Arca Swiss Z1 vs Really Right Stuff BH-55

[bob_mcbob]

I'd like to get a new tripod head, but I'm having a really hard time deciding

between the Z1 and BH-55. Both would be fine for my needs (100-400 is the

largest lens I'll be using right now). I like the Z1's elliptical ball, but a

lot of well-regarded pros seem to suggest the BH-55 as the "best" ball head.

 

I also need to get some quick release plates, and I've been debating between

Wimberley and RRS. In particular, I'm not sure whether to get a camera-specific

plate for the BG-E2, plate for the bare camera, or universal plate. The

Wimberley P5 seems to resist twisting with friction alone, so I am kind of wary

of choosing it. Is the BG-E2 strong enough to use in portrait mode?

 

Any advice would be much appreciated.

[jwhite3.0]

I've used the Z1 sp (single pan) and it is more than capable of handling the 100-400 + camera set-up. I haven't used the BH-55 but also hear good things about it. Both are in the same price range. The Z1 is very light and compact. Movement is smooth on the ball. As for plates, Kirk, RRS, and Wimberely are all very good and pretty much do the same thing. My personal choice is to buy a plate for the bare camera and not for the grip. When my camera is mounted to a tripod it is usually for landscape or macro work so I don't need a grip for those purposes. Most people suggest not using a universal camera plate. I like the specific plate as it seems to hug the camera better and in my mind less likely to twist. Under most situations, the difference in friction resistance may be little.

[mark_chappell]

<I>The Wimberley P5 seems to resist twisting with friction alone, so I am kind of wary of

choosing it. </I><P>

 

I've used this plate for some time and it shows not the slightest tendency to slip in normal

usage with a heavy camera+lens. I get the impression that any force that was strong

enough to make this plate twist would be sufficient to seriously damage the camera. The

two big advantages of the P5 are (1) low cost and (2) portability -- you don't have to buy a

new plate when you upgrade (an unfortunately common urge when using DSLRs).<P>

 

The one sort of camera-specific plate I would consider worthwhile is an L-bracket, which

lets you do verticals without swiveling the ballhead 90 degrees. But I've never found that

to be much of a problem. L brackets are bulky and expensive, but lots of folks use them.

[jeff_bingham]

Hi Chris,

I switched to a RRS BH-55 ball head last year from a older model Arca Swiss and have been very happy with it. I have a few pieces from RRS and got to say that they have never given me any problems. I commomly mount my 400 2.8 to the BH-55 with great results.Customer service, which is very important to me is also very good at RRS. I would second what Mark said about the L bracket, I wouldn't be without mine.

My two cents worth.

Jeff Bingham

[jwhite3.0]

Z1 review

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Arca-Swiss-Monoball-Z1-Ballhead-Review.aspx

 

Actually the price difference is more than I thought. Z1 with quick release system is $327 and BH-55 w/ quick release is $415. BH-55 is also 1/2 pound more as well. BH-55 is well-received but for the price and lighter I think the Z1 is a great alternative. The RRS looks more sleek but I think both ballheads will serve you well for most types of applications.

[bob_mcbob]

I've been leaning towards the Z1 because it has such a great reputation. I like the idea of the elliptical ball that makes things smoother as you tilt the head around. I also like the fact that it's a lot cheaper than the BH-55. I'd probably get the $455 clamp-style BH-55 if I were going to buy one, so the price difference is fairly significant. However, I do want to make sure I get the "best" I can right now, because this is hopefully going to last me for a good long time.

[will_webster]

I'm in the same boat; looking for a ballhead which can hold up to 500/4 (which lives on the Wimberley now but I'd like a lighter more compact option for static subjects). I'm also leaning toward the Z1 for price, weight, and aspherical ball. The only bad comments I've read on the Z1 were about the clamps, so I'll probably get it with a plain stud and add a Kirk clamp I already have; maybe later switch to an RRS lever clamp.

[bob_mcbob]

Honestly, I think I am drawn to the BH-55 because it looks flashy and is the latest and greatest. Obviously it's a superb ball head, and I appreciate the lower height and double cutouts. I also really like their lever release clamp. It's a tough choice. I'm placing an order from B&H tonight, so I will have to spend some more time thinking about it.

[jwhite3.0]

You can't go wrong with either choice. You could always try both and sell the other. I sold a year old Z1 for $295. Granted it was in mint condition but expect a good return for one in good condition. My main reason for not choosing the BH-55 was price. Both ballheads are neck and neck in terms of functionality so I liked the savings on the Z1.

[jay a. frew]

Hello Chris:

 

After two weeks of research here and on other forums, I decided to buy the BH-55 with the B2-AS-II (Lever Release clamp). $455.00 was a lot of money, but, I did not find a complaint about this head (other than price). I also bought the camera plate for my EOS3 and an L-Plate for my 10D.

