticisms are that the clamp requires many turns to free the camera unless you slide it in or out of the jaws. And the same with the rotation release 'knob'. Too many turns required in my opinion. I am used to the fast pitch of the Acratech clamps. I was originally concerned that the fast pitch would work loose more easily, but I have been using that head for years now without it ever accidentally loosening.

[Ellis Vener]

The PC-LR  I ordered will be arriving Friday. I've been using the PCL-1 clamps for a long time and have even had one rebuilt by RRS as I felt that it was developing too much play between the fixed portion and the rotating portion. While i suspect I am an outlier in that regard, hopefully this is addressed in the PC-LR. Let me explain

Over the years that I have been shooting multi-row  stitched panoramas, my camera of choice has usually been a tall and relatively heavy camera such as the Canon EOS-1Ds Mark III or Nikon D3X, oriented  in "portrait" orientation to get greater vertical resolution in the finished pans.  Occasionally I use a Nikon D800 and even more rarely, I've used a PhaseOne MF camera and digital back.  To get the lens axis centered over the vertical rotation axis, these tall bodied cameras mean that the weight of the lens, camera, and the vertical arm with clamp attaches to the lever (the horizontal bar) further away than if I were using a shorter lighter body like a D800 or Sony A7r. This is physics at its most basic: fulcrum and lever. To which is added the necessity of the lever rotating on the fulcrum.  I wanted a  fulcrum that rotates just as freely as the PCL-1  but with a little less vertical play. Less vertical play should mean that it should (in theory)  keep the plane of rotation fixed instead of wobbling slightly from frame to frame. Errors add up.

Mark at Really Right Stuff suggested  a solution to the play problem i was seeing with the PCL-1. His suggestion is locking the rotator for each shot. I have tried that and while it improves the results, it slows down  the shooting process.

Why don't I just get a heaviest duty Gigapan and automate the process of shooting?  That certainly has its appeal but from what I understand once you start the sequence you cannot adjust the interval between frames.  I shoot cityscapes primarily so I like to be able to control when time when I want to shoot the individual frames based on what is moving  through that individual frame.

[Mark Muse]

I understand. You might benefit from the shallow pitch of the threads in the locking mechanism. You can use it to set the rotational tension. Like I said, I have not experienced any play in mine with an 800e and typically 2/100 Zeiss MP, but I have only been using the PC-PRO for a year or so.