Arca Swiss Z1, RSS BH-40 or other?

[smarksphotography]

<p>

<p>Arca Swiss Z1, RSS BH-40 or other?<br>

Hi, <br>

I know this a common question with lots of answers, but I am in the market for a tripod that will primarily be used outdoors for nature and macro work, the occasional sporting event, and some macro inside. Portability + stability + ease of setup is key for me.<br>

My gear includes a Canon 40D and probably within the next year or a EOS 5D Mark II. My largest lenses are 28-300 f3.5-5.6 and 70-200 f 2.8, and I don't anticipate getting anything larger in the next few years. <br>

I've tentatively decided on the Gitzo GT2531 for the tripod. (I think the traveller series is too light weight for my general uses). <br>

After a lot of poking around online, I've narrowed my selection of a Ball Head to either the Arca Swiss Z1 or the RSS BH-40. I think the BH-55 is more than I need, a little bigger than I want to carry around, and at the far end of my price range anyway. <br>

Most of what I've read is that I can't go wrong with either, and that the choice is largely a matter of personal preference. <br>

Here's the rub, though, since I have never had the opportunity to actually use or even handle either, and I won't until I purchase one, I won't be able to choose based on that.<br>

The qualities that are important to me in a choosing is the pretty standard list:<br>

- light weight.<br>

- easy of use. <br>

- stays adjusted - no slipping when I try to re-adjust etc. <br>

- easy to adjust in small increments.<br>

- reliability <br>

I would say, simple, ease of use is probably more important to me than perhaps the average person. I don't want to have think a lot about the tripod setup when I am setting up a shot. The less distractions the better. Repeatability is helpful too. <br>

I assume I should not be concerned with the RSS BH-40 18 pound weight limit even when I add macro flash rig to above setup?<br>

I assume the "fit and finish" of both are comparable. <br>

I was hoping to get some thoughts on the big differences between the two. <br>

Also, what plates people recommend going with - especially for the Z1 - I think I have the BH-40 plates/clamps figured out although I have some concern about the spirit level in the BH-40 hindering motion - as describe in catalog. <br>

Finally, and importantly, where do people buy the Z1 and learn more about the plating system for it? I have had a hard time finding additional info about all the options. (Lots of good reviews, though - and of course, click to buy links from the usual online places, but I need more info on clamps and plates before I know what to buy). <br>

Thanks in advance, </p>

<p>S. </p>

<p> </p>

</p>

[smarksphotography]

<p>Also, a quick followup. I forgot to mention my "confusion" regarding the flip-lock vs screw on the plate. Wondering what the pros and cons are of each. <br>

Thanks again for any insights. </p>

[Hector Javkin]

<p>I have the Z1, and like it for its non-spherical ball, which helps prevent a lens and camera from flopping down violently, but for me it has one flaw: the plate is held high in the clamp, so that safety stops on any plates that have them can't work. I posted a photo <strong><a href="../filters-bags-tripods-accessories-forum/00SUIN">in this thread</a> </strong> that illustrates the problem. That thead also has a good discussion on the flip-lock versus the knob screw. If you might ever need to use a plate which varies somewhat from the A-S standard, the knob makes it much more likely that you'll get a firm hold.</p>

<p>Please search photo.net. There must be thousands of threads on this.</p>

<p> </p>

[smarksphotography]

<p>Thanks for the specific info. I will check out that thread. There are many of them and I have tried to go through at least the more recent ones I could find. - Thanks. </p>

[Ed_Ingold]

<p>The Arca Z1 has a single knob for both tension and lockup - it has a very gradual action. Since the Arca has an out-of-round ball, the tension increases as the ball is tilted, hence provides very effective tension control and high load capacity when tilted. My older B1 holds an 8# Sinar 4x5 view camera at any angle. The knob to lock panning is separate. The build quality and smoothness of operation is very good.</p>

<p>The RRS BH-40 is very well made, and somewhat more compact (shorter) than the Arca. The tension control knob is separate from the locking knob. Since the ball is spherical, I doubt the tension control is very effective. That's OK if you keep one hand on the camera and one on the knob.</p>

<p>In general, the larger the ball the smoother the action and the greater the load capacity. IMO, the BH-55 is a better match to the Z1, and really not that bulky nor heavy.</p>

[smarksphotography]

<p>Thanks, that was helpful. However, I had decided on the BH-40 because it seems like most people like the RSS clamps and plates better and rather than mix an match I was going with a complete system, but I am undecided again because your description of the one handed tension control was very appealing. I don't always want to have one head on the camera when adjusting. Does, the BH-55 have the one hand tension you mentioned? I assume not since it does not (as far as I know) have the non-spherical ball. <br>

