Quick Release System

[wildpicture]

Hi,

<p>

Here is a question about QR's. Yes, I know there have been many

discussions about this subject. I have spend many evenings reading

all the previous threads. Still, one thing keeps bothering me.

<p>

I am thinking about buying an Arca Swiss B-1 to replace my Manfrotto

168 ballhead (Bogen 3055 in the US). The quality of the ballhead is

no question at all. What I am wondering about is the use of the QR

plates. Contrary to some people I do like the Manfrotto (hex)QR

system very much. Just one click and my 500/4.5 with heavy camera is

secure. I can do this with one hand. There is even an extra security

switch. With the AS system, you have to slide the plates into the

mount and then tighten the screw. This is more difficult and hard to

do with one hand. Also I am always afraid the plate might slip and

drop the heavy lens when carrying it over the shoulder.

<p>

AS plates are also very hard to get over here in Europe. The original

AS plates would be easiest. Kirk is a possibility but still extremely

expensive. RRS is actually out of the question because of

their "strange" business approach to ordering and paying. (Try

ordering a $55 plate from them from Europe and you and up spending

$100 all together and have to wait for ages)

<p>

Sure I know AS style plates can be made to fit a lens. But both my

300/2.8 and 500/4.5 are perfectly balanced, so I don't need to slide

the plate through the clamp. Also I can fit the $15 Manfrotto hex

plates easily to my lens-collars and make sure they don't twist.

<p>

So, considering the above mentioned points, what is from your

experience the benefit of the AS QR system? I am even (seriously)

thinking of buying the non QR B-1 and fitting it with the Manfrotto

QR system. (I know this might sound like cursing in public to some of

you) But please, give me your opinions.

<p>

Regards,

Hans

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

[ShunCheung]

Hans, I used to have a Bogen (Manfrotto) tripod and I found its hex quick release (QR) plates very difficult to use. With only one screw, it is extremely difficult to tighten it onto the bottom of a camera body or a lens. The cork on it has a strong tendency to slip. That was several years ago and I don't know whether things have improved or not. IMO the Arca Swiss system is far superior and that was why I switched.

 

One advantage of using a sliding QR system is that you can adjust the center of gravity (CG) of your set up: (big) lens, camera, teleconvertor and perhaps extension tube. The tripod collar of a big lens isn't necessarily at the CG of the system, which may shift depending on whether you use a heavy camera body (e.g. an EOS-1v or an F5) vs. a light body (e.g. a Nikon FM2). The CG will shift a lot more if you add a long TC such a 2x and/or an extension tube. The fixed hex QR system from Bogen doesn't let you adjust the contact point between your camera system and the ballhead. The sliding QR system from A/S does and gives you a much more stable set up.

[squareframe]

Hans,

 

even though every lens and camera I own is fitted with an Arca Swiss plate, there are many times that I have thought it to be a mistake and poor investment. why? because of the design, you are a twist away from either not tightening sufficiently, or inadvertantly not placing both sides in the groove. you tighten, let go, and your lens swan dives to the ground. what I do like about the system, is consistency. I can mount a lens or camera, quickly because they all use the same plate style. the Bogen system had different styles for each head. too many for a large collection of equipment. with my 4x5, I needed to use the 410 geared head which has an integral QR system. my solution was to use the RRS plate on the Linhof, and attach that to the Bogen QR plate. I was hesitant at first, but the Bogen remains quite secure and has an excellent safety catch. something glaringly missing on the AS style. as the previous poster mentioned, the AS plate allows me to shift the center of gravity, to help equalize loading due to bellows draw and heavy lenses. this allows the gear head to work much more smoothly by equalizing the loads.

 

there is something secure, in hearing your plate click into place and knowing your investment is double locked. however, the flexibility of the AS system is hard to beat. the solution is in the mantra 'tighten once more, twist, tighten once more ...'

 

enjoy!

[matt_hagadorn]

Another advantage of the long plates by Kirk and RRS is that it gives you something to hold onto when manually focusing long lenses. With my 500/4.5, I can use my left thumb and forefinger to focus, with the remaining fingers wrapped around the plate and lens foot that protrude in front of the ballhead, giving me extra stability. Its hard to explain, but it works nicely.

