Ball Head Recommendations

tpower

QUESTION: Looking for opinions/advice on the choices between Kirk, RRS, Arca Swiss, and Acratech ball heads and between particular models within the recommended brand - double pan vs. single pan; flip lock vs screw lock for quick release, etc...

BACKGROUND:
Tripod: Gitzo 2530
Lenses: Canon EF 100-400mm zoom and smaller
Use: General Purpose, including backpacking and hiking. Shooting birds and wildlife. Airshows.

Thank you,
Tommy

Scott_Quier

FWIW - I've had the ultimate ballhead Acratech Ultimate Ballhead for more than just a couple of years now and have not had ANY problems with it. I've actually mounted the EF 100-400 on it and it was rock steady (or at least enough for my needs).

Were I to buy another ballhead, I think I would take a serious look at the Acratech V2 Ballhead.

DavidTO

RRS BH40 LRII

Richard

DavidTO wrote:

RRS BH40 LRII

+1

Very sweet.

tpower

Digging Deeper (Andy, are you reading?)
Thank you very much for the input. I would like to dig a little deeper before I make this purchase:

• Why do you love the Acratech?

• What makes the RRS so sweet? (Would love to hear from Andy on this, too).

• Why has no one yet mentioned the unit that was my front-runner until I started reading posts to this board (Arca Swiss Z1 with double pan and the screw-style (as opposed to flip lever) quick release)?

I am looking primarily for:

1. Differentiators between these units,
2. Pros (why I will be glad I bought the unit and passed on the others), and
3. Cons (what will make me wish I had bought something else).

Thanks!
Tommy

Scott_Quier

See embedded responses:

tpower wrote:

Thank you very much for the input. I would like to dig a little deeper before I make this purchase:

• Why do you love the Acratech?
  • It's light
  • It's solid - When you lock it down, it stays there - no issues, no worries.
  • If used the ballhead in 0 degree weather and in 100+ degree weather. The rubberized nobs are easy on the hands.
  • There's no lubrication on the ball to collect dirt/grit
  • If the ball does get dusty - it's a simple job to clean it
  • Dealing with the people (I found a need to call them when I screwed up an order) - they corrected the order over the phone with no hassles. - Very easy to deal with.

1. Differentiators between these units,
2. Pros (why I will be glad I bought the unit and passed on the others), and
3. Cons (what will make me wish I had bought something else).I hvae found one con - there are three knobs on the device and it's sometimes easy to get them mixed up when you have your eye to the viewfinder. Doesn't happen much any more, but in the beginning it was something I needed to pay a little more attention to.

Thanks!
Tommy

Richard

tpower wrote:

• What makes the RRS so sweet? (Would love to hear from Andy on this, too).

Precise, solid, zero-maintenance and not too big or heavy. The lever quick release is fast to use and pretty much impossible to screw up. The variable tension adjust lets you choose how easily the camera will move before you lock it down. I like the ergonomics of the lever lock down knob as well, as it seems surer to me when wearing gloves in winter than a round knob.

What I can't offer is a comparison to other high-end ball heads, as what I had previously was not in the same league. Thinking about it, I don't think I have ever seen a post from an unsatisfied RRS customer. Poorer, yes, to be sure.

claudermilk

I can only echo what Richard said. That pretty much sums up my feelings on the BH-40-LRII. Each control is different (lever for main locking, a knurled knob for preload, and a 4-lug knob for the pano base lock--easy to ID by feel). As with Richard this has been my only high-end head I've owned, but barring purchase of any really big guns, I don't anticipate ever needing another. It's a joy to use.

DavidTO

RRS is the only gear to buy when it comes to ballheads and pano gear.

tpower

DavidTO wrote:

RRS BH40 LRII

Thanks, David. I found the following note on the RRS site regarding this unit:

"A note about choosing the BH-40 LR II ballhead:</B< font> The clamp that comes installed on this ballhead is our full-size B2 AS II clamp. This clamp is larger than the clamp that comes installed on the BH-40 LR ballhead. If the diameter of your tripod platform is larger than the base diameter of the ballhead (2.1"/53mm) you may experience clearance issues when using the drop notch. The larger B2 AS II clamp cannot freely clear wider platforms because the head itself has such a low profile. This is not an issue if you only use L-plates, but we strongly urge you to choose the BH-40 LR ballhead instead of the BH-40 LR II ballhead if you use conventional body plates."

