jason_norris Posted June 10, 2004 Share Posted June 10, 2004 Hi everyone, I'm a beginner trying to plan what equipment to buy and I'm having trouble with ballheads. I've looked and looked for an answer to this question on the other threads, but I'm still lost and wondering if someone will help me out. I've decided to invest in a Canon Elan7ne, EF 400mm f/5.6, and an affordable Bogen 3021 tripod. However, I'm not sure about ballheads (specifically how much support I need), and I really can only afford about $175-$200 max. I've also looked for the 3038 and 3055 models, but can't seem to find them anywhere. Have they changed the nomenclature? This is all for bird photography if that makes a difference. Please help! Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_Ingold Posted June 10, 2004 Share Posted June 10, 2004 You are wasting your money if you buy a new ball head costing less than $200. They lack the holding capacity and workmanship you need to do the job. With an Arca-Swiss style clamp, the lowest cost will be closer to $250. Perhaps you can find a used one that hasn't seen combat. Otherwise, you can get a first-rate pan-tilt head for less than $100. Save up for an Arca-Swiss, Kirk, Linhof or other suitable ball head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael_zhang Posted June 10, 2004 Share Posted June 10, 2004 I bought 3055 with 3021BP, they are very good and enough to support 400 f/5.6. You are right looks 3055 is not being sold anymore, no idea replaced by which one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akajohndoe Posted June 10, 2004 Share Posted June 10, 2004 The 400/5.6 is almost hand-holdable (and not suitable for use with the extenders for speed reasons, IMHO. I have been using the Arca-Swiss B1 myself. However, if you ever think you might rent a 600/4, you might want to take a look at the Wimberly "gimbal" head for birds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason_norris Posted June 10, 2004 Author Share Posted June 10, 2004 I'd like an Arca Swiss ball but I think a Kirk BH-1, for the price, will be better for me. So you think maybe a BH-1 (or is it BH-3 that is lighter?) will suffice for the combo I'm trying? I've read that a ball is better than pan-tilt for birds in flight or fast moving birds. But anyway, you think a Kirk is more suited for what I'm wanting to accomplish? Thanks a bunch for everyone's help! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryan_taylor1 Posted June 10, 2004 Share Posted June 10, 2004 The Kirk heads are excellent. The BH-3 is lighter than the BH-1 and will be more than sufficient to support your 400/5.6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason_norris Posted June 10, 2004 Author Share Posted June 10, 2004 Oh, one more question. You say that going handheld is also possible with the 400/5.6? I know Arthur Morris snaps some great shots without a tripod, but is that possible when stalking say...an indigo bunting or a warbler? Perhaps it would be trickier with a tripod, I don't know. It may be better to just hold off on a tripod until I can talk my wife into letting me spring for a gitzo and a B1. With Provia and a steady hand can I reel in the sharp pics? Or is that a stupid question? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rayliguori Posted June 10, 2004 Share Posted June 10, 2004 You will significantly increase the number of "keepers" if you use a tripod. Regarding heads, I have both the Kirk B1 and the more expensive Arca Swiss. I love the Kirk. The Arca Swiss is very quirky. The Arca Swiss is supposedly rated for 90 lbs which is probably why it is so expensive. If I could somehow attach all of my lenses at once to my camera, I still don't think it would weigh 90 lbs. The Kirk is plenty of head for me. I agree with the statement that you are probably wasting your money to buy something new for less than $200. Check out eBay, but only buy from sellers with more than 25 sales and satisfaction ratings of 98% or higher. Be sure to read the description carefully. You want excellent+ quality or better. The Wimberley Gymbal Head is the best option for Birding, but it sounds like that's way over your budget. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
klaus_gerhard_vogel Posted June 11, 2004 Share Posted June 11, 2004 The Kirk ballheads have the same poorly-designed badly-working separate-knob tensioning control as the old Graf Studioball. Arca's tension (drag)control is much better. You get what you pay for. As to the Arca B1 being "quirky" or locking up, this is something that was a)easily prevented by not locking the ball when transported; b)easily remedied by turning the lock knob *tighter*, then the head would release; and most importantly c)was a problem with early B1's 8-10 years ago and the story continues to be propagated on the internet by ignoramuses who can't refrain from contributing to threads even though they've never used the gear in question. I have 2 Arca B1's and a B2, none of them has ever given me a moments problem. My Studioball OTOH (cloned by Kirk for their BH1 and BH3)was long ago relegated to my Bogen 3033 with the Calumet 4x5 since it's tension control was all but useless for nature photography. