Lightweight Ball Heads.....?

Hi -

<p>

I have been using a <i>Velbon Sherpa 1000</i> for a couple of years now, and though not perfect, it

is quite light

(carbon), I got it for a good price, and I am happy with it. But I am sick of the head (<i>Velbon

PH-157Q</i>) which is pretty bottom

of range and a 3 way pan/tilt thing. It doesn't stay dead still, and it's heavy as well [600g] So anyway,

whilst it pretty much suffices, I am sick of it and think I'm gonna get me a ball-head.

<p>

I have seen a <i>Velbon QHD-51Q</i> ball head <a href="http://www.velbon-tripod.com/

panheads.htm">[link - 8th down]</a> pretty cheap. Now I know they are pretty cheap new (about 50

GBpounds) and are probably right there at the low end of ball-heads, but I was wondering if they were

any good at all. It seems to weigh 180g, which I like. And it is smaller than the rubbish I currently

schlep about with me.

<p>

Ideally I would like the best, lightest, most blisteringly wonderful ball head. But I have seen some

outlandish prices.....

<p>

So - what I would like to know is reasons why I should or shouldn't go for the cheapo velbon model,

and if anyone could recommend some other lightweight head that would be better that would not cost

me hundreds of pounds, but would be worth the extra pounds.

<p>

I need this for use with a <i>Hasselblad 500C/M</i> which is almost exclusively used with the 50mm

lens, and have just got myself an <i>SWC/M.</i>

<p>

thank you

<p>

Robert

<i>

[london - uk]</i>

http://acratech.net has a great ball head that I use for hiking/backpacking with a 4x5. They also make a leveling base as well. I can't comment on the Velbon heads.

Look at the Manfroto 222 action grip head. I have used it on Mamiya 7 & Hasselblad 500 series and find it is excellent. They also have a new version which takes more weight and I am also thinking of buying that for another tripod. Best of luck

Hi, Robert,

 

You should forget about the Velbon's ballheads. They don't stay still either no matter how forcefully you tighten the locking screw.

 

You should also forget about the quick shoe made by Velbon. It's too wobbly.

 

If you would insist on a lightweight ballhead, then the Acratech should be the ultimate choice. If you are concerned about the price of Acratech, you may want to consider Gitzo G1277M with its camera holder replaced with an Arca-Swiss type clamp made by Foba, Kirk or Wimberly.

 

I use G1277M with Foba clamp mounted on Gitzo Basalt tripod G1297 for my 500C/M & Planar 80/2.8 combo and am happy with them.

I will second AcraTech (Ultimate model) and at about $280 it is a bargin. I still use Kirdland and ArcaSwiss ballheads (and happy with both), but when weight and/or gritty conditons are the main concern, my Acratech atop a carbon Gitzo Mountaineer never, ever fails me. My largest camera/lens combo I would likely use on a AcraTech is a 1DMkII w/300mm f/2.8 L. I'm sure the AcraTech could handle more weight/torque, but I am afraid it is just not smooth/predictable enough for quick adjustments or panning for 500mm f/4 L glass. For really big glass or 2-axis panning I go with a Wimberley atop a Gitzo Pro-Studex, but not cheap and quite heavy. I can not speak about AcraTechs new V2 model, but the specs look attractive.

Robert,<br>

1) Don't forget the value of the camera and lens that is mounted on the ballhead.<br>

2) Don't forget also that sharp images need no vibrations at all. And the heavier the tripod and head, the sharper the images.<br>

Weight may be a problem, but soft images with no sharpness are a greater one.<br>

I hear you all - I need to spend some proper money it seems. Rats. Thing is I have been

taking pictures with the AWFUL head that came on the tripod and they have been excellent

- to step up from that to an arcatech would be like going from a pushbike to a cadillac,

and I think, financially speaking, I cannot really justify that. A step up to a small compact

car would probably keep me happy.

 

I think I have to find a shop where I can actually compare things in my hand. Anyone know

a good place in London for these things ?