 

I have been using this head for about 6 weeks now and don?t regret spending the extra $$. It is so well machined and put together that, to me, it seems like Art. It is VERY smooth, easy to operate and it was very easy to get used to. I can't compare it to other similar heads because the only other head I have used is the Manfrotto 486.

 

I shoot in the cold 4-5 months of the year and need to wear various layers of gloves, so, I like the large size and shape of control knobs.

 

I had read that the RRS Panning Lock is designed differently than the Arca Swiss(and others). The panning lock on my head works as advertised.

 

The ball tension pre-load adjuster works pretty well for me, but, the heaviest lenses I have used on the head are the EF100-400 and the EF 70-200 2.8, so, not much of a test really.

 

I am glad I spent the extra on the Lever Release. I can also tell at a glance if it is open or shut. It is VERY quick and easy to operate and it does not protrude like the Screw Knob.

 

The L-Plates are a lot of money. Mine is very well made, stiff, light, permits access to all my camera ports and I hardly notice it when I am using the camera without the tripod.

 

I haven?t decided if I?d buy another L-Plate (if I buy another camera) or just get the camera plate. I need to use this stuff a little longer before I can decide. Maybe take Mark Chappel?s advice and try the Wimberly plate (it is compatible with the RRS Lever Release clamps).

 

I did read, in more than one spot, that the Z-1 may seize-up from time to time due to the elliptical ball. I did not like the control knobs on that head.

 

The folks at RRS have given me great service. This past Monday, I ordered another Lever Release clamp (for my monopod) along with an accessory plate (MPR-1) for my macro rail. The parts were at my door before 2PM on Tuesday?not a bad turn-around from California to Cambridge, Ontario Canada.

 

Cheers! Jay

[jwhite3.0]

Great points Jay. The point about the Z1 seizing is news (unsubstantiated) to me and it was a small point of concern on the older monoballs. I have had one B1, two B1Gs, and one Z1 and none of them have ever seized under any conditions (even if I leave them locked when unused). L-plates are nice, esp. for flash bracket attachments, but I have not gotten any new ones. The reason is that although I thought I'd be doing a lot of vertical (right-side up) shooting the truth is that I use my camera is horizontal on the plane 99% of the time. However if money was not an object I'd go with the RRS L-plate just so I had something ready for the 1% of the time. The Z1 panning lock does leave a lot to be desired. It is too close to the main knob and my opinion should be someone else on the base. Cold, rain, sleet, snow the Z1 performs as well as any other ballhead. Craftsmanship by Arca Swiss and RRS is really high.

 

Not on a budget I'd be hard-pressed not to pick up a BH-55 + L-plate. On a budget I like the Z1 + RRS clamp + non-L RRS plate (or used L plate from KEH or elsewhere).

 

Chris, go with your gut as the specs on these two ballheads won't be enough to make a decision.

[gerrymorgan]

This does not help you to compare, but I'd like to echo what others have said about RRS: I'm very pleased with my BH-55 LR (lever release), and their customer service is superb. I'm also pleased that I got the L-plate.

[colinsouthern]

Add me to the list of very happy RRS users, inc the BH-55 (with panning clamp) (and lots of other RRS stuff).

[bob_mcbob]

Wow, there is certainly a lot of love for the BH-55 here! I think I will just order my stuff from B&H and place an order with RRS some time next month for a BH-55 and a couple of plates.

[robin_sibson1]

Consider the Acratech GV2, which is beautifully made, strong but very light because of its unusual design, and is designed to provide a gimbal capability for light to medium weight telephoto lenses (like the 100~400 - it could probably just handle a 300/2.8 or 400/4DO). I bought one recently and am delighted with it.

[ed_okie]

Here's a bit of "rule breaking" that works well in providing an immediate pseudo gimbal unit with the BH-55 head. Flip the head to either of the two side notches (for vertical shooting). Reposition the lens' clamp back to a horizontal format for the camera. Fully release the ball head's friction knob -and- the panning knob. Overall lens/camera balance is near perfect (hands off the 5D + 400 lens stays in position with both knobs released) and the gimbal "point-anywhere" effect is smooth as butter. I find it an excellent combination when shooting unpredictable wildlife. (I also have the Sidekick which is a fine unit, but adds additional bulk, weight and specific mounting criteria. Whereas, the BH-55 side-flip is "free," built in and always available. (I've actually lined the bottom of the drop-down "U" cup with a piece of frictionless tape where it cradles the ball-head's shaft.

 

Another modification I've done that improves smoothness in the BH-55's panning function: take apart the bottom bearing, clean out the thick grease and replace it with "teflon-type" spray typically used in a wood or machine shops for table-top or cutting-blade surfaces.)

[Brad_]

I've been using the RRS head for about a year. I like my AS head MUCH better.

