Ballhead advice

LiveAwake

I think I've finally outgrown the Manfrotto RC2 line . . . my 496RC2 just doesn't quite have the holding power I need - I've noticed that with my 28-300 lens even most of the way zoomed in, if I'm shooting in portrait orientation, it creeps down ever so slowly no matter how much I ream on the lock lever or friction knob.

So . . . been doing some research, and looking very closely at the Acratech Ultimate GP. More than I want to spend, but I like the design, weighs under 1lb, looks very well made, and gets good reviews. So, a couple of questions:

• Has anyone had personal experience with this (or the other Acratech) heads, and can speak to its strength. Specifically, will it resist swiveling down under this kind of load in portrait mode?
• Will I have to replace all of my RC2 plates with other plates, or will they fit on the Acratech?

If I do have to replace the plates, can someone recommend a good brand/model that has a D-ring on the bottom much like the RC2 plates? I use the D-ring to clip in my strap when not on the tripod, so this is a must for me.


Thanks!

pathfinder

My wife has used an Acratech ball head for a number of years - 8-10 yrs - for her cameras and lenses - typical 5DMIII and a Sigma 24-105 or a Canon 70-200 f4 iS L. I always envy her the lightness of it, but it seems pretty strong and capable. It has held up under significant use and travel. They are very good tools.

But my preference is to use ball heads from ReallyRightStuff - For a 28-300 I would probably favor a RRS BH40 LR for $375 - a bit heavier, but undoubtably stronger and more durable. IMO

IF you really want strong, consider the BH55 which is my preferred head for shooting time exposures in the dark with large 1 series bodies and large fast primes at night, where you absolutely do not want any camera movement or shifting.

LiveAwake

Hm, thanks for your thoughts. Weight is very important to me as I do a lot of hiking and traveling with my gear, so the BH55 is definitely out . . . but it looks like the BH40 LR might actually be about the same weight or even slightly lighter than the Acratech. I see two different numbers on the RRS website, but both are within an ounce. The design doesn't seem quite as versatile as the Acratech, but I know RRS makes great stuff. Can you say for certain that the RRS BH40 will be stronger than the Acratech Ultimate GP?

Any other opinions?

pathfinder

I understand the weight concerns. When asked about the best tripod, I always tell people that the best tripod you want to have, when are ready to set up and shoot, is exactly the tripod you will absolutely hate when you have to carry it. Heavier tripods generally are more stable than lighter ones, even if they are made of unobtanium and carbon fibre.

I have not actually used the specific Acratech you are asking about, but I have used my wife's Acratech, and I choose to use a BH40, despite the greater weight. What more do I have to say?

The Acratech GP ( this one right ?? http://www.acratech.net/ballheads/gp/gp ) looks pretty nice, even able to be used upside down as a leveling base for panos. Cool.

As much as I like carbon fibre and modern polymers, high grade aluminum still offers great strength for its weight. My tripod legs are carbon fibre, ( or wood ) but my ball heads remain machined metal. Maybe I am just old fashioned.

Actually the BH 40 LR weighs 336 grams, and the Acratech GP weighs 454 grams, so you can have metal and save 100 grams to boot.

I think they are both great products, and either will probably meet your needs. Are you planning on shutter speeds of tenths, one hundredths, or shutter speeds of seconds to many minutes?

LiveAwake

I'm on the fence between the one you linked to and this one: http://www.acratech.net/ballheads/ultimate/ultimate-gp-ballhead

Acratech ballheads are actually machined aluminum, not carbon.

I do longer exposures, often between 10-60 seconds, so any creep will cause blur.

David_S85

I also use the BH-40. Love it, along with some of their various clamp options. 5DIII with 70-200 or 400 - stable as all heck. For portability, they also offer two smaller ball heads.

puzzledpaul

I've not seen or used any of these heads, so not in a position to make any informed comments, but noticed a couple of things.

Didn't see any dimensions, but the BH40 doesn't seem as high / tall as the Acratech.
My experience of fiddling around with allen keys (in the field - especially under less than ideal conditions) has led me to avoid setups that use them when making the bits of custom kit that I have.