 

Also remember that these things in UK are a lot dearer (think almost same amount in UKP

as in dollars)

 

I was hoping (still am) that someone who has actually seen this Velbon head (it's a brand

new model I believe) would give me some comment on what it is like.......

 

I guess I want someone to come up with advice for a magic solution - cheap, light, and

good enough, without satisfying military standards.

 

I'll go have a think and see how much I can really justify.

 

RX

I went for the FLM Centerball 32F head ($70.+ at B&H), smooth and just right for lighter cameras such as digitals with a tripod combination by Velbon El Campagne 530. I wish Kirk would make the plastic ball head collar in a smaller version because it is needed no matter what. If you need a small light weight tripod with ballhead I would recommend this combination.

Well, with tripod heads you get what you pay for. Acratech, Arca Swiss, Kirk, and Really Right Stuff ball heads are the latest and greatest and well worth the expense. Given what you just paid for your Hassy's, it really is piffle, and if you don't have a stable head you are tossing any advantage you might have with the fancy Zeiss glass. You might also look at used Lecia and Linhof heads, which should be readily available in the UK. Both should hold your kit with ease.

Just spoke to a chap at Calumet in Soho who pointed out that the thread on my tripod is

only 1/4 inch and that this made almost all decent tripod heads unusable - unless I got a

little adaptor which he said was not very good. "Bin the lot and get a new set-up" was his

advice.

 

I hear what you are all saying but I simply can't justify GBP 250.

 

>

I have, however, just found the REAALY RIGHT STUFF site and their smallest seems to be

the BH-25 Pro, which comes with a 1/4" adaptor for my legs and fitted with their wee B2-

mAS clamp fitted. Now that, at USD145, I could perhaps swing for.......as my sister could

bring one over from San Diego next month.

 

It seems RRS have nothing but good things said about them.

 

Maybe I have found my own solution ?

R

The Leica Large Tabletop Ball head is a great choice and a fine alternative to the Acratech

heads.

Robert,

 

I was just about to post a referral to this web site: http://www.reallyrightstuff.com/

ballheads

when I saw that you've already been there. I have a RRS BH-40 and the quallity is top of

the line. I think the 25 would be far better than any of the alternatives if you are trying to

keep the expense down and it will easily hold your Hasselblad as long as you aren't using

it with very long lenses.

 

You really can't go wrong with an RRS head and you can build a system around it by using

their camera base plates too. Eventually you can move to a larger head from RRS if needed

and your base plates will be interchangeable.

Robert, it might be easier to give an advice if you say what is your budget. If I say Linhof Ballhead II (that's what I have for my Rolleiflex which is like your 500CM), it will be probably too expensive.<br>

Take a look at the Gitzo Centre Ball Head 2 Magnesium (Ref.G1277M). It weights 1.1 lb, has a maximum load capacity of 13.2 lbs. Its price is ﾣ84, VAT excluded at Robert White.<br>

 

Link : http://www.gitzo.com/ then click on products - heads - center ball - series 2. (Sorry, but it's a FlashPlayer website).<br>

"You should forget about the Velbon's ballheads. They don't stay still either no matter how forcefully you tighten the locking screw."

 

Not true at all. Velbon makes a variety of ballheads for different size/weight cameras and one must tailor the right head to the right camera. For example, the Velbon PH-273QL medium ballhead I have holds my Bronica GS-1 with lenses up to 250mm just fine, with no slippage. And the clamshell ball clamp design makes for a one-hand adjustment, with no futzing around with a third friction screw to keep the head from flopping down when loosened.

budget - well I have been thinking about getting a ballhead for a while, because I keep

getting annoyed with my camera slipping on the one I currently use. It's fine [servicable]

for taking pictures, but it's when carrying it that it is a real pain.

 

So I happened on that Velbon head and it looks like I could pick it up for about a tenner,

which is well affordable. If I am to splash out more than that I could probably go up to the

price of the Gitzo (and hence the RRS), but recently decided I needed to curb photographic

spending until I could make it pay, if only a little.

