Ball Head for 4X5 Field Camera

[Rick Preston]

I'm shopping for a ball head for my 4X5 field camera. 2 interest me. Arca Swiss Z1 double pan, or the RRS BH-55 with pan head.
Am I missing something, or will the marks on the Z1 pan head (the one above the ball) be impossible to see when the camera is mounted on the head. Looks like the marks on the pan head are on the top. Seems like they should be on the edge, like on the RRS BH-55.
ricky

[shadow images]

Acratech ultimate ball head. I loved this head when I borrowed one, wish I didn't have to give it back. Someday I'll pick one up.

[anchored]

Although I use an Arca Swiss B1, and like the looks of the RRS... I do believe as far as ballheads go the very best is the Markin. Made of titanium, has a heavy load capacity, locks to camera very well (as does the RRS), and weighs far less than the Arca Swiss and RRS units. Obviously just a personal opinion, but when "my ship comes in" I'll be replacing my ballheads with Markins.

Glenn

[Brian Ellis]

One thing to watch out for with the RRS head is to make sure that you can turn the handle that tightens and loosens the ball when the head is mounted on your tripod. I have that head (or possibly the smaller version but same design, I don't remember my model number) and I can't use it on my Gitzo 1325 tripod because when I rotate that handle to loosen or tighten the ball the end of the handle bumps into the tripod base.

[Paul Kierstead]

Am I missing something, or will the marks on the Z1 pan head (the one above the ball) be impossible to see when the camera is mounted on the head.

I suppose the natural question is, do you need to see the marks? If you do, even marks on the side of a top panning head will be hard to see with the large base of a field camera. If you really must pan a specific number of degrees, you can also use a levelling head underneath your (whatever) ball head and use a lower panning unit then, assuming your camera is being operated level (fairly typical in a view camera). If your camera is not being operated level, not that the center of gravity of a view camera can be much higher up then an SLR and seems to require considerable more weight capacity out of the head. Field cameras aren't *too* bad in this respect; I find my monorail to be a nightmare in this respect. If you tip that forward (even worse, straight down), it puts a large amount of strain on the head. Something to consider if you ever see a monorail in your future and you are popping a lot of dollars on a head.

[Peter De Smidt]

Why are you interested in the double pan Z1? That would be of use mainly for stitching photos. If you aren't going to do stitched panoramics, then I'd save the cost and weight and recommend a single pan model.

I have a B1, and it's my favorite all-around tripod head. (THe Sinar pan/tilt is better, but only with Sinar cameras.)

Paul Butzi (www.butzi.net) has a review from a few years ago of a number of ball heads on his site.

[Rick Preston]

Yes, I will be stitching photos for panoramas. I expose film and scan it. I do need to see the pan marks. I can't see through the camera when doing these shots. They must be done very fast to get the same light (a big problem with 4X5 panos). So I notice what marks to line up with before I actually expose the film. I also do some triptychs with multiple exposures which is even more critical. It's a pain to level the tripod, which is the way I have been doing it.
Thanks for all your comments. I'll be checking for more.

[Ed Richards]

RRS makes a panning plate you could put between a ball head and the camera. If you are just using the ball head to level the camera, you could use a leveling head and the pan plate, saving weight and getting a more rigid rig.

[rdenney]

The Sinar tilt head provides panning and a panning scale marked in degrees. It's visible from the side, below the tilting plate. As long as you can adjust the top of the tripod for level (which I can with my Bogen 3036 legs), it will meet your requirements.

I prefer it to ball heads, which I find a pain in the rear to adjust in small increments with a big camera. My view camera is just too top-heavy for a ball head. I do, however, use my old Monoball with my Pentax 6x7 or with small cameras. I have a Bogen 410 geared head, but I have not enjoyed using it as much as others have, and I've finally obtained a Sinar tilt head that is in good shape. (They are available--I just wasn't willing to pay what they cost until now, which is between $200 and $300 on the used market.)

It has alignment pins for Sinar tripod adapters, but these can be easily removed.

Rick "liking the low profile design" Denney

[Peter De Smidt]

Hi Rick,

You might check out some of the Nodal Ninja rotators. They are pretty heavy duty, and you can use click stops that you set up in advance, and so in action they are very fast to use. Simply mount one on top of a three way head. Level the head, and there you go. You could use a ball head to level the rotator, but that'd be a pain.

[Warren Clark]

Rick,
I have used a RRS BH 40 for several years for different 4x5 cameras --
others will work well but it is still my choice for most shooting--stable,
light and reliable. Also a good choice of attachments available.

Warren Clark
Ft. Collins, Colo.

[Joseph Dickerson]

Rick,

Another vote for the RRS BH 40. I use one with a Shen Hao and Sinar F1 and it works great. By the way, RRS is now making their own tripods. Saw one the other day. Made in San Luis Obispo and really impressive.