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slide Posted June 11, 2004 Share Posted June 11, 2004 I'm currently looking at upgrading to a better ballhead. If you get one for under $200, you will probably end up doing the same. I've got it narrowed down to a kirk bh-3 or an acratech. You can get by with a cheaper ballhead for wide angle photography, but not when you get up to 400mm. If you absolutely can not go over $200, you might be better off with a 3047 pan tilt head. I have one of these on one of my tripods. I don't really like it, it's heavy, bulky, and kind of a pain to use, but it will hold a 400mm lens fairly well, and it's not so expensive that it will hurt when you eventually realize that you have to upgrade.<BR><BR> Also, someone stated that the 400 won't work with teleconverters. I have a 100-400 that I've used with the 1.4 TC. No it's not fast and no it's not as good as a 500mm f/4 ($5K+?), but it's definitely acceptable for some types of photography, i.e. things not moving. This following shot was taken last week with this setup, and I imagine a 400mm f/5.6 would perform somewhat better with a teleconverter. <BR><BR>This shot was on the 3047 head, 1/3 second, 560mm f/8. <BR><BR> -slide <BR><BR> <img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/2429312-lg.jpg"> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rich long Posted June 11, 2004 Share Posted June 11, 2004 So Klaus, it looks to me like you're bashing the Kirk heads, but you've only used the Arca and the Studioball? Surely not. If true, that would make you (in your own words) one of the "ignoramuses who can't refrain from contributing to threads even though they've never used the gear in question". But perhaps I've somehow misread your post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erik_loza Posted June 11, 2004 Share Posted June 11, 2004 What Rich said... I quit listening to the "A-Swiss or nothing" crowd a long time ago. Let's reduce a ballhead to what is really is: A housing, aluminum ball, softer metal or composite cup, tension and friction controls (either together or independently) and panoramic base on the good ones. Then, it's just a matter of getting the appropriate size and build quality unit to match your body/lens combo. When you're talking about mfr's like AS, Kirk, Foba, Studioball, and I guess Markins, now, the difference in performance between any of them will be neglegible at best. Then, it just becomes an issue of your budget and personal choice. When I decided to go with a big ballhead, it came down to AS and Kirk (they only made the B1 at the time). I went with the Kirk because it was almost $100 cheaper than the AS, which amounted to an extra lens and body plate. Did I think the AS was nice? Sure. Did I think it was better? No. Five years later, I have zero regrets about my decision. My tripod and head have lead a rough life in the field and won't win any beauty contests but despite dust, mud, going underwater, and rattling around in an aluminum pickup truck bed box for thousands of miles, the Kirk has never once given me any problem other than a bent clamping knob(my own fault for dropping it while rock climbing). The truth of the matter is that when you get to this level of ballhead they are all going to perform well but anybody who says that one significantly outperforms the rest for 35mm gear either hasn't tried them all or is simply a brand buyer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darren m green Posted June 11, 2004 Share Posted June 11, 2004 Hey there, I use a Cambo ball head available from calumet. I had the team at wimberley modify the clamp fo rme for fifty bucks. I use the wimberley sidekick with my ball head and slap on my EOS 10D with battery grip and a 500mm f/4. Head performs beautifully. Take your kit to your local dealer and try thee heads out with your tripod to see what suits you best. If your dealer wont let you try heads in store, find another dealer. Good Luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike r Posted June 11, 2004 Share Posted June 11, 2004 I recently got the Kirk BH-3 and use it with my 3021 - they are a perfect match in size and appearance, and I think would work well with the equipment you have. It holds my N80 and 80-200 f2.8 as solid as a rock. Of course, you will also need to get the dedicated plates, but you can usually pick those up on Ebay if you're patient. With the Kirk you may end up spending more than you planned, but you'll be happy you did. I sometimes wonder what the agenda is of those who like to bash the Kirk ball heads, because to me they are superbly crafted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason_norris Posted June 12, 2004 Author Share Posted June 12, 2004 I want to thank everyone again for the assistance. I believe with your advice I can now narrow it down to a few smart choices. The Wimberley head looks like the way to go with birds and heavier telephoto lenses, but I'm going to have to save a while. I've looked at the Kirk head and it would probably do the job just fine too. In any event the advice has been very helpful and I don't feel as confused now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex_lofquist Posted June 14, 2004 Share Posted June 14, 2004 Kirk and the Sidekick=nice combination! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quat_le Posted April 24, 2005 Share Posted April 24, 2005 Jason, not that it matters since you seems to narrow down what you want, but since you were wondering about the Bogen 3038, it was replaced with 490. http://www.calumetphoto.com/ctl?PAGE=Controller&ac.ui.pn=cat.CatItemDetail&ac.item.itemNo=BG1227&ac.cat.CatTree.detail=y&type=PRDINDEX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now