 

The plates don't slip (assuming you rememberd to tighten the screw). There are a lot of pros walking around with 600/4's mounted on A-S style quick release plates slung over their shoulders.

 

If ordering from Kirk or RRS is too expensive, others have suggested its not too difficult to get them made if you have access to a machine shop.

[wildpicture]

Here is some more feedback regarding the first answers.

<p>

The hex plates I use at the moment have one screw to attach to the lens or camera (Kirk has special hex-plates for a 500mm that have two screws for $42). But besides this one screw, there are also three more small screws in the plate. These can not be screwed into a thread on the lens mount, but they do fit into the openings in the bottomside. So, the lens is attached with one screw, but the other small screws prevent it firmly from pivotting. Of course two screws would be even better for the 500/4.5 but then I could buy the Kirk plate. My 300/2.8 can only be attached by one screw anyway. So the problem of securely attaching and prevention of pivotting is no problem at all to me.

<p>

Balancing the load. Yes, this is impossible with the hex plates. But as I have said before, I don't have problems with this. I use a (heavy) Canon F1-n/AE camera with external Winder FN. Together with both the FD 300/2.8L and the FD 500/4.5L the balance is very nice. I can leave these combinations in place without tightening the head. They don't flop. Attaching a (tiny) 1.4x converter doesn't make much difference. I have hardly ever used an extension tube. Closest focussing distance on the 300/2.8 is 3 meters and on the 500/4.5 it is 5 meters. So to me the problem of balancing is not really a problem.

<p>

The most important issue to me is that the hex plate clicks firmly with one movement. I can do this with one hand. The AS plate requires more attention. And as Daniel said, there is always the fear that the plate might slide out of the clamp. The RRS plates have an extra screw on one side to prevent this. Yes, but only on one side. (if they had such a screw on both sides the system wouldn't work anymore) This issue is what bothers me most. But maybe there are other factors regarding this last issue that I am overseeing.

<p>

Hans

[drc]

Hans, i have the AR plates attatched to all of my cameras and lenses. Over many years i have never had any rig slip out when running around with a combo as big as a 600 F4 and motordriven camera slung over my shoulders. The trick is to be consistent and have a set routine in putting the lens or camera on the quick release. Always have your grip either on the tripod collar plate attatchment or on the camera, and dont let go until your 100% certain it's all secure. Sitting down and doing it over till it's second nature whilst watching your favorite TV program is an extremely worthwhile investment. As for quality and security, the Manfrotto's are not even in the same class as the AS system plates (when properly assembled), the best of the bunch being the RRS by a long margin. As the other posters have said, the ability to fine tune the balance of different lens/camera combinations is an extremely important feature.

[don_baccus]

Well, I'm going to blow my image and tell the world that I'm still using Bogen hex QR plates. I have no problem with them rotating, etc, it is just a matter of getting them tight and/or using the right one. My 600/4 is mounted with the plate that has a 3/8" screw and my monster screwdriver and I had no problem getting that sucker so tight that it's never budged a bit. Hans has apparently solved this problem, too.

 

A main motivation for me has been the large number of bases and plates I own for tripods, home-made flash gizmos, my home-made shoulder stock, window mounts, and all the lenses and bodies. I spent the money I could've spend switching to AS-compatible plates on a Gitzo carbon fiber tripod.

 

The hex plates are bulky and chunky, and they annoy me when I'm not using them on a tripod, to the point where I often remove them if I'm just walking around with my camera playing touron or whatever. The AS system with its custom plates is very appealing due to their inobtrusive nature.

 

On the tripod, window mount, or shoulder stock, though, I'm happy with the hex plates. And that's where I do 90% of my shooting.

