ballhead for 8x10

[climbabout]

I'm interested in any one who uses or has used a quick release ball head for 8x10. I currently use a gitzo 1-3/8" leg tripod with their large 4x6 bed 3 way head. It's a bit heavy to say the least. I'm considering getting a cf feisol, but am unsure about the stability for long exposures using a ballhead. I shoot an 8x10 deardorff, often with a 450c fujinon with up to about 20-22" of bellows out. Would like to hear of any of your experiences with a simliar setup and lightweight tripod and ballhead. I've communicated with Kerry and like the feisol line, and the photo clam heads look nice as well, but would like to hear from those who have used a ballhead for 8x10.
Tim

[BarryS]

I use my Deardorff V8 on an Arca-Swiss B-1 ballhead mounted on a Gitzo 1228 CF tripod. I'd call that a pretty lightweight setup for 8x10. I haven't had any issues with stability, but if it's a little windy, I'll lash my camera bag to the hook on the center column. If it's very windy, a massive tripod still isn't going to help much with an 8x10. The B-1 handles the weight with ease, but it can be slightly tricky leveling the camera. It just takes a little extra care and a light touch, once you have the correct tension dialed in on the B-1. After some practice, I can level things out pretty quickly and the setup has been working fine for me.

[Songyun]

I wouldn't use ball head for my 8X10.

[Don Hutton]

I've used a RRS BH-55 with an 8x10 Chamonix on a Gitzo 1348 - works great. The RRS head has a really big locking knob which is handy for dealing with a big camera.

[Ole Tjugen]

I use a ball head (a Unilock), but not a quick-release plate. I'm not in a hurry...

[climbabout]

I'm not in a hurry either Ole - it's just that most lightweight ballhead's I've researched have qr plates.
Tim

[David A. Goldfarb]

Stability isn't so much of an issue with ballheads (as long as you have one that supports the weight you need), because they have greater strength for weight than pan-tilt heads, but they do take some getting used to for precise leveling.

The Arca-Swiss B2 offers both the strength of a ballhead and the control of a pan-tilt head, because it uses two nested balls, one for each axis, but it supports 150 lbs, so it's lightweight as far as heads that can hold that kind of weight go, but it's not exactly a super lightweight head (it's about 3.5 lbs.). The new Z2, which will replace the B2, is said to be lighter and more compact, but I haven't heard of anyone actually possessing this head yet.

FLM makes a ballhead that looks attractive for large format, which has a braking function, so you can level one axis, brake it, and then level the other axis. I've been satisfied with my B2, so I haven't tried one of these myself, but maybe someone else here has and can report on it.

[Walter Calahan]

I never use a ball head for an 8x10. Traditional pan-tilt is much easier to control for fine movements.

[Maris Rusis]

I use a Manfrotto 468MGRC4 Hydrostatic ball head to hold up a Tachihara 810GF. The RC4 part of the model number is the quick change plate and it works securely. This ball head weighs about 700g and will hold about 14kg at any angle. The hydraulic locking mechanism is immensely powerful but requires only light finger pressure to actuate.

Last time I looked KEH was offering this rather expensive head at a good price. That's where I got mine.

[Lenny Eiger]

Novflex 5

[Drew Wiley]

Sorry to be the devil's advocate, but why use ANY kind of head for an 8X10, unless
you are pointing the camera almost straight down? Tripod heads are the root of all evil
when it comes to image sharpess. And if you must use one, you'll want something with
a platform effect, like the Ries head (unless we're talking studio use here). I set up my
8X10 right on the platform of a Ries tripod and have never even used a head. I have
property not far from Yosemite Park and once in awhile go in there on snowy days.
It's a bit amusing seeing some poor soul attempting to stabilize an 8X10 on a ballhead.
It just wobbles and wobbles with the slightest touch or gust of wind. This is simply a
law of physics. You take all your vectors and center them on just one little vibrating metal post. It largely nullifies the value of the tripod itself. Obviously, some ball heads
are much better than others, but 8x10 photography isn't for horse races anyway, so
why not learn to compose using the tripod legs only? It isn't that difficult.