Whilst irrelevant here, I've been using an inverted Gitzo PL5 head as a turntable base (immersed in water) for a while ... so was interested to read about the Acratech's usp

pp

kdog

puzzledpaul wrote: »

My experience of fiddling around with allen keys (in the field - especially under less than ideal conditions) has led me to avoid setups that use them when making the bits of custom kit that I have.

Which ballhead requires that?

puzzledpaul

kdog wrote: »

Which ballhead requires that?

The Acratech during conversion to a pano head ... according to the vid mentioned on post #5.

pp

David_S85

My RRS ballhead is also a pano head, sort of. I've never ever required an allen key using it.



I use this RRS setup…
http://www.reallyrightstuff.com/Shop/Panorama-Packages-for-Single-Multi-Row/

Yeah, not cheap, but very very fast to attach the slider bar onto the clamp in the field once you know the setting for each lens you have.

LiveAwake

Thanks all for the feedback. Can anyone speak to my other questions - will I have to replace the RC2 plates, and if so, can someone recommend one that has a D-ring on the bottom?

Tom Foster

Have you considered getting the Manfrotto 498RC2? Bigger and sturdier than the 496, I've got one and have had no problems with the camera moving (apart from when I've not tightened the plate properly)!

LiveAwake

Spectacular Edinburgh wrote: »

Have you considered getting the Manfrotto 498RC2? Bigger and sturdier than the 496, I've got one and have had no problems with the camera moving (apart from when I've not tightened the plate properly)!

I thought of it, but I'd like to keep the head at 1lb or less.

lifeinfocus

David_S85 wrote: »

I use this RRS setup…
http://www.reallyrightstuff.com/Shop/Panorama-Packages-for-Single-Multi-Row/

Yeah, not cheap, but very very fast to attach the slider bar onto the clamp in the field once you know the setting for each lens you have.

Thanks for posting this. I have a friend at our camera club who does quite a few panoramic shots and will find this useful.

Phil

David_S85

lifeinfocus wrote: »

Thanks for posting this. I have a friend at our camera club who does quite a few panoramic shots and will find this useful.
Phil

Hey, no problem. There is an old tutorial on pano head setup here: http://dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=202830

lifeinfocus

David_S85 wrote: »

Hey, no problem. There is an old tutorial on pano head setup here: http://dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=202830

Thank you! I am putting together a "Picture Perfect Panoramic" article for our camera club newsletter and I will include that link.

Question? When using that type of pano head setup does the resulting image need post processing any or very little correction after stitching the images together? Does it making stitching easier?

Phil

David_S85

lifeinfocus wrote: »

Thank you! I am putting together a "Picture Perfect Panoramic" article for our camera club newsletter and I will include that link.
Question? When using that type of pano head setup does the resulting image need post processing any or very little correction after stitching the images together? Does it making stitching easier?
Phil

Yes. What I like to do is first is make sure I've done a good job with alignment on the rig for the focal length because the closer any foreground objects are, the dicier it gets. Think indoor real estate pano's here. Once that's figured out, you can just repeat this step easily by just logging the setting. More distant objects aren't as prone to cause parallax errors, if at all.


360 I made for the realtor's VR in the listing

The images making up the panorama are best taken in full manual with a locked white balance. Makes for easier stitching. Proper overlap in images is important (roughly 15-25%). The subs then get processed to correct for any barrel or pincushion distortion, since severe distortion can confuse a stitching app. Again, all post processing of the subs should be treated equally, no matter what you do there.



I use a very old version of Panorama Factory (Windows), necessitating many of the above steps. PS will undoubtedly do a better and faster job, and can be set up to do a myriad of things to each image automatically before it begins to assemble the pano. PS has at least five projection types now for resulting images.

There are several other dedicated stitching packages out there that cost far less than PS.

Tom Foster

LiveAwake wrote: »

I thought of it, but I'd like to keep the head at 1lb or less.

Ok, sounds reasonable! I just thought I'd suggest it as it's a great head and isn't actually all that heavy to me, guess that's a fairly subjective thing though!