Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear => Topic started by: Jeremy Roussak on February 03, 2019, 07:49:07 am
-
In a final act of crass stupidity before I left Japan last week, I lost my RRS BH-40 ballhead. I was perfectly happy with it. Before I rush out to order another, I wonder: does anyone have any recommendations for other makes that will accept my RRS L-bracket? I'd very much prefer a lever-operated clamp. I have a 5Ds and the longest lens I'm remotely likely to use is a 100-400, perhaps with a 1.4 converter.
Any suggestions will be gratefully received.
Jeremy
-
Any brand that has an arca compatible clamp will generally accept the rrs l plates. Personally, you won’t find anything that feels as nice as the rrs gear in my opinion. Lots of good options, but rrs always feels just a step above it all...at least in my opinion. I have several different cheaper ball heads than the rrs, just for around the studio use, but in the field or on location, I always take the rrs. It feels the most solid and has proven to be the most reliable.
-
I've been using an AcraTech Ultimate ballhead for the past 15 years. I like it's open design--impossible to jam with snow and ice. It's never failed me. I use everything from a tiny Leica IIIc to a vintage 1925 Gundlach Korona 5x7 on it.
Kent in SD
-
If you’d like to do a total “geek-out” on tripod heads, check out this thread:
https://www.getdpi.com/forum/medium-format-systems-and-digital-backs/58781-great-tripod-head-thread.html
Some folk have serious gear, perhaps in combination with serious issues! (I may be one of them. LOL)
Fun read, at least.
Rand
-
Arca Swiss D4. Highly recommend it. I just replaced the clamp with the RRS lever clamp.
Jeremy, sorry we missed you in Japan. Last year in Japan I used the Acratech. It did not do so well in the extreme cold with the weight of the Phase One XF. This years trip, no issues with the cold and the D4.
Steven
-
Thanks, all. I'll give it some careful thought.
Jeremy, sorry we missed you in Japan. Last year in Japan I used the Acratech. It did not do so well in the extreme cold with the weight of the Phase One XF. This years trip, no issues with the cold and the D4.
I'm sorry too - your name cropped up in conversation during our lengthy drives between locations. I hope you had fun; we certainly did.
Jeremy
-
I also like my BH-40 ballhead...
Have it over 10 years and use it a lot; got a problem two years ago - send it back to the US and got it repaired for free.
RRS even paid the transport back.
-
Arca Swiss D4. Highly recommend it. I just replaced the clamp with the RRS lever clamp.
Steven
Charlie Cramer used the Arca Swiss D4 in the LuLa video with him. He said that it had changed his whole outlook on ball heads, and now couldn't imagine going back to anything else. But as he noted, it also stands out for being very expensive.
-
Jeremy
We had a great shoot. I am thrilled with the images we got this year versus last year in Hokkaido. We went to some new areas that are less travelled and found some amazing scenes.
We seemed to be a day or so behind your group in location. We were there to shoot landscapes not the wildlife.
Steven
I'm sorry too - your name cropped up in conversation during our lengthy drives between locations. I hope you had fun; we certainly did.
Jeremy
-
Arca Swiss P0.
-
The D4 is great( I got to try Charle Cramer's during a print workshop); but, as noted, it is expensive. Acratech is nice and light but has difficulty with heavy systems as Steven mentioned, for example it is very difficult to frame macro shots with a 645Z and 120mm macro. The weight of the lens applies enough torque that creep is inevitable. I am very happy with an Arca-Swiss Z1, the aspherical ball is very effective at preventing creep and the head is relatively light. I would avoid their clamp however, it seems attractive since it is adjustable for slightly different plates, but in practice can be finicky to open.
-
Check this site out. It includes some very interesting ballheads.
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/coloradotripod/the-worlds-first-titanium-tripod-system?ref=2y2hlk
And if interested in tripods, try this one below. It is supposed to be more vibration resistant due to the weave in the carbon fibre build.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnW19EdT9SA
-
Hi
I have just sold my Arca Swiss Cube and RRS TVC34L as they are no longer need since I gave up my Hasselblad MFD kit. I have just bought a Sunwayfoto Geared Head GH-Pro Mk 2 from Photospecialist in Germany but I imagine it is available in the USA. The price was 435 Euros shipped and I am really happy - lighter than the AS Cube and just as flexible a geared head and ball head in one with Arca Swiss compatibility.