[Don Hutton]

Sorry to be the devil's advocate, but why use ANY kind of head for an 8X10, unless
you are pointing the camera almost straight down? Tripod heads are the root of all evil
when it comes to image sharpess. And if you must use one, you'll want something with
a platform effect, like the Ries head (unless we're talking studio use here). I set up my
8X10 right on the platform of a Ries tripod and have never even used a head. I have
property not far from Yosemite Park and once in awhile go in there on snowy days.
It's a bit amusing seeing some poor soul attempting to stabilize an 8X10 on a ballhead.
It just wobbles and wobbles with the slightest touch or gust of wind. This is simply a
law of physics. You take all your vectors and center them on just one little vibrating metal post. It largely nullifies the value of the tripod itself. Obviously, some ball heads
are much better than others, but 8x10 photography isn't for horse races anyway, so
why not learn to compose using the tripod legs only? It isn't that difficult.
Works fine for me and I don't have to spend hours fighting a tripod to compose.... Sorry, but I just don't buy your argument at all. I can assure you that an 8x10 on a decent ballhead doesn't "wobble" at the slightest touch or gust of wind. Perhaps you need to have a first hand look at some of the amazing gear that's been made in the past 25 years for attaching cameras to tripods before you knock it - you might be surprised.

[BarryS]

Yeah, me too. Never noticed any wobbling or issues with unsharp negatives. Pretty sure I could spot a problem after over 30 years of photography and critically examining negatives. Why would I want to monkey around with adjusting three tripod legs? Sounds like a good way to dump the camera.

[Robert Fisher]

My 12 year old B2 (traveled the world many times) has supported numerous 810 bodies and 600mm Nikon lenses. It will probably support a SUV.

[Drew Wiley]

I knew I'd get flack over my comment. Let me explain. My father was a surveyor.
What kind of tripod system does any competent surveyor use? About six months ago
I was handling one of the lasers used to realign the Panama Canal locks. It is so
sensitive that it will recompute for the curvature of the earth, and is programmed to
instantly shut off if it is disturbed even a tiny fraction of a degree. If you showed up
with an aluminum tripod or an elevator head it wouldn't work, and it probably would
not even turn on if you tried a ballhead. Obviously this is a higher standard than most photographers use, but it illustrates a principle. What they do use is a heavy
maple tripod, often fiberglass-clad, which function like a truncated pyramid, forming a platform on the top, so that the instrument itself serves as the apex of the pyramid. The last thing you want is an X-pattern with the weak link below the
instrument. This is not hearsay but common-sense physics. Granted, when I'm off
to the high country for a week I'm likely to grab a 4X5, Quickload holders, and a
graphite tripod; and I use tripod heads for medium format, when I need greater
speed in composition. But when sharpness if critical (I sometimes run 30X40
Cibachromes) I wouldn't dream of using a ballhead. In fact, I virtually never use a
head for view cameras. Just useless weight with no performance return. As far as
tipping over, I'd hauled view cameras up ice cliffs with ropes onto ledges so narrow
that it something went over, it wouldn't be just the camera!

[Don Hutton]

I knew I'd get flack over my comment. Let me explain. My father was a surveyor.
What kind of tripod system does any competent surveyor use? About six months ago
I was handling one of the lasers used to realign the Panama Canal locks. It is so
sensitive that it will recompute for the curvature of the earth, and is programmed to
instantly shut off if it is disturbed even a tiny fraction of a degree. If you showed up
with an aluminum tripod or an elevator head it wouldn't work, and it probably would
not even turn on if you tried a ballhead. Obviously this is a higher standard than most photographers use, but it illustrates a principle. What they do use is a heavy
maple tripod, often fiberglass-clad, which function like a truncated pyramid, forming a platform on the top, so that the instrument itself serves as the apex of the pyramid. The last thing you want is an X-pattern with the weak link below the
instrument. This is not hearsay but common-sense physics. Granted, when I'm off
to the high country for a week I'm likely to grab a 4X5, Quickload holders, and a
graphite tripod; and I use tripod heads for medium format, when I need greater
speed in composition. But when sharpness if critical (I sometimes run 30X40
Cibachromes) I wouldn't dream of using a ballhead. In fact, I virtually never use a
head for view cameras. Just useless weight with no performance return. As far as
tipping over, I'd hauled view cameras up ice cliffs with ropes onto ledges so narrow
that it something went over, it wouldn't be just the camera!
Right at the moment, I'm working on a scan for a 36x54 inch print from an 8x10 negative - it's razor sharp - shot on a beach with some morning breeze, on a ballhead. I exposed 4 negatives that morning - they're all razor sharp. You are completely overestimating what's required to have a sharp 8x10 exposure - and the comparisons to theodilites just bares that point out. The fact that surveyors use equipment suited to their purposes should in fact make you realize that there's an excellent reason that almost all large format photographers use tripod heads - it's because they work well for their purposes and improve their efficiency.