[kurt_heintzelman]

This is an interesting thread. I don't yet own a ball head, but continue to rely on a humble Bogen 3047 pan/tilt head with the hexagonal QR plates, and I'm with Hans here--I love the Bogen hex. QR plates, for the following reasons: 1) although they are somewhat bulky and heavy, the mounting screw has an ~1 cm knurled head that's easy to grip, but more importantly, the Bogen Hex. QR plates feature a large, ~2.5 cm. knurled circular "thumb" nut that allows the user to tighten down the plate assembly to the camera (or lens foot) whilst simultaneously controlling the depth of PENETRATION of the mounting screw into the base of the camera. As you know, depending on the robustness (or lack thereof) of the base of the camera, it is possible to be over-zealous when screwing a mounting screw into the camera base, which might result in actually punching or drilling a crude hole up into the camera base! Bogen's well-conceived thumb nut allows one to screw the mounting screw into the camera base just until resistence is felt as the screw encounters the limit of the camera's screw socket. At this point, one should then "back off" or loosen the mounting screw's penetration into the camera by a turn or two, then use the thumb nut to really snug things down. By doing so, one is of course able to achieve a snug connection without risk of driving the mounting screw through the base of the camera. From here on, it is up to the photographer to regularly check for any play or loosening of this thumb nut, and to re-tighten it as needed. I personally have grown very familiar with these hex. QR plates, and I tend to automatically check the thumb nut for snugness when mounting; 2) the Bogen hex. QR plates have an arrow imprinted on them ("LENS-->") that clearly indicates how the plate should be afixed to the camera or lens foot--when properly mounted, that arrow should point at the front of the lens. It seems that some users don't get this, or don't seem to understand how the plate should then be mounted to the head for correct orientation. For those who understand the system, it is a breeze to correctly mount the plate to the head, and this leads me to point #3)...as one correctly "docks" the hex. QR plate to the head, one will immediately hear (and feel) an authoritative and confidence-inspiring "kah-thunk" suggesting that the plate is now securely and correctly seated. (Like many of you who use this Bogen system, at this point I ALWAYS maintain a firm hold on the lens/camera while simultaneously applying some mechanical stress to the connection to make sure it is secure); 4) my local dealer is usually well-stocked with Bogen hex. QR plates (costing about $20.00 apiece), and so it is no problem for me to buy extra plates that can be dedicated to heavier lenses such as a 70-200/2.8L or 300/4 IS, as well as a second camera body. At least with my current lenses, I don't have to go the expense, possible confusion, and delay of having to order custom mounting plates; 5) I own several extensively used Bogen hex. QR plates, and none of mine have exhibited any problems with their cork pads coming loose--they work as well now as the day I bought them.

[lanierb]

Hans, I used the Bogen plates for several years and then switched to Arca-style plates (RRS) about one year ago and have been very happy with them. I had also solved the plate-slippage problem on the Bogen plates by putting them on so tight that they didn't budge. Despite this I have found that the Arca-style plates provide a significantly more secure linkage to the tripod. Let me just address your concern then: I regularly walk around with a 600/4 cantilevered over my shoulder hanging off the top of a tripod and attached using only an Arca-style plate. The QR connection is so secure that I have never even entertained the thought of it falling off. I would be very nervous (perhaps unnecessarily so but I would) about doing this with a Bogen hex-plate because the piece of metal holding down the plate is small enough that it could easily shear off. You don't have to tighten the knob that much to get the plate very snug, and the lens is really quite easy to attach. If you've never tried using them I would suggest trying them out in a store or something. I think that will put your fears to rest. Also, I'd bet RRS makes a plate that "cups" the tripod foot of your FD 300/2.8 so that it won't easily spin even with only one screw.

[jim_bridges1]

I also use the 3047-pan/tilt head, and concur with every point that Kurt has made on the system except one. The only modification I�ve made to the Q/R plates was to replace the cork pads with a 1/32-inch hard neoprene material. The only gripe I can come up with is that when I have an 80-200/2.8 mounted on the tripod, I have to either remove the plate on the camera (F4s), or turn the plate so the edge is parallel to the camera body so they don�t smack each other, but I can live with that. I have considered buying the Kirk machined Q/R Bogen plates, but as the old clichi goes, �if it ain�t broke, don�t fix it�.

[squareframe]

the Arca Swiss plates work well, and once secured properly, I do not give a millisecond thought about a lens or camera coming unattached. <U><B>however</U></B>, the problem was inadvertantly untightening the wrong knob (the QR knob) thinking I was grabbing the Arca Swiss B1 knob. and then, visitors always would play with this knob when looking at my camera collection, making me very <I>nervous</I> indeed. the best solution was to tighten this knob so incredibly tight, that there would be little chance of mistaken identity.

