I just purchased a set of the new Bogen Carbon fiber legs(the 190Cx3's-2.8 Lbs/11.1 lbs max load). I abandoned the center column, and have my Manfrotto 486RC2 ball head mounted directly to the legs with 2 stainless steel washers and a 3/8 inch ss bolt (I had to do a bit of filing to get the surface flush.) Of course after I started filing, I thought to myself-"I should have just coughed up the extra 250$ for the Gitzo's....too late.) I have attatched a bungee cord to the tripod to stand on for stability in wind. Anyway, the set-up seems very stable-more so than my Manfrotto 3021bpro legs that I have been using with the same head(confirmed through tests with my 70-200 f2.8L). Now I am thinking about spending some $ on a better head-I think this might be the weakest link at this point.
My setup is Canon 5D, 16-35 f2.8L II, and 70-200 f2.8L(which I think I am going to trade in for the lighter f4)
I want the lightest, and smallest head, that is going to be rock solid with the equipment I have. I don't plan on getting any heavier lenses in the future, and I hope to never have to replace it.
I was thinking about the Really Right Stuff BH40, the Markins M-10, or the Kirk BH-3
I like the RRS most so far, just because it is the lightest, smallest-(and looks the coolest)
Anyone have any suggestions or personal preferences?
Thanks, Chip
Posted by Zack Schnepf on April 6, 2008 at 1:41 PM
Hey Chip, I was just researching this for myself. I have a Gitzo 1028 tripod which is really light and sturdy, ideal for hiking. My old kirk ballhead was feeling a little heavy with this tripod so I was looking at the really right stuff BH-25 LR ultra lightweight ballhead, that will be my next ballhead when I can afford it. It only weighs half a pound, amazing.
Chip,
I use the Markin's M10 and the RRS BH40. The difference in weight is only a couple of ounces if you include the lever clamp. I find the Markins smoother while panning the ball. Also at times the lever on the RRS drives me nuts because it hits the camera. Of course you can pull it out and reset its position, but its an extra step. The two slots are nice though. Finally, the RRS like the Kirk is 3 knobs while the Markins is only 2. I prefer only 2.
Also there is a smaller version of the Markins - I think it's the Q10, but that may be too small for a 70-200 f2.8.
How light is light?
My backpacking tripod and ballhead weighs 2.5 pounds total. I wouldn't put a 70-200 2.8 on it though. It's mainly for my D80 with the 18/200 lens.
Thanks so far guys. I don't need the panning feature at all actually. I think in the long run, the heaviest lens I will be using is a 70-200 f4-about a 1 1/2 lbs, probably with a tripod collar.
Zack-I saw the BH-25, but wondered if this would be too small. I also wonder if this is even as stable as my Bogen 486RC2, which I only payed 65$ for....any thoughts?? (Bogen max=13.2lbs, BH-25=8.8) They are recommending the BH-25 for use with non-pro dslrs and kit lenses.
I have a Markins and have compared it to many other ballheads. It's the smoothest and the locking knob on the main tension knob has never slipped or loosened. I torture this ballhead and it's been awesome for the last 2 years. Highly endorsed. http://www.markinsamerica.com/MA5/M10.php
I know people that don't like the large silver tension knob on the RSS ballheads - I'm not sure how you adjust tension or if it has a definable tension range like the Markins has. Unfortunately I don't know anyplace where you could compare these side-by side here in the PNW.....
Chip - the panning smoothness is nice even if you are not panning. It's nice just to be able to smoothly move the camera position to the correct comp. Also the tripod max weight is misleading. You must also take into account the flex in the legs when you are shooting at higher telephoto values - like 200mm. Just because the tripod is rated at the weight doesn't mean it is stable at high telephoto values.
Ditto what's been said about Markins. I've got the Q3 on bogen 441 CF legs and it's rock solid even with my 100-400. Also by far the smoothest ballhead I've ever used.
all 3 heads you've named are excellent. I have the Kirk BH-3 and love it, it's light, compact and pretty solid, though I am not sure I would use it with the 70-200 2.8. Markins has a better load ratio in theory, but when the BH-3 is the only one that comes with a QR plate standard...saving you 50-100 bucks...
I went through the same process last year, i.e. I wanted the lightest possible tripod combo, that is also reasonably sturdy. I ended up with the Gitzo 0530 and RRS BH25. The total weight is just under 2 lbs (1.6lbs plus 6.5 oz). I use this for my 5D, 28-70/2.8L, TS-E24, and 70-200/4L IS. I wouldn't use it for anything heavier than those cameras and lenses, but for this equipment it works great! The BH25 is strong enough, but keep in mind that it only has one release lever so panning and tilting the head is done simultaneously; you may or may not like this.
