|
Garry Black Photography |
|
|
|
TECHNICAL
NOTES |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Lightweight Ball Heads Bill Hall wrote me an e-mail asking about lightweight ball heads. In
particular a Giottos MH 1002 head that he had read about in Outdoor
Photographer magazine. This is something that many people, including myself
have struggled with over the years. As of yet I haven’t come up with one that
works for me. Below is my answer to Bill’s question. As well as an article
that I wrote for the Winter 2004 issue of Canadian Camera magazine about
tripod heads. And finally I found a thread on the Photo-Net Forums about
heads, as it was in an unachieved forum I copied it just before it was
deleted and have posted it here. (I’m not sure about the ethics of doing this
so I’ve removed the people’s names.) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ANSWER TO BILL’S E-MAIL I took a look at the Outdoor Photographer article on lightweight
tripods and heads. I have to say that from my personal experience and
what I've seen workshop participants go through with light weight
tripods/heads, I'm not really a big fan of them. I have tried many
different lightweight ball heads in the past in an effort to cut
down on weight and have been disappointed with all of them. My biggest
complaint with them is that after a little use they will not hold the camera
in place. There tends to be slippage, once you compose your shot and tighten the
head then the head drifts downward due to the weight of the camera
and lens. It's always worse with a telephoto lens; this is because of the
heavier weight of the lens and also the narrower angle of view. To solve the
problem I ended up composing the picture higher than what I wanted and
hoped it would drift down to where I wanted it to be. It was very
frustrating and annoying! So I have scratched lightweight ball heads off
my equipment list. I did do a little research on the internet on the Giottos MH
1002 head and found some unfavourable reviews, and a couple of good ones.
Here are a couple of web page links: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=000e8K It looks like this head doesn't do well with 35mm equipment let
alone medium format. What head do you have now? Are you happy with it? Or were you
looking at a smaller one just to cut down on the weight? Just a final thought, a feature that you should consider having
with any head is a quick release plate. They help in cutting down with the
frustration of attaching the camera to the head. CANADIAN CAMERA ARTICLE Recently a travel magazine asked me what effect I thought digital cameras were having on photography: not point and shoot snapshot photography but serious image creating. A quick synopsis of my thoughts is that they’re wonderful but at the same time can also pose a real challenge to creative photography. Let me put those comments into perspective. If you’ve been photographing for a while, you learned photography on a camera that shoots film. You learned all about metering and exposure, types of film and film speed, and the proper use of wide angle and telephoto lenses. You have probably developed a photographic vision and personal style of your own. Perhaps you learned darkroom techniques, printed your own work, or purchased a film scanner and used digital image editing software, such as Photoshop. As a result, you know all about histograms, curves, 16 bit images and the entire pixel world. The next step to using a digital camera isn’t a very large one, and if it’s one that you’ve already made you’ll agree with me that digital cameras are wonderful, as long as you don’t mind sitting in front of a computer monitor for hours on end. Now imagine, or perhaps this applies to you, your very first camera is digital. You don’t have the luxury of learning photography in small steps; you’ve taken a huge leap. What has taken other photographers years to learn, you must master in a very short time. This can be quite daunting and challenging. So to help you, along with other photographers who are learning the basics, here are a couple of hardware tips. In the Fall 2003 issue I wrote an article on tripods. Just because you’re using a digital camera don’t think you can get by without using a tripod. You must use the lowest possible ISO setting in order to keep digital noise to a minimum. As a result, you cannot hand hold the camera and should be using a tripod. One of the most important aspects of using a tripod is that it forces you to slow down and actually “see” what you’re photographing. It develops your photographic vision and stops you from just taking snapshots of your subjects. The tripod head that you use is probably more important than the legs. A head that is difficult to use will quickly frustrate and annoy you more than it will help you, so choose your head carefully. There are 2 types of tripod heads, a ball head and a pan/tilt head. Both types have very loyal followers and it is hard to get an objective opinion as to which is the best to use. What I have found is that it’s really a matter of personal preference, just because someone else likes a certain type doesn’t mean you will too. Ball heads have one knob (sometimes two) that you turn to loosen the ball so that it floats freely in its socket. Composing with this type of head is very quick, providing that when you tighten up the knobs the head doesn’t move. This movement