Capacity of Manfrotto 3275/410 Geared Head

[r.e.]

I have been planning to acquire one of these heads to support an Arca-Swiss 4x5 Discovery on a Gitzo 1325 carbon fiber tripod. The head is rated for 5kg/11 lbs.

I use a Nikkor 120mm macro, a Rodenstock 150mm and a Wollensak 254mm lens on the camera. The idea was to use the Manfrotto head to supplement my Arca-Swiss B1 ballhead when I want more precise control, and I was confident that the Manfrotto would be adequate for the task.

Now a complication has arisen and I need a reality check. I've acquired a 25cm extension for the Discovery's 30cm rail, and I'm about to acquire a 360mm lens. The lens is Copal 3 and weighs 1.4kg/3.1 lbs.

The combined weight of the camera and this lens will be very close to 5kg/11 lbs.

So here are my questions:

Is the capacity rating for this head right on, conservative or optimistic?

If there is a capacity problem with using the head with this camera/lens combination, would there also be a problem if I used the combination only with the Arca-Swiss B1, which if I recall is rated for quite a lot more than 11 lbs. That said, I've always had the sense that the B1 capacity has been kind of optimistic.

I would prefer to avoid buying a bigger geared head, because the 410 is otherwise just right, not only for most of my 4x5 purposes, but also for my medium format camera and binoculars.

I think that the Gitzo 1325 tripod is plenty strong enough and is not an issue, I'm just not sure about the 410 head.

Thanks.

[Ken Lee]

My experience is that the manufacturer errs on the conservative side: the 3275/410 head can hold more than the stated weight, in all orientations.

On the other hand, when the equipment gets heavy, it can be a challenge to make extreme tilts using just the knobs, because the knobs are fairly compact. Unless you have very strong hands, they can become a bit hard to turn. There is not sufficient torque, you might say. In those cases, you have to help out by moving the camera with one hand, while turning the knob with the other hand.

I have used my 3745/410 Head with a Sinar P, 5x7 back, and a fairly large 300mm f/4.5 Heliar portrait lens. I have also used it with an 4x5 ArcaSwiss Discovery with Extension Rail and 450mm Fujinon lens. I also used it with a ShenHao 8x10 camera and a 5x7 Kodak 2A. It was always strong enough.

[r.e.]

Thanks Ken,

That's what I needed to know.

I'm aware of the compact controls/torque issue that you mention. It can be an annoyance, even with fairly light gear. Tradeoffs, tradeoffs...

Much obliged.

[Dave Hally]

I also use a 410 head on a Manfrotto tripod ( not sure what number) Ohter than the torque issue, you shouldn't have any problem, especially if you can center the rail over the head. Right now I'm using a Toyo 45A, which has the tripod socket offset towards the back, which can make it a little akward, as I tend to use difficult setups, sometimes shooting straight down. I have had the wind take the setup over once, which dented the filter ring and broke part of the camera from the impact. The head was fine, it is very robust.
Good Luck
Dave

[r.e.]

Thanks Dave,

It sounds like I'll be fine going with the 410.

[sultanofcognac]

I've been using the 410 almost exclusively for three years with MF and digital, used it with my Arca Swiss 4x5 model A until I bought the AS Z1 head, which I trust more (for some reason). But I never had a problem with the weight of the 4x5, save for the torque problem at extreme angles. One must simply hold the camera to make adjustments with the 410 when all the weight is at an angle - but even more so when using a ball head.

I love the 410 - it's the right size, has precise movements and has yet to let me down, although I hesitate to put my Plaubel Profia 8x10 on that small head, not so much that it wouldn't handle the weight but more that it would surely strain the gear mechanism. I don't think it'd drop the camera - it's a VERY sturdy head.

Good luck!

[Archphoto]

You will love the 410, but check if it holds your gear propperly.
I bought one through the internet, arrived at my ex house and she had it shipped to me to Brazil. When I got it my first impression was My God, this is the smallest ?
(I bought it for a DSLR that I use in Brazil, my "real gear" is in Holland)
It should hold my SL 66 and RB with ease though.

Maybe, just maybe, the 405, which is larger, could be an option.

[BennehBoy]

I got a sinar pan/tilt after trying to use a p2 4x5 on a 410 head, just too susceptible to rocking with that weight on. 4x5 p2 weighs about 6kg + maybe 750g for the lens I was using.

[falth j]

FWIW...

From my experience, the 410 head is great for cameras smaller, and lighter than the sinar p.

From the bottom of the 410 base to the top of the sinar p, the height can be between 20 to 24 inches.

Given the weight and height of the camera from the tripod attachment point to the top of the camera, the whole setup is really not well suited for each other.

With the added height of the sinar p and its somewhat taller rail clamp, the whole assemblage tends to vibrate with the slightest touch to the sinar.

For this reason, I would hesitate to use this camera and head combination, where it might be subject to the slightest breathe of air outdoors.

I have observed that the vibration problem stems from the 410 head; the head is otherwise quite stable with lighter-weight cameras, but the vibration tendency is greatest with the sinar p attached, and for that reason will invest in a heavier duty-rated head before investing time and money bringing the rig outdoors.

[neil poulsen]

It's a very neat head. I've played with it in stores, but haven't used it.

I know that one can release the gears and make gross changes in a single dimension and then re-engage the gears. Plus, if one's concerned about torque when tilting the camera, you could guide the camera down with your hand so as to relieve the torque experienced by the gears.

There are two characteristics about this head that would inhibit my purchasing it. There's no option for the hexagonal plate (which I like a lot), and it doesn't have independent bubble levels. Only the single bubble for two directions.

With the two independent levels on the 3039 (229), I can adjust them in both directions for my view camera and very quickly level the camera using the head levels.

[seepaert]

The weight indicated by the manufacturers is what it can carry, and indeed that's very often on the conservative side. I have never seen a tripod or head collapse under the weight of the equipment.

But what's important is what is the maximum weight, with which the whole construction remains stabile enough. Probably the Gitzo will cause you more problems than the head. But it probably has a hook to hang a weight on. Do not do that, it will cause your equipment to swing. Attach a rubber on it and place your foot or a heavy weight in it ON THE GROUND. Allways position the centre of gravity about one or two cm next to the middle. If it is exactly above a vibiration will not die. Allways keep one of the legs in the same direction as the lens. Allow some time between the placement of the film and the actual exposure. Consider buying a long lens support Manfrotto 359.

[r.e.]

Falthj,

That is encouraging. The Arca has a lower profile, and if it is true that the Sinar P weighs 13 lbs, the Arca is half the weight.

Neil,

The 229 is rated for more weight than the 410, but I believe that it would require an adaptor, which Kirk sells for a cool $130, to take the camera, and one of my main reasons for getting the geared head is that it should help with focusing the macro lens.

Seepaert,

Thanks for the tips. The Manfrotto 359 would involve tightening a C-clamp on a carbon fiber tripod leg, an idea that makes me very nervous.