Best tripod head for 4x5 camera?

[David R Munson]

My current setup and preference:

Induro CT213 (review on my Photo Otaku blog if anyone's interested) is great in all regards. I'd buy it again without hesitation. Strong, light, a joy to use, etc. Best tripod I've owned.

Manfrotto 410 geared head, with an adapter from Hejnar that replaces the factory QR system with an Arca-type clamp. The version I bought also extends the top plateof the head just slightly so that the center of the clamp is over the center of the tripod (unmodified, it's off center with the 410). I am presently without view camera, but have used 4x5s on the 410 many times before and it was great. I currently use it under everything up to an RZ67 with motor drive, which is a notably heavier piece of kit than something like a Chamonix 4x5. Handles it with ease.

For the sake of ease of use on uneven terrain, I sometimes use the 410 head with a Benro PC1 panning clamp between the head and the camera. That way, once everything is leveled out, you can pan one way or another without going out of level.

Full disclosure: I do some occasional affiliate sales for Induro, but would be an enthusiastic and happy customer regardless. No affiliation with Manfrotto, Hejnar, or Benro.

[jp]

There's a great deal of subjectivity in these choices, but I personally think the 3047 head is a little bigger than necessary for 4x5, at least for field camera / press camera use. It would be great for a monorail with a 300mm lens on it.

Right now, I alternate between two tripods for 4x5 and smaller outdoor use;

Ries Junior (similar to current J series) with 3025 head because it handles ice/snow and being set in salty beach sand better than my other tripod.

Tiltall because it's simple and solid for it's size and I've used it since 1993 for various cameras.

For indoor use, I have a Davis & Sanford with mh-1 head and wheels I bought used from a school picture company.

[Ari]

To tag along in this thread, any links or comparisons between the Manfrotto 410 (very popular choice) and the FLM (not sure the comparable model). If not, perhaps let me know the suggested FLM model and then I will do my research on the two. Thank you.

This would be for a 4x5 Chamonix, so never much weight.

Hi Jonathon,
I doubt you'd find a comparison review between the 410 and a ball head, they are different animals; I've never used the 410 myself, but, as you can see, there are many here who highly recommend it for VC work.
If you want to research an FLM ball head to use with your Cham, there are two sizes of ball head I'd recommend: 43mm and 48mm, and you can look up the following five suggestions:

CB-43FT
CB-43FTR

CB-48F
CB-48FT
CB-48FTR

Anything with "T" in the item name means it has "Tilt Lock". The 43mm size will certainly do a great job with your present gear; the 48mm head is a small step up in size, weight and price, but a huge step up in performance wrt to supporting LF gear. Personally, I like to over-spec a little, and if you move to larger lenses or even a larger format, you'd still be very well-covered with a 48mm head.
If you have any other questions, feel free to contact me anytime through the FLM Canada website below.

[David R Munson]

I doubt you'd find a comparison review between the 410 and a ball head, they are different animals

For what it's worth, this is something I could do in a month or so after I've finished the move I'm in the middle of. I've got both on hand and could borrow a 4x5 for it.

[Peter De Smidt]

For me, the main advantage of a ball head is that it's fast. I use one for smaller formats for fairly close-up portraits. People move. If I have to use three knobs to follow them, I'll miss the shot. If, on the other hand, I'm shooting something static, such as architecture, using a 410 is a joy, not that a good ball head can't be used successfully for that as well.

[Ari]

David, I'd be curious to read it, though I still maintain it would be akin to comparing apples to bicycles.

[David R Munson]

Thing is, I like apples and bicycles. I don't mind arriving at the conclusion that one is X and the other is purple because it's Tuesday. Weird comparisons can make for interesting observations.

I like Peter's observation about final purpose and I think it points to the core issue of what one is trying to do and how one is trying to do it.

[Ari]

Thing is, I like apples and bicycles. I don't mind arriving at the conclusion that one is X and the other is purple because it's Tuesday. Weird comparisons can make for interesting observations.

I like Peter's observation about final purpose and I think it points to the core issue of what one is trying to do and how one is trying to do it.

Seems like a good starting point for an interesting review.
Please keep us posted.

[Drew Wiley]

I'll stay with my previous advice: the most dependable, lightest-weight, and most stable tripod head is none at all ! Otherwise, for a very lightweight field folder
4x5, when I'm not obsessing with pack wt like on a long backpacking trip, I might opt for a low-profile Gitzo pan-tilt head. Ball heads just seem contradictory to
the whole concept of torque vector physics. I like to use long lenses, and that's a lot of leverage zeroed-in on some little nail point of a connection.

[appletree]

Oh, my apologies! Flipping through this thread and my lack of knowledge/not using the internet at my fingertips, I did not realize the 410 was a 3-way head (not sure specific name), but I understand what it is now. Nor did I understand the FLM's being discussed were ballheads. Yes very much different animals. To each his own as far as that goes.

Once again, sorry. I thought it was oranges to oranges.

Ari,
I will look into the 43 and 48mm ball heads. Thank you.