[Drew Wiley]

If you like ball heads that's great. We all have different prefences based upon
individual needs. I'm not critisizing the equipment but suggesting a realistic option.
The fact is, it is really quick to compose without a head once you get used to it -
it becomes second-nature and instinctive. Also sharpness is relative. I personally
print to a higher standard of sharpness than any digital device is capable of
reproducing (not bragging, not a joke - I am in regular contact with some of the
people who invented the most sophisticated printers available and know the relative
parameters. I also use a more advanced optical enlarger than anything you can go
out and buy.) My own standard "viewing distance" for a large print is about two
inches away with a magnifier. Of course, there are always depth of field issues and
so forth. I use precision holders which actually hold the film flat, etc. I am merely
stating that, for my own purposes, in the type of weather I might encounter, there
is a distinct and perceptible advantage to dispensing with a tripod head. This is
based upon years of testing and school-of-hard-knocks experience. I've gotten sharp
exposures in 80mph winds where I could hardly stand up and the tripod itself had
to be reinforced with heavy rocks - crazy, I'll admit. If some of you, on the other hand, get wonderful results with ball heads, I'm not contesting that. But I can't think of one significant shot I've missed, or that could have been improved, if a tripod head was available (unless shooting almost straight down.)

[Don Hutton]

I've gotten sharp
exposures in 80mph winds where I could hardly stand up and the tripod itself had
to be reinforced with heavy rocks - crazy, I'll admit. Crap. 80mph winds and you would have been history as you opened the car door. Try holding a an 8x10 holder out the window of your car at 80mph... By all means stretch the truth a bit, but don't get ridiculous. Just for a while I had presumed that you were trying to offer sensible advice for people wishing to make photographs with an 8x10 camera... I see now I'm mistaken. I'm getting a good idea of where that 80mph wind might have started.

[BarryS]

You have to look at the whole system. A high quality ball head may contribute some extremely small amount of flex, but I can tell you it's probably less than 1% of the flex in the camera itself. If my Deardorff was only 50% as solid as my Arca-Swiss head, I'd be ecstatic.

[Dirk Rösler]

I don't understand why you dismiss this so easily. You say yourself, a head's purpose is to improve efficiency - it does not add anything technical, least stability to the setup.

Besides being "a bourgeois concept" (Bresson), sharpness can also be totally relative and subjective, as opposed to surveyors data. But then data is not always appreciated by photographers and in web forums ;)

I will certainly try the non-head technique, especially with a monorail it should be easy - thanks.

[David A. Goldfarb]

I sometimes shoot without a head. If I know the subject matter I'm going to be photographing will require a level camera, like architectural subjects and some kinds of landscapes, then I leave the head at home, or I might just bring a leveling base. But there are a lot of things out there that can be photographed at angles other than parallel or perpendicular to the ground, and for those, it's useful to have a tripod head.

[Frank Petronio]

A compromise might be the leveling base that Gitzo makes for the 3-5 series tripods. It allows 15 degrees of XY movement, which should suffice for most long shots. It is very stable, it barely rises above the tripod itself.

Of course I'd want a 90-degree option, maybe not with 8x10 but if I use smaller formats with the same tripod. The most solid would be a pan-tilt only (no yaw) Ries, Baco, or Sinar-type head (Lois Conner shot her 7x17 tipped 90 degrees in China -- how'd she do that?)

[Dirk Rösler]

This one Frank?

[climbabout]

I feel like my thread has been hijacked a bit, but thank you all for the spirited discussion and varying points of view. I never considered going without a head - I'm not sure I'd like it, but I may try it out in the backyard anyway. Thanks for all the ballhead recomendations. My main intent is to find a lighter, more compact alternative to my current gitzo setup, as I often travel quite far from the car, with the 8x10. So keep the opinions and options coming.
Tim

[Frank Petronio]

Climbabout: Yes in fact most people stop answering the original question here, after the first or second response. It is more a game to show who is smarter and knows more trivia. Then there are some who like to argue, and others who will just bitch about digital or Republicans or whatever is up their arse that day.