[lorraine_kaplan]

Hi.

 

I have recently switched to a Kirk ballhead and I am using the Kirk plates and I am very happy with them. I had been using a bogen head with the hex plates. I was happy with the plates, but not the head. I just wanted to let people who are using the hex plates know about the hex plates that Bogen calls the 90 degree alignment plates - they are not much more expensive than the regular hex plates, but the have an adjustable lip that keeps the camera from twisting on the plate. It makes a big difference. I used these on all my equipment. I've always been surprised that I've not heard anyone mention them.

 

Anyway, for what it's worth...

[Michael Eckstein]

For those on a budget another answer is the Lindahl Rapid Release. It is similar to

the more expensive units. It sells for about $40.00 with one camera/lens plate. Extra

plates are $10 eac at B&H. I am using them with Linhof profI II ballhead and find

them quite satisfactory. Will hold relatively heavy equipment securely. Have used a

number of other brands including Bogen hex shaped which I found very cumbersome

and the only set-up where I've managed to have the camera fall off the tripod!

[Brian P Bower CamraScapes]

I've been using the AS system with long lenses for eleven years and never had a mishap. The benefits are standarization, ease of use, balancing lens with different bodies-teleconverters and extention tubes, and being able to rest long lens on AS plate for stable ground shots when taken off tripod. I have even manufactured my own long lens plates, using my band saw to cut the required 45 degree angle from flat aluminum stock. Although it will not remedy your need for adapting older existing lenses, it would be nice to have Nikon and Canon machine their long lens tripod feet, and the base of their bodies with the Arca Swiss shape, thus eliminating the need for any additional plates at all. In my opinion, there is no other option than to use the AS system.

[john_macpherson]

Hans - I have enjoyed your website - a lot of fine work there.

<P>

Are you aware of the Manfrotto Universal Plate? It is 6cm x 12cm and

has a variety of holes in it of differing diameters, and the normal

hex plate underneath. It has a huge wing-nut type fixing method for

lens attachment. Because of its size it allows you to carry the lens

by it - like a large handle. It also allows what Matt Hagadorn (4

March) mentioned - the ability to rest your hand on it to allow easier

focus method.

<P>

BUT the beauty of this, and what may help you is that there are four

threaded holes (about 4 or 5mm diameter) around the central threaded

hole, each about 15mm from their centre to the main hole centre, and

20mm from each other's centre. With my Nikkor 500mm F4IFEDP the tripod

mounting foot is slim enough to allow these holes to permit the

insertion of a screw with a pointed end (some are supplied with the

plate but have flat ends so you need to file the ends to a point) on

either side that will protrude through and fit snugly against each

side of the tripod mount foot, and prevents the lens from rotating.

Lens is still only attached by one screw (albeit a big one) but the

two small ones prevent any rotation. A small amount of Loctite will

prevent ANY movement of the threads.

<P>

Any use?

[wildpicture]

Thanks for all the answers and advice. To make things a bit clearer, I have just made a page on the website explaning the use of the hex plates. It has photographs of the plates, showing all screws etc and lens mounts. I have also added pictures of the Manfrotto and Kirk plates from their catalogues. Since I have no digital camera (and don't want one either), I have just put the objects on my flatbed scanner. Surprise, it worked perfectly. Images are very nice and very sharp. Have a look at this webpage from the photography section of my <a href="http://www.wildpicture.com">website</a> or <a href="http://www.wildpicture.com/pages/photography/hexplates.htm">directly</a>.

<p>

I like the flat hex plates since they allow you to put the lens on a table or something. Also you can use this plate as a little "platform" in situations where you can't use a tripod. Handholding the lens is also possible with the hex plate (I only do this with my 300/2.8, never with the 500/4.5) but then they may be a bit big and the pointed edges may not be comfortable.

<p>

The big universal plate may indeed be the best plate to use with my 500/4.5, (thanks John). It's big and strong, has several screws and let's me rest my hand on the plate while focussing (thanks Matt).

