Old Ries or new Berlebach tripod?

[tim atherton]

How many lenses do you own Kerry?

Ha - do you really want to know? Have you looked at his website? I'm guessing maybe 100...?

If you ask most large format photographers which they prefer I'm sure you'll find out most do not use a ballhead if they have been at it for any length of time.

Not many of the ones I know. As Kerry said - well - it depends who you ask. I know a good number of LF (8x10) photographers who use ballheads - mainly arca B1

Why would you recommend a wobbly ball head to a newcomer when the pros don't even use them. He will be frustrated the first time in the field.

Not recommending wobbly ballheads - but rather solid ones. As I said many pros (hmm - I'm a pro too...) use them.

And if you shoot 30 sheets of 8x10 before lunch with just even 15 keepers then you are one hell of a photographer. But that means you are carrying 15 film holders. So much for weight savings. Now if you are just carrying 2 or 3 then that means setting up a changing bag and reloading film in the field. If that is the case I would love to see 30 of those shots you made before noon.

Ah yes, but my film holders probably weigh around 1/3 of what yours do and are just over 1/3 as thick - it's fairly easy to carry 7-10 in the small backpack or shoulder bag with another 5 or 10 stashed.

One simple example - for one magazine story I did of diamond mines with the 8x10 @ -40c I think I shot about 45 sheets in the one day

A set of Gitzo 1325 legs (or somewhat cheaper aluminium ones) and an Arca B1 will give plenty of long term use with the Wehman and lenses up to 300mm + (with my setup I use this very easily with the 450mm lens - which is the longest I generally use). Bruce may find he doesn't really like a ballhead - like the Ries tripods, folk either seem to love them or hate them - in which case switch to the gitzo low profile - but I find the Arca B1 is actually more solid than the Gitzo low profiles - it certainly locks down tighter and doesn't have the creep they do unless you really exert some force when tightening them up.

And if he starts taking closeups of flowers with a 450mm lens or something - then yes, it may get a bit unwieldy. But only then - and I've done that with a 370mm lens on the above set-up with little problem

[Kerry L. Thalmann]

Robert,

You seem to have misunderstood my intentions. I never claimed a ballhead (or any head for that matter) is THE best solution for every conceivable application. I just offered an alternative that has worked well for me for cameras up to 12.5 lbs. and lenses up to 600mm (or 720mm telephoto).

On to your specific questions:

Why would you recommend somthing where he may have to make additional purchases in the future in order to meet the application?

Since I have no idea what his applications might be in the future, I simply recommended a combo that will easily support the equipment he specifically mentioned. The camera he mentioned is one of the lighter 8x10s available and the reason for his inquiry was to reduce the weight he has to carry. From his post, I inferred he puts a premium on weight. That may, or may not, be the case, but seems reasonable since he specifically asked about reducing weight. So, I merely suggested a lightweight combo that is easily capable of supporting the equipment he asked about - and more. To assume he will someday outgrow this combo is just that, an assumption. By no means is an 8.7 lb. camera and a 250mm lens pushing the limits of a Gitzo 1325 tripod and an ARCA-SWISS B1 ballhead. In fact, he's not even close to pushing the limits of what this combo can support. It could easily support a camera weighing five pounds more and a lens more than twice as long.

The real issue comes down to personal preference. You, obviously don't care for ballheads. That's fine. Others use them. Some tolerate them. Some love them. Some hate them. I have no idea where Bruce stands on this issue. I have no idea what his background is (and I didn't automatically assume he's a "newcomer" as he already has a 15 lb. Bogen - he must have been using it to hold up something fairly substantial). Again, I made no claims that a ballhead is for everyone. It's not. Nor did I claim it's the best tool for every conceiveable application. It's not. I even said that if I ever get that 7x17 I'm dreaming of, my head of choice will be the exact same Gitzo 1570M you recommended. I don't advocate ballheads for every conceiveable application. In some scenarios, for some users, they make a perfectly logical choice. In other situations, they don't. I've used both and continue to use both a geared three axis head and a ballhead. Each has their pros and cons. One is better for some jobs, the other better for others.

