Feisol tripod Markins ballhead question

[friedemann_pistorius]

<p>Hi,</p>

<p>I'm in the process of upgrading my tripods, and have settled on Feisol tripods for various reasons, mainly because they're affordable, lightweight and the legs can be folded reverse/upwards to keep the size small for transportation.<br /> I like the idea of getting a <strong>Feisol CT-3442 </strong>with<strong> Markins Q10</strong> ballhead for long distance and overnight trips, and also a <strong>Feisol CT-3472 </strong>with<strong> Markins Q20</strong> ballhead for short hikes and stationary work.<br /> My camera is an Ebony SV45Ti, heaviest setup (camera and lens) ca. 2500 g.</p>

<p>1) Do these Markins ballheads (with lever release plates) completely fit between the reverse folded tripod legs? <br /> 2) Has anyone experiences with Feisol CB-50D ballhead equipped with either RRS or Markins lever release plates?</p>

<p>The tripod choice is final (well, almost) but I am open to suggestions regarding ballheads.</p>

<p>Thank you, Friedemann</p>

[rodeo_joe1]

<p>I don't think I'll ever understand the attraction of ballheads for anything other than macro or low-level work with medium and small format cameras. I certainly wouldn't trust an LF camera to any portable-sized ballhead. One less-than-tight ballhead = total disaster. The camera flops over and either the lens, bellows or GG come off the worse for it. Also ballheads have that stupid little stalk of metal that connects the ball to the camera plate; not a good design for arresting vibration. So unless there are very good reasons for choosing a ball design I'd be looking at a 3-way pan-tilt head, especially if over 5lb weight of expensive kit is going to be stuck on top of it - plus the pressure of inserting and withdrawing a filmholder.</p>

[friedemann_pistorius]

<p>Thank you Joe for your answer. However, neither did I ask if anybody likes or dislikes ballheads with LF cameras, nor was it my intention to start another 3-way head v. ballhead discussion. I got perfectly used to a ballhead with my LF work.</p>

<p>My old Manfrotto stuff needs to be replaced, for whatever reason - that's all.</p>

[melmann]

<p>Friedemann,<br>

I'm looking at my Markins Q-10 right now sitting on my Manfrotto 055 tripod. The diameter of the bottom of the ballhead body is a millimeter or two larger than the circular tripod plate it mounts on. My legs don't reverse-fold but if they did with their current mounting systems the ballhead would fit within the folded legs. The big locking knob will have to fit between the legs - it sticks out an inch from the ballhead body - and you'll have to figure out where the rotation locking knob goes - it is 45 degrees from the big locking knob and probably would interfere with one leg folding upward.<br>

I saw someone trying to put a RRS head on a reverse-folding tripod and it didn't fit - too large a diameter; don't know what model they were working with. Most of the people I know who use reverse-fold tripods take the head off to get the full advantage of the benefit.<br>

Hope that helps.</p>

[thirteenthumbs]

<p><a href="http://www.feisol.net/">http://www.feisol.net/</a> <br>

Neither tripod you list has the flip leg symbol with its description.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.markins.com/">http://www.markins.com/</a><br>

shows the dimensions for each of its ball heads.</p>

[jim_graves1]

<p> I have both the Feisol CT-3441 (4-section leg version of the 3442) and the CT-3472 ... both have legs that fully flip. Of course, I don't know if they changed the design ... but I don't think so.</p>

[friedemann_pistorius]

<p>Thanks so far for the responses.<br>

Charles, I've done quite extensive research before posting my question. Both tripods mentioned do have flip legs. I also know the specs of the Markins ballheads. Based on the diameter of the ballhead, both heads would fit between the reverse folded legs. However, i wonder if the protruding knobs might prevent the legs from folding correctly.</p>

 

[kerry_thalmann2]

<p>Friedemann,</p>

<p>Please check your email. I sent a detailed response concerning the Markins ballheads fitting within the reverse folded legs of the Feisol tripods You are correct. It is not the size of the base, it is the location of the knobs that is the issue.</p>

<p>Kerry Thalmann</p>