[Jeffrey Sipress]

I believe RRS makes the BH-55 with a built in panning base. I have the BH-55, no panning base, and it is fabulous. I have no interference issues using Gitzo 3 series tripods, as mentioned above.

[Peter De Smidt]

For his application, stitched panoramics, the panning base need to be above the level (ball) adjustment. He could certainly add a RRS panning clamp, which would itself have an Arca style plate on the bottom, but this would be really expensive.

If he's going to do regular panoramics, something like a Nodal Ninja leveling base with a rotator would be quicker to use and much cheaper.

Dont' get me wrong, I love RRS products. I keep one of their L-plates on my D200 at all times, and I have a number of their quick release plates.

[Jeffrey Sipress]

perhaps you're correct. The BH-55 PCL is built that way.

http://reallyrightstuff.com/ballheads/02.html

[Peter De Smidt]

Hi Jeffrey,

That's certainly a high quality option. The question, though, is why would you want to use a ball head, no matter how smooth, when one regularly needs to critically level the panoramic rotator? Sure, I've done it that way, but it's no fun. A good three-way head or panoramic three screw leveling plate is much easier to use.

[Jeffrey Sipress]

Unless you shoot panos sometimes, and single frame images most of the time (as many do). I believe the head is designed for those that do both. The dedicated pano only rigs are quite different.

[Peter De Smidt]

Yep, that's true, but having build my own nodal slide systems and three-d panoramic heads, if you're serious about doing stitched panoramics, you're much better off with a three screw leveling plate and a rotator for doing the panoramics instead of messing with a ball head. The leveler/rotator aren't very heavy or all that expensive. Use whatever head you prefer for regular shooting.

[Doug Dolde]

I love the Arca Z1 DP. Once you level the camera you can pan at the top and stay level. Not only for stitched panos but also to change your composition.

[George E. Sheils]

Another vote here for the Sinar Pan/Tilt Head.
I use mine with a Berlebach 3032 tripod which has a levelling ball.

Very quick, very precise and as Rick Denney says, nice low centre of gravity.

[Rick Preston]

Has anyone out there used the RRS B-55 PCL (that's the one with the panning clamp on top) with a 4X5 wood field camera? Looks like the screw knob on the panning clamp would be VERY close to the camera base when the camera is attached with the B35 flat plate. Wondering if there is sufficient clearance for finger tightening of the screw knob. Seems that the panning clamp is not available with a lever.
Rick

[Rick Preston]

The RRS BH-55 or BH-40 with panning clamp are looking good to me. Sounds like Warren and Joseph think the BH-40 is beefy enough for 4X5 field. The BH-40 would save about 8oz and about $60.
Jeffrey has it right for my use. I shoot pannos only occasionally and single frame most of the time. Right now when shooting pannos I find it a pain, and time consuming to level the tripod. The "GOOD LIGHT" doesn't stay around very long.
The debate, of course, is THE PRICE. I don't buy equipment often (I've been using the same camera and lenses for over 20 years), but when I do I want it to be the right tool for the job and I want it to last a long time.
This thread has been very helpful. Thanks to all for your input.
Rick Preston

[Rick Preston]

I will now reply to my own questions. I received my RRS BH-55 PCL ball head yesterday. I have been "field testing" it in my yard this morning. What a superb piece of equipment! It is exacly what I need for occassional pannos with my Wisner 4X5 Field camera. Very fast to level the panning clamp without leveling the tripod. All knobs are very easy to use and smooth operating. When just doing single exposures it works as a normal ball head. In 5 minutes I could identify all knobs with my fingers while looking through the camera. A very intuitive piece of equipment. I opted for the full size head so I would have confidence using it with my rather cumbersome Monorail camera, which I don't use very often.
The panning clamp only comes with quick release clamping knob(not available with the lever type). Even with the "slow" clamping knob it takes me about 5 seconds to drop the camera in from the top and tighten the knob. The clamp knob is rather close to the flat bottom of my field camera, but there is no problem tightening the knob(In my opinion the close proximity is a non issue.).
Etched panning marks on the panning clamp make it a breeze to accurately set the camera for each exposure when doing a panno. The marks are very important with 4X5 since you can't see through the camera when you are making the exposures.

[Peter De Smidt]

That's great, Rick. I'm glad you found something that'll work well for you.

