Balln Head Recommendations???

[SUITEFREAK]

Hi all,
I am looking for a good Ball Head. I've seen the ByThom articles about it, but I don't want to spend more than about $150-$200 for a ball head. So with that, do any of you have recommendations for me? I'm thinking along the lines of Manfrotto heads, but just not sure what type would be good. I already have a CF tripod, but I have a pan head. I want to be able to swap it out.
Thanks!:)

Okay, that should have said Ball Head in the title. Not sure how to edit it. Sorry!

[T06]

Yeah Manfrotto make great ball heads & the quick release system they have is very good, I've got the 488RC0, very pleased. If you want to edit your posts just click on edit to edit the text. If you want to edit the title or pic/attachment etc click edit & then go to the go advanced button.
As kiwi stated, you aint allowed to touch the title.

[K1W1]

There is a lot of info about ball heads and tripods in general on the Nikonians site but be warned those guys think no tripod under about $3000 is worthwhile. :)
Seriously though have a read there, it's good information.

You cannot edit a thread title once it's posted. The only thing you can do is delete the thread but you cannot do that once somebody has replied.

[SUITEFREAK]

Thanks guys!

[K1W1]

Okay who edited the title?

[Rooz]

i have the 322RC2 or something like that anyway. its excellent for moving your FOV around quickly and easily but it isnt great for longish exposures, too much movement.

[K1W1]

$159.00 plus postage (http://photobuff.com.au/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=35_85&products_id=354) and you would have it on Tuesday or Wednesday if you lived in Australia.

[T06]

bugger me is there more than the 'one' I've got then?;)

[Aldor88]

I was looking at ballheads and tripods the other day as well. I came across the Manfrotto 190Xprob + 488RC4 ballhead, any experiences?

[T06]

:eek::rolleyes::eek::cool:
I was looking at ballheads and tripods the other day as well. I came across the Manfrotto 190Xprob + 488RC4 ballhead, any experiences?

Yeah I got the first one at 0. it doesn't move , it doesn't cost $3300 dollars it is reliable.... nEXT.....!!!!! sorry i just read my post & it's hard not to get sarcy sometimes, people need to do search.

[SUITEFREAK]

Okay who edited the title?

:D Thanks to T06, I did!:D

[SUITEFREAK]

As kiwi stated, you aint allowed to touch the title.

Actually, I was able to change it by clicking the Go Advanced button. So you were correct...:D

[SUITEFREAK]

I'm leaning towards the 488RC4 or 488RC2, and I'm waffling back and forth between the 2. On Amazon, the RC4 rates better than the RC2 for people w/ bigger cameras. The biggest difference as far as I can see is the rapid connect/quick release plates. The RC2 has the extra knob under the QR plate to make it easy to turn the screw to connect it to the camera. The RC4 doesn't have the knob. It's a screw in; in which case you'd need a screwdriver or a coin. I'm wondering which is going to be more stable, and I'm leaning toward the RC4. Once it's in, it's not coming off most likely, and if I need to, I can get extra plates. Any opinons as to which is better?
The RC2 reminds me of my old camcorder tripod QR plates made of plastic in which the knob thing broke off. Also, I read one review that indicated it had an extra nub on top of the RC2 QR plate that is supposed to fit into the underside of a camcorder or digicam, but my D80 doesn't have an extra hole to accomodate that nub. So if I got that one, I'd be concerned about having to remove it or if it will make it any less stable.
Any opinions?:)

[K1W1]

Actually, I was able to change it by clicking the Go Advanced button. So you were correct...:D


Ah yes but you didn't change the main title. It still shows as Balln Head. :D:D

[TheWengler]

i have the 322RC2 or something like that anyway. its excellent for moving your FOV around quickly and easily but it isnt great for longish exposures, too much movement.

I haven't noticed any problems with movement, maybe because I don't have much heavy gear. You think it's due to the quick release handle instead of a knob to tighten down the ball joint?

[Rooz]

i think its a combination of the weight, (d300 + 105VR + R1 kit), and also the fact that they are always set up at angles. either aimed down, or up or to the side etc. i very rarely get to set up my tripod perfectly level/ upright.

