Ballhead for tripod.

[WesternGuy]

I have an older Manfrotto tripod and I would like to get a ball head for it. I am looking for advice on what features I should look for and any recommendations that anyone may have as to what makes/models I should look at. It will need to accommodate a 5D with a 100-400 L IS attached

Any insight that anyone can provide will be greatly appreciated.

Cheers,

WesternGuy.

P.S. Wasn't sure if this was/is the correct forum for this question. If it isn't, can a Mod please move it. Thanks.

[another view]

You're in the right spot! That's a fairly heavy camera/lens combo, so you'll want something pretty sturdy. I have an Arca Swiss B1 which is really great but not inexpensive. It uses custom adapter plates for the camera body and lens collars. Really Right Stuff and Kirk Enterprises make similar heads and also the adapter plates that go with this system.

[mjs1973]

I have heard really good things about the Really Right Stuff BH-55, but I have never used one. Not cheap, but worth every penny from what I have heard.

I have a Bogen/Manfrotto 488RC2 and it has treated me pretty good. I use it mostly with my DRebel with battery grip and a Sigme 170-500mm.

[mwfanelli2]

[QUOTE=WesternGuy]I have an older Manfrotto tripod and I would like to get a ball head for it. I am looking for advice on what features I should look for and any recommendations that anyone may have as to what makes/models I should look at. It will need to accommodate a 5D with a 100-400 L IS attached

Any insight that anyone can provide will be greatly appreciated.
/QUOTE]

I use a Kirk ballhead. It is an improved Arca design and extremely smooth. It will easily hold a heavy lens.

[WesternGuy]

Thanks folks. I guess it is time to do some web research and get specs on these various models and manufacturers. Appreciate all insight.

Cheers,

WesternGuy

[Jaedon]

Have a look at Jobu Designs as well.. They make a Gimbal head that I have and it has replaced the ball head for my long lens. You can set the friction on it so that you can move it with your hand but when you let it go the lens/camera holds it's position.

The Gimbal head is in the $250 - $300 range but it is one piece of equipment you will never have to replace.

[another view]

I use a Kirk ballhead. It is an improved Arca design and extremely smooth. It will easily hold a heavy lens.

FWIW, I've had both the Kirk and Arca and preferred the Arca. I bought the Kirk (new) and about a year later bought a whole pile of stuff to sell piece by piece (most money I've made in photography...). One piece was the Arca head which was pretty stiff. I paid $100 to have it re-built and it seemed smoother than the Kirk did when it was new. Very close though, but I flipped a coin and kept the Arca. Wouldn't have a problem with either.

[gryphonslair99]

I have an older Manfrotto tripod and I would like to get a ball head for it. I am looking for advice on what features I should look for and any recommendations that anyone may have as to what makes/models I should look at. It will need to accommodate a 5D with a 100-400 L IS attached

Any insight that anyone can provide will be greatly appreciated.

Cheers,

WesternGuy.

P.S. Wasn't sure if this was/is the correct forum for this question. If it isn't, can a Mod please move it. Thanks.

The lens and body combo you listed weighs in at 4.78lbs. The Manfrotto 488RC2 head supports 17.6 lbs. Almost 4 times the weight of your rig. That is a good weight to support ratio.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...Ball_Head.html

At a little over $100 it is a good player at a good price. Nothing wrong with the Arca-Swiss types. I have used both. I think the Arca-Swiss stuff is over priced for what you get. I have used RC2 for a long time and never had a problem. Like anything you use, you just have to pay a bit of attention when using it. Also, if you decide you want an Arca-Swiss QR mount later you can buy a conversion for the 488 ball head.

[WesternGuy]

Thanks gryphonslair99. I was very close to deciding that the 488RC2 would be the first one to look at.

WesternGuy

[fx101]

Go ahead and splurge on an Acra. I spent over 500 bucks for mine with the quick release plate. I've tried kirks and Manfrotto's and the Acra's are just light years better. You won't even look back after buying one. Top notch stuff.

[mwfanelli2]

One piece was the Arca head which was pretty stiff. I paid $100 to have it re-built and it seemed smoother than the Kirk did when it was new. Very close though, but I flipped a coin and kept the Arca. Wouldn't have a problem with either.

Just curious. It took an extra $100 to get the Arca as smooth as an out-of-the-box Kirk?

Go ahead and splurge on an Acra. I spent over 500 bucks for mine with the quick release plate. I've tried kirks and Manfrotto's and the Acra's are just light years better. You won't even look back after buying one. Top notch stuff.

Gee, "light years better?" In what ways? I have never heard anyone say that before. Arca has a long history of lock-up problems, erratic movements, sometimes rusting in heavy use, and extremely poor customer service. Not to mention the inflated high price.

There are many excellent alternatives out there that match or exceed the Arca. Of course, the basic Arca design is the one that is copied most of the time.

[fx101]

Just curious. It took an extra $100 to get the Arca as smooth as an out-of-the-box Kirk?



Gee, "light years better?" In what ways? I have never heard anyone say that before. Arca has a long history of lock-up problems, erratic movements, sometimes rusting in heavy use, and extremely poor customer service. Not to mention the inflated high price.

There are many excellent alternatives out there that match or exceed the Arca. Of course, the basic Arca design is the one that is copied most of the time.

Ok... maybe not light years better, but here is why. Assuming you get a good copy of it (just like third party lenses, some Arca's are succeptible to a life of lock ups and jerkyness) there are a few reasons. First off, with eliptical Arca's (that is no tension correction to gravity) operation is very simple, the dials are all the right size and operation is silky smooth. The Kirk I tested wast the BH1, a slightly bigger model when compared to the B1 I use. The finish on the kirk scratches and gets marked easily (almost reminds me of the Leica finishes, except there's no pretty brass to look at ). The thumbscrews can also hit on certain panoramic indexes (when you get them too close and angled). Don't get me wrong, the Kirk is a great ballhead, and I am certain they will some day surpass Arca. Plus Kirk has better support. However, the Arca just has this quality feel to it that makes it a seamless integration to your photographic excursions. It is unexciting, but I need a ballhead that does the job and won't scratch :incazzato: when it falls out of my Pelican case when I forget to close it. Take your pick, some people have had better experiences than others, but I prefer the classic feel of the Arca's. Either way, I cannot recommend Manfrotto as I have personally wittnessed these things slip under a tight clamp, changing the weight balance on the tripod, and letting a $15,000 camera system fall to the ground. The camera and lens survived but the flash and polarizer weren't so lucky (I didn't know they cracked that much . Find what's best for you and your budget and get that.

[another view]

Just curious. It took an extra $100 to get the Arca as smooth as an out-of-the-box Kirk?

It was used - very used - when I got it, and very stiff. A friend had the Arca and it didn't work at all like his, obviously needed a rebuild. That was about four years ago and it's been great ever since. I thought the Arca was slightly smoother but it wasn't a big difference.