Re: LF ballhead sought- current offerings questions
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Sal Santamaura
...Bottom line: in my opinion, Colin should have no issue obtaining solid lock down and good independent axis control with an FLM ball head. I'd definitely recommend the CB-58FT for his 8x10, especially considering the way he carries it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Colin Graham
Thanks Sal. That's good to hear the FLM heads can be slung like that under load, so that's one less thing to worry about if I decide to retire the Ries and use the ball head for everything. Looking forward to getting the FLM when I have the funds. I use a 5x7, so I'm leaning towards the 48...
You're welcome Colin. Just to be clear and not mislead you, I thought the (now deleted) picture of your camera being carried on a tripod was an 8x10. That, and the way you carry it, are what lead me to suggest the 58, i.e. for maximum locking force. The 48 is great for my SV-57 and would probably support your 5x7 perfectly as well, but I never carry my cameras on the tripod like you do. Therefore, I can't guarantee that it wouldn't require a 58 to resist what must be incredible impulse forces on the ball joint as your footfalls translate to downward vectors on the camera with the tripod horizontal. You might try the 48, then need to return it for a 58. Not a prediction, just a caution.
Re: LF ballhead sought- current offerings questions
Thanks for the clarification. To be clear, the tripod and camera are slung at a single fulcrum point on the tripod legs, so that slight see-saw action absorbs a great deal of the stress on the camera and head. While the sling is fairly hands-free, I also tend support the head/camera connection with my hand, because it's just a natural resting place.
The photo seemed redundant and off-topic yesterday so I deleted it- after all, no head is really designed to do this. I was never really comfortable shouldering a tripod and camera since all the expensive bits are behind, out of site, and my shoulder would go numb after 100 yards. But this is a much better solution for me, and is a great way to carry smaller large-format gear for literally miles at a stretch, and saves an extraordinary amount of set-up time in the field. So this is my idea of a quick-release, hehe.
https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8602/...423c9eeda7.jpg
Please forgive the barrel distortion around the gut area.. ;-]
Re: LF ballhead sought- current offerings questions
Ok, this thread is going to cost me a bunch of money! I think I am going to save my pennies and get the Arca-Swiss d4 with the geared head and the screw lock. How much time until Christmas?
Re: LF ballhead sought- current offerings questions
I've used ball heads from Manfrotto, Gitzo, Arca Swis , and Really Right Stuff. I've used 4 Arca Swiss B1's that were manufactured in the 2000 - 2008 date range and they all sucked. They all had sticky movement that was extremely annoying. Of the ball heads that I have used the RRS BH-55 is far superior to all of them. So sturdy & silky smooth. I have 2 of those plus the smaller BH-40 (which is too small and cramped for my taste so I rarely use it). And as Sal mentioned the RRS locking levers are far superior to the screw locking devices. Unless something dramatic changes, I don't see myself ever buying a ball head other than the RRS BH-55.
2 Attachment(s)
Re: LF ballhead sought- current offerings questions
Quote:
Originally Posted by
cowanw
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Colin Graham
Thank you Bill, good to know that there is an aftermarket plate already available that will fit.
Some more input on your situation. First, now that I've reviewed your blog about how you built the camera's tripod plate, let me caution you against long, narrow "rails" like the one linked above. Since most of your tripod plate's area is composed of only 1/16-inch aluminum, there will likely be substantial torquing around such a thin contact area. Much better would be this plate from Kirk
that spreads the forces more evenly over your camera's aluminum area. Should you be inspired to go back into your shop and work more metal, the most elegant approach is replacing your camera's plate with one that incorporates an integral dovetail. That's what I had Adam at S.K. Grimes do for my Ebony SV-57 and SV Wholeplate cameras. Even with titanium tripod plates, using Really Right Stuff rails, considerable vibration could be induced when the titanium flexed under load. Attached are some images of the replacement camera plates. Note that, if you plan to use a screw clamp, it would be necessary to add a "spacer" to the dovetail section so the plate clears a clamp's knob. With lever-release clamps, I designed the new plates to be as low as possible.
Re: LF ballhead sought- current offerings questions
Sal makes some good points.