[SUITEFREAK]

Ah yes but you didn't change the main title. It still shows as Balln Head. :D:D

:eek:Dang!:D

[SUITEFREAK]

I'm leaning towards the 488RC4 or 488RC2, and I'm waffling back and forth between the 2. On Amazon, the RC4 rates better than the RC2 for people w/ bigger cameras. The biggest difference as far as I can see is the rapid connect/quick release plates. The RC2 has the extra knob under the QR plate to make it easy to turn the screw to connect it to the camera. The RC4 doesn't have the knob. It's a screw in; in which case you'd need a screwdriver or a coin. I'm wondering which is going to be more stable, and I'm leaning toward the RC4. Once it's in, it's not coming off most likely, and if I need to, I can get extra plates. Any opinons as to which is better?
The RC2 reminds me of my old camcorder tripod QR plates made of plastic in which the knob thing broke off. Also, I read one review that indicated it had an extra nub on top of the RC2 QR plate that is supposed to fit into the underside of a camcorder or digicam, but my D80 doesn't have an extra hole to accomodate that nub. So if I got that one, I'd be concerned about having to remove it or if it will make it any less stable.
Any opinions?:)

Hello -- does anyone know whatthe differences are to between the RC2 vs RC4 and if they make that big of a difference to stability in shots? :)

[Rooz]

there is no difference in stability. if there is any its miniscule.

[Rooz]

btw that little niob your talking about at the top is collapsible, you dont need to remove it. i use the plates on my vid cam aswell. the rc2 plate is quite small so i bought a bunch of em and leave them on my lens/ camcorder for conveience. the rc4 stuff is much larger.

neither plate is made of plastic. the rc2 plate is solid metal. it aint breaking no matter what you do with it. cant remember the rc4, but i know not having to use a scredriver or a coin to undo the plate is a huge bonus for conveniece.

[SUITEFREAK]

btw that little niob your talking about at the top is collapsible, you dont need to remove it. i use the plates on my vid cam aswell. the rc2 plate is quite small so i bought a bunch of em and leave them on my lens/ camcorder for conveience. the rc4 stuff is much larger.

neither plate is made of plastic. the rc2 plate is solid metal. it aint breaking no matter what you do with it. cant remember the rc4, but i know not having to use a scredriver or a coin to undo the plate is a huge bonus for conveniece.

Thanks for the info Rooz. I agree not having to have a screwdriver or coin is a huge convenience bonus. I think I'll get the RC2 just for that. Do you use a level at all on your camera? I liked that the RC4 has the built in vertical and hoizontal levels, but not sure if they make any difference since it's on the head and not on the camera itself. What do you think? :)

[Rooz]

i thought i'd use a level so i bought a hotshoe mounted one for $10. looks kinda like this... http://cgi.ebay.com.au/Hot-Shoe-Camera-Double-Bubble-Spirit-Level-Balance-SV09_W0QQitemZ120248166456QQihZ002QQcategoryZ29982 QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

i rarely use it though. but my kind of shooting doesnt demand it. i imagine for landscapes, architecture its fairly critical. and yes, of course you are right, it must be on the camera to be effective.

[SUITEFREAK]

i thought i'd use a level so i bought a hotshoe mounted one for $10. looks kinda like this... http://cgi.ebay.com.au/Hot-Shoe-Camera-Double-Bubble-Spirit-Level-Balance-SV09_W0QQitemZ120248166456QQihZ002QQcategoryZ29982 QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

i rarely use it though. but my kind of shooting doesnt demand it. i imagine for landscapes, architecture its fairly critical. and yes, of course you are right, it must be on the camera to be effective.

Thanks Rooz! In that case I'm getting the RC2 and I'll get the level at a later date.:)
ETA: changed model number.

[wilson44512]

can you use a ballhead on a monopod?

[SUITEFREAK]

can you use a ballhead on a monopod?

Yes, you can.

[toriaj]

Thanks for all the tripod info --

After searching around, I think the Manfrotto 190CX3 with the 486RC2 ball head is the right combo for me.