And yes Dirk, that's the one.

[Drew Wiley]

Not stretching the truth about the wind at all. There are climbers who traveled with me
who have seen me do these things. And no, I wasn't in a car or even anywhere near a
road. I have repeatedly photographed in extreme conditions. Today I tend to use a
fold-up camera which requires a very different kind of stabilization than a monorail type. Previously I shot a Sinar in the mountains. The Sinar rail clamp worked superbly
as a compromise. I added a right angle bracket sometimes which allowed me to shoot
straight down and was lighter than any kind of head. The tripod itself could be suprisingly light and support that kind of system. However, the Sinar system was very bulky and I was typically carrying an 85 lb pack or heavier. But a flat-bed camera works best with a platform effect, such as the Gitzo or Ries low-profile heads - or in my preference, no tripod head at all. Just talk to the Ries people. I didn't invent this idea just to spice the conversation. It actually works. I apologize for getting slightly
off topic, but otherwise we're just talking about shopping for gear and not about
integrally related technique.

[climbabout]

Drew - as someone who has climbed extensively in the winter on Mount Washington (thats the place with the highest wind speed ever recorded), as well as climbs in the Northwest Cascades and Mount McKinley, I can say from actual experience that walking erect in winds above 60 is near impossible - not to mention the accompaning higher speed gusts that invariably accompany high sustained winds. I can honestly state I have never considered setting up a tripod in those conditions.

But my intention is not to get into that argument, but to thank you and others for suggesting alternatives other than a tripod head. The leveling base mentioned earlier is something I might try as a good comprimise. The vast majority of 8x10 images I have made were with the camera dead level or very near. Add to that the 15 or so degrees the leveling base would give, plus a little fudging with the tripod legs, and I'll probably have all the adjustment I need for a fraction of the weight, which is huge for me as I often hike and climb with the big camera.

Plus, I can always tilt the back and front standards as well.

Thanks Drew and Frank and others for bringing a different viewpoint, which I never would have considered - that is the true positive of these forums.

Tim

[Daniel_Buck]

Back to the ball head, I'm using a Kirk BH-1 for 35mm, medium format, and 4x5. I prefer to use my Ries single axis tilt head for 4x5 and 8x10, but when I'm bringing my 35mm as well, sometimes I'll bring the ball head and a quick release plate for the 4x5 so I can quickly pop between 35mm and 4x5. If I've got my 8x10 though, I always make sure I have the Ries head.

The BH-1 ball head does hold a light weight 8x10, but it's a little difficult to 'wrangle' an extended 8x10 on a ball head, at least that's been my experience from the few times I've tried it. It's not so much a question of stability that I don't like the ballhead on the 8x10, it's just awkward to use.

[Drew Wiley]

Tim - Glad to hear that there are other people in the mtns with a view camera. I've
never actually run into anyone else on the peaks, although view cameras users are fairly common around here in the redwoods and beaches. I did a lot of stupid things
when I was younger. Once actually tied myself to the tripod to act as the weight,
and yes, in winds I couldn't even stand up in. If the wind speed is sustained, you can get away with this, but if gusty, view camera work is very difficult. I'm often shooting out at Pt Reyes on the coast where the wind almost never stops its ebb and flow, so
I'm used to mild gusts. Once in Wyoming my Sinar with its tripod did turn into a kite and fly away, and I ended up with an expensive repair. I can hardly imagine what Vittoria Sella went through carrying a primitive ULF camera up 22000 ft on Chogolisa. Of course, Bradford Washburn, like a few others, got around the whole problem by using an aerial camera with no bellows at all. It's been fun, but I don't think I can
afford to lose another camera to the wind.

[kev curry]

Tim,

I use a Fiesol 3471 4 section pod and the big Fiesol CB70 Ball head to house a Shen8x10 300/5.6 copal3. The legs are solid and inspire confidence and the same can be said of the ball head, once its locked down its rock solid and easily supports the camera.