<p>

The only two lenses I use on my tripod are the 300/2.8 and the 500/4.5. I hardly ever put my camera on the tripod with any other lenses. All of these are small enough to be handheld. I do not own a 80~200/2.8 zoom. Canon never had such a zoom in the FD system. The one I use is a relatively small and light Canon FD 80~200/4 L zoom (with both fluorite and UD glass!) which I bought recently, brandnew in the box for $500.

<p>

Don, I am sorry to have made you blow your image. :-) But your extensive experience and your great results mean much more to me than any image could.

[tony_gorell]

Although I have recently invested in two quite expensive lenses (Nikkor AF-I 300/2.8 and AF-S 80-200/2.8) I have continued to use my Manfrotto Hex-plate system because I already had a sizeable investment there for several plates, a three-way head, ball-head and monopod head. The AS system (either Kirk or RRS) appeals (but not the price).

 

As a quick solution, I removed the cork pads, filed down the slightly raised lips, and mount the lens directly metal-to-metal. So far, no twisting. To solve the problem with the protrusion of the hex plates, I actually filed the corners down to a more rounded shape. This certainly improves the hand-holding. I also use the Manfrotto 130 plate with the non-protuding screw (refer Hans' site above), keeping the 030 plate when I need to mount a plate on the camera itself. This also improves the feel.

 

A question though: The RRS catalogue makes reference to the potential danger in the Manfrotto/Bogen system relating to the use of a spring clip holding the tension to secure the plate to the head. Has anyone had personal experience with one of these clips actually failing? Its always in the back of my mind now that the whole thing will collapse.

[tom_hill1]

Hans,

 

It's quite an investment getting into a Acra QR system. I had used the Bogen system for a long time and had only one complaint-the size of plate. When attached to my 300 F4 ED-AF, hand holding was a literal pain. I was constantly dealing with the knob at the bottom of the plate. Still, even this wasn't that inconvenient. What made me finally change was a potentially bad event. Once in a rush, I jammed my F90x equiped 300 F4 on my tripod and went shooting. Moved the tripod around and worked the system for 10 minutes when my camera unpredictably dislodged itself from the mount-I caught it in mid-air. Apparently, I hadn't squarely put the lens on and the plate was being held my two sides instead of the customary three. I even remember hear the audible "click" of release lever. I was totally fooled. I could understand being forgetful and not tightening a knob or two. But in this case, I honestly had been fooled by a system I had trusted for quite some time. In fact, I vowed not let it happen again. But it did happened again two months later. I was convinced, there was a serious design problem with the hex plates and how I used them.

 

Now that I have Kirk QR plates, a Wimberly Sidekick, and a 500 F4 AF-S, I can't image taking wildlife photos without them. Everything I have has a QR plate and it's easy to use. Having a balanced lens/camera setup is an entirely new thing with the QR plates. It's critical for a something like the Sidekick.

 

I know QR plates are almost a fad right now but there are a lot of good reasons to have them. I probably would still be depending on Bogen plates if I hadn't had those couple of scares. Now that I have QR plates, I can't imagine working without them.

 

Oh, I'm still scared of a free-fall incident with the Acra QR plates. Maybe the definate requirement/effort of tightening them makes me less complacent.

 

Cheers

 

Tom Hill

[jason_elsworth3]

The Arca swiss system can certainly be expensive especially as the plates form RRS and Kirks are only for one lens. It is however very good and hopefully something that will last a long time before it is significantly bettered. There is some truth in the adage that it is cheaper to get the best and what you want first time, but of course finaces always enter into it.

I have ordered RRS stuff here in New Zeland and found it arrived quickly and efficiently and postage isn't too bad if you order a few things at one time. Also it doesn't take that long as Bryan of RRS always despatches next day. So I wouldn't discount ordering from Europe, however I would certainly throughly investigate the alternatives, due to cost and slight pain of overseas ordering.

Finally RRS make a clamp locking knob that once tightened can't be undone accidentaly, this would be great for big lenses. It gets in the way of a cokin P on a 24 2.8 a bit.