So my question to you is: Do you use "conventional body plates" and if so, has this created any problems for you?

DavidTO

No, RRS L plates only.

Richard

tpower wrote:

So my question to you is: Do you use "conventional body plates" and if so, has this created any problems for you?

I also use an L-plate, so I have hardly ever used the drop notch. If you are really sure that you will only be shooting landscape orientation, then it is not an issue, but if not it would be wise to pay attention to the warning. One of the nice things about RRS is that they tell it like it is.

DavidTO

Richard wrote:

I also use an L-plate, so I have hardly ever used the drop notch. If you are really sure that you will only be shooting landscape orientation, then it is not an issue, but if not it would be wise to pay attention to the warning. One of the nice things about RRS is that they tell it like it is.

Yeah, there's really not much sense in having a great ballhead like that and then not using an L plate.

tpower

Richard wrote:

I also use an L-plate, so I have hardly ever used the drop notch. If you are really sure that you will only be shooting landscape orientation, then it is not an issue, but if not it would be wise to pay attention to the warning. One of the nice things about RRS is that they tell it like it is.

David, Richard,

This is great information. I probably want to reserve the capacity to use the drop slots, as I would like to be able to change from landscape to portrait on the fly.

1. What am I giving up by going with the LR instead of the LR II, other than a large clamp lever and (I believe) the spirit level?
2. How important have you found the large clamp lever and spirit level to be in your work?
3. I am quite the noob, and have never used an L-plate. My understanding is that you cannot use an L-plate to go to portrait on the fly, but if this is not correct, please re-calibrate me.

Thanks again,
Tommy

DavidTO

tpower wrote:

David, Richard,

This is great information. I probably want to reserve the capacity to use the drop slots, as I would like to be able to change from landscape to portrait on the fly.

1. What am I giving up by going with the LR instead of the LR II, other than a large clamp lever and (I believe) the spirit level?
2. How important have you found the large clamp lever and spirit level to be in your work?
3. I am quite the noob, and have never used an L-plate. My understanding is that you cannot use an L-plate to go to portrait on the fly, but if this is not correct, please re-calibrate me.

Thanks again,
Tommy

You're missing the point of the L bracket. It allows you to change from landscape to portrait faster, easier and without changing the center of focus. It's betterer. And the reason the why the size of the base of your tripod isn't an issue is that you don't need to use that feature because you have a better feature.

Richard

DavidTO wrote:

You're missing the point of the L bracket. It allows you to change from landscape to portrait faster, easier and without changing the center of focus. It's betterer. And the reason the why the size of the base of your tripod isn't an issue is that you don't need to use that feature because you have a better feature.

The drop notch also forces you to use the panning base to move left and right, so you have to lock down twice. To me, this seriously reduces the convenience of a ball head.

tpower

DavidTO wrote:

You're missing the point of the L bracket. It allows you to change from landscape to portrait faster, easier and without changing the center of focus. It's betterer. And the reason the why the size of the base of your tripod isn't an issue is that you don't need to use that feature because you have a better feature.

Hmmm. It is clear that I do not fully understand LB usage. I get that you are saying that the LB obviates the need to use the slot, and therefore the tripod base clearance issue goes away. I just guess I need a tutorial on LB usage. If I frame a shot in landscape and then decide I prefer portrait, then to use the LB, don't I have to take the camera off the head, install the LB, and then re-install?