normally downwards usually happens when using a long lens and can drive you crazy. To compensate, you have to aim the camera higher than you actually want it and hope it drifts down to the original desired point. This problem only happens with inexpensive ball heads (less than $200.00). If you want a quality ball head be prepared to spend upwards of $600.00 Pan/tilt heads cost considerably less. You can get one of the top of the line heads for under $250.00. It takes longer to compose using these heads, as you must adjust 3 different handles. These handles control the direction the camera is pointed, vertical angle and leveling of the horizon. Quite a few people think this feature is one of its highlights. For example, if you want to move the camera only a bit to the left, all you have to do is adjust one handle to make that movement; with a ball head as soon as you loosen the knob the head is free to travel in all directions, making slight adjustments more difficult. A major complaint against pan heads is that one of the handles comes straight out and hits you in the throat. This, however, is only true of one of the two major manufacturers of these heads. One last feature to look for in either type of head is a quick release plate. One thing that I have noticed over the years is the time that people waste trying to attach their camera to their tripod; with a quick release plate it should only take a matter of seconds to attach or remove it. This is very important, as light can and will change very rapidly creating a fleeting photographic moment. Light
ball head? From Photo-Net Forums I'm looking for a ball head suitable for use with a light tripod. My primary criteria are:
If a maximum weight of 600g were acceptable, the Markins M10, Kirk BH-3, and Arca-Swiss B1 would probably be the most promising candidates, but these are all too heavy for my purposes. The options within or close to the weight restriction seem to be (it's not clear how useful the stated maximum load is, since I suspect they're computed according to widely varying standards):
Of the acceptable options tabulated above, the most promising options seem to be: FLM Centerball 32F (some reports of quality construction, good price), Foba Superball M-1, Kaiser Pro Ballhead Small, Gitzo G1177M (lifetime warranty, hopefully the 4kg load is very conservative with respect to the other maximum loads), and Benbo Professional. Recommendations would be much appreciated. Answers
apr 13,
2005; Have you looked at the Acratech Ultimate ball head? It's very light, and can be purchased or fitted with an Arca-Swiss clamp. It has a 2 inch ball, which makes it very strong, less likely to shift when tightened and less likely to exhibit slip-stick action for fine adjustments. The downside is that it has no friction setting. Secondly, the ball stem will only go slightly past vertical before you have to rotate the head to go further. apr 14,
2005; Velbon PH273 magnesium ballhead, their largest of this design. It's large but very light yet still strong. Costs about $150. Don't be put off by the cheap, crappy Velbon tripods you've seen in K-Wart or Wal-wart. They make some excellent legsets and heads. This is a good one. It does have some quirks so I'll try to describe it. I used to have photos of it "in action" with my Nikon F3HP/MD-4 and 180/2.8 Nikkor - a pretty hefty load - but I can't find those jpegs right now. The large ball is clamped into place via a dirt simple clamshell design. A single locking lever controls clamping and unclamping. The locking lever resembles something on one of the more ergonomically designed hand operated can openers. It's not a knob like most other ballheads, so it's easy to operate with gloves on or numb, cold hands. The clamshell is notched on opposite sides to allow for quick shifting to vertical orientation. The notches bottom out slightly past what would normally be the leveling point, so it's still necessary to square things up in the viewfinder or use a bubble level for critical compositions. It needs absolutely no grease or lubricant of any kind. That's one factor that sold me on this ballhead. Those nasty, greasy Bogen/Manfrottos and others irritated the hell out of me. The finish is essentially self lubricating and very resistant to wear. I've had mine for at least three years, banged it around in my truck, dropped it on the sidewalk, and only the tiniest dings have appeared - none on the ball itself. The design may have shortcomings for some users. Because a single lever and clamshell clamp are used there's not really any fine control over friction. That's something the more expensive, multi-knob designs do better. So panning and up/down sweeping tracking of moving targets is not as fluid as with other ballheads. But I've gotten accustomed to working with it so it doesn't bother me most of the time. I typically use it while sitting on the ground with the tripod set very low. I'll place my left hand on the ballhead and operate the camera with the right when tracking laterally moving targets. Works well enough. The ballhead doesn't sag - it's very rigid. However my inexpensive Slik 300DX legset does sag a bit because there's a rubber or synthetic ring between the top of the legset and bottom of the ballhead. Also, the Slik uses synthetic collets on the center post and leg locks. Don't get me wrong, it's a very good tripod, comparable to the Bogen/Manfrotto 