But here's the problem...there's movement being caused by the QR plate. I think the problem with it, is that the biggest Fiesol QR plate has too small a surface area at 100x47mm. The QR clamp on the Ball head holds the QR plate absolutely solidly with no movement but there a weakness higher up the chain ie...there doesn't seem to be enough contact between the camera bottom and the QR plate, hence there's a little movement.....(I taped a laser pen to the camera for the test). If I could solve that problem I would be happy. I cant be totally sure but a 100x100 size QR plate might make all the difference if I could find one thats compatible with the clamp?

As for using a ball head with a 8x10, I think its easy and don't have a problem at all, in fact I really like it. At first I would try to compose the image by placing my hand underneath the camera with my fingers wrapped around the head before loosening the ball locking knob, and then try to compose, but I quickly found that to be an awkward and potentially dangerous way of doing things. I realized that the best way for me to operate the rig was to take hold of the leather camera strap on top of the camera with my left hand and then loosen the locking knob on the head with my right and then simply position the camera via holding the strap...bingo, and no fear of the camera flopping around! Though I would throw that in:)

kev

[climbabout]

Tim - Glad to hear that there are other people in the mtns with a view camera. I've
never actually run into anyone else on the peaks, although view cameras users are fairly common around here in the redwoods and beaches. I did a lot of stupid things
when I was younger. Once actually tied myself to the tripod to act as the weight,
and yes, in winds I couldn't even stand up in. If the wind speed is sustained, you can get away with this, but if gusty, view camera work is very difficult. I'm often shooting out at Pt Reyes on the coast where the wind almost never stops its ebb and flow, so
I'm used to mild gusts. Once in Wyoming my Sinar with its tripod did turn into a kite and fly away, and I ended up with an expensive repair. I can hardly imagine what Vittoria Sella went through carrying a primitive ULF camera up 22000 ft on Chogolisa. Of course, Bradford Washburn, like a few others, got around the whole problem by using an aerial camera with no bellows at all. It's been fun, but I don't think I can
afford to lose another camera to the wind.

Drew - I don't climb high anymore with the 8x10 - been skunked too many times by the wind to be carrying all that weight for nothing. On occasion I'll pack a little 4x5, but usually it's the 6x9 folder. I've got a couple of Brad Washburns posters in my office - his first ascent of the west buttress and one from tuckerman ravine.
Tim

[climbabout]

Tim,

I use a Fiesol 3471 4 section pod and the big Fiesol CB70 Ball head to house a Shen8x10 300/5.6 copal3. The legs are solid and inspire confidence and the same can be said of the ball head, once its locked down its rock solid and easily supports the camera.

But here's the problem...there's movement being caused by the QR plate. I think the problem with it, is that the biggest Fiesol QR plate has too small a surface area at 100x47mm. The QR clamp on the Ball head holds the QR plate absolutely solidly with no movement but there a weakness higher up the chain ie...there doesn't seem to be enough contact between the camera bottom and the QR plate, hence there's a little movement.....(I taped a laser pen to the camera for the test). If I could solve that problem I would be happy. I cant be totally sure but a 100x100 size QR plate might make all the difference if I could find one thats compatible with the clamp?

As for using a ball head with a 8x10, I think its easy and don't have a problem at all, in fact I really like it. At first I would try to compose the image by placing my hand underneath the camera with my fingers wrapped around the head before loosening the ball locking knob, and then try to compose, but I quickly found that to be an awkward and potentially dangerous way of doing things. I realized that the best way for me to operate the rig was to take hold of the leather camera strap on top of the camera with my left hand and then loosen the locking knob on the head with my right and then simply position the camera via holding the strap...bingo, and no fear of the camera flopping around! Though I would throw that in:)

kev

Kev - your experience is kind of what I suspect would be the case with a small qr plate. I think I might give the leveling head a try - as others have suggested - I think it will fill my needs.
Tim

[M Salhuana]

I use both a Arca Swiss B-1 Ball Head and a Markins M20 Ball head (which has the arca swiss qr) with my Arca Swiss 8x10. I have never had a problem with either ball head and they work beautifully on my Gitzo Carbon Fiber tripod. I have one on the plate and one on the column and both work great.