Thanks again for the comments. </p>

[Brad_]

<p>I have the RRS BH-40 and and A-S B1. The BH-40 is definately prettier.</p>

<p>But don't underestimate the huge value of the aspherical ball providing progressive tension in the A-S head. To me that's much more important and guards against accidental "flops."</p>

<p>I'd get the Z1 for that reason alone.</p>

[smarksphotography]

<p>Thanks for the info.I am also definitely worried about accidental "flops.<br>

If you don't mind, a couple of questions. <br>

Wondering why you purchased the BH-40 if you think the Z1 is superior. <br>

What plates and camps do you use with Z1? <br>

From what I've read elsewhere here, it sounds like the screw release rather than the lever release is favored. Is that your opinion too? <br>

It is possible to screw the release on too tightly? If so how likely is that?<br>

Any experience the BH-55?<br>

Thanks a lot of the comments. </p>

[Brad_]

<p>>>> Wondering why you purchased the BH-40 if you think the Z1 is superior. </p>

<p>I purchased the BH-40 two years ago (before the Z1 was available) wanting a ball head smaller/lighter than my Arca-Swiss B1. It is indeed, but through use realized I miss the progressive tension feature the A-S heads provide.</p>

<p>>>> What plates and camps do you use with Z1? </p>

<p>I don't have a Z1 (it's a B1). I have plates from RRS, Kirk, and A-S. All work fine on the B1 - it's a screw clamp - slight mismatches in plate dovetails are OK as you can apply more clamping force with the screw clamp. My RRS BH-40 head is a lever clamp. I prefer the lever clamp, but you need to make sure others' plates are compatible; else there will be insufficient clamping force. A-S plate dovetails are slightly different than RRS plate dovetails; thus you should not use an A-S plate with a lever clamp RRS ball head (but a screw clamp RRS ball head is OK, according to RRS). </p>

<p>>>> It is possible to screw the release on too tightly? If so how likely is that?</p>

<p>Not using your hand. Probably with ViceGrips... :=)</p>

<p>>>> Any experience the BH-55?</p>

<p>Nope...<br>

<br /></p>

<p><br /></p>

[steven_f1]

<blockquote>

<p>The qualities that are important to me in a choosing is the pretty standard list:<br />- light weight.<br />- easy of use. <br />- stays adjusted - no slipping when I try to re-adjust etc. <br />- easy to adjust in small increments.<br />- reliability <br />I would say, simple, ease of use is probably more important to me than perhaps the average person. I don't want to have think a lot about the tripod setup when I am setting up a shot. The less distractions the better. Repeatability is helpful too.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>As far as Staying Adjusted with no slipping and easy to adjust in small imcrements, the Bogen 410 and 405 gear heads are tops. For macro photography it is highly recommended and it does very well for landscapes. With a gear head you can take a picture, recompose for another dozen shots, and then reposition the head to the exact same position of the first shot (assuming the tripod wasn't moved). In terms of reliability I have had mine for over 10 year now and it has been through a lot of abuse and it still works as well as it did new. In my opinion it is easy to use but that is subjective. </p>

<p>It is not good following moving things so for sporting events I wouldn't recommend it. In most sporting events professionals use monopods instead of tripods. If you type "Bogen 410" in the photonet search field you will find a number of discussions on it including some from people that also own good ball heads (including Acra-Swiss). Note that the 410 is sometimes refered to as the 3275, its Manfrotto model number. </p>

[smarksphotography]

<p>Steven, thanks for the option. I had considered a gear head because it sounds like a great option for macro and landscape work but might not be as general purpose I'd like. When I go to the store, I am actually hoping to check these heads out. They are probably one of the few I am interested in that I can actually play with before I buy. (I am also hoping to see a Z1 before I buy, but I won't be able to directly compare that to a RSS model. Although I have to admit being quite swayed by the aspherical ball feature of the Z1. <br>

Since the ball heads I am considering all have a screw mount for plates, it is safe to say I can use the RSS system on a Z1? </p>

<p>Thanks, </p>

[Ed_Ingold]

<p>A geared head is useful for niche applications, mainly closeups. Unfortunately, Bogen uses a proprietary QR system which is bulky, weak and fails to keep the camera from rotating on the screw. As a minimum, you would want to adapt an Arca-style clamp to it, perhaps one with built-in panning.</p>

