Help me decide: Acratech V2 or RRS BH-40

Raymond Bradlau said:

What a shame, great head, the m10 is rock solid with my 300 2.8 and
tele. I bought mine from Nikonians, I see what you are saying about
the Markin site.

Click to expand...

Hi,

Impresseive to see a small ball head with such big lens.

Nikonians charges $20- more on M10 for shipments to Asian countries--that's besides the shipment charge. They said, it's because of the import tax, etc. Small annoyances adds up.

Anyway, if I should decide to go for M10, I'll order it from Markins America, I think.

Naoki
--
http://my.reset.jp/~takagaki/galleries/india_2002/india_2004/index.html

with either the Bh-40 or the M10. I also looked at the Arca Swiss B1 at the time. It is another nice ball head in this class. I would avoid the V2.

I am sure you are aware. You can order the M10 without the std. clamp and fit it with the RRS lever clamp. Personally, I prefer the screw clamp since I can tighten the tension myself. For plates, I use exlusively RRS and Kirk's. Markin plates are not as good IMO.

Good luck with your choice.

Willie

I can tell you guys are serious about a solid setup. I wondered if you could help me with this question that has gone as yet unanswered. I apologize for being a bit off topic but my goal is the same -- having a solid setup.

I understand the value of a good tripod or monopod but find that the play in the Nikon lens mount leads to unacceptable camera motion when shooting subjects that don't lend themselves to using a shutter release and locking up the mirror (eg. sports, fast moving animals, etc.)

Maybe I need a better technique for holding the camera on a pod especially when the lens is the point of connection. I also think I have read about a plate that connects the camera and lens to make a unified mounting plate.

I really appreciate the quality of your images and value any help you can give. Right now I am wishing I was using a different camera system like my old Canon with the breech-lock mounting ring on the lens. I have a D2X, 300 f4 AFS (great lens) and also have a 70-200VR. Thanks.

Rick Vogeney

--

Have a system to achieve work you are proud of, that can absorb the problems that inevitably happen when you are in a hurry.

Hi,

Both BH-40 and M10 are most likely fine products. I'm being more careful because, unlike people who live in the U.S. I cannot so easily return the product if I didn't like it. Well, I could but it takes days and unnecessary shipping charges as well. A user report like the one I provided the linke to above also pressures me to practice due dilligence. Appreciate your input though.

Naoki

ith said:

with either the Bh-40 or the M10. I also looked at the Arca Swiss
B1 at the time. It is another nice ball head in this class. I
would avoid the V2.

I am sure you are aware. You can order the M10 without the std.
clamp and fit it with the RRS lever clamp. Personally, I prefer
the screw clamp since I can tighten the tension myself. For
plates, I use exlusively RRS and Kirk's. Markin plates are not as
good IMO.

Good luck with your choice.

Willie

Click to expand...

--
http://my.reset.jp/~takagaki/galleries/india_2002/india_2004/index.html

Hi,

I'm afraid I'm in no postion to answer your question. I think there are many others on this forum better equipped with the right answer you may be looking for. You might want to try again with a fresh thread with sample photos.

Regards,
Naoki

rv for Jesus said:

I can tell you guys are serious about a solid setup. I wondered if
you could help me with this question that has gone as yet
unanswered. I apologize for being a bit off topic but my goal is
the same -- having a solid setup.

I understand the value of a good tripod or monopod but find that
the play in the Nikon lens mount leads to unacceptable camera
motion when shooting subjects that don't lend themselves to using a
shutter release and locking up the mirror (eg. sports, fast moving
animals, etc.)

Maybe I need a better technique for holding the camera on a pod
especially when the lens is the point of connection. I also think I
have read about a plate that connects the camera and lens to make a
unified mounting plate.

I really appreciate the quality of your images and value any help
you can give. Right now I am wishing I was using a different camera
system like my old Canon with the breech-lock mounting ring on the
lens. I have a D2X, 300 f4 AFS (great lens) and also have a
70-200VR. Thanks.

Rick Vogeney

--
Have a system to achieve work you are proud of, that can absorb the
problems that inevitably happen when you are in a hurry.

Click to expand...

--
http://my.reset.jp/~takagaki/galleries/india_2002/india_2004/index.html

Thanks for suggesting that I attach some photos Naoki. Maybe that would help me get a response. I need to get setup with a web image server. I did start a fresh thread on it a few weeks ago but received no response, maybe it was because I didn't show any examples of the rotational motion blur that i get when I press the shutter release and the camera body moves relative to the lens, with the lens being mounted as firmly as possible to the tripod.

Like you I am trying to get the most solid setup possible and want to get rid of the weakest link. It looks like I am going to get a good ballhead, probably the M10 as from what I can tell it is the best value for the price. I am also leaning toward the Benro tripod. It seems to get good reviews although I would like to stay with the Manfrotto QR plate.

If there is anything I can do to help you let me know and thanks again.

Rick Vogeney
--

Have a system to achieve work you are proud of, that can absorb the problems that inevitably happen when you are in a hurry.

The Acratech is cheap and light, but the ergonomics are poor. The BH-40 is much easier to use, and the BH-55 even better. Don't go cheap. The larger the ball, the smoother the operation and the tighter the lockup. You won't regret moving from Bogen QR to the Arca-Swiss type.

I'm using Bh-55, I think it's the best head actually, I'm very pleased with it.

If you don't use big and heavy lenses I think you can go with the BH-40 but if you want the ultimate product consider the BH-55 and you'll never regret.

