Ball head or Pan tilt head for Bird photography?

Ball head or Pan tilt head for Bird photography?

 

 

I'm still learning why professionals use ball heads. I haven't seen

many

pro ball heads. Sorry if this is a stupid question.

 

For me I thought Pan tilt head is much safer. Here's the reason why

 

As far as I understand for ball heads there can be two locks.

One for pan(not all of them have it) and other one for all other

movements.

 

Here's my concern. If you losen the second lock (screw) the camera

can fall in any direction.So we've to hold on the camera.

This is OK for long lenses to tilt up and down. But don't

they can fall towards left or right too? If that happens

then there will be lots of pressure

on the camera's lens mount. Isn't that bad?

 

With pan head I leave the pan lever losen. So the lens can be

rotated.

Even if I take my hand off the tripod or camera is not going to

fall.

I also leave the tripod collar losen. So I can rotate the lens

to take vertical pictures. I don't have to losen vertical tilt

lever of the head. That's kind of permanent for me. I'll hold the

main tilt lever with left hand and losen or tighten as required

and use the force on the lever to rotate the long lens.

So there's will be no pressure on camera's lens mount.

 

This is my obeservation. Am I missing anything? I guess so. Otherwise

this many prfessionals won't use balls heads. Can anyone help me

about this?

 

Thanks

Jemini,

 

It would be very helpful if you could try out each type. Try renting one before you buy it (or borrow one from someone you know). The differences between the two types would be noticible very soon.

 

The advantage of a ball head is the ability to easily move the camera about and instantly lock it into position. I wrote a basic summary of the differences between pan & tilt heads, ball heads & gimbal type heads on my website (www.ozarkimages.com). Go to the Hints & Tips section and look at the page on Tripods.

 

Good luck.

 

Kevin Ferris

a quality ball head, like Kirk or Arca Swiss, etc., allows the head to remain free to move when you apply pressure but does not flop over after you let go. the degree of precision necessary to achieve that control means those ballheads are expensive. any head will flop if not properly adjusted by the user.

Good ballheads do have a panning base and a knob so you can adjust friction depending on the weight of the lens. They don't "fall" that easily. I use a 300/2.8 + TC on a Kirk BH-1 and with the proper friction, the lens won't fall on its own, no matter how tilted it is. And I don't need to push hard in order to change position.

NEITHER.

 

For birds with long lenses, you can't beat the Wimberley gimbal head or the smaller Wimberley sidekick that is designed to mount on top of a ball head (or really any head with the arca swiss quick release plate system).

 

http://www.tripodhead.com/

i second the wimberly recommendation. the best. and the most expensive. if wimberly werent a choice, i would choose ballhead over pan. for me, ballhead was a lot quicker to use than pan with those ever so fast birds.

The Wimberly is useful for tracking moving subjects with really big lenses (400/2.8, 500/4, 600/4, 800/5.6) but probably overkill for anything less and pretty inconvenient for non-telephoto use.

 

Reading between the lines of Jemini's post I doubt a Wimberly would be appropriate but maybe I'm wrong. I have NEVER seen a 500/4 or larger lens used on a pan-tilt head and I don't know any nature photographers who would even consider this an option.

 

Ball heads give much greater flexibility of movement than pan-tilt heads and are generally much more useful for wildlife work. Pan-tilt heads are great for studio, landscape and architectural work but too slow and cumbersome for wildlife where your subject may move around and you need to keep moving the lens.

This one is a no brainer. If you are not convinced, try out a pan/tilt head and a ballhead, you should be convinced in a matter of seconds. The Wimberly is a good option for big lenses, but the head itself is big and expensive as well.

I agree with the opinions mentioned before by Bob and Shun. A pan-tilt head is abslotely unusable for bird or wildlife photography. Loosening and tightening the different axis takes just way too much time. A ballhead with just one know is the answer. Also it can be (depending on tyep brand and type) very smooth, whereas a pan-tilt can never be so smooth.

 

I have been using an Arca Swiss B1 for years now and am very happy with it. For me it is the perfect tool for my 500/4 lens. I use it both on a tripod (Gitzo G1505)and on a window mount (Ergorest).

I've used both for bird photography and feel that a ball head is much quicker and more convenient. Another big plus for a ball head like the Arca Swiss is the fact that it uses excellent quick-release plates that let you switch lenses quickly and SAFELY. IMHO

Hans,

 

I also agree with Bob, Shun and many of the other replies, but i think you are a "bit" strong in your rejection of pan & tilt use in bird photography.

 

A lot will depend on a persons particular situation and prefered method of bird photography. Ive used pan & tilt all my life, and i find it far from unusable with this subject, as have many people of my generation. A good quality fluid head is very smooth and extremely quick. My pan lock is always unlocked, and therefore there is only one locking mechanism that is ever in use. When "the action starts", this lock is also not in use, allowing the lens to be directed at high speed.

 

Although i am in a relative minority as a 100% hide photographer these last few years, and my choice of tripod head may seem a bit eccentric to some, i dont think a ball head could offer me any advantages in my particular situation, although it may well do with the majority of bird photographers.

 

I think if hide photography was a small part of my bird photography, i would almost certainly go for a ball head, for the reasons that Bob pointed out.

 

I was just beginning to feel a bit sorry for pan and tilt, so i thought i would offer a small amount of support.

 

All the best

Thanks a lot guys..

 

From all the replies I think I definitely have to try the ball head. Still my concern is the safety. Sorry if I'm stupid.

 

When the main lock is losen, What will happen to the lens/camera?