Regards,

Miguel

[Michael Kadillak]

Your point Drew while valid in your experience is by no means necessary and/or industry standard. If you find that it works for you - great. When we talk about engineering requirements for any load bearing system we have to put things into the proper perspective and balance the risk and reward components. But let's remember that we are talking about a rather innocuous load with an 8x10 view camera all things considered. Speed of efficiency in obtainig the photograph with a tripod head trumps the academic mindset in this situation.

A good friend of mine was having diner with Ansel Adams in Hawaii years ago and someone in their dinner party asked Ansel what he felt was the best tripod. He quickly responded - "A yard of set concrete with a 1/4x25 bolt on top."

My point is if we really wanted to get anal retentive about the process, why start with a tripod head when we can start with the tripod? The reason that we don't is because it is all relative. For me starting with a perfectly level tripod makes me feel comfortable that my investment that actually produces the image has a reasonable chance of staying where it is put during the photographic process. I can always be patient and wait for the correct moment to make the image when the natural variables stabilize.

Each of my tripod heads (Linhof, Bogen, Ries and Arca) perform the tast they were designed to do marvelously and without second guessing.

Onward!

[Drew Wiley]

Put two and two togther when you're in my shoes. I do mostly outdoor photog, mostly
with an 8x10, and am almost 60. I Would like to do this until I'm at least 75. Camera
manufacturers have jumped through all kinds of hoops to shave down the weight of an
8X10 and still keep it rigid. How much does a decent head for an 8X10 weigh? I own
some myself, but have found them to be largely redundant in the field. This is not a
jab at anyone else's style, nor is it a matter of "industry standard" (whatever that
means), nor about being anal, but a realistic option for those who have to tote their gear on their backs. Sometimes less is more.

[Michael Kadillak]

If 99.9% of photographers that work with a LF 8x10 camera in the field utilize a dedicated tripod head of various manufacture (including all of the well collected photographers from the Golden Age), I consider that to be the Industry Standard.

Lets be honest. There have been so many technical advances withi the last five years in the arena of carbon fibre tripods, ball heads and lighter cameras that backpacking with 8x10 is no longer an issue for many as old as you and even older.

Grow a pair.....

[Drew Wiley]

Ho hum. Already have a carbon fiber tripod, but prefer wood when possible. Probably have the only structural composite 8x10 colorhead housing in the world - but, heck,
what's a dummy like me know about new things? Yes, I must admit that it's a sad
state of affairs when an old coot like me has to wander into the mountains with only
75lbs of gear on my back instead of 95. As for the other 99% of large format photographer out there, I've been unable to ascertain the statistics, because I've never actually met another one in the backcountry, much less hacking his way up an ice slope. Then there's a friend of mine who insists that the only way to do 8X10 is with a Sinar P and a $6000 Foba stand. He has at least three of them. Have a little fun PLEEEZ. I have a constitutional right to leave the tripod head home if I want to!

[patfahey]

I shoot both a wooden 8x10 field camera, and a metal Horseman 8x10. The field camera is often used on a Gitzo 3540 w/ RRS BH-55 head. The metal 8x10 is too heavy for a ball head, and I often mount it directly on a Gitzo 1500 tripod, or on a 3-way head. The camera has a long "lens plate" mounted to the two holes on the base so I can easily slide the camera fore or aft in the clamp for better balance.

The BH-55 is the most heavy-duty ball head I have ever seen, and it is rock-solid with the wooden field 8x10.

Using the ball head did take a lot of getting used to, but once there, I would never go back. It's quick, easy and solid.


Remember Hernandez.


For the record: I'm not carrying either camera up any mountains. ;-)

-Pat

[climbabout]

Pat how do you mount the wooden 8x10 to the rrs ballhead? do you use a quick release plate? which one?
Tim


I shoot both a wooden 8x10 field camera, and a metal Horseman 8x10. The field camera is often used on a Gitzo 3540 w/ RRS BH-55 head. The metal 8x10 is too heavy for a ball head, and I often mount it directly on a Gitzo 1500 tripod, or on a 3-way head. The camera has a long "lens plate" mounted to the two holes on the base so I can easily slide the camera fore or aft in the clamp for better balance.

The BH-55 is the most heavy-duty ball head I have ever seen, and it is rock-solid with the wooden field 8x10.

Using the ball head did take a lot of getting used to, but once there, I would never go back. It's quick, easy and solid.