That three-way Linhof head in his photo is another excellent choice. We're really spoiled for choice when it comes to quality tripod heads.
Re: LF ballhead sought- current offerings questions
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Sal Santamaura
Some more input on your situation. First, now that I've reviewed your blog about how you built the camera's tripod plate, let me caution you against long, narrow "rails" like the one linked above. Since most of your tripod plate's area is composed of only 1/16-inch aluminum, there will likely be substantial torquing around such a thin contact area. Much better would be this plate from Kirk
that spreads the forces more evenly over your camera's aluminum area. Should you be inspired to go back into your shop and work more metal, the most elegant approach is replacing your camera's plate with one that incorporates an integral dovetail. That's what I had Adam at S.K. Grimes do for my Ebony SV-57 and SV Wholeplate cameras. Even with titanium tripod plates, using Really Right Stuff rails, considerable vibration could be induced when the titanium flexed under load. Attached are some images of the replacement camera plates. Note that, if you plan to use a screw clamp, it would be necessary to add a "spacer" to the dovetail section so the plate clears a clamp's knob. With lever-release clamps, I designed the new plates to be as low as possible.
Something like this is what we should all be doing, seeing as many of us use cameras with a large, wide base.
I have something similar, though in two pieces, for my Toyo 810M. It's made so that the two pieces lock together.
Better to have something that can clamp onto a substantial area of the bed while using a good dovetail or other locking system.
Manfrotto made a 4"x4" plate attached to their hex lock, but I would suggest making the plate as large as possible.
Re: LF ballhead sought- current offerings questions
Yeah, I haven't felt overly-confident about trying to adapt a ball head to my hiking setup and routine, so I'll stick to the Ries head for outdoor work. Any weight saved by moving to a ball head would be negated by having to reinforce the tripod platform and camera connections. So any ball head I get will just stay on my indoor tripod. That was the original plan anyway, just find a head that was a better match for the Gitzo legs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Sal Santamaura
Since most of your tripod plate's area is composed of only 1/16-inch aluminum, there will likely be substantial torquing around such a thin contact area.
To be accurate, my camera's tripod socket is a 2"x2" chunk of 1/4" aluminum that's mortised into the camera bed. The 1/16" aluminum plate is just a scuff plate primarily, but it does help reinforce the connection and distribute some of the stress.
Re: LF ballhead sought- current offerings questions
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Sal Santamaura
Some more input on your situation. First, now that I've reviewed your blog about how you built the camera's tripod plate, let me caution you against long, narrow "rails" like the one linked above. Since most of your tripod plate's area is composed of only 1/16-inch aluminum, there will likely be substantial torquing around such a thin contact area. Much better would be this plate from Kirk
that spreads the forces more evenly over your camera's aluminum area. Should you be inspired to go back into your shop and work more metal, the most elegant approach is replacing your camera's plate with one that incorporates an integral dovetail. That's what I had Adam at S.K. Grimes do for my Ebony SV-57 and SV Wholeplate cameras. Even with titanium tripod plates, using Really Right Stuff rails, considerable vibration could be induced when the titanium flexed under load. Attached are some images of the replacement camera plates. Note that, if you plan to use a screw clamp, it would be necessary to add a "spacer" to the dovetail section so the plate clears a clamp's knob. With lever-release clamps, I designed the new plates to be as low as possible.
Sal,
Would you give us an idea on how much your Grimes plate cost? A rough ball park is fine. I have been using a rather narrow plate and while I haven't had any problems getting sharp images from my 8x10, I have always wanted something more substantial on the bottom that had more surface area like yours. Thanks. Jim
1 Attachment(s)
Re: LF ballhead sought- current offerings questions
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Colin Graham
Yeah, I haven't felt overly-confident about trying to adapt a ball head to my hiking setup and routine, so I'll stick to the Ries head for outdoor work. Any weight saved by moving to a ball head would be negated by having to reinforce the camera plate and connections. So any ball head I get will just stay on my indoor tripod...