-
There's some good analysis and measurements of tripod & head stiffness at https://thecentercolumn.com (https://thecentercolumn.com)
-
There's some good analysis and measurements of tripod & head stiffness at https://thecentercolumn.com (https://thecentercolumn.com)
Thanks! Interesting web site. I’m glad for people like this that have way too much time on their hands. LOL
As an aside, one technique I use in windy conditions is to break out my “screw into the ground” dog tether holder. I then use my small block and tackle, that I made for the purpose, clipped to the screw and to the hook under the tripod apex platform and snug it down good. Solid as the proverbial rock, and doesn’t blow around like a camera bag or other pendulum type weight hung from the hook.
Rand
-
Hi Jeremy,
I’m enjoying the Benro B2. I’ve had zero problems with it and it handles everything up to my FF Nikon w/ 70-200 f/2.8 or 300 f/4. It probably handles more but that’s all I have to throw at it.
Terry
-
There is nothing, nothing, that compares with the Arca D4. I got mine on Charlie's recommendation and have not looked back. All ball heads drift, even the hallowed RRS, and they are quite excellent. I have used an old Arca B1, and still have and occasionally travel with an Acratech, but with the D4, you turn the knob and the camera stays EXACTLY in place, no drift. It is expensive and not super light but, like Charlie, I'd not be without it.
-
If you really want to go small - the RRS Microball.
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1301195-REG/really_right_stuff_bc_18_micro_ball_clamp.html
The sucker is STRONG, very well designed and fits in a shirt pocket. It's rated for 10lbs and while that may not seem like much, I use it with a hassy H5D + HC 210mm (one of Hassy biggest), which only weighs in at just under 7 lbs soaking wet.
It locks solid with no slop or sag and is smooth. It also only drops 45 deg, so if you forget to lock it, it wont slap into your tripod.
-
RRS makes some pretty ball heads to be sure. For the ultimate landscape head I bought the Arca-Swiss D4 GP head from Robert White in the UK (not available in the USA). There is nothing better. It is a real treat to be able to do micro adjustments to the tilt of the camera with strong vertical shapes to get the image aligned before the shot is taken instead of fixing it later in Photoshop or other editor.
Like most people I could accept paying $1100 for a top performing tripod but had not appreciated the benefits of a $1,100 for a ball head. It was an oversight on my part that I waited too long to remedy.
-
Like most people I could accept paying $1100 for a top performing tripod but had not appreciated the benefits of a $1,100 for a ball head.
Sorry, but MOST people aren't carrying $1100 tripods, let alone those tripods with an $1100 head. Yes, I know that a few are, but I think a very small fraction of even very serious photographers have gone that far. Those pieces of kit are way, way out there on the price/benefit curve.
Brad
-
Several years ago I had the RRS BH40 & BH55. I really disliked the dual drop down notches, and precision focusing for macro work was not fun. I sold them both and went for the Arca-Swiss D4, and I'd never go back. If you do not need precision focusing the D4 is certainly overkill, but it is a dream head for some of my work. Sure, it's pricy, but it cost less than most of my lenses, and I expect it to last many years. I have a RRS gimbal head for my 600mm f4, and for multi-row stitching, but I go to the D4 for everything else. Horses for courses.
Mary
-
Yeah, I got the thing. I just forget the price and use it with a great big smile on my face.
Larry
-
I'd like it for close-ups/macros. Unfortunately, even if I could forget the price, I (and maybe my very young mitral prosthesis) couldn't forget the weight.
-
This D4 has a lot of knobs; is that not a problem to use it in a quick way? i guess it is more for slow precise work than for quick action?
-
I tried a D4 (belonging to someone else); I didn't like it. I'm fully prepared to accept that the fault is mine.
Anyway, I have bought another BH-40. Thanks for all the suggestions.