Now I have just ordered a B2 AS II clamp to replace the RC0 quick release clamp on my Manfrotto 488RC0 ballhead too, and use that wonderful RRS camera QR plate (B5D) for both tripods.
I found the plate for the 5D on Markins' web site 50$. The head is 270$, supports 65lbs, and weighs 13 oz. Almost sounds too good to be true(except for the price....) I just wonder if it will considerably more solid than my Bogen...
Inge-That sounds like a pretty ideal setup. Do you find that head to be solid in wind with the tripod stabablized. I want to make sure that if I am going to fork out the $ on a decent head, it is rock solid and I can completely eliminate it as the cause of any softness.
I use the RRS L bracket on a 40D with the Markins with no problems. It's compatible with any Arca Swiss/RRS/Kirk plate as far as I know. For the 100-400 I use the same qr plate I used with a Graf Studioball, Mini-Studioball, and now the Markins.
Posted by Kevin Pieper on April 6, 2008 at 10:25 PM
Chip, I have a gitzo 1540 for backpacking, and use my kirk bh-3 on it. I'm looking to get rid of the kirk, however, as the tension knob drives me nuts (it works itself loose over time). I'll probably go to the markins as well.
Posted by Chip Phillips on April 6, 2008 at 10:30 PM
Kevin, are you thinking about the Q3? Do you use an L-clamp. I know this keeps the camera more centered, but is it really necessary for my 5d+16-35? I do a lot of vert. shots-do you think it would work well w/o the L clamp?
Posted by John Lehmkuhl on April 6, 2008 at 11:57 PM
The L-bracket is a must own if you have not tried one, Chip. You can keep the same locked down comp and take the camera off, flip it and capture the same comp in Portrait aspect. It's also a lot more solid on the camera than just a small plate. I have a plate right now on my 20D but have an L-bracket for the battery pack and it drives me nuts that the plate gets loose on me all the time !!
I have just the standard plate on the Markins M-10 that has the indentation lock (which is totally necessary) but it didn't have the built-in bubble-level when I got mine.
Thanks guys! Maybe I will look into the Markins Q3 with a RRS L-plate.....I looked on the RRS website and only saw one universal L-plate that didn't specifically fit the 5D. I might call them a ask about it tomorrow.
Posted by David Taylor on April 7, 2008 at 1:48 AM
also, you may want to consider Feisol (feisol.net). My business partner just picked one up. Quite impressive, he also got one of their lightweight ball heads. The build quality is very good - and very light. Just my 2 cents
I bought the BH-40 from RRS and really like the ballhead. Now....with that said...if I could do it over again, I would get the Markins. It isnt that the RRS ballhead is horrable, It is VERY well built (feels like it is cut from one hunk of granite), durable, and looks very nice to boot, but that knob that they chose to adjust rotation on the base is right next to the other knob and is kinda tight to use. I would much rather have 2 knobs than the 3 they use is all. Other than that small problem...the RRS ballhead is not a bad choice....just not the best choice.
Hope this helps.
Roman
Posted by Chip Phillips on April 7, 2008 at 12:03 PM
Thanks Roman! I'm thinking the Markins Q3 with a RRS L-plate...
Thanks Rick-I checked those out as well. The Q3 was the lightest weight and handled the biggest load, and was the cheapest so I got one. I also ordered the L-Plate from RRS. I am putting my 70-200 f2.8L on ebay tonight. I plan on getting the lighter f4. The guy at RRS said I shouldn't need a collar for it with the L-Plate and a good head....Thanks very much for all the suggestions!!!!
Posted by Kevin Pieper on April 7, 2008 at 3:01 PM
I was thinking the markins M-10- a little heavier than the Q3, but I would use it on my heavier tripod as well.
As far as an L-plate. I highly recommend. I use the RRS for my 5D-makes shooting verticals much easier.
1. As stated above I use the Markins Q3 with a 100-400 mounted on a 40D body and it is rock solid. I'm sure it would handle a 70-200 no problem. For my lenses that don't have a tripod collar I have the RRS L Bracket on the body. Again, rock solid.
2. Once you shoot with a RRS L bracket you'll never shoot without one by choice. I got the 40D for Christmas and went on a shooting trip a week later before the new L bracket arrived. (the bracket I used for my 10D was NOT compatible with the 40D) I shoot a lot of verticals and every time I had to flop the tripod head over on it's side and recompose I said a lot of bad words.
