deep7: I have a fairly old German "monoball" (the name has a small m) head, which I got second hand. It's about 65mm diameter so bigger than any of these. It has "Für schwere Kameras" written on it. I can't find out much about it and thought this might be a good place to ask! Does anyone know if it is related to any of these brands?
It has a knurled screw for locking panning and another for setting minimum friction, as well as a big butterfly type screw for the main friction setting. Mounted on an equally old Manfrotto 058 (Italian made) tripod, it is overkill in terms of stability, which is why I like it!
Thanks in advance...
"It does say made in Germany though, which is where I got stuck last time I did a search."
Then search for Hensel monoball - German company Hensel once made such a ballhead, labelled as "monoball" and with "Made in Germany"
There's so many more tripod brands than Gitzo ...
monoball is from Arca Swiss, that's a company from Switzerland.
"Für schwere Kameras" translates to "For heavy cameras".
bikinchris: I completely disagree with your statment that other ball heads would not match up because they have smaller balls. The Markins Q20 ball head from Markins is rated for 110 lbs load. This is the best in its class (48mm and $415). Although it has a high price compared to many ball heads in this test, it has a higher load rating than many in the test.
"is rated for 110 lbs load. This is the best in its class"
Any manufacturer can - within some reason - claim any load capacity he wants. So your above statement is meaningless.
racketman: Why don't tripods have markings on the legs so you can see they are all extended equally when necessary?
E. g. German www.Berlebach.de
ManuelVilardeMacedo: "Aside from it's questionable build quality""Its", not "it's".Illiteracy is taking over. Maybe most don't care, or maybe I'm just being picky, but where will it end?Grammar aside, the Benro and Induro ball heads seem to be little more than OEM, made in China products that can be purchased under other brands for less with only slight differences between them. One of those brands is Triopo, which appears to be a polish-chinese venture. Worth checking out for its good price-quality ratio.
"Discounting a carefully written article over what is literally a tittle seems a shame, and hardly warrants concern that the sky is falling on literacy."
The problem with the "review" is the basic non-knowledge: Whoever writes nonsense like "the best number to consider is the weight capacity of the tripod beneath the head" makes clear he hasn't a clue about tripod basics - so if the basics are wrong why should anyone take the rest of the "review" serious?
"It's the tripod ball head that lets you point it wherever you'd like."
And all the other tripod heads don't?
Airless: I don't get how the short flash duration makes sharp pictures. Doesn't the shutter stay open even after the flash ends?I have heard of 1/8000 shutter speed but not 1/16000.
That is commercial spam!
The data is easily found on the Nikon USA website athttp://www.nikonusa.com/en/Nikon-Products/Product/Flashes/4809/SB-910-AF-Speedlight.html
"1/880 sec. at M 1/1 (full) output 1/1100 sec. at M 1/2 output 1/2550 sec. at M 1/4 output 1/5000 sec. at M 1/8 output 1/10000 sec. at M 1/16 output 1/20000 sec. at M 1/32 output 1/35700 sec. at M 1/64 output 1/38500 sec. at M 1/128 output"
http://www.nikonusa.com/pdf/manuals/Speedlights/SB-910_EN.pdfon page H-14
acidic: 3 way heads are slow and cumbersome. Great for larger, clunkier formats and static subjects (especially architecture), but for dSLRs, I much prefer a ballhead. The Compact Ball Head leaves much to be desired, but for lighter dSLRs and lenses it should be fine. Plus better ballheads tend to add quite a bit of weight, easily gobbling up the 1/2 lb savings by going carbon fiber in the first place.
It depends on - that's why there are different head types available.
bodos: it all sounded good until I read it's height is 5'5".
thank you, good bye!
It depends on - mostly on your own height, or to be precise on the height of your eyes. Which includes things like the height of the (tripod) head, the camera used etc. pp.When you have to bend over to look through the viewfinder, the tripod is too low.
wfektar: Welcome to see more reviews, and not just of cameras and lenses.
That said: here's a request. Can you go with measured weights and dimensions, rather than what the mfr claims?
For tripods, how about a stability measure. One possibility is to attach a laser pointer to the hot shoe, point it at a target, and find the spread as the tripod or nearby surface is struck with a known force.
Also for tripods, how about a carrying capacity measure? I have no idea how to do this, but as long as it is reasonable and consistent it should be fine. There are too many meaningless numbers bandied around as it is.
Mike, load capacity is what the manufacturer CLAIMS - it may or may not have to do anything with real life use.Not only a tripod has to be seen as a three-piece set (legs, head, cam), but besides weight focal length plays an important role as well as mirror slap. And how the cam is attached to the head, via the body or via a lens collar. And there's even more ...All plastic parts WILL break one day - not important if you get the tripod out thrice a year and use it for three years only, but when you use it regularly and over many years ...Low weight is good for transport of the gear - but for shooting higher weight is better.And of course vibration/dampening has to be measured by the use of a laser pointer visible in test photos.So it's nice to see a tripod test - but it has to be much more thorough to be really useful.(personally I only use wooden tripods, for serious non-nonsense gear see http://www.berlebach.de/?bereich=produkte&kategorie=1&sprache=english)