Jeremy
-
Geared heads are a "love them or hate them" proposition. That's why one can always get a cheap used Manfrotto 410 (and soon to come, Benro) - someone has a product-shot project, uses it, hates it, sells it at next opportunity.
-
Arca Swiss P0.
I'll second that. A great bit of kit.
-
Re Nancy's comment. I've had a Manfrotto 410 for a long time having not go on with ballheads. It is quite heavy but I love the control, particularly for macros and for a sculpture project. That said, in many other cases I am using a tripod less and less.
Best wishes,
Jonathan
-
I love a simple ballhead; strong and not many knobs for swift action- The BH-40 has 3 knobs - for me two would be enough.
It is used with a panning clamp (http://www.reallyrightstuff.com/BH-40-Ballhead?quantity=1&custcol31=4) so one knob more , but almost fit for anything and not too heavy.
The Arca Swiss P0 seems an even more elegant design that has the same features.
Geared heads i would prefer for very precise work when I do not have to carry the tripod around.
-
Sorry, but MOST people aren't carrying $1100 tripods, let alone those tripods with an $1100 head. Yes, I know that a few are, but I think a very small fraction of even very serious photographers have gone that far. Those pieces of kit are way, way out there on the price/benefit curve.
Brad
I used to think that way. I mean, it's just a tripod and head, right? Not like it's a new lens, all that cool shiny glass. Most of us drop a lot more money on lenses than on tripods. $2,000 for a 70-200 f2.8 or $12,000+ (yikes!) for a 600 mm f4 is seen as just the price of entry.
But if you're putting serious effort into your landscape photography, you're interacting with the tripod and head on every single shot. It's amazing how much impact it has on the results. When I finally got a tripod that was tall enough, I stopped seeing all my horizons sloping down to the right, and my back stopped aching from bending over. A rock-solid tripod added more sharpness than a higher resolution sensor or a better lens. And that Arca Swiss D4 head is worth every penny. Micro-adjusting the composition in elevation, azimuth and yaw, with zero drift...once you've tried it, you never want to go back.
-
I used to think that way. I mean, it's just a tripod and head, right? Not like it's a new lens, all that cool shiny glass. Most of us drop a lot more money on lenses than on tripods. $2,000 for a 70-200 f2.8 or $12,000+ (yikes!) for a 600 mm f4 is seen as just the price of entry.
But if you're putting serious effort into your landscape photography, you're interacting with the tripod and head on every single shot. It's amazing how much impact it has on the results. When I finally got a tripod that was tall enough, I stopped seeing all my horizons sloping down to the right, and my back stopped aching from bending over. A rock-solid tripod added more sharpness than a higher resolution sensor or a better lens. And that Arca Swiss D4 head is worth every penny. Micro-adjusting the composition in elevation, azimuth and yaw, with zero drift...once you've tried it, you never want to go back.
+1
Rand
-
Agree with the last posters. Most of us think nothing of spending $1K or even $2K for a lens. A properly purchased tripod and head are essentially lifetime investments. I smile every time I use my Arca D4, and I use it a lot. Remember, "the sharpest lens in the world is a tripod," said by someone far smarter than me. And the best tripod (and head) are even sharper :) :)
-
I resisted getting the D4. I had the Manfrotto 410 geared head so I was sold on geared heads. But the 410 was just to big and heavy and the D4 is much more svelt. If you don't like using something you tend not to use it. I did not like the weight of the 410. So I bit the bullet. The one thing the original D4 did not have was geared rotation. I like and need that. Shortly after I got mine they came out with a new version which had it. More money I think but if you are paying that much what's a few more shekels.
I think that Manfrotto has come out with a new geared head which is smaller and might fit the bill. I would check that out. Probably a lot cheaper.
For landscape geared head is the way to go. But I sometimes do other things so I carry in the van a good second tripod with an Acratech ball head should the need arise.
Larry
-
Numerous people in this thread have extolled the better image quality with "rock solid" tripods and heavy, geared heads. Have you ever directly compared image quality results (not framing ease) with "lesser" tripods and heads, side by side with your camera and lens. And even go so far as doing it handheld with a good, modern body/lens that includes image stabilization?
