question about ballheads & leveling columns

Tango

looking at getting a ballhead...and some new legs...

i am never on level ground, i find that i spend way too much time getting my current tripod
level so i can do semi-pano shots...
adjust this leg a little, no wait, now this one down, no wait this ones gotta come back up...no wait...etc.etc...

ive never touched a ballhead or really even seen one up close...

first question:
how do i know if a ballhead is plumb level with the tripod itself? is there some kind of feel to it to let me know when its plumb level? a click maybe? how do you know?

second question:
the column leveling feature on the gitzo, does it make life better as apposed to adjusting
each leg until i get the legs level?
something like this:
http://www.gitzo.com/Jahia/site/gitzo/pid/4765?kindOfProductCollectionRequest=productDetail&productCode=GT2531LVL&productDescription=SER.2%206X%20LEVELING%203S%20G-LOCK&curBrandId=BGI&market=MKT1&actualPathCategoryKey=1CAT:AAA1:2CAT:BB59
:help

EarthDog

AaronNelson wrote:

how do i know if a ballhead is plumb level with tripod itself? is there some kind of feel to it to let me know when its plumb level? a click maybe? how do you know?

second question:
the column leveling feature on the gitzo, does it make life better as apposed to adjusting each leg until i get the legs level?

Ballheads: No, I don't think there are any that have a detent, or something like that, for true plumb. I'm not sure it's even possible, since there's no way of predicting what the angle would be. The other consideration is that, with a ballhead, you still need to either level the tripod (the top of the center column, specifically) the same way you're doing now, and then put the head on, or use another gizmo on top of the ballhead to provide the panning capability.

Levelling Columns: An excellent idea, which really makes a ballhead unnecessary, as it serves the same purpose. Then you can use whatever head you already have, assuming it has panning capability. So, yes, it does make life easier :

With either item, you will still need to use a bubble level to determine correct setup. I assume you have one but, if you don't (and for other readers), there are little ones that slip into a camera's hotshoe, some tripod manufacturers make ones that insert into a special slot on the 'pod, there are specialty items that have them built in (http://reallyrightstuff.com/rrs/Itemdesc.asp?ic=PCL-1&eq=&Tp, or you can just pick up a larger one on eBay for $2 and slip it in a pocket.

The panning clamp is very nice, if you don't mind dropping that much cash. The little slip-on ones are better than nothing, but they're so small that they're a pain to work with. Personally, I favor the $2 option because A) it's a lot easier on the budget, and it's a lot bigger than any of the other options, and therefore easier to use and more accurate. I can live with the fact that it's not going to make my fellow photographers envious.

Ok, if you're asking WHY you need a second device (or the same routine you're using now) with a ballhead, it's because of the same axis of rotation problem you have with your current setup. When you level the camera atop the ballhead, unless the tripod is also level, the shaft running from the ball to the camera mount is at some random angle to the base of the head. If you then rotate the upper part of the head, from the ball up, the camera's angle relative to the horizon changes.

I don't know why no one (that I know of) has invented a ballhead that pans from the top, instead of the bottom. The panning clamp is the same concept but, if you put it on a ballhead, you're paying for two panning devices, when you only need one. In fact, you have to disable one to allow the other one to work!

Tango

EarthDog wrote:

I don't know why no one (that I know of) has invented a ballhead that pans from the top, instead of the bottom. The panning clamp is the same concept but, if you put it on a ballhead, you're paying for two panning devices, when you only need one. In fact, you have to disable one to allow the other one to work!

ive been wondering the same thing....got a few hundred thousand to invest to get this going? it just seems to make sense to level the camera on the ballhead and then pan from between it and the camera.......
this is just another example of why im not a billionare yet...a good idea and no idea how to get it out there...

thanks for the reply, i think i will go with the leveling column for sure...
and besides i need the better tripod in general....and i could use a ballhead too,
i am very tired of my tilt/pan, just too much in adjusting during golden seconds if ya know what i mean....

so i guess i am now wondering more about my issues...
even with a ballhead i still need to level my legs first and then the ballhead after....
another idea....a ballhead that is easy to plumb level....

this is just great, i could take the tripod world by storm and instead im just writing the ideas here to be copied by anyone....

dancorder

I think the panning clamp that Earthdog is talking about is exactly what you want. Yes you will also have the ability to pan below the ball if you want to, but it's simple enough to just lock that adjustment and use the panning clamp.

Before buying a levelling column you should take a look at the PCL-1 made by Really Right Stuff: http://reallyrightstuff.com/pano/02.html (you can ignore the other pano gear for now and add it later if you want)

I went through the same process as you considering a levelling column but went with this instead, it also has a bubble level built in to help with getting it flat whatever angle the tripod is at. As you'll see on the page you can either attach it directly to a ball head or add a plate so you can put it on when you want. I attached mine directly as I'd only end up carrying it with me anyway and the extra plate and clamp would make things heavier overall.

While we're at it, you'll find loads of recommendations for ball heads in these forums if you search a little, the majority of people seem to recommend the RRS ball heads (although I'm sure a number of the others are also good). I went with a BH-40 and haven't regretted it.

Tango

thank you for pointing that out!...that is sweet!

also, i was thinking a bh-40 or 55 so i guess i need to add up the cost and sit down for a while to get over the shock....

thanks guys, im grateful for the help

Andy

Leveling column, I don't see the need

BH-40 if you are shooting 200mm or less most of the time. 300mm f/4, even f2/.8 will be fine on occasion - if you shoot regularly with a long heavy lens (300 f/2.8, 400 f/2.8, 500, 600 etc) then the BH-55 is a must.

The RRS Pano Elements rig is *awesome*

Tango

thanks Andy