He has a new 8x10 with one lens. Do you really think he is not going to buy longer lenses in the future?

I have no idea. And even if he does, a Gitzo 1325 with an ARCA-SWISS B1 could provide adaquate support - PROVIDED HE LIKES USING A BALLHEAD. Again, it comes down to personal preference - not how much weight the ARCA is capable of supporting. If he's comfortable using an ARCA-SWISS ballhead with his 8.7 lb. camera and a 250mm lens, he would likely be comfortable using it with the same camera and a longer lens. If he simply hates using a ballhead with a large format camera, the focal length of the lens isn't the issue and nothing I, or anyone, can say will change his mind.

How many lenses do you own Kerry?

Irrelevant. I already have a tripod/head combo that suits my needs just fine. Whether or not that same combo will suit Bruce's present and future needs is up to him to decide. He knows those needs better than any of the rest of us.

What I recommended to him is the best application for anything he will ever want to do with that camera with just one purchase and at a weight of 8lb.

That's a huge assumption on your part. You have no idea what he may, or may not, want to do with that camera (and neither do I). Suppose he wants to hike 20+ miles with it. Suppose he only wants to use wide angle lenses. Then is the heavier three axis head still the "best" solution? Based on my experience, I would say "no, it is not". Believe me, I once hiked 26 miles in a day with my 4x10 camera and a 12.5 lb. tripod with a three axis head. That was enough to convince me to get a carbon fiber tripod and give the ballhead a try. But, again, that's my personal experience and I have no idea if it's remotely applicable to Bruce's needs.

I don't understand why this is so hard to understand. If you feel the need to defend what you use then that's fine.

What's hard to understand? I have said over and over until I'm blue in the face that there is no single tripod and head that is "best" for every user and every application. I am not defending anything. I merely offered an alternative suggestion based on my experience that may or may not be worthy of Bruce's consideration. I readily admit he may be happier with a three axis head. But since I don't know him, or know his personal preferences, I also find it conceiveable that he may he happy with a good ballhead, too. My post was merely a suggestion that he consider a ballhead, not a mandate that he do so (or an indictment of those that prefer three axis heads - remember, I stated in my first post that for ease of use, I prefer a geared head, followed by a three axis head when working close to the car).

But why mislead someone that is new?

Now this I find offensive. I did nothing to mislead anyone. Unlike you, I never claimed that any particular price of equipment "is the best application for anything he will ever want to do with that camera". I merely offered an alternative that has worked well for me. There is nothing remotely misleading in anything I wrote.

You know as well as I do that a three axis head is so much more stable and easier to use than any ballhead and it is a better application for any large format camera.

Now you're putting words in my mouth. It all depends on how you define "better application". If a three axis head is the "best" for any large format camera, then why do full-time professionals with several decades of experienec use ballheads? While a three axis head may be better for some cameras and some applications, that doesn't make it the "best" solution for "any large format camera". Such all-encompassing blanket statements are easily refuted. The Toho FC-45X I use for backpacking weighs a whopping 2 lb. 12 oz. It's ridiculous to think a head that weighs more than the camera would be the "best" solution for backpacking with this ultralight camera. You may find this shocking, but the head I use for that application is a 6 oz. (yes' that's right 6 OUNCES) Velbon magnesium ballhead. And that's my entire point - there is no single solution that is best for everyone and everything. Yes, there are many users and many uses where a three axis head is superior (I have readily acknowledged this over and over in this thread), but that doesn't make it THE "best" solution for EVERY user and EVERY application. If that were the case, there wouldn't be a single large format photographer using a ballhead. There are, including several full-time professionals. There must be some reason for this. Hint: while perhaps sacrificing some ease of use (until you get used to using it), a GOOD ballhead offers the best combination of weight, stability and compact size available. That's why professionals who make their living carrying their camera gear to remote locations use them rather than a heavier, bulkier three axis head. Note: I'm not claiming they are best for all applications and users, just SOME applications and SOME users.

