Alternatives to Bogen 3047 -- 329??

[Jeff_3801]

I am seeking a light weight 3-way head alternative to my (HEAVY) 3047.

I noticed this 329:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=ProductDetail&A=showItemLargeImage&Q=&sku=253613

It looks like an almost perfect compromise, but the bubble levels seem useless to me. With the 3047, I can level the bubbles on either axis, after the camera is on the head. I don't think I can do this with the 329.

Does this seem like a drawback? Anyone else have any other alternatives I should check out? I tried thie 3437 head:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=ProductDetail&A=showItemLargeImage&Q=&sku=186289

The weight savings is great, but, the knobs seem difficult to tighten firmly, and, of course, I really miss the bubble level style of the 3047.

Thanks for any comments.

[Edward (Halifax,NS)]

The 3437 is only rated to 3kg so unless you are using a light 4X5 field camera and short lenses it might not hold up. You would be better off with a 3030, rated to 6kg (although it has no level). The 329 will hold a man and small boy but the .3kg weight savings seem minimal and you seem worried about the level placement. Boy, I have been a lot of help.

[Gem Singer]

Jeff,

I use both types of heads for my 4X5 cameras and like them very much. They both have 2-way spirit levels built into the underside of the camera platform. The 329 also has a third bulls-eye-type spirit level built into it's base. The 2-way spirit levels on the 329 are a slightly smaller size than the levels on the 3047. Perhaps that's why they don't show up clearly on the pictures.

The 329 has a lower profile, smaller and lighter weight than the 3047, but it is rated as being able to support a heavier load. It uses a smaller size, lighter weight, square metal quick-connect mounting plate than the hexagonal-type plate used on the 3047. Both heads have a safety catch to prevent accidental release of the mounting plate before it is locked firmly into place.

I have been using the newly re-designed 3047 head (yes, some significant changes have been made over the previous model) on a set of Bogen/Manfrotto 475 tripod legs. It seems to be the ideal match-up for my new Ebony SV45TE camera.

I use the 329 head, mounted on Bogen/Manfrotto 3233 legs, for the Toyo 45AII camera. (another ideal match-up, IMHO).

Both tripods are fitted with Bogen/Manfrotto carrying straps, to enable my wife to easily carry them over her shoulder. (you didn't think that I was going to haul them around by myself, did you?)

[Jeff_3801]

Eugene, your 3047 may be different than mine. Mine has two cylinder like bubble levels, one for vertical, and one horizontle, each embedded on the sides of the platform. They don't "face up", as does what I like to call a "bubble eye", which is visible on the 329 link, above.

This pic shows one of the two cylinder style bubble eyes on my 3047: http://216.25.78.123/bigpics/bogen/3047.jpg

The reason the upwardly facing bubble eye is not useful for me, is, because when my camera is on the head, I cannot verify levelness, because the upwardly facing bubble eye is covered by the camera body.

The second side mounted bubble eye, when not facing upward, is not really usefull, because, if I am not mistaken, these bubble eye's must be pointing up to judge levelness. The side mounted bubble eye, I believe, only becomes usefull if you have the head cocked 90 degrees, in which case it *is* then upwardly facing.

Anyway, at this point, I probably appear overly obsessive about the head. Suffice it to say, I wish I could have something with the control ergonmics and bubble levels of the 3047, without the weight.

I have an Ebony RW45, and my lenses are not overly weighty, so I don't have to have a monster head.

Maybe I should just dispense with the convenience of the side mounted bubble levels, and carry a little pocket level with me in the field (one more thing I am sure to lose, however!)

Jeff

[John O'Connell]

I use an older 329, which has cylinder levels rather than the little bullseye ones on the new head. It also uses an oddball square plate shared by no other Bogen head (lucky me). I bought it because the 3047 is just too tall and the 329 comes with the shorty handles.

The levels on the head, in my opinion, are useless. I've never used them.

I've both of my handles slightly. They still work fine, but they will bend if you attempt to overtighten them. Of course, I use it with an 8x10.

I don't think you gain much over the 3030 with this head, except for the marginal advantage of Bogen QR plates.

[Mike Troxell]

On a slightly different note:

John,

How rigid/safe is the 3047 on a 8x10? I've used a 3047 on 4x5 for over 10 years and it works great. I just recently got an 8x10 and I'm using the 3047 on it but I keep worrying about the 3047 not being able to support the extra weight and coming lose while I'm carrying the 8x10 from one location to another..

[Gem Singer]

Hi, again, Jeff,

I guess I didn't make it clear enough. BOTH of these heads have cylinder-type bubble levels embedded in the sides of their platforms. The 329 has the advantage of having an ADDITIONAL "bubble eye" level mounted in it's base. This level is useful for leveling the tripod legs BEFORE the camera is mounted on the top of the tripod. Both heads use similar large rubber grips. The 3047 head is taller, and slightly heavier. The 329 was designed to be used with medium format cameras, but it works very well with my 6 pound metal 4X5 metal field camera.

[Gem Singer]

Hi Jeff,

I just looked at the picture of the newest Bogen/Manfrotto 329 pan-tilt head on the B&H website. It appears that they have changed the design of the 329 head that I have. You are correct, it looks like they are now using "bubble eye" levels on the platform. My 329 is not that old, and it has cylinder type bubble levels imbedded into the platform. I have no idea why they made the change, but it must be an improvement over my older model 329 head. No need to worry, just get the new 329 and try it. It should work very well, and will save you about 1 1/2 pounds of weight.

[Bruce Schultz]

I used a 3047 with a Deardorff and did fine. It was a problem to carry the camera on the tripod because the head would slip sometimes. I also opted for the larger quick-release mounting plate. Recently I got rid of the Deardorff and went back to my Bender, and the 3047 is more than adequate.

[Brian Ellis]

I recently replaced my 3047 with the Bogen geared head and have been very pleased with it. I don't know how the weight compares with the 3047, I didn't replace the 3047 for weight reasons, I got tired of my verticals or horizontals in architectural photographs being ever so slightly off because I couldn't adjust the 3047 in sufficiently small amounts by hand. The geared head has fixed that problem and is very nice to use with other types of photography as well. It does have only a single "bulls eye" bubble level but it can be seen with the camera on the tripod (plus my camea has its own levels so having one on the tripod isn't that critical). My only complaint is that with the orientation of the head on my tripod the knob that controls forward and backward tilts of the camera is in an awkward left hand position.

[John O'Connell]

Mike,

I've never had the pleasure of using my 8x10 on a 3047. I can't think of an 8x10 that would be a problem for that head, though: it should be able to handle the Toyo and Calumet "field" cameras.

The 329 works fine with a light 8x10, even with heavy lenses. I worry more about the camera.

I don't think the weight advantage is really significant with the 329. My first reaction on hefting the box was, "Much heavier than I'd hoped..." I'm going to switch to a ballhead (for weight reasons) when I can afford it.

Levels on the tripod and the head have never done me any good -- and I've got four of them below the camera base now. I'd only consider them necessary if I shot architecture or multi-frame panoramas. And it's the levels on the camera that you still have to rely on.