[dr._steven_bein]

One thing that no one has touched upon is the sidekick from Wemberly which is wonderful with the AS head. Recently, I had . I had the Bogen hex head system and went to AS. Never had a problem with the Bogen, but the plates took too much space and the AS is easier to use for me.

I had to return the AS for service due to excessive jamming.

I am now testing the Gitzo 1337M as a replacement to use instead of the AS B1 ballor along side with it. I shoot several formats together and need more than one head anyway. I will be putting heavy loads on the Gitzo ball head to compare. I hope it holds up since it seems to be decent quality and less expensive.

[GerrySiegel]

Hans, you almost really got me convinced that I should have hung in with the Bogen/Manfrotto system-economic arguments are strong ones in Frugaland where I come from. Had I seen your piece and not read RRS catalog and the review in Shutterbug ten years ago I might have been where you are with that 3047 and the hex plates. And it's ok, really ok, we still like you and your work. I did make the plunge and took a big chunk of my discretionary income, but you make convincing arguments why not everyone is going the Arca route. Arca seduces you in with their fine ball head. Then RRS and Kirk say go with custom plates. And the "bums" are correct. Stay with what works for you and is affordable.

[walther_adler]

For lenses up to 200mm the smaller Manfrotto/Bogen QR system with rectangular plates is even more convenient than their hexagonal plate system because the rectangular plates fit perfectly under most camera bodies. Handholding becomes easier, storage in tight camera bags also.

[struan_gray]

As a physicist who regularly works with mounts for research-grade

optics I have to say that all the plate manufacturers have a whiff of

snake oil about them. None of them take the trouble to make truly

kinematic mountings, which rather gives the lie to their claim to be

performance-driven. Also, they (and especially RRS) tend to praise or

damn generic solutions when the real key to performance is in the

details of the implementation, not the overall design philosophy.

 

I use a B1 with a Manfrotto hex plate adapter and a mixture of

homebrew and customised plates. The RRS/Kirk plates are works of art,

but if you make plates for the hex system with the same care and

precision there is really little to choose between the two.

 

The hex plates do have an advantage in that they resist torque equally

about all axes; the AS system is much better along the plate than

across it. Not a big deal for 600/4 type lenses where you can orient

the good direction along the lens, but for me the difference is

significant in larger, squarer formats.

 

Also, I feel that a 'quick release' should be quick. I can fix a

camera to the bare B1 as fast and securely as I can attach and tighten

the AS quick release. For me, saving the baseplate finish for future

generations is not a major photographic goal.

 

Disadvantages? The hex plates are unnecessarily large for small

cameras. Also, in general Manfrotto products achieve stability

through weight and bulk, not precision machining, and the hex adapter

is no exception. I find Manfrotto's policy of offering some heads

with a single, non-negotiable, incompatible plate style a little

baffling.

 

Finally, I have heard that the latest AS ballheads do not have the

camera attachment permanently fixed to the ball. Thus Hans could add

the AS quick release later, which was not an option when I bought my

B1.

 

Finally, finally: has anyone here used the Novoflex mini-connect

system with large lenses or heavy cameras? They claim it works with

big glass, despite the tiny size of the 'plate', and have a good

reputation for well-made products, but it seems almost too good to be

true.

[harro_de_wilde]

Hello Hans,

With regard to ordering from RRS from Europe (I live in the Netherlands) I have to disagree with you. I called them for

a catalogue and received it 4 days later.I then ordered by

mail (4 plates & clamp) & received the goods 10 days later.

Shipping cost was $19. In my experience RRS,maybe stange

in not accepting credit cards etc.,was very quick in sending

my order and not expensive for shipping costs.

Regards, Harro

[robert_p._boner]

I had a 500mm lens + TC + camera body slide out of the AS quick release as I slung it over my shoulder. Very expensive disaster. Since then I have attached a ring to my tripod legs and modified the lens carrying strap so that it has a clip which I can fasten to the ring on the tripod legs. I am far more concerned with the security of the system than the "quickness."

 

I used to use the Bogen system, but I didn't have any really heavy lenses then. When I acquired the larger lenses, I didn't trust the metal in my Bogen head. The locking part on the QR looks like pretty cheap metal. I have one of the earliest 3047 heads. Maybe the later ones are better.