I disagree with this conclusion. The lightest Ries double-tilt head I can find any specifications for
weighs 4.75 pounds. Even a Linhof 3663, the weight baseline I've tried to reduce from, is 1.76 pounds out of the box. Replacing its large, star-shaped camera screw with a stainless hex-head 1/4-20 screw (as I did after the earlier picture was taken) knocks off another couple of ounces. My custom Grimes plate on the SV-57 is only three ounces heavier than the standard titanium plate plus a RRS dovetail plate, both of which it replaces. And the RRS lever-release clamp screwed onto the 3663 is only three ounces. Net: just over 2 pounds. That's 2.75 pounds less than the Reis. I put all this atop a Gitzo GT3225S and have zero stability issues even with the 5x7 Ebony mounted. Attached is a crappy cell phone picture of that combination at the Grand Canyon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Sal Santamaura
...Since most of your tripod plate's area is composed of only 1/16-inch aluminum, there will likely be substantial torquing around such a thin contact area...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Colin Graham
...To be fair, my camera's tripod socket is a 2"x2" chunk of 1/4" aluminum that's mortised into the camera bed. The 4"x6" x 1/16" aluminum plate is just a scuff plate primarily, but it does help reinforce the connection and distribute some of the stress.
I did note in your blog post how you'd constructed the tripod socket assembly. That your Ries' large contact area works well to avoid flexing of the scuff portion is why I suggested that Kirk quick release plate. Which, by the way, even if it weighs another eight ounces, would still keep your new head system at least 2.25 pound lighter than the Ries, assuming a Linhof 3663. Drop that even more with an FLM 48. I remain convinced that a narrow dovetail rail would not fare so well with your 2 inch square solid connection and thinner large scuff plate.
Re: LF ballhead sought- current offerings questions
I have the much smaller J250, which is about 2 lbs. The new ones are listed at 2.5 lbs, but I'm pretty sure mine is lighter than that. The platform on mine is a different casting.
http://www.riestripod.com/?product=the-j250-head
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Sal Santamaura
I remain convinced that a narrow dovetail rail would not fare so well with your 2 inch square solid connection and thinner large scuff plate.
I do agree with this, very much so. Thanks again for the suggestions- much to consider!
Re: LF ballhead sought- current offerings questions
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jim Becia
...Would you give us an idea on how much your Grimes plate cost? A rough ball park is fine...
At the time I had those made, pre-retirement, my colleagues included mechanical designers with access to CAD equipement and the skills to use it. One of them worked with me to create a 3-d model of the plates, which required precise measurement of the camera bases' hole locations. Apparently, Ebony's titanium part supplier drills the countersunk holes manually, so they are not uniformly located. Not wanting to have wood problems with screws ending up close to but not exactly where the original ones were, we measured everything to within 0.1mm. Adam took the CNC file and machined aluminum from it. I specified hard anodizing, which Adam doesn't do and had to subcontract. Given all that background, and remembering this was almost six years ago, total to Grimes for both replacement plates (SV-57 and SV- Wholeplate) was around $500.
Re: LF ballhead sought- current offerings questions
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Colin Graham
I have the much smaller J250, which is about 2 lbs. The new ones are listed at 2.5 lbs, but I'm pretty sure mine is lighter than that. The platform on mine is a different casting...
OK, then, so much for my search skills! :)
In that case, if you're interested in a ball head, the weight analysis I went through, even just using the Kirk plate with an FLM 48, shows a probable slight reduction or at worst a wash. Personal working preference would drive your decision.
Re: LF ballhead sought- current offerings questions
Thanks for the link.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Sal Santamaura
Re: LF ballhead sought- current offerings questions
Btw., it's not that hard to machine aluminum to fit in an Arca quick release clamp. A carbide table saw blade works fine, especially with something like Fortal.
Re: LF ballhead sought- current offerings questions
How's about an Acratech? I heard good things about it. I'm wondering choosing it or the RRS BH 40, for 4x5.
Re: LF ballhead sought- current offerings questions
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jumanji
How's about an Acratech? I heard good things about it. I'm wondering choosing it or the RRS BH 40, for 4x5.
I own several Acratech products and love them. For my Sinar F I use the Acratech Large Leveling Base. It has a broad platform that is the same diameter as the bottom of the Sinar's monorail clamp (2.9" / 75mm). While it doesn't have the range of motion of a true ballhead, it is effectively a small ballhead in nature. It has a large adjustment knob that is easy to tighten and loosen, and allows you to rotate the ball within the socket to point the camera the right direction, and then about 10 degrees of tilt. It's very lightweight at about half a pound.