Puzzled,
Tommy

P. S. With the 100-400 this shouldn't be an issue because of the rotating lens mount ring, right?

Richard

tpower wrote:

Hmmm. It is clear that I do not fully understand LB usage. I get that you are saying that the LB obviates the need to use the slot, and therefore the tripod base clearance issue goes away. I just guess I need a tutorial on LB usage. If I frame a shot in landscape and then decide I prefer portrait, then to use the LB, don't I have to take the camera off the head, install the LB, and then re-install?

Puzzled,
Tommy

P. S. With the 100-400 this shouldn't be an issue because of the rotating lens mount ring, right?

No need for the slot. My L-bracket never leaves my camera. All you need to do to switch orientation is open the quick release, reposition the camera and close the release lever again. Takes about 10 seconds. The bracket is machined on the bottom and on one side. The RRS bracket is finished well enough that it never bothers me when I am hand-holding, which is most of the time.

I believe you are correct about the 100-400 mount, but I don't have one myself.

OffTopic

I can't imagine life without my RRS L-plate.


I have an Arca-Swiss B1 with QR (the precursor to the Z1). I was torn between that and the RRS, but RRS was so backed up with orders at the time and I didn't want to wait. I absolutely love my Arca-Swiss, build quality is exceptional, the fluid movement of the ballhead is a thing of beauty, I just love it and it really made me enjoy using a tripod again. But two things to keep in mind; one, it's on the heavy side (although the Z1 is a little smaller and lighter than the B1, and the weight is comparable to the RRS BH-55), and two there is only one certified repair shop for Arca-Swiss in the entire US and it's in Chicago. I spent a little too much time in the desert dust last winter/spring without properly protecting my tripod head and now I really should have it taken apart and cleaned, but I don't know how I'm going to do without my tripod head for a couple of weeks. (And they're a little too pricey to have a backup on standby).

DavidTO

Richard wrote:

Takes about 10 seconds.

Only if your buddy is holding one of your arms behind your back and you're forced to close the quick-release with your tongue.

Richard

DavidTO wrote:

Only if your buddy is holding one of your arms behind your back and you're forced to close the quick-release with your tongue.

You mean that's not the way to do it? Guess I better RTFM...

davidweaver

I have a 2530ex with a bh-55LR. Got the 55 over the 40 as I wanted something I would use in studio and that the slight extra weight was okay if I was packing gear.

Get the larger plate on the bh40. it about 1.5 inches wider. Get "L" plates for your gear. Everything said about why to do is true in my experience.

It's worth the expense.

Cheers,
David

Manfr3d

I own the Acratech UMB V2 and my girlfriend the UMB. Both
work absolutely fine. Very light, durable, comfortable. I can
only recommend it. It holds my 70-200/2.8L very steady,
I doubt that it would be anydifferent with your 100-400.

cmason

The point of the L plate is that you do not have to move the ball head at all. You simply quick release the camera and L plate, change orientation and start shooting. this is especially useful when you dont have level ground, and you spent considerable time leveling your camera on the ball head. If you use the ball head to switch orientations you have to futz with it to ensure it is level again.

Btw I am eyeing the Kirk BH3, since it is very well respected, comparable to the RSS and cheaper. YMMV

gryphonslair99

If you ever get bigger glass take a look at the Bruzynski tripod head. It's expensive, but it is rock solid and designed for big glass.

http://www.naturfotograf.com/burzynski.html

It's not a head for everybody, but it is rock solid, easy to use and with an Arca Swiss QR on the top it is hard to beat in a lot of ways.

tpower

Richard wrote:

No need for the slot. My L-bracket never leaves my camera. All you need to do to switch orientation is open the quick release, reposition the camera and close the release lever again. Takes about 10 seconds. The bracket is machined on the bottom and on one side. The RRS bracket is finished well enough that it never bothers me when I am hand-holding, which is most of the time.

I believe you are correct about the 100-400 mount, but I don't have one myself.

I am still missing something here. With an L-bracket, don't you have to remove the camera/bracket assembly from the head, rotate it 90 degrees, and re-attach to the head in order to change from landscape to portrait or vice-versa? How is this not a more time-consuming operation than just releasing the ball, dropping into the slot, and retightening, which I envision taking 2-5 seconds?