I just did the following test - $780 tripod/ballhead combo vs hand held. I have an Oly, OM-D e-m1. Mounted it on my low/mid price and sized manfrotto 055 cx3 carbon fiber tripod (approx $340) with Acratech GP Ballhead ($440). Lens was Oly Pro 12-40 f2.8. Sunny, late afternoon landscape shot at 25mm. Shutter speeds from 1/500 down to ⅛ at 1 stop increments. Used self timer on tripod and manually focused. Then did exactly the same framing and shots handheld with image stabilization without self timer. Compared the same exposure pairs, tripod vs handheld image in Lightroom @ 1:1. In each pair from 1/500 f2.8 down to 1/30 f 11, the two images were identical - couldn't tell which was which. In the 1/15th pair, the tripod image was a tiny bit sharper. At ⅛, it was easier to see that the tripod image was sharper. But of course these image pairs degraded because of diffraction compared to the images from 2.8 to f11.
My conclusion based on this test--- I don't need to tripod mount for image quality in reasonably bright landscape photos shot at this focal length as long as speed at 1/30 or faster.....which is the vast majority of the landscape photos I take. And while I don't have a $2200 combo of ultra tripod and head to compare with mine, I can't believe that at the camera settings I used that I'd see any difference between my "low/mid priced" tripod-head pair vs the $2200 ultra combo.
Image stabilization has been a wonderful advancement for image sharpness and greatly reduces the need for tripods.
-
The point about geared heads is that they can be easier to use when fine control is needed. However, if you can get the control you need with a ball head, ball heads are simpler and faster to operate.
If you do macro, you pretty much need either a tripod or a flash system.
-
…..if you can get the control you need with a ball head, ball heads are simpler and faster to operate. . . .
Hi Nancy,
I have found this to be untrue. I previously used a RRS BH-55. I find my Arca-Swiss D4 geared head very much faster and more positive. With camera/lens gear of any size on any ball head, one is constantly playing the "hold it in place" game (even w/ the friction-tension optimally adjusted) and the "how much should I aim up to compensate for post-lock-down droop." If I had a nickel for every time I've had to unlock, tweak, lock - unlock, tweak, lock my BH-55, I'd be able to afford a Phase One. ;D
In my view a geared head like the D4 only "looks like/seems like" it would be more complicated and slower. In reality, I don't futz around anywhere near as much as I did previously. And the fact that you can level the camera body w/o regard to the tripod being level is a joy - especially if one wants to rotate.
Rand
-
This D4 has a lot of knobs; is that not a problem to use it in a quick way? i guess it is more for slow precise work than for quick action?
See my comment to Nancy above. My response re "lots of knobs" is NO. It is not a hindrance to rapid adjustment - it is boon.
Like any new equipment, it takes a little bit of time to develop the muscle memory to do it all by feel. In my case, about two trips out and about with it. After using the D4, you couldn't give me a ball head for free (well you could but I'd just sell it ;D).
Rand
-
Hi Brad Smith-You did an interesting experiment but I'd like to add a comment. When doing long exposures, eg ten seconds, three minutes, clearly there's no substitute for a solid tripod. IBIS is good, just not that good :). Also, perhaps relevant mostly to those of us who grew up with film and larger cameras, eg 4x5, there's no substitute for the contemplation possible while carefully composing an image in live view or the finder or screen of a mirrorless camera. Then film cost real money and folks did not just fire one off just to see if it might work. One of the things I love about mirrorless is the ability to use a tilt-shift lens, make careful adjustments and proceed slowly. Each of us should be able to do the kind of photography we prefer, I prefer using a tripod wherever possible, the more solid the better, for the head, the less likely to drift, the better. For the absolute best image quality, if you can use a tripod, you should, no disrespect meant to those who prefer to use IBIS and lens stabilization.