 

The SWC needs to be used with a spirit level and so a good head would just make that a

much more pleasurable experience, but having naughtily shelled out 700 GBP on the

camera, I would feel very bad if I spent a further 200 on a head for it........

 

Am v tempted by the RRS, as it is very pretty, very light and very good by all accounts.

 

I may get the Velbon anyway, as a stop-gap [my sister comes over late August], and then

give it to a friend who could use it and to whom I owe a nice favour.

 

Robert

If the cost is an issue you could also go for a chinese Benro ballhead. I bought myself one (model KJ-1) from *Bay recently and have absolutely no complaints about the quality. Look for seller id 'digitalishop', for example.

The RRS BH-25 would be perhaps a bit small for your mf gear, but it all depends on the lens focal length and the wind. The ease of use and rigidity with this sort of gear comes from the camera plates which don't turn on the body. They are a bit expensive but are a joy to use.

A key characteristic of a good ball head is one that will hold the camera in position when partially tightened, yet allow you to move it for composition. When tightened, it should hold the camera at any angle, even straight down, without slipping. Another key characteristic is that it has an Arca-Swiss style quick release system, or can be fitted with one (qv http://www.reallyrightstuff.com).

 

Finally, plan to spend between $300 and $500 on a ball head. If you think a $30 head, or even a $130 head will perform well, you are mistaken (or have never used anything that works better). A ball head is a MAJOR investment, but will last a lifetime. Those of us who have a top-flight ball head have been there and done that - spending a lot of money on inadequate systems en route.

 

In general, you need a ball about 2 inches in diameter (40mm is probably close enough). Anything less tends to be either locked or loose without adequate tension in between, and usually exhibits slip-stick behavior when you try to adjust the camera's position under partial tension. Secondly, only Arca-style QR systems are custom fitted to the camera, and don't slip on the screw in use, and the clamp is secure enough to carry the camera in place. The proprietary, one-plate-fits-all systems aren't worth looking at. Arca, RRS and Kirk make retrofit clamps and plates.

 

The best heads are arguably the Arca B1 or RRS BH-55. Other suitable heads include Kirk, Markins and Foba. RRS lists heads that can be fitted with an Arca clamp. The Acratech Ultimate is lighter and cheaper than the others listed, but is quirky due to its geometry - you have to reverse the head to tilt the camera backwards more than slightly past vertical).

Glen,

 

My comment is based on my real experience at the shop. At first, I was very much tempted by Velbon's ballheads because they look simple, the necks are very wide and the profiles are low.

 

However, I was very disappointed by the samples in different sizes at the shop: they were all slippery, sorry to say. The samples might have been treated roughly by irresponsible people, but the treatment could reflect the reality in the field. That's why I decided on Gitzo one.

I second Ellis's recommendation. The ball head he mentioned just went for $59 on the a-site. I seem to recall that I paid $50 new for mine maybe 30 years ago and B&H lists them (now Leica) for $200 new. It looks virtually unchanged except for the marque. There probably isn't a lot of photo gear that's been around that long virtually unchanged.

 

It holds a P645 with 200mm and a RZ just fine without much tightening pressure. For MF, I use it mostly with the Leitz table top legs for the Pentax when I don't want to carry a full-size tripod, but I have used it with 3021 tripod legs for both cameras.

 

That said, with full size legs, I much prefer a geared head so I can't say I've used the Leitz a lot in that configuration nor could I compare it to other ball heads.

"The RRS BH-25 would be perhaps a bit small for your mf gear, but it all depends on the

lens focal length and the wind. The ease of use and rigidity with this sort of gear comes

from the camera plates which don't turn on the body. They are a bit expensive but are a

joy to use."

 

I have sent an email to RRS to ask what their opinion is. Their catalogue says that it is "not

sutable for full time use but an ideal compromise for travel." It also says the load weight is

4kg. Now my cameras are under 4kg, and I am wondering why a head that is fine for travel

would not be fine for full time use ? Sure - the other ones are better, but are RRS saying

that this head will not be good enough, but that when travelling you don't require the

tripod head to be that solid ?

