Which ballhead?

<p>I want to buy a good ball head. I've narrowed it to Markins M20, Kirk BH-1 and really right stuff BH-55.<br>

The least and most expensive of the three are the Kirk BH-1 and BH-55 respectively. I am leaning toward the Markins M20 but I've read about the panning base not locking fully and about binding in the cold. I'd like to hear form Markins M20 users regarding this and regarding customer service.</p>

<p>I have a BH-1 and I am 100% satisfied with the ball head and all their products. Also they have a great costumer service and their delivery system is really fast. Before buying the BH-1 I look in Photo Net for reviews and comments of all the most popular ball heads. The BH-55 also has very good reviews. Good luck! </p>

<p>I've had the Arca Swiss B1, the Kirk BH-1, and the RRS BH-55. The BH-55 is by far the best ballhead I have owned. It handles the easiest of any of them. It is worth the extra $$$.</p>

<p>Alan</p>

<p>Of those choices, get the RRS BH-55. With tripods and heads it is usually cheaper in the medium and long run to get the best thing you can afford</p>

<p>The problem with the BH-55 (for me)is cost. With camera plate its over $510 (about $700 for me in Canadian $). What about Markins M20? Will it not do the job as well as the RRS head?</p>

<p>I agree with Alan and Ellis. The BH-55 is excellent. You have a choice of clamp styles: screw or lever. The lever is more convenient but works only with plates from RRS or Wimberley (and not all from Wimberley). It's also slightly more expensive.</p>

<p>Will the RRS BH-55 last me a lifetime (with proper use and care)?</p>

<p>BH-55.</p>

<p>Leonard,<br>

I am in Toronto and bought the Markins M10, partially to avoid the huge costs of the other choices. It was not just the original cost, but the added FEDEX fees, fixed brokerage charge of $50 plus taxes on top of everything. Markins will ship by mail from BC saving a lot of money for better purposes.<br>

I have not used it in really cold conditions, only about -10C, but had no problems. The most I use it with is a D300 with Sigma's big 120-300 f2.8 -- a total of about 8 lbs. The action is smooth and the friction can be easily adjusted. It works fine for me. </p>

<p>Leonard, I think it depends on how well you take care of your equipment. I would say it will last a lifetime with proper care. I couldn't believe the quality when I received mine. I can't imagine what they could do to make it better. The ballhead does have a 5 year warranty.<br>

I even dropped mine once (while hiking...stuff happens) on rock, and other than a little fleck in the metal, it was fine. I've had mine a few years with no problems. I have the BH-40 because I didn't think I would need the load-bearing weight of the BH-55 (and so far I've been correct), and I always try to keep my equipment light.</p>

<p>http://reallyrightstuff.com/Downloads/BH-55.pdf</p>

<p>To add to your confusion: I went through the same exercise at the end of last year. Read lots of threads, went in circles and changed my mind multiple times. In the end, it seemed like among the better ballheads, the BH-1 was a good bang for the buck so that's what I got. Solid head, very smooth, no regrets.</p>

 

<p>Another vote for RRS ... they produce high quality products.</p>

<p>I prefer the aspherical ball of the Arca-Swiss B1. The second generation B1 did not have the lock-up issues of the first generation and also had some other improvements. I am not sure about the third generation Arca-Swiss, the Z1. I am reading that they made the stem two pieces, glued together. The newer models are apparently secure; however, the earlier ones were not; and there is no way to tell them apart.</p>

<p>I would probably go with the Really Right Stuff BH55-Pro with the screw (rather than the lever) quick-release at this point in time if I were buying new.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I generally use my tripod in some pretty nasty winter weather such as Minnesota blizzards. The open design of the AcraTech ultimate ballhead have worked absolutely perfectly for me in conditions that have been known to lock up other ballheads. I once had it out most of a day when it was 42 below zero. No issues at all. Its open and easy to clean design, plus light weight and 26 pound capacity were all important to me. I think I've had it for five years now and never had a single issue with it. Just about every other piece of gear I've owned in that time has been either damaged or totally destroyed, to give you an idea. At a ny rate, I wouldn't consider the relatively small differences in prices between ballheads be a factor. A really good ballhead is something you will use for years if not decades.<br /><br />Kent in SD</p>

<p>In October last year, I was on a photo trip with about 18 serious photographers. Well over 50% in the gorup was using RRS's BH-55, including John Shaw, who was one of the leaders, and me.</p>

<p>I still own an Arca Swiss B1, which I used for about a decade. the BH-55 is clearly the better head now. I am sure it can easier last me another decade.</p>

<p>Lots of votes for RRS BH-55. Thank you for your opinions.<br>

Any votes for Markins?</p>

<p>D N,<br>

I also prefer the aspherical ball of the Arca-Swiss heads, but it wasn't on his short lest.</p>

<p>Haven't tried those, but after some research bough an Arca Swiss Z1 and haven't had a regret -- it's a great head. That said, people have different needs. I cannot say if the BH-55 is better, but I can say that I don't need anything better than the Z1 right now. The bottom line is that either you can go with the BH-55, which seems to have no risk, or you can actually find users for the other heads and find out how good the heads are. Depending on what you do, you might not actually need the BH-55.</p>

<p>I'm using several Burzynski heads on my various Sachtler tripods. Sometimes it's better to go for the best quality not the most popular alternative.</p>

<p>I use a Markins M20. Last week I went out shooting with a lady who has a RRS ballhead. All I could think of what how huge & clumsy it looked. I've hand my Markins M20 for about 2 years now & I love it. It even balances my Sigmonster - if I need it to (though I do have a Wimberely) - that's how strong it is.<br /> Lil :-)</p>

<p>Another vote for the Arca Swiss Z1p.</p>

<p>Bjorn - I've done a search on the Burzynski ballheads & find that within the US this is not one I've found even available. Ordering from Germany will be expensive I'm sure. It looks great in the fact that it looks simple & uncomplicated. But it does seem that getting it here & paying potentially tax etc etc etc - maybe going with a more easily attained ballhead would be more appropriate.<br>

But I don't know where Leonard is located. Sometimes - often- I wish I knew where people are located, would be not only fun to know, but make it easier in situations like this.<br>

Has anyone ever suggested we get that feature added to photo.net?<br>

Lil :-)</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Sometimes it's better to go for the best quality not the most popular alternative</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The assumption is that these are distinct. Not necessarily. In what publication have the BH-55 and the Burzynski been reviewed side by side?</p>

<p>I found, via a search, a site that has several of these heads compared. I do not know anything about the site, but <a href="http://www.websiteoptimization.com/speed/tweak/ballhead/">here it is anyway</a> .</p>

<p>I have both the BH-55 and the BH-40. Both are a dream to use and I don't regret either purchase. The BH-55 is huge and bulky to lug around (though no worse than the Arca-Swiss) so the BH-40 could be a better choice if you are using gear of modest weight and size (no really long telephotos). Both are very easy to use once on the tripod- like any really good gear they just get out of the way.</p>

<p>Bill DeJager</p>