In general I like Acratech because they products are incredibly well built and well designed. For lighter cameras I use the Acratech GP ballhead, which I've had for five years and could not see myself parting with. I don't think the GP would be a good choice for my hefty Sinar, but it's fine for my lightweight Nagaoka 4x5. I have a half dozen of their quick release plates as well.
Re: LF ballhead sought- current offerings questions
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Greg Miller
I've used ball heads from Manfrotto, Gitzo, Arca Swis , and Really Right Stuff. I've used 4 Arca Swiss B1's that were manufactured in the 2000 - 2008 date range and they all sucked. They all had sticky movement that was extremely annoying. Of the ball heads that I have used the RRS BH-55 is far superior to all of them. So sturdy & silky smooth. I have 2 of those plus the smaller BH-40 (which is too small and cramped for my taste so I rarely use it). And as Sal mentioned the RRS locking levers are far superior to the screw locking devices. Unless something dramatic changes, I don't see myself ever buying a ball head other than the RRS BH-55.
Hey Greg -
I recently bought the BH-55 and have yet to use it. But I keep reading about these geared heads that I wonder if I should switch to one of those.
Have you used many geared heads over the years? What are you shooting with the BH-55? I would imagine geared heads and ball heads are a bit like apples and oranges due to what they do but I'm wondering if I should start out with a geared head or ballhead (I'm shooting with the Chamonix 4x5).
All the best
J
Re: LF ballhead sought- current offerings questions
Since you already have a BH-55, a first rate ball head, why not give it a try?
Re: LF ballhead sought- current offerings questions
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JChrome
Hey Greg -
I recently bought the BH-55 and have yet to use it. But I keep reading about these geared heads that I wonder if I should switch to one of those.
Have you used many geared heads over the years? What are you shooting with the BH-55? I would imagine geared heads and ball heads are a bit like apples and oranges due to what they do but I'm wondering if I should start out with a geared head or ballhead (I'm shooting with the Chamonix 4x5).
All the best
J
Geared heads are too slow and tedious for me. But these things always come down to personal taste and subject matter. I use a ball head for everything. With LF my process is to level the tripod and then level the ball head (which is easy to do with a BH-55 because the quick-release has a bubble level in it. I do not point the camera up or down. I use rise and fall instead which keeps the film and lens planes parallel to each other and perpendicular to the ground. At least until there is a reason to changes the planes. With the tripod level and the ball-head level, I am free to pan the head without losing level with the camera. None of the planes changes unless there is a reason to. If you point the camera up or down, now it is necessary to make at least one plane change just to get back to square. So a Ball head works perfectly well for me and avoid all the tedium that comes with a geared head or pan/tilt head.
If I shot architecture a lot I might change my mind, but this works very well for me.
If I were in your shoes, I would borrow a bunch of heads and try them out to see what you like.
Re: LF ballhead sought- current offerings questions
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Greg Miller
Geared heads are too slow and tedious for me. But these things always come down to personal taste and subject matter. I use a ball head for everything. With LF my process is to level the tripod and then level the ball head (which is easy to do with a BH-55 because the quick-release has a bubble level in it. I do not point the camera up or down. I use rise and fall instead which keeps the film and lens planes parallel to each other and perpendicular to the ground. At least until there is a reason to changes the planes. With the tripod level and the ball-head level, I am free to pan the head without losing level with the camera. None of the planes changes unless there is a reason to. If you point the camera up or down, now it is necessary to make at least one plane change just to get back to square. So a Ball head works perfectly well for me and avoid all the tedium that comes with a geared head or pan/tilt head.
If I shot architecture a lot I might change my mind, but this works very well for me.
If I were in your shoes, I would borrow a bunch of heads and try them out to see what you like.
Thanks Greg. A very thoughtful response. Much appreciated.
Since I am a newbie, I am a bit nervous about spending so much money on these items. This is the kind of technique that I like to see. I'll try it out and let you know what I think.