OK, I guess I've beaten that to death. Bruce, when you decide what to buy, please let us know of your decision. More importantly, once you've had a chance to use it for a while, let us know how you like it. Beyond the Gitzo 1570M and ARCA-SWISS B1 Robert and I suggested, there are a whole slew of other possibilities. Don't just pick an ARCA-SWISS B1 based on the arguments I submitted. There is a lot more to using a ballhead with a large format camera than specs and the opinions of others. If you have a chance, try one out in the store or borrow a friends. Ballheads and large format cameras aren't for everyone. They are an aquired taste and a significant investment (for a good one - and there's really no reason to consider a second rate ballhead for supporting an 8x10). Chose carefully based on your own needs, not the long-winded ramblings of a stranger like me.

Kerry

[David A. Goldfarb]

It doesn't address the "slim budget" issue, but yet another compromise is the Arca-Swiss B2, which has the compact design and strength of a ballhead, but the function of a pan-tilt head.

[Dan Fromm]

Gentlemen and others, please take the acrimony over to photo.net's leica forum. Its a better fit there.

[John_4185]

Back to the topic!

I am skeptical of CF tripods. Many are just traditonal legs recast in CF technology. CF has only lightened the load and introduced new issues. Stability has not improved; new issues are apparent again.

CF legs work best in stable enviroments such as a studio, or the usual highly controlled mopix situtations. I know of many CF legs in the MO-pics world where they work very well, but that is not our world. I got raked over the coals of CF legs maker here where I work. They are invested in a narrow scope of success and it does not for a moment incude hikers, or real photographers with LF hardware.

What we need is a dramatically different view of lightweight (CF or otherwise) materials for the Rest Of Us.

CF is not a solution. IMHO!

[Paddy Quinn]

I thought photo.net's leica forum was where the whiners hung out Dan?

[robert_4927]

Kerry, From you very first post. " Robert I think the problem is we've gotten into a bit of applesranges here". If you would have read my post from the beginning of this discussion before making this claim you would find that is not what I was recommending at all. Just because I made mention to the fact that my 8x20 and 14x17 sits on Ries tripods in no way was I recommending that is what to use for his application. That post was in response to someone saying a Ries was the worst investment they ever made. No where did I ever say I used a 1570 m on a Reis tripod as you claim. For one I use Ries heads on my Ries tripods. I take offense to you trying to take part of my post and twist them to sound as such, as you did. Next time scroll back a little farther and read everything that was written. Also in your first post you wrote, " If/when I get that 7x17 I've been fantasizing about I will definitely be getting a 1570 M. " Now think about this ,a 7x17 is built on a 5x7 bed with a 5x7 front standard. An 8x10 is built on an 8x10 bed with a 8x10 front standard. Why would mounting a smaller 5x7 bed to a 1570M be a better application than mounting a 8x10 bed to a 1570M? I have been shooting 8x20 for sometime and just because you have a larger rear standard doesn't change the camera bed to tripod head mount. I use a 16 1/2" Dagor on my 8x20 and at times a 30" red dot on my 8x10. So not always do you use longer lenses just because it is a panoramic format. I have no problem with this debate. I will be the first to agree to disagree. But I will not stand for someone coming into the middle of the debate without reading what was actually written before hand and insulting me by misconstruing my words. I will apologize to the 4x5 shooters. Because the smallest format I shoot is 8x10. At times I forget 4x5 is also large format and every much large format as anything I shoot. A ballhead may be just fine for this format. My mistake is in my thinking that LF starts at 8x10.