Won't it fell towards the sides? Or in case if the tension is good enugh then don't we have to put lot of pressure on the camera to rotate or move the lens? Probabaly not. I'm sure I have to try a professional ball head. I wasn't impressed by Manfrotto. Does anybody use Manfrotto pro ball? In good ball heads which one will be the cheapest?

 

I'm also planning to do lot of 'hide' photography. I'm going to start from my backyard....

It is very rare that so many people agree on one issue in photo.net (or for that matter, any web forum or newsgroup). Usually, many people disagree with me. Therefore, the message is clear.

 

My advice is to get a good ballhead. I have gone through a pan/tilt thead, a cheap ballhead before finally getting the Arca Swiss B1. A cheap one will not be very smooth and eventually you'll have to upgrade. There should be tention adjustment so that you can fine tune the "drag" on the head so that your camera and big lens won't "flop." Also Kirk Enterprise in the US sells a "collar" that prevents flopping. I don't have one (because I don't feel that I need it), but if you are so concerned about flopping, that is a gadget you can get.

 

What kind of weight (e.g. what is the biggest lens you have in mind) are you planning to use?

Shun

 

I already have my lens and camera. It's Sigma 500mm f/4.5 HSM lens and F5 camera.

(I know some people will laugh at this combination. Forget about that now. I wish

if I could afford a Nikon AF-S glass or Canon 500 IS).

This lens weighs only 6LB. It has a wondefull tripod collar. I can put the lens

on the tripod where it's center of gravity is. So it can be well balanced.

Total weight would be around 9LB with camera attached and hood on.

 

I don't want to buy any bigger lens at least for now. But I would like to

get the best tripod I can afford and carry and forget about it. In case if I

want to buy a bigger lens still I should be able to use it.

 

Can you please send a link to that 'collar'? So that I can learn about it

and buy it in case if I want. Do B&H sell it?

Jemini, I use a 500mm/f4 AF-S with either an F5 or D100. The A/S B1 holds that combo very well. If I were you, I would go for either the A/S or the Kirk BH1. I have played around with the "Ultimate Ballhead" and I wouldn't feel comfortable to put a 500mm/f4 on it.

<P>

The <A HREF="http://www.kirkphoto.com">Kirk Enterprises</A>, which makes the BH1, also sells the collar that prevents "flopping." I happen to think that it is unnecessary. The "collar" is a plate with an open slot that fits on top of the ball but below the quick release clamp. It prevents the ball from rotating too far from the horizontal position. If I remember correctly, it only costs a few dollars though.

Note the B1 has an aspherical ball, a unique (and patented) feature. This means the "drag" on the ball increases as the ball rotates in any direction from the vertical. This tends to prevent the lens from "running away" once the the center of gravity moves out from being directly above the ball.

Seeing now that you have posted the kind of rig you wish to support, I'd go with a fine ball head and STURDY tripod but save your $$$ for the Wimberley sidekick.

 

If bird photography isn't about long lenses and tracking moving objects, I don't know what is.

Thanks a lot guys. Sounds like Ball head is the way to go. Now I found that Kirk BH-1 is around 329. How's BH-3? Is that good enough for 6LB lens? It's description says 300/2.8 lens or 400/3.5 lens. My lens is about the same weight.

Jemini,

 

Stick with the BH-1 rather than the BH-3. You will only want the latter if weight is more of an issue, in which case you won't be wanting to carry a large lens with you!!

 

I use the BH-1 and Wimberley Sidekick with an Canon EF 300mm L IS. The lens weighs about the same as your Sigma. I could have got away with the BH-3, but Kirk recommended that the BH-1 would be better, especially if I go longer.

 

I also have the collar, though this is really for when you are "in transit" to prevent the lens "flopping". It severely restricts the available movement so I don't think its meant to be used while actually trying to track a moving target.

Thanks Colin. Thanks all of you who helped me.

 

One more last question. How's Manfrotto ball heads?

I found Manfrotto makes the pro balls too.

Are they any good? I think they are bit cheaper. Major reason I was

looking into this option is that there are some used ones available.

There's one in B&H for $179

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bh6.sph/FrameWork.class?FNC=ProductActivator__Aproductlist_html___800271374___271374___USE___CatID=0___SID=F46645AF590___call=specs#goto_specifications

 

It says it can hold upto 28LB.

Jemini, as usual, you get what you pay for. If I were you, I would stick with either an A/S B1 or a Kirk BH1. The BH3 is intended for smaller lenses. Generally speaking (really general), Manfrotto/Bogen tripod products are heavy and bulky but sturdy. I had a Bogen ballhead before. Not only was it heavy to carry around, the ball was not very smooth, which made precise composition difficult.

Shun

 

Thanks for the answer. Yeah, I've noticed that this head is 3LB. BH-1 is only 2LB but better. BH-3 is only 1LB. That's amazing!!

 

Arca-Swiss is bit expensive though.

As I said before, I started with a Bogen pan/tilt head. Then I tried to "save money" and bought a cheaper Bogen ballhead, which didn't work, and I eventually bought the expensive A/S B1. The real way to save money is to get the right head for your 500mm lens the first time around. I ended up spending a lot more by buying and selling other heads. Of course, if people want to go through the same mistakes I made, it is their choice.

Just a quick correction. The URL for Kirk Enterprises is www.kirkphoto.com NOT kirkenterprise.com

 

rod

Hi there:

 

I wouldn't use the small Arca Swiss B1 ballhead on anything bigger than a 400mm lens for fast-moving subjects. I've used it with the 500 f/4.0IS and while it works, it wasn't an ideal situation for flight shooting or fast-moving birds. The lens is long and heavy and trying to make adjustments while keeping it balanced atop the small ballhead is clumsy and awkward. If I had the choice, I'd get a wimberely for a 500mm.

 

Good luck!

G