Kirk Ballheads

[sunny_from_the_sunshine_st]

I am planning to invest in a ball head to go along with my Bogen tripod.

I have done some research and there are some good ones out there.

I have narrowed my search to the two Kirk ball heads.BH1 and BH3.

Apart from the load it can handle , are there any other major differences between the two.

I use Nikon D 300 with Nikon 70-200 2.8 my heaviest lens.

My question is : will BH1 be an overkill for my setup ; on the other hand will BH3 suffice for me stability wise.

I understand that BH1 would definitely be more stable.

There is a $ 100 price difference between the two.

Thanks ~ Anis

[ted_springer]

I personally do not like Kirk. For a little more you can get an Arca Swiss that has an aspherical ball.

[nick_davis]

The BH-1 is a great ball head. I'd definitely recommend it over the smaller BH-3.

[chris_werner]

You're getting a nice ballhead either way. I'd spend the extra $100 for the BH1 unless you have some concern about the added weight (only 11 oz more). If the slightly increased weight doesn't bother you, you'll get a ballhead for life for sure for only $100 more. I've never regretted paying up, and I've frequently regretted trying to skimp and save a couple of bucks.

[bruce_margolis]

The day you pick up a 300+mm f/2.8 lens, you will either be disappointed with the BH3 or appreciate the extra strength of the BH1. If you like Kirk, go all the way and never look back.

[sunny_from_the_sunshine_st]

Thank you all for your valuable advise.There is no denying the fact that what you pay for is what you get.It makes more sense in this situation as a good ball head could last a lifetime as Chris mentioned. I actually have a Wimberly head that i use exclusively for my Sigma 400-800 lens.

It would be impractical to us such a monster for lighter lens'.

I will let you guys know what i finally go for.

~ Anis

[JohnMWright]

I've tried both heads and I prefer the BH-1 for the weight you describe. Get the BH-1. It won't be overkill, it will be so secure you won't give it another thought.

[alex_lofquist]

I've used the BH-1 for many years, to hold everything from 20mm up to 500mm and a TC. It's a good solid mount which works well holding the Wimberley Sidekick. Importantly, it doesn't move when locked down

[leif_goodwin8]

I would also consider the Markins M10. It can carry more load than the BH-3 and is a similar weight and size. Apparently Photo Clam are good too, though I have not used one.

[sunny_from_the_sunshine_st]

Thank you all for your input.

~ Anis

[charles.dadswell]

Anis: Not to disagree with the above responses in any way, but I have found the Kirk BH-3 in conjunction with the

Canon 40D and the Canon 70-200/f2.8 to work just fine using the lens mount. For my purposes weight was a factor,

but I have never had even the slightest concern about the BH-3 being robust enough to handle the above

combination. You do get what you pay for in most cases, but here if this is the most you will ask of the Kirk, I would

save the $100.00 and go with the BH-3.

[ken_yee]

FYI, I listed a BH-1 on fleabay and MS's live cashback is at 30% in case you want a BH-1 well below a BH-3's price ;-)