[Kerry L. Thalmann]

Robert,

Perhaps we both need to improve our reading comprehension. In those hundreds of lines I posted, I only mentioned the word "Ries" once. In fact, we both agree that where weight is a concern a carbon fiber tripod - specifically a Gitzo 1325 - tripod is a better choice. Any disagreement we may have has nothing to do with Ries tripods. Our difference of opinion seems to be solely related to tripods heads. In fact, it was this exact comment from you that drew me into this discussion:

And why anyone would want a ballhead for large format is beyond me. Nothing like going through some intricate movements and then realizing you need to tilt the bed a little. You crack the ballhead loose and the wobbly a$$ thing is all over the place.

At this point, I'm sorry I even bothered to respond to this. If you think an ACRA-SWISS is a "wobbly a$$ thing" then you've likely never used one (or at least didn't use it properly). You denegrated anyone who would even consider using a ballhead with a large format camera - and yes, 4x5 is large format. In fact, it's by far the most popular of the large format sizes. And yes, some of us are crazy enough to actually use a ballhead for large format use. That doesn't mean they are for everybody, but it does mean they shouldn't be dismissed out of hand without even considering them.

Now think about this ,a 7x17 is built on a 5x7 bed with a 5x7 front standard. An 8x10 is built on an 8x10 bed with a 8x10 front standard. Why would mounting a smaller 5x7 bed to a 1570M be a better application than mounting a 8x10 bed to a 1570M?

Simple geometry. Even is you discount the fact that every single 7x17 available weighs more than Bruce's 8.7 lb. Wehman, you still have the issue of torque. A 7x17 back is ~1.7 times wider than an 8x10. Even if it only weighs a pound or two more, the weight is further of axis. In fact, if it is indeed built on a 5x7 chassis with a 5x7 front standard ALL of the extra weight, and then some, is in the back of the camera - which is the part furthest from the axis of the tripod. Torque = mass x distance. A 7x17, no matter how light, puts more torgue on a head than an 8x10. For me, this is still not a stability issue. I am convinced an ARCA-SWISS B1 is capable of supporting most 7x17 cameras. The specific reason I would choose a Gitzo 1570 for use with a 7x17 has nothing to do with stability, it comes doewn to ease of use. One of the features I dislike on three axis heads - long levers that snag on trailside vegetation - is a decided advantage when trying to adjust a heavy load that is very far off axis. The torgue you get with those long levers helps counteract the torgue that results from the off-axis load presented by such a wide camera. Also, I don't plan on backpacking or hiking as far with a 7x17 as I do wih my 4x5 and 4x10. So, weight and bulk become much less of an issue. So, while I prefer a ballhead for some applications, I'd prefer a three axis head with long levers for a heavier, wider camera that will be used closer to the car. Horses for courses.

I apologize for any bad feelings my comments may have generated. I never claimed a ballhead was the best for all situations. I was simply trying to respond to your offhanded dismissal of anyone who would even consider one and explain why I use one and why it may or may not meet Bruce's needs.

But I will not stand for someone coming into the middle of the debate without reading what was actually written before hand and insulting me by misconstruing my words.

You have also jumped to some conslusions. I actually did read every post in this thread before jumping in in the middle. All I did was offer a counterpoint to your offhanded dismissal of ballheads and anyone who uses one with a large format camera. I never called you any names, and I just went back and re-read every word I posted and I can't honestly see anything I said that was a personal insult. Still, I obviously said something that hurt you. And for that I do sincerely apologize. That was not my intent.

Kerry

[ZoneIII]

Forget the Gitzo. Get a Ries and you will never regret it. Gitzos are for kids.

[ZoneIII]

Forget the Gitzo and the Berlebach. Get a Ries and you will never regret it. Gitzos are for kids. I have found that almost everyone who recommends a Gitzo over a Ries never actually owned a Ries. I have owned them both and Ries is the hands-down winner. Switching to Ries was one of the best moves I ever made. They are a pure joy to work with.

Don't worry about stabiliity with an old Ries either unless something is broken. The inherent design of Ries tripods keeps them stable. On the other hand, old Gitzos can become very shaky.

Ries aren't light, of course, but pound for pound you won't find a more stable platform.