<p>I find that RRS plates work fine with an Arca clamp. The Arca lever clamp is adjustable if necessary, but a screw-type clamp can be used with nearly any plate.</p>

[smarksphotography]

<p>Wondering why one would opt for a RSS Plate and Arca Clamp? Why not just use RSS clamp as well? (Price?, or other - I am assuming, maybe, other?) <br>

In theory I think I'd rather work with the lever clamp, but lots of posts about it being basically, sub optimal on the Z1 have me worried about going that way. The lever clamp, to me, is appealing because it seems faster to use, and "more secure (i.e. either on or off). But posts suggest it is more complicated than that with the Z1. <br>

When I put the camera on the head, I want to be certain its own correctly and securely without having to stop and think about it great deal. I don't want have to second guess myself while I am trying compose a shot etc. I wonder if a screw-type would have me second guessing that I did not screw it on tight enough. I am not sure quite sure how the lever design can be "confusing" to use, but would like to understand more about the differences. <br>

For what its worth, I am currently leaning towards a Z1 ball head, but remain uncertain about clamps and plates. <br>

Thanks again to everyone who has given me some excellent info. I am getting close to figuring this out I think. </p>

<p> </p>

[Brad_]

<p>>>> Wondering why one would opt for a RSS Plate and Arca Clamp? Why not just use RSS clamp as well? </p>

<p>No aspherical ball and progressive tension in RRS heads.</p>

[smarksphotography]

<p>Sorry, I guess I am confused, <br>

No aspherical ball and progressive tension in RRS heads<br>

explains the preference for the A-S heads, but it seem some people use a combination of A-S plates and clamps with RSS plates and clamps and wondering why not just one or the other and not the combination. <br>

Also, am I correct, in this statement: The A-S plates are generic while the RSS plates are specific to camera model (therefore better fitting?)?</p>

 

[steven_f1]

<blockquote>

<p>A geared head is useful for niche applications, mainly closeups. Unfortunately, Bogen uses a proprietary QR system which is bulky, weak and fails to keep the camera from rotating on the screw.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Edward, My experience with the bogen 410 is that the quick release is not weak and the plate never gets loose. In ball heads people frequently move that camera with tension applied to the ball to fine tune the composition. That puts a lot of torque on the QR plate screw. On gear heads you never do that. You never apply torque to the QR plate on a bogen 410. You always use the gears to move the camera and never apply force to the camera. The last time I removed my quick release plate was for a short time 6 months ago. In the last 6 months it has not not come loose. The plate is solid when connected to the tripod with no play. Fitted QR plates and L brackets were designed to address issue with ball heads. In my experience there is no need for these on gear heads. </p>

<p>Last month in this <a href="../canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00StuJ">forum</a> the bogen 410 was discussed and one person posted a link to information on how he had modified his 410 to replace the bogen QR with a Arca-Swiss QR system. I have had no significant issue with the 410 in Landscape and nature photography or the limited amount of macro I have done. I have lenses that cover a 17mm to 400mm (no gaps) on my 5D and I find I have more issue with the bulk of the lenses and camera and other accessories then the QR plate. For moving objects, yes the bogen 410 is not a good choice.</p>

[peter_n1664876959]

<p>I use a Linhof ballhead so can't comment on your choices but I fitted it with a Markins clamp and use Markins plates. The Markins A-S generic clamps/plates are beautifully made with excellent build quality. I don't trust the lever clamps so I use a captive screw knob mechanism on my clamps.</p>

[Ed_Ingold]

<p><em>My experience with the bogen 410 is that the quick release is not weak and the plate never gets loose. In ball heads people frequently move that camera with tension applied to the ball to fine tune the composition. </em></p>

<p>True to a point. However you must "flop" the head to take a vertical picture, wherein the weight of the camera imposes a turning force. Furthermore, Bogen QR plates are retained by spring tension alone, which is inherently more risky than with a passive screw or lever clamp.</p>

<p><em>Wondering why one would opt for a RSS Plate and Arca Clamp? Why not just use RSS clamp as well? (Price?, or other - I am assuming, maybe, other?) <br /></em></p>

<p>Other! Arca offers an extremely limited assortment of plates, whereas RRS has plates fitted to nearly every camera in common use. These plates fit snugly to prevent turning or loosening in use, and require very little torque on the screw to keep them in place. It happens that the Arca screw clamp is very well made and works perfectly with RRS plates. I see no reason to replace it. Where the original head must be upgraded , I have used RRS clamps. Arca clamps fit only Arca heads, whereas there are RRS clamps to fit others as well.</p>