Cool. I'm pretty excited to try it out! I just purchased a steel eye bolt to hold the head to tripod with, and plan on using bungee cords, or stuff sacks full of rocks to steady it in wind.
If you have not purchased the f.4 70 - 200, try the 70-300 DO --- it's becoming my standard hiking lense. It's an f 4, and I do lose speed, but it's a wonderful lense. Nancy
Discussion
31 repliesMy setup is Canon 5D, 16-35 f2.8L II, and 70-200 f2.8L(which I think I am going to trade in for the lighter f4)
I want the lightest, and smallest head, that is going to be rock solid with the equipment I have. I don't plan on getting any heavier lenses in the future, and I hope to never have to replace it.
I was thinking about the Really Right Stuff BH40, the Markins M-10, or the Kirk BH-3
I like the RRS most so far, just because it is the lightest, smallest-(and looks the coolest)
Anyone have any suggestions or personal preferences?
Thanks, Chip
I use the Markin's M10 and the RRS BH40. The difference in weight is only a couple of ounces if you include the lever clamp. I find the Markins smoother while panning the ball. Also at times the lever on the RRS drives me nuts because it hits the camera. Of course you can pull it out and reset its position, but its an extra step. The two slots are nice though. Finally, the RRS like the Kirk is 3 knobs while the Markins is only 2. I prefer only 2.
Also there is a smaller version of the Markins - I think it's the Q10, but that may be too small for a 70-200 f2.8.
Hope this helps
My backpacking tripod and ballhead weighs 2.5 pounds total. I wouldn't put a 70-200 2.8 on it though. It's mainly for my D80 with the 18/200 lens.
Zack-I saw the BH-25, but wondered if this would be too small. I also wonder if this is even as stable as my Bogen 486RC2, which I only payed 65$ for....any thoughts?? (Bogen max=13.2lbs, BH-25=8.8) They are recommending the BH-25 for use with non-pro dslrs and kit lenses.
Chip - the panning smoothness is nice even if you are not panning. It's nice just to be able to smoothly move the camera position to the correct comp. Also the tripod max weight is misleading. You must also take into account the flex in the legs when you are shooting at higher telephoto values - like 200mm. Just because the tripod is rated at the weight doesn't mean it is stable at high telephoto values.
RRS does have a good return policy so try one.
I went through the same process last year, i.e. I wanted the lightest possible tripod combo, that is also reasonably sturdy. I ended up with the Gitzo 0530 and RRS BH25. The total weight is just under 2 lbs (1.6lbs plus 6.5 oz). I use this for my 5D, 28-70/2.8L, TS-E24, and 70-200/4L IS. I wouldn't use it for anything heavier than those cameras and lenses, but for this equipment it works great! The BH25 is strong enough, but keep in mind that it only has one release lever so panning and tilting the head is done simultaneously; you may or may not like this.
Now I have just ordered a B2 AS II clamp to replace the RC0 quick release clamp on my Manfrotto 488RC0 ballhead too, and use that wonderful RRS camera QR plate (B5D) for both tripods.
Inge-That sounds like a pretty ideal setup. Do you find that head to be solid in wind with the tripod stabablized. I want to make sure that if I am going to fork out the $ on a decent head, it is rock solid and I can completely eliminate it as the cause of any softness.
I would suggest a L-plate for your 5D from RRS.
I have just the standard plate on the Markins M-10 that has the indentation lock (which is totally necessary) but it didn't have the built-in bubble-level when I got mine.
Here is a link to the RRS L-plate for 5D - w/o battery grip:
http://reallyrightstuff.com/rrs/Itemdesc.asp?ic=B5D%2DL&eq=&Tp=
If you have a battery grip this is the correct one:
http://reallyrightstuff.com/rrs/Itemdesc.asp?ic=BGE4%2DL&eq=&Tp=
Dave-I'll check it out.
Hope this helps.
Roman
Go here: Acratech
We have two that have been all over hill n dale on our backpacks, bounced in the back of our truck and jeep and always work!!
As far as an L-plate. I highly recommend. I use the RRS for my 5D-makes shooting verticals much easier.
1. As stated above I use the Markins Q3 with a 100-400 mounted on a 40D body and it is rock solid. I'm sure it would handle a 70-200 no problem. For my lenses that don't have a tripod collar I have the RRS L Bracket on the body. Again, rock solid.
2. Once you shoot with a RRS L bracket you'll never shoot without one by choice. I got the 40D for Christmas and went on a shooting trip a week later before the new L bracket arrived. (the bracket I used for my 10D was NOT compatible with the 40D) I shoot a lot of verticals and every time I had to flop the tripod head over on it's side and recompose I said a lot of bad words.