Remember Hernandez.


For the record: I'm not carrying either camera up any mountains. ;-)

-Pat

[patfahey]

"Pat how do you mount the wooden 8x10 to the rrs ballhead? do you use a quick release plate? which one?"

I do. I don't have the exact number, but looking at RRS's Web page, it looks like a MPR-192, about 7", with two bolts. It works very well.

http://reallyrightstuff.com/rrs/Itemdesc.asp?ic=MPR%2D192&eq=&Tp=

Mine came with two, 1/4" screws so I needed to add the inserts into the two 3/8" mounting threads on the camera.

You might want to call RRS and tell them what camera you have. They can help with the correct plate.

The clamp is the QR clamp option available with the BH-55.

-Pat

[climbabout]

Pat - so it sounds like your field camera has 2 mounting holes in the bottom?
I'm shooting with a deardorff which has only 1 - 1/4-20 hole.
Tim

[patfahey]

Yes. The wood field I use is an Ebony RW810 w/two mounting holes on the camera base.

[john wilton]

Came across this old thread researching ball heads...hope it is OK to revive it. I'm totally with Drew on the merits of no head, when one must keep weight down on the street with dog leash in one hand and tripod in the other.

What hasn't been mentioned is just how easy and fast it is with a surveyor-style (eg Ries) tripod. I learned this in surveying class a long time ago. Key is the front leg pointing in the same direction as the camera. Moving the front leg sideways moves the bubble in the same direction, fore-and-aft movement moves the other bubble in the opposite direction to leg movement. After the initial rough planting and leg adjustment to terrain that is necessary with any tripod with or without head, there's no fiddling with three legs. Just the front. Very fast and secure.

[Merg Ross]

Came across this old thread researching ball heads...hope it is OK to revive it. I'm totally with Drew on the merits of no head, when one must keep weight down on the street with dog leash in one hand and tripod in the other.

What hasn't been mentioned is just how easy and fast it is with a surveyor-style (eg Ries) tripod. I learned this in surveying class a long time ago. Key is the front leg pointing in the same direction as the camera. Moving the front leg sideways moves the bubble in the same direction, fore-and-aft movement moves the other bubble in the opposite direction to leg movement. After the initial rough planting and leg adjustment to terrain that is necessary with any tripod with or without head, there's no fiddling with three legs. Just the front. Very fast and secure.

This is fine for landscape/portrait photography. I use the same principle with a Baco tilt head. However, without at least a tilt head, how does one photograph straight down?

[Drew Wiley]

Merg - for straight down work I sometimes carry a machined stainless right angle
bracket. It weighs far less than any ball head and is more solid. Don't think I've ever
done this with the 8x10, but have with the 4x5, and used it for 6x7 on our trip to
Hawaii in April, so in this case I could shoot the camera vertical as well as horizontal. And now, as a lightwt backup to my big Ries tripod, I have acquired one of the largest Feisol carbon tripods, which was easily converted to a 3/8 thru-bolt so I can use this in the same manner for 8x10, with no head.

[Drew Wiley]

Thanks John for pointing out the method - I adjust the tripod legs so instinctively that I never seem to notice how I do it, even in really tricky places. Just takes a litte
practice.

[jeroldharter]

I'll give my 2 cents. I have a large size Feisol carbon fiber tripod and an Wehman 8x10 camera and a Fujinon 600mm lens. I tried this combo on my Arca Swiss Z1 ball head. Not good at all.

Technically, the ball head supports the weight. However the quick release plate is almost microscopic relative to the huge surface area of the camera base. It is like mounting the camera on the head of a pin - it is stuck but unstable. I tried buying a large, 4-6 inch long plate with 2 screws which was better but then it was like mounting the camera bed on a knife edge rather than a pinhead. I also found it annoying to fiddle with getting the "quick" release plate into the head. The camera is so big that I could not see anything so I had to put my head under the whole thing and try to slide the plate in from an awkward angle. Then the handle/knob for the quick release mechanism was almost flush with the bottom of the camera so it was a nuisance trying to tighten it. So there was nothing quick or simple about it. The camera was not stable at all. I also have an Arca Swiss F-Line 4x5 which works very well with this head on a lighter problem.