[Professional]

So RRS BH-55 can be a good ballhead for a large format cameras? I have that ballhead with B2-AS II clamp

[eduardtoader]

hello!

what can you tell me about some plate for a Sinar base? I´m looking by a tilt head or a ball but my Sinar base have 75mm diameter. I love the BH 55 look but I can´t buyit without a plate. Still I didn´t saw any plate with this size. Can you help me with some information?

thousand thanks

[Professional]

hello!

what can you tell me about some plate for a Sinar base? I´m looking by a tilt head or a ball but my Sinar base have 75mm diameter. I love the BH 55 look but I can´t buyit without a plate. Still I didn´t saw any plate with this size. Can you help me with some information?

thousand thanks

Not even one of these?

http://reallyrightstuff.com/rrs/items.asp?Cc=BodyFormat&iTpStatus=0&Tp=&Bc=

[Peter De Smidt]

Eduard,

Get a Sinar pan/tilt head. It's the best head for use with a Sinar by a long shot.

[Matus Kalisky]

When I was looking for a new head for my Tachi 4x5 I wanted one as light as possible - so I gave the Photo Clam PC-33NS head (available from reallybigcameras.com - thanks Kerry) a try - together with a Feisol Tournament tripod. It did for me everything I asked for - and at the same time it is one of the lightest packages that will handle a light 4x5 camera (together about 1400g). I used this tripod and head combination during my trip to New Zealand with lenses from 75 - 400 (tele). No issues (OK, with 400mm 500g lens the Tachi front standard is rather shaky) and I got home some pretty sharp pictures.

Both head and tripod are of good quality (I find the Feisol definitely better made than Benro it replaced) and I hope they will last - I do not plan up "upgrade" even if the funds were there.

[Mike1234]

Many will bash me for this but I say the cheap Smith-Victor $60US BH-8 ball head is fine for just about any medium weight 4x5. I have one and it holds an old Toyo 810G in the "straight" position fairly solidly though it loses clamping force at much angle at all. The 810G is quite a heavy beast, BTW. Again though, for the average 4x5 field camera it should do quite nicely for the $60 investment. There's a return privilege so what can you lose?

[Brian Sims]

I'll add another vote for the Acratech Ultimate Ball Head--it is strong, lite, and easy to use even in cold weather. I've owned one for about 4 years. The only complaint was the knob to loosen the quick release plate felt too similar to the knob that loosened the ball. There were several times I loosened the wrong knob and almost lost my camera. Two months ago, I sent a suggestion to the company that they should change the feel of the quick release knob. They emailed me back within a couple of hours to let me know thay had already done so and asked for my shipping address so they could send me the new knob for free.

[bobwysiwyg]

Many will bash me for this but I say the cheap Smith-Victor $60US BH-8 ball head is fine for just about any medium weight 4x5. I have one and it holds an old Toyo 810G in the "straight" position fairly solidly though it loses clamping force at much angle at all. The 810G is quite a heavy beast, BTW. Again though, for the average 4x5 field camera it should do quite nicely for the $60 investment. There's a return privilege so what can you lose?


I'm fairly new to LF. My first LF camera was/is a Cambo 4x5. I got by using an existing tripod I used for 35mm and a DSLR. It did the job as long as it wasn't windy.:D

I recently added a Shen-Hao, wanting something a bit more packable. I've also moved up to a good solid Berlbach tripod.

In looking through threads researching ballheads, I found most pretty expensive. I just didn't feel I could invest half the cost of a camera in a ballhead. Then I came across a Vanguard SBH-100. Spent some time examining one locally and it certainly seemed up to the task for the Shen-Hao, but really would like one that would work with the Cambo as well. Found out that it does handle both very well. Once tightened down, it will handle even the Cambo tipped at a 45 degree angle. The cost was only about $80 purchased at Huron Camera here in Dexter. Might be worth a look for anyother frugal newbie. :)

[rdenney]

It seems to me that the "frugal newbie" might be best served by abandoning the notion of a ball head, which I find to be a real pain in the posterior with a view camera (especially a monorail), and going with a three-way head. The Bogen 3047 head is very sturdy and more than sufficient for large-format use, and used examples can be had on any given day for $50 or less.

In order of preference for use with my Sinar, the heads I own are: Sinar tilt-head (~$250 used), Bogen 410 geared head (assuming the wobble is adjusted out of it; $200 new), Bogen 3047 ($25 used), and finally an Arca Swiss original Monoball.

For my Pentax 6x7, the order is: Arca-Swiss, 410, 3047, and the Sinar head is unsuited for use with a fixed-body camera unless the tripod has a leveling column (which some Berlebachs do).

For DSLR, the order is Arca-Swiss (for short lenses), gimbals head (for long lenses).

Ball heads are really nice for many applications but I was instantly frustrated trying to use mine with a monorail view camera. It was sturdy enough, but it was just too hard to make the fine adjustments necessary to level the rail in two axes. I would want one that solves that problem, but those are the latest and most expensive versions.

Rick "thinking it takes real money to beat out that beat-up $25 3047" Denney

[bobwysiwyg]

Thanks for the insight. I will keep the 3-way head in mind should I run into issues with the ballhead.

P.S. Where were you when I was looking? :D