I want to use it with my current kit, plus eventual upgrades :)
I will mostly use it for landscapes, especially night shots.
Occasional sports use (for example, tracking a player at 1/250 sec at 300mm)
Light and collapsible as possible.
Height not much of an issue (I'm short and I don't mind bending down.)

The 190CX3 is carbon fiber. 3 sections. Weighs 2.9 lbs. Collapses to 21.7" . $249.

I considered the 322RC2, but I heard it wasn't stable for long-exposure shots, and I do take some at up to 30 minutes (no that's not a misprint!) I also heard that panning the head (i.e. tracking a player) requires constant pressure on the trigger head, so my hand would quickly tire.

Am I right? Is this a good setup? TIA

[K1W1]

can you use a ballhead on a monopod?

There is not a lot of point.
All you really want to do on a monopod is be able to use the camera in either landscape or portrait mode. Angles can be adjusted by shifting the monopod itself. Manfrotto make this for monopods (http://photobuff.com.au/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=35_85&products_id=358) which is all you really need.

[Rooz]

Thanks for all the tripod info --

After searching around, I think the Manfrotto 190CX3 with the 486RC2 ball head is the right combo for me.

I want to use it with my current kit, plus eventual upgrades :)
I will mostly use it for landscapes, especially night shots.
Occasional sports use (for example, tracking a player at 1/250 sec at 300mm)
Light and collapsible as possible.
Height not much of an issue (I'm short and I don't mind bending down.)

The 190CX3 is carbon fiber. 3 sections. Weighs 2.9 lbs. Collapses to 21.7" . $249.

I considered the 322RC2, but I heard it wasn't stable for long-exposure shots, and I do take some at up to 30 minutes (no that's not a misprint!) I also heard that panning the head (i.e. tracking a player) requires constant pressure on the trigger head, so my hand would quickly tire.

Am I right? Is this a good setup? TIA

looks good tor and you're spot on. 322 is no good for long exposures or quick panning. mind you for panning like tracking a player i'd imagine your just twist the monopod around rather than try and use the head for that sort of fluid movement.

[T06]

Another thing to remember is you will upgrade eventually to heavier lenses. Unless you want to be stuck with an all round tripod my advice is to get a sturdy(capable of supporting at least 5kg) do it all tripod & then if you want a light one for tramping/travel etc take another stab.

[toriaj]

Thanks, guys, I'm glad I'm on the right track! The 190CX3 does hold 5 kg (11 lbs) so that should be plenty for my needs in the future. It looks like it is a brand new product, so I'll be paying premium price ... but I don't want to wait :D

[XaiLo]

Get it, get it, get it... then tell me all about it ;) I'm likeing the Pro4. :)

[toriaj]

I'm sure the 190CXPRO4 is very nice :) I think the differences between it and the more basic (and $75 cheaper) CX3 are

- carbon fiber center column and top plate (CX3's are aluminum)
- 1.1" greater height without column extended
- it actually doesn't go quite as low, less than 1" difference
- 2" shorter when folded
- .05lb heavier
- 4 sections instead of 3 (some would say 3 is preferable)

The shorter folded length would be nice, but I think the main selling point is probably the carbon fiber column and plate. I'll be glad to tell you all about mine when I get it, but I think it might be a month or so.

[XaiLo]

OKay I'll be waiting :)

[SUITEFREAK]

Hi all,
I have one more question regarding ball heads. Can any of you tell me your opinions regarding the differences between the 486RC2 and the 488RC2? I see that the 486RC2 only has only 1 single ratchet locking knob for 360° pan and +90° -90° tilt movements and the 488RC2 has a separate fast action ratchet lever for the 360° pan and an easy to grip locking knob for +90 -90° tilt movements.
I'm buying this for use out in the field, so I'm leaning more towards the lighter one (486) just because of that. However, I don't want to skimp on quality and am concerned that I'll miss having separate controls for Pan & Tilt. Some say it's faster with only one knob controlling everything and others say it's easier to be more precise with 2 separate knobs. Please weigh in with your opinions...
Thanks!