3001 (tho' better in my opinion). But it doesn't exactly do its part in minimizing sag. So I have to guesstimate how far above the target to center my aiming point, so that when I let go the target is within the desired framing. I should probably get a better tripod, but I don't want the extra weight and, frankly, none of the carbon fiber legsets I've tried are any better. The PH273 comes standard with a large roughly oval shaped head that, at least on my model, is nicely corked. With all but the heaviest loads the friction is adequate to prevent shifting. However an all-metal quick release system would probably be better. (Now that I think about it, the cork may contribute a bit to sagging, as would the rubbery bottom of my Nikon D2H.) Velbon makes a pretty good QR for this tripod and almost any standard QR system can be used to replace the PH273 head, leaving the clamshell, ball and stalk that supports the head/QR. For some reason Velbon designates this as a "Pan Head", hence the PH in the PH273. It's not a tilt/pan head. Something must've gotten lost in the translation. I think Velbon is either a subsidiary of Hakuba or is imported by them. So you might find more info and photos on Hakuba's website. Velbon and Hakuba products are definitely not the same - I've examined them side by side in camera shops. I like the better Velbon products a little more, but the Hakubas aren't bad either. apr 14,
2005; This will sound strange but consider instead a Leica large ballhead for tabletop tripod. It's great, small and strong. apr 14,
2005; What camera and lenses will you use with this tripod? apr 14,
2005; Ditto what the others said about the Acratech, which is a great product. I also have the Foba M-1 (with quick release plate) which is very good considering its light weight. But obviously the Acratech is better. Both of them slip a bit when locking, but tolerable. I would not worry too much about the published max load figures. Person Who Originally Asked the
Question apr 14,
2005; Thanks for the suggestions. In response to some of the issues raised:
apr 14,
2005; Keep in mind that the Velbon PH273 is their largest ballhead. I got that size because I typically use my Nikons with motor drives - heavy loads so I figured I needed a bigger head. For a lighter weight camera one of Velbon's smaller magnesium ballheads of the same design would do just fine. I looked at Foba, Bogen/Manfrotto and one other type of ballhead in a local shop the other day. I'm still satisfied with the Velbon. I hardly notice the weight and that's saying something for me - I busted up my back and neck in a car wreck a few years ago so I try to save weight wherever possible. The only way I could do better is to buy one of those new mysterium legsets that are supposed to be lighter, stronger and more rigid than carbon fiber. apr 14,
2005; I have a Leica head and it will support what you're suggesting. It has a machined, groved ball that locks rock solid. I'm guessing it weighs around 5 or 6 ounces and is about 3-inches tall, depending on which version you get. My used (?) vintage model is shorter than a new one, and has 1/4 and 3/8 interchangable threads on both ends (14110?). apr 14,
2005; Acratech Ultimate. apr 14,
2005; The Leica ball head seems to be a little too small (difficult to tell though, since B&H Photo doesn't list the weight and height) with a low maximum load of 2.5kg. The biggest lorig I've used withthe Leitz large tabletop tripod ballhead is a Nikon F5 with a 300mm f/2.8 AI-S everything was steady with no creep once locked down.. I once saw a photographer using it with Pentax 67 gear and another one using it with a Nikon F2 motordrive rig and the original (extremely large 80-200mm f/8 AI-s which out weighed the 300mm f/2.8. You'll have to trust me on this: it is an extremely capable head. Ofthe other heads you mention besides the Arca-Swiss B1 monoball, The Acratech is the best followed very closely by the Foba and Linhof Profi II heads. The other reason I like the Acratech Ultimate is because it is non-lubrication needed design and is very easy to clean. I've never been impressed with the Giotto, Slik or graf Studio ball heads (very, very unimpressed with the Graf Studio ball; I threw my second one into the Mississippi up near Davenport , IA after it failed on me after less than a year.). I haven't tested the lastest versions of the Gitzo heads but the older one's with the off center design had creep problems when I used them. My general advice is to stay away from ballheads which need lubrication. apr 14,
2005; Call Scott at Acratech and tell him you want a second. I paid 250 for mine with a lens plate. The reason it was a second? I don't know, I haven't found anything wrong with it and it's coming up on a year this month. apr 14,
2005; Oh, I routinely have a D60 w/grip and two batteries, a 70-200 2.8L IS, a 25mm tube, a 1.4 converter and a 550ex strobe on it with no problems. apr 14,
2005; I have a Studioball (the big one) that I've used for almost 10 years now...rock solid...it is by far my favorite ball head. (It is very heavy!) I have no experience with the Miniball...but I can vouch that they make a quality product. I also have an Arca Swiss which I rarely use...I know it is the popular ball head on photo.net but I am pretty unimpressed with it. Mostly it sits collecting dust. I have used the Foba before and it is also a very good ball head. |