Seems there may be some key bit of understanding that I am missing here, some additional complication that comes with the no-L-plate scenario. Is it the pan adjustment? I did not really follow what was said about that...

Thanks for bearing with me, guys.

DavidTO

tpower wrote:

I am still missing something here. With an L-bracket, don't you have to remove the camera/bracket assembly from the head, rotate it 90 degrees, and re-attach to the head in order to change from landscape to portrait or vice-versa? How is this not a more time-consuming operation than just releasing the ball, dropping into the slot, and retightening, which I envision taking 2-5 seconds?

Seems there may be some key bit of understanding that I am missing here, some additional complication that comes with the no-L-plate scenario. Is it the pan adjustment? I did not really follow what was said about that...

Thanks for bearing with me, guys.

When you move the ballhead everything moves and you need to recompose. When you use the L bracket you're still pointing in the same direction, only having changed the orientation. It's easier to snap the quick release, slide the camera out and back in than it is to mess around with the ballhead. You've only got a couple of drop slots for putting the ballhead at 90 deg. as well, so you will most likely have to move the entire tripod to get the shot lined up. It's really a PITA. Trust us.

tpower

DavidTO wrote:

When you move the ballhead everything moves and you need to recompose. When you use the L bracket you're still pointing in the same direction, only having changed the orientation. It's easier to snap the quick release, slide the camera out and back in than it is to mess around with the ballhead. You've only got a couple of drop slots for putting the ballhead at 90 deg. as well, so you will most likely have to move the entire tripod to get the shot lined up. It's really a PITA. Trust us.

Thanks very much for the explanation. Very helpful (and persuasive). I will be going the L-bracket route and will likely purchase the RRS BH40 LRII as well. If anyone out there feels the need to convince me otherwise, time is running out!

ian408

tpower,

Go to www.reallyrightstuff.com and have a look around. There are some excellent guides that explain what makes RRS the best selection for your needs.

I have been a very satisfied RRS customer for some time (brackets, pano gear and ball head).

If I was to compare my RRS head to the Acratech, I would say the RRS is more intuitive and easier to use. The Acratech can be a challenge when you're trying to get things moved around in a hurry. This is especially true going between orientations. In my opinion, the Acratech is not as good a choice for a heavier setup (which matters to me).

I use my BH-55 with a Sidekick fairly regularly. I don't think this would be as easy nor as stable with the Acratech.

Don't let my comments dissuade you from Acratech. It's well crafted and in most instances, will perform well. However, you have a heavier camera/lens setup, you might want to consider the RRS gear instead.

claudermilk

Once you have used an L-bracket, you'll wonder why you waited so long. Yes, you do have to flip the lever open, rotate the camera, and close the lever. That is about the 2-5 seconds you mention--but without the subsequent recomposing due to camera movement. There is no downside to using an L-bracket over the drop notch...except maybe the cost difference and that is only once and fades quickly. Really, we wouldn't all be singing the praises of the BH-40LRII + L-bracket so loudly & long without good reason.

Oh, and with the long lenses using their own feet, the whole rotation thing becomes moot. But we all mount short lenses as well as long. I do. It's not the cheapest solution, but in practice it's by far the best & worth the cost.

rpcrowe

I agree with Claudermilk - I usually do!
The L-bracket is THE BEST WAY to mount a non-tripod ring equipped camera/lens on an Arca compatible quick release system.

http://reallyrightstuff.com/QR/05.html

Giottos and manfrotto have their versions of a generic L-bracket but, they are not camera specific and not anywhere near as slick as the RRS L-bracket.

Here's something very unusual about the Acratech heads. I saw an Acratech ball head (new but, blemished) selling on eBay. I emailed Acratech asking if the dealer was an "authorized vendor" for Acratech products and if the warranty would be in effect if I purchased the head on eBay. Acratech responded to say that they honor their lifetime warranty even if the head is purchased used. Not too many other manufacturers have that kind of liberal policy.