 

This whole camera plate thing seems to be adding an extra $50 per camera to the

tripod...I understand that to get the best I will have to pay, but quite honestly, right now, I

can't afford to be spending $300 on a tripod head. If I did that I would feel obliged to go

buy me a better set of legs, so would be looking at $300 for the head then another for

some new legs.

 

 

"Finally, plan to spend between $300 and $500 on a ball head. If you think a $30 head, or

even a $130 head will perform well, you are mistaken (or have never used anything that

works better). A ball head is a MAJOR investment, but will last a lifetime. Those of us who

have a top-flight ball head have been there and done that - spending a lot of money on

inadequate systems en route."

 

 

I understand that, but am happy to get something "adequate" that I can upgrade to

something I will keep forever as and when I can justify affording it. MAJOR investment

does not match me right now.

 

"My comment is based on my real experience at the shop."

 

Akira - when was this - I believe they have new ones that have been out for about 6

weeks. Evdiently it will not be in same league as RRS, but will it SUFFICE. I use wide-angle

lenses (38/50mm in 6x6) and am not expecting to be using this tripod in force 10 winds.

 

This thread is great though because I am learning about what I needed. I never realised

that I would need a camera plate AS WELL as a ball-head. I also thought all tripod legs

would use same threading. Not so. Maybe I f***ed up buying the Velbon Sherpa legs all

that time ago, but I got them for GBP100, reduced from GBP250, and it seemed like a

great deal at the time. To use the stereo analogy, spending hundreds on a ball-head to go

on top would seem like buying some ten thousand dollar speakers to play music from a

walkman.

 

A shop I spoke to this morning recommended the Manfrotto 488 if money was tight.

 

R

Hi Robert,

<P>I have all the RRS tripod heads, and I cannot recommend them highly enough. I sold

my Arca Swiss B1 after buying the BH55...it is just a more reliable, easier to work with

head. In any case, I think any of the heads would work for you, but the BH-40 is really the

best bet. I use it as my main head for 35mm and MF at the moment, with the BH-55

primarily for 4x5. If you can afford it, the BH-40 is really solid, light, and easy to work

with. The BH-25 is a great little tripod head, but it is not going to provide the stability of

the larger heads, particularly in difficult situations like where the camera is tilted. The

BH-40 gives you room to grow, which is nice. But if you are only going to be using a 500c/

m with 50mm lens or a SWC, then I don't think you are going to be too disappointed. You

would probably need a stiffer legset to see a large difference anyway.

Robert,

I tested QHD-51 as year ago or so. Not exactly the QHD-51"Q", but the difference is the camera clamp and my experience should be able to be applied. I tested the quickshoe of Velbon's pan-tilt head, but the one on 51Q looks different from what I tested. It may be improved.

 

Another thing I noticed was that the width of the groove in which the neck moves is almost the same as the diameter of the neck. I suspect you can tilt the camera only back and forth "or" sideways. Not back and forth "and" sideways like normal ballheads, which may be problem if you have to set up the tripod on uneven ground.

"My comment is based on my real experience at the shop. At first, I was very much tempted by Velbon's ballheads.."

 

And my comment was based on my real-life use of a particular ballhead in the field with a heavy camera and lens combinations, in all kinds of weather. There may well be Velbon heads that aren't sturdy enough or that don't fit Robert's needs, but one shouldn't generalize with a general condemnation - unless of course you've acquired and extensively used ALL of them in the field, yourself.

i ve your equipment and i use Velbon magnesium ballhead PH-263 and it's more than sufficient. It's light weight and can lock your equipment properly at any angle. However, if you put on long Hasso lens such as 180mm upwards, this ballhead has exceeded its limit and you will need the large model PH-273. I think these 2 models mentioned may ve become the old models now. If you switch to large format, these ballheads cannot hold heavy equipment properly.