RRS BH-40 VS BH-55

[MikeMike]

I have been looking at heads for a while, and im tired of pan-tilts, and the three way heads are a real pain when quick adjustments need to be made. So i guess my only options are ballheads. Now im new this but i still have some heavy equipment (1d with 100-400, sometimes with 2x) The bh-40 and 55 are both very nice and im sure the 40 is more than enough for my needs but the price difference is a mere $80 with so im not going to skimp if im going this far. I guess my real question is that is there any real difference between the two with strengh and quality? i know the weight difference is a bit over half a pound but is it really noticeable?

thanks in advance,

Mike

[Nill Toulme]

Yes the weight difference is noticeable and so is the 80 clams.  If the 100-400, or even a 300 f/2.8, is the biggest lens you'll be putting on it, you'll be fine with the BH-40.  Put the other 80 bucks towards a Wimberley Sidekick to go with it instead.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

[MikeMike]

Thanks Nill, would the sidekick be usefull for lense that size though? i dont track moving objects like wildlife when i shoot. I use it for mostly landskaping.

[Nill Toulme]

No, you don't need it for slow work like that.  For following animals, birds, vehicles, aircraft or people, though, it's invaluable.  I use it for stage work.

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

[stever]

i have a bh-40 and have not been happy with the stick-slip feel (largely solved by periodic application of spray dry lubricant)

my understanding is that the bh-55 is a different design and have heard no complaints about its action

if the weight of the bh-55 is acceptable i think it's a better choice, if you need something lighter you may want to look at other alternatives

unless you're tracking moving objects, a sidekick should not be necessary

[SeanBK]

I use BH-55 & it is excellent. Does not slip, but with my D2X & 80-400 & M.F, I wouldn't want to go with BH-40. Tripod head is such an integral part of shooting, that's not where one should skimp. I used pan-tilt before the switch, never looked back, best investment I made.

[Chris_T]

I have been looking at heads for a while, and im tired of pan-tilts, and the three way heads are a real pain when quick adjustments need to be made. So i guess my only options are ballheads. Now im new this but i still have some heavy equipment (1d with 100-400, sometimes with 2x) The bh-40 and 55 are both very nice and im sure the 40 is more than enough for my needs but the price difference is a mere $80 with so im not going to skimp if im going this far. I guess my real question is that is there any real difference between the two with strengh and quality? i know the weight difference is a bit over half a pound but is it really noticeable?

thanks in advance,

Mike
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

If you shoot macros, you want a BH that does not "creep" when tightened:

[a href=\"http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=14687]http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....showtopic=14687[/url]

[MikeMike]

Thanks for all the replies everybody, but i was wondering what the difference between the two were. Does anybody have any hands on experience with the two to compare?

[DarkPenguin]

The bh55 is huge in comparison.  It is about as good as a ball head gets.  The 40 seems to work just about as well for everything I've tried.  I have not used one for macro and I have not used one where I noticed any creep.  but then I haven't used either one for an extended period of time.  (I use a kirk bh-3.  It is also nice.)

They are basically what you would expect.  One is bigger, heavier, sturdier and more expensive.

[CatOne]

Thanks for all the replies everybody, but i was wondering what the difference between the two were. Does anybody have any hands on experience with the two to compare?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102237\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yes, I have both of them.  I usually go with the BH-55 on my Gitzo 1257 and it's a good match.  I like the tension knob for speed of operation -- it's handier than the lever on the BH-40 for me.  But when I need something smaller and lighter I use the BH-40.

I also use the BH-40 on my Gitzo 1027 when I need something light but functional.  If I need something SUPER portable (like a week long hike in the mountains) I'll go with the 1027 and a BH-25 (which is *just* adequate for the 1D mark II and a 70-200 f2.8L IS... but only if it's not windy).

Anyway if you need portability, the BH-40 will be better.  I took it on the trip to Antarctica and it worked fine.  But my biggest lens is my 70-200 f2.8L IS.  Your 100-400 isn't much heavier.  If you went with a 300 2.8L or larger you'd probably want to go with the BH-55.

As to the weight difference... the difference is a full pound.  When coupled with a ~3 lb tripod, the difference between 4 and 5 pounds total weight is definitely noticeable.

[MikeMike]

Yes, I have both of them.  I usually go with the BH-55 on my Gitzo 1257 and it's a good match.  I like the tension knob for speed of operation -- it's handier than the lever on the BH-40 for me.  But when I need something smaller and lighter I use the BH-40.

I also use the BH-40 on my Gitzo 1027 when I need something light but functional.  If I need something SUPER portable (like a week long hike in the mountains) I'll go with the 1027 and a BH-25 (which is *just* adequate for the 1D mark II and a 70-200 f2.8L IS... but only if it's not windy).

Anyway if you need portability, the BH-40 will be better.  I took it on the trip to Antarctica and it worked fine.  But my biggest lens is my 70-200 f2.8L IS.  Your 100-400 isn't much heavier.  If you went with a 300 2.8L or larger you'd probably want to go with the BH-55.

As to the weight difference... the difference is a full pound.  When coupled with a ~3 lb tripod, the difference between 4 and 5 pounds total weight is definitely noticeable.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=103590\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thanks so much Cat, I'm actually selling my 100-400 and i was thinking that the bh-55 might be overkill with just a 1d and 70-200, but that seems to be what you have right? Am i going to see a big improvement with the 55 or does it just handle a little better.
Thanks again  

[CatOne]

Thanks so much Cat, I'm actually selling my 100-400 and i was thinking that the bh-55 might be overkill with just a 1d and 70-200, but that seems to be what you have right? Am i going to see a big improvement with the 55 or does it just handle a little better.
Thanks again 
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=103622\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Personally I really like the knob.  You position the knob in your left hand and can move the camera with your right hand easily, and lock it down with the knob.  It's faster and more ergonomic for me than the lever on the BH-40.

I'll say this.  If I had a tripod at least as big as a Gitzo 1228 (which ain't that big), and if weight wasn't extremely important, then I'd go with the BH-55 over the BH-40, regardless of whether my biggest lens was a 24-70.  It's still not all that heavy of a ballhead -- it's about 1 lb lighter than my Arca Swiss B1 was.

Oh, and get the lever clamp.  It is SO worth it for convenience and safety (screw clamps you have the annoying tendency to slide in from the size... and I missed the jaws on my B1 twice and bobbled the camera... not dropping it but it was close.  That would be a very expensive mistake ;-)

[MikeMike]

Thanks cat, you've really helped me with my decision making.

When i get it ill put up a post on how i like it    

[Harley]

I own both. I use the BH-40 on an 1127 for backpacking and long hikes. I have the BH-55 on a 1325. Unless weight is an issue, I would go for the 55. It is an absolute pleasure to use. It is the only ballhead I have ever owned that I don't think about when using it. It just does what it is supposed to with no hassle. I like the 40, but no comparison the 55.