[smarksphotography]

<p>Thanks for the "other" explanation I think I understand now. <br>

I think I will be going with the Z1 (but now wondering about the BH-55) however the non round ball to prevent flopping seems like a large win to me. I wonder the RRS counter point is to this feature. <br>

If I get a Z1 I will use the screw clamp and get RRS plates for my lenses and camera. (Is the RRS lever more "trustworthy" thank the A-S lever (which seems to have a lot of detractors?). <br>

Thanks a lot for all the great answers</p>

[Brad_]

<p>>>> If I get a Z1 I will use the screw clamp and get RRS plates for my lenses and camera. (Is the RRS lever more "trustworthy" thank the A-S lever (which seems to have a lot of detractors?).</p>

<p>My B1 is a screw clamp model; so I can't compare. My BH-40 is lever operated and its operation is superb. With RRSand Kirk plates there has never been an issue of insufficient force - and has never needed any maintenance. It's also nice in that if you pull the lever all the way back, beyond the spring resitance, the jaws open a bit wider letting you lift your camera straight out, rather than sliding it out.</p>

<p>But, even with the great RRS lever clamp operation (which I prefer over a screw clamp), I'm still a huge fan of the A-S aspherical ball...</p>

[smarksphotography]

<p>Thanks, I was just re-reading the RRS catalog, it says to stay away from the level models for non RRS ball heads. <br>

I think I am going with the Z1 + A-S screw clamp + RRS plates for lenses and camera body. I will probably not get the L Bracket yet though as I am hoping to upgrade camera bodies in a year or so. I think this will be better than BH-40 and perhaps has good as BH-55 at about the price of the BH-40. And if not, I probably won't know the difference since I won't have been able to really compare both for myself. : > </p>

[steven_f1]

<p>In regards to the Bogen 410 and Edwards comment:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>True to a point. However you must "flop" the head to take a vertical picture, wherein the weight of the camera imposes a turning force. Furthermore, Bogen QR plates are retained by spring tension alone, which is inherently more risky than with a passive screw or lever clamp.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>I have a Canon 5D and with the 17-40, 24-105, and 70-200F4 floping the head to take a vertical has not cause the camera to come loose. You would need to have a heavy unballanced lens to get that to happen. All lenses Canon sell that are heavier than my 70-200F4 have a tripod coller. If a lens has a tripod coller the QR plate should be attached to the lens. My largest lens is the 100-400mm with the QR plate on the lens. The plate has never come loose. Granted if I slam the head 90 degrees to do a veritical it could come loose. However in that situation you are moving the camera so fast that you could do internal damage to the lens or camera. </p>

<p>Bogen QR plates are not held on by spring tension. That is simply not correct. It is a lever clamp type. Yes it does have a spring in it. When the QR plate is placed on the head the spring is released moving the lever into a locked position securely locking the QR plate onto the head. The lever will not release until a safety lock is released by the photographer. The system is 100% reliable in my experience over 10 years with it. My brother has the same head and at one time the tripod was accidently pushed over. The QR plate didn't let go. The lens however broke into two pieces. </p>

<p>The screw holding the QR plate onto the camera or lens has a large slot and can easily be tightened with a coin or key. So if the plate does come loose you can easily tighten it. In my experience the amount of force needed to pull the plate off of the head or loosen the screw is far greater than forces normally experienced. If you do experience those forces there is a good chance the camera or lens will fail first.</p>

[david_leibowitz1]

<p>I have the Z1, and use the RRS camera and lens plates. I have the lever. The lever has been fine for me, because there is a small knurled nut that you can use to adjust the tension of the lever. I do mostly sports photos with this setup, and I want to be able to switch the camera on and off quickly. The RRS plates are very high quality, and have worked perfectly with the Z1.</p>

[Ed_Ingold]

<p><em>Bogen QR plates are not held on by spring tension...The lever will not release until a safety lock is released by the photographer.</em></p>

<p>Both the lever and safety lock are held in place by spring tension, which may or may not present a significant risk. However, it doesn't matter how tight you make the screw, the camera will still turn on the plate with little resistance. Been there, done that.</p>

[adam_kuan1]

<p>One key difference that is not mentioned on this thread between Z1 and RRS, Markins and other ballheads is that the Z1 ball locking knob on the right hand size. It is usually more desirable to have the locking know on the left hand when doing macro work in you are right-handed. You can use the left hand to adjust know while using right hand to position camera.</p>