-
Hello Eric,
I agree with all the points you made about the necessity of tripods for very long exposures and I also understand that some people really enjoy the slower, contemplative approach that a tripod can offer you, even in good light conditions. I shot landscape 4x5 for 30+ years and also enjoyed that difference from the handheld 35mm film camera shooting I did back then. And I agree that Macro can be easier and give more predictable results IF (and that's a big IF) it is practical to use a tripod. And I agree that huge, heavy, long, big aperture lenses require a tripod or monopod to keep from breaking your back in addition to eliminating motion blur.
But I differ with you on one account and several other statements made by others in this thread that paint the SHARPNESS benefits and the resultant "quality" of tripod photography TOO BROADLY. I think your statement that ...."For the absolute best image quality, if you can use a tripod, you should..." is too all-encompassing. Based on the test I did, I'd revise your statement to be something like.... "for the absolute best image quality based on no visible motion blur with my 12-40 zoom, I should use a tripod whenever my shutter speed, using IBIS will be less than 1/30th." Another statement in this thread that was obviously too broad was this one....."if you're putting serious effort into your landscape photography, you're interacting with the tripod and head on every single shot" Huh!!??
And I also was making the point that in my opinion, given your specific body and lens, you only need the least heavy/expensive tripod and head that will eliminate motion blur on "long" exposures for that camera/lens combo. You don't benefit any further from added weight or cost.
My post was made because I thought that overly broad, sweeping statements were being made about big, heavy, expensive tripods and heads. That was the purpose of my post.
-
...
My post was made because I thought that overly broad, sweeping statements were being made about big, heavy, expensive tripods and heads. That was the purpose of my post.
I agree- i have 5 tripods of different sizes and weights- all do fine when used at the right time.
In some cases a tripod can make you loose sharpness and is your body the ideal tripod, absorbing micro trembling form the soil.
but one extra thing i like about using a tripod is: the TIME it gives you to think about the composition. The stability of the view and to be able to place the focus exactly were you need it, including corners shapness and DOF.
and about heads- if a head holds the weight of the camera it is good enough for a sharp photo; The rest is about easy composition and handling, certainly not unimportant in everyday use.
-
I think that Manfrotto has come out with a new geared head which is smaller and might fit the bill. I would check that out. Probably a lot cheaper.
I think that is the one I had that uses RC2 plates (smaller than the 410 RC4 plates).
I can't recommend that head. It's got a lot of plastic, a non-replaceable clamp, and isn't as stiff as I'd like.
I got rid of it and got the Benro GD3WH which I have only used a few times but so far it seems very nice and solid for real estate work.
For landscapes I still mostly use a Manfrotto ball head.
-
I use a Manfrotto video head on a bowel mount tripod. Works great for everything, but heavy.
-
Right - we need to know, did you do the right thing & get an Arca Swiss P0?
-
Right - we need to know, did you do the right thing & get an Arca Swiss P0?
I didn't, Bill. I looked at the price, compared it with a second-hand BH-40 that Dave Chew offered me, and hesitated for several microseconds before making my choice. I've now just bought a second-hand Acratech levelling base from felix5616 and I'm back where I started.
Jeremy
-
I wanted a head that I could use to quickly level my camera on both axis for indoor and outdoor photography and bought the Arca-Swiss D4 GP lens from Robert White in the UK ($1100). I use it primarily on the Gitzo 2531LVL tripod with its quick leveling head. I can move the tripod to a new patch of dirt and have the tripod head close to level in seconds and then when the camera is mounted and a scene in the frame I can do micro adjustment to the camera very quickly. With it taking so little time I have no concerns with moving the tripod from one spot to another one.
The Gitzo legs I bought in 2013 for $750 still work perfectly and fortunately I was able to buy one before they were discontinued. Good legs and a good head will provide decades of use regardless of what cameras one may own now or in the future. No other piece of photographic equipment has anywhere near this length of useful life.
The D4 GP works great with my cameras and pano head but it also works very well with my 600mm f/4 lens. For overseas travel I can put this head on my Feisol tripod with its quick level base and have a setup that will work with any lens I choose to use. There is a value in versatility. I have so much gear and it is important to be able to use a piece for more than one task whenever practical.