In the end, I picked up a Gitzo pan-tilt head which I was loathe to do. I just prefer the aesthetics of a ball head. But it works great. It has no quick release, but if I put the platform in the vertical position it is very easy to screw in the camera base with less effort that the ball head quick release mechanism. Also, it has a huge platform so the camera is much more stable. The controls are still a little sticky with fine adjustments but it should loosen up with time.

So I would not mess around and get the big Gitzo. I toyed with the idea of a leveling base but decided against it because I could not figure out a simple way to screw on the camera and the movements are so limited. Same with no head: I did not want to be spinning my camera onto a screw - doable but awkward and at some point I would probably drop the camera.

[Drew Wiley]

Jerold - you don't spin the camera onto the tripod stud; rather, you simply attach a
turnknob from below, just like on a Ries or survey tripod. In the case of the Feisol,
I simply removed the center plate, drilled out the stud, inserted a bushing, and put
through a stainless 3/8-16 eyebolt through the bottom, retained by a stainless e-clip
above, plus a few teflon or nylon anti-friction washers. The eyebolt doubles as a
place to hang a bag of rocks if needed, since the Feisol is about half the weight of
the Ries and really too light for windy conditions. It's just as fast to operate as any quick-release and a lot more stable and secure. To rotate the camera, you simply
reduce a little tension on the bolt via a wingnut below the platform, then retighten. It's so damn simple.

[Drew Wiley]

Forgot to add - the Wehman has some kind of funny clasp thing on the bottom to
accept a strap, as I recall. This is less than ideal for stability. The point is to have
as much contact surface between the camera bottom and the tripod platform as
possible. Probably there is some way to modify the Wehman too.

[rdenney]

A note about tripods for use with no head:

The Ries and surveying-style tripods have deep spikes. Moving a leg laterally requires lifting it first, and that complicates the leveling process. A person can become practiced at anything, but that aspect is a pain to deal with. I don't own a Ries tripod, but, as a civil engineer, I'm no stranger to surveyor tripods, from before the days of automatic leveling.

I have had very good luck with Bogen 3036 tripods in this application. Though I use a head (a Sinar tilt-head that provides panning, which to me is not an unimportant feature in practical use), I make it a practice to level the top of the tripod so that panning occurs on a horizontal plane. That allows me to adjust the aim of the camera slightly without having to re-level anything.

The key feature of those 3036 tripod legs that make them useful for this situation is the adjustable-length braces that extend from the bottom of the center column to the first joint on the leg. With those braces, one does not need deep spikes to prevent the legs from slipping on smooth surfaces, and the shallow spikes provided by those legs (with the rubber feet screwed in) will provide a firm contact with the surface. So, to level these legs, one loosens the brace thumbscrews, moves this leg or that as needed to level the top of the tripod (with minimal lifting required), and then tightens them back down. Height on uneven or tilted surfaces is usually faster to adjust with in and out movement of a leg rather than adjusting the telescoping section.

These legs don't seem to be overly popular for whatever reason, but they are very easy to level up and quite sturdy when locked down.

I'm not sure I would want to point an 8x10 camera straight down without a vacuum back, but that's pure speculation on my part. But I also recognize that sometimes a downward view might not be possible with rise/fall and tilt alone, so there are times when the rail/bed needs to be tilted, in my experience at least. That's the point of the yaw-free design of my Sinar--making a tilted rail possible without pesky subsequent interactions between tilts and swings. Thus, I use a tilt-head.

Rick "whose tilt-head has a far stiffer structure than the platform post on any ball head" Denney

[jeroldharter]

Drew,

You are handier (and probably more clever) than I am! I like your system though. It would be good for backpacking/ultra-lightweight. But I personally hate fiddling with tripod legs for alignment.

The Wehman does have a strap, but it is not on the bottom so it does not interfere with tripod mounting or any other operations. It is a great ultralight 8x10 (and lighter than some 4x5's) and would work very well with your system.

[Drew Wiley]

That Wehman certainly does look like a great camera for portability, though I use a
Phillips myself. Dick Phillips was one of the first guys to think outside the box and design a really solid portable 8x10. I like to rethink things myself. I do own a few pan/tilt heads, though most of my studio work was done with the Sinar system, which
has its own version of things. Ries made a clever platform for large format cameras -
not strictly a pan/tilt head, but with enough features to do the trick.