 

The RRS is nicely made an beautiful to look at, but there's no substitute for the smooth

progressively increasing tension my AS head provides.

 

My cam (a 20D) flops way too easily on the RRS head...

[alan_myers]

Hi,

 

Not to throw a wrench in the works, but I've been using the Kirk BH-1 for about 6 years and have been quite happy with it. Currently about $355. I haven't compared it closely with the recent RRS and A-S heads, but it seemed a good value when I bought it. The newer version now has a level bubble in it, and slightly revised/improved clamping and safety features.

 

As to camera plates, I use two 30D/BG-E2, two EOS3/PB-E2 and one 10D/BG-?, all fitted with them. I definitely *do not* recommend getting a universal plate. Get the one that's shaped to fit the bottom of your camera's grip, to prevent twisting. I've got Kirk and Wimberley plates on my cameras, both of which are designed this way. They are shaped to wrap around the bottom of the grip, so there's no way they can twist.

 

I've never been a fan of camera L-brackets. Added weight, added cost, makes hand-holding difficult. I came up with another solution that works very well for me.

 

First, let me explain that my longest lenses are 300/2.8 and 500/4. Both of these are light enough to use with the Wimberley Sidekick gimbal mount. (400/2.8, 600/4 and presumably the new 800/5.6 require a full gimbal head, for safety sake.)

 

Not only does this mean my tripod can in seconds be converted back to standard ballhead configuration, I also found the Sidekick works quite well to hold a camera, with a smaller lens attached, in the vertical orientation. This is possible because the Sidekick fastens to a lens with the lens' t'pod foot positioned 90 degrees to the side (while a full gimbal head, that completely replaces the ballhead, actually mounts underneath the lens for an added measure of support). So, any SLR-sized camera with an A-S plate on the bottom is very easily mounted as well, in the vertical orientation. Kills two birds with one stone (a bad phrase for a wildlife photog to use, I suppose)!

[tom_christiansen]

Yet another wrench in the works...: Have you considered the Acratech Ultimate Ballhead (http://acratech.net/) ?

 

I bought one years ago when they first came out. Haven't looked back. Other ballheads used: Linhoff Profi II, Bogen 308RC.

 

Tom

[bob_mcbob]

Wow, my question certainly generated quite a lot of discussion! I hope this is helpful for other people in a similar situation in the future. I actually decided to backtrack on my previous comment and order the Z1 SP with my B&H stuff. I also got two Wimberley plates (P20 and P5). All my new goodies should be here tomorrow afternoon, so I will add my impressions of the Z1 to the thread some time this weekend. Thanks for all the useful commentary, everyone!

[bob_mcbob]

After playing with it over the weekend, I can say I'm *extremely* happy with the Z1. It is wonderfully smooth in operation, and I'm not the least bit concerned about it flopping over. It's also rock solid and stays put exactly where I leave it. The Wimberley P20 is also excellent, though the safety stops don't work with the Z1. I haven't had a chance to try the P5, but I'm sure I will be similarly impressed.

 

Now to order the Gitzo legs! :)

[jwhite3.0]

RRS, Kirk, Arca Swiss, etc. Hard to go wrong choosing any of those manufacturers. I agree, Z1, is smooth and solid support. If you get worried about it flopping over Kirk has a snap collar for the Z1.

[smarksphotography]

<p>Hi, <br>

Sorry to be coming to this thread so late, but I find myself in the same boat as the original poster. <br>

After doing as much reading about the topic as I could, I am left with one question (I think). <br>

Without starting a flame war, (I think this is an honest question), I'd like to hear the RRS counter claim to what I think is a highly compelling feature of the Z1 namely the non round ball which reportedly provides progressive tension and helps greatly with "flop". I only say "reportedly", because I have no first hand experience, and it is what I read. I find this feature highly compelling, yet the RRS seems extremely popular without this feature, so I was wondering what I was missing in the pro and con arguments. <br>

Thanks in advance for any insights. </p>

[smarksphotography]

<p>Hi, <br>

Sorry to be coming to this thread so late, but I find myself in the same boat as the original poster. <br>

After doing as much reading about the topic as I could, I am left with one question (I think). <br>

Without starting a flame war, (I think this is an honest question), I'd like to hear the RRS counter claim to what I think is a highly compelling feature of the Z1 namely the non round ball which reportedly provides progressive tension and helps greatly with "flop". I only say "reportedly", because I have no first hand experience, and it is what I read. I find this feature highly compelling, yet the RRS seems extremely popular without this feature, so I was wondering what I was missing in the pro and con arguments. <br>

Thanks in advance for any insights. </p>

[scott_gardner1]

<p>Spencer, did you resolve this to your satisfaction?<br>

The aspherical ball design of the Arca-Swiss heads is patented and unique to their heads. It works very well indeed.</p>