Alex

I have the BH-40 and I am very pleased with it. I use it with the Gitzo 1227 legs and like the combination. It is used with my D2x with lenses up to a 300mm F4. Since I take the tripod with me hiking, I wanted something that is not too heavy. I assume that the BH-55 would be better on something like the popular Gitzo 1325 with larger lenses, but that would add several more pounds of weight. Not being a young guy anymore, I wanted a lighter tripod even though the camera is not so light. I have absolutely no complaints regarding the BH-40. It is a great ball head.

Naoki Takagaki said:

Hi everyone,

I'm about to upgrade my ball head. I've spent last several days
reading numerous threads and reviews on various ball heads and
narrowed down my choice to 2 ballheads, namely Acratech V2 and RRS
BH-40. I'm currently using Gitzo G1228 and Manfrotto (Bogen) 488RC2
ball head. The heaviest equipment I use is F5 and 70-200mm +
TC-14E. I also shoot macro with 90mm. Current setup is mostly
adaqate, but I want to start using L-brackets and Arcaswiss-type
plates.

I've considered Markins M10 and Kirk BH-3 as well, but I have a
strong preference to low profile design, so I pretty much excluded
them from my choice unless V2 and BH-40 are inadaquate for my
needs, whic doesn't seem to be the case.
Quick operation is something I value very much and that's the
reason BH-40 with its lever clamp attaceted me in the first place.

Click to expand...

Then you've settled the issue. You want "the fastest operation" and you say you have a 70-200mm f2.8. That totally rules out the RRS lever clamp, and mens you've got to get the Acratech.

The Acratech double threaded clamp has the fastest operation of any knob type Arca clamp, and it will accept virtually any manufacturer's Arca plates.

The RRS clamp head, while slightly faster than an knob type clamp in certain situations, deviates considerably from Arca's plate dimensions, so it will not work with some Kirk plates, or any Markins plates.

(Yes, it's RRS's problem, they blew it, or they wouldn't have to list Arca-Swiss as one of the plates that an RRS clamp will not work with. Since Arcs-Swiss obviously is Arca-Swiss compatible, RRS isn't).

You need to use Markins plates for "the fastest operation".

Neither. All you need is a simple Markins camera plate. Markins is the only company that I know of that makes high quality camera plates where the dovetails run fore and aft, the same orientation as on all lens plates (RRS, Kirk, Wimberly, and Markins), medium format plates, macro equipment, and the original Arca Swiss view cameras. The machining on the Markins plates are excellent, they're a leader in features (RRS has recently begun copying the hand strap slots Markins has been putting on their plates for years). Markins has plates specifically machined for a few popular DSLRs like D200, or "universal" plates for other DSLRs. I have universals for my D2X and D100, and a custom for my D200.

RRS and Kirk promote plates and L-brackets for 35mm and DSLRs that have the dovetail running "sideways" in relation to how it runs on a lens, a medium format camera, or a large format camera. I believe RRS was the company who originated the sideways dovetail on 35mm cameras, prompting the term "really rong stuff".

With the camera plate and the lens plate running in the same direction, you've got all sorts of tricks available. The tripod and mount become a "third hand" to help you change lenses, instead of something you fight with. Say you're shooting your 70-200mm, and you decide that the scene needs the "magic" of the 85mm f1.4. Grab the big zoom firmly with one hand, release the Arca clamp with the other, and slide the 70-200mm out of the clamp, and the camera's plate into the Arca clamp, will holding everything by the lens. Lock the arca clamp, hit the lens release button on the camera, and dismount the lens. You've never changed your grip on the lens, and there's the camera, level, pointed in the right direction, all ready for you to twist and lock the 85mm f1.4. Takes about 15 seconds for the whole changeover.

Try that with the camera bracket sideways, and you add a dismount the lens, walk around the tripod to where you can slide the camera into the clamp sideways, walk around again to dismount the lens, then reposition everything to set up the shot again.

Before I discovered Markins plates, I used to use plates meant for lenses on the camera, so the plate runs fore and aft, just like a lens plate, and a square plate with grooves on all four sides on the bellows). The Markins plates are even more convenient. Most have "bidirectional" dovetails. The dovetail portion of the plate is 36mm square, the dovetail being machined on all four sides of the plate. This means you can use the plate with that fore-aft trick I mentioned for changing lenses, or also use them with equipment like the Novoflex Castle-Q or RRS macro rails that require a sideways lens plate. Don't worry that the Markins playe only gives you 36mm (about an inch and a half) of dovetail, vs 50-60mm (2 inches) for a "really rong" sideways plate. You don't realize just how strong 36mm of milled aluminum tongue and groove plate mated into an Arca clamp is. It's sturdy enough to tear the camera to pieces before you'd twist the plate loose. Engaging 2-3 inches of sideways plate is overkill, for no good benefit, at all.

--
Normally, a signature this small can't open its own jumpgate.

Ciao! Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

Naoki Takagaki said:

Only thing that mildly bothers me is reviews that indicate BH-40 is
not as smooth as its competitors. The load capacity of BH-40 is
rated as 18 pounds (8kg) where as V2 is rated as "25 pounds at any
angle." Now, since neither ball heads is available for in Tokyo
where I live, I cannot test them before purchase. I do like to hear
the real-world experience from the users.

Click to expand...

I haven't used a V2 Arcatech. I like the original, very much. (Is it called "V1" now?)

Naoki Takagaki said:

Incidentally, relative un-smoothness of BH-40 is probably due to
the fact that the ball is not lubricated by default (according to
the manual I downloaded), but then neither is the ball of V2...

Click to expand...

This is a "good thing". Lubrication is necessary for some activities, but moving a ball head isn't one of them. The lubricant affixes dust and dirt to the ball, and this causes jamming, wear, and the destruction of the ball's surface, leading to very unsmooth movements. The ball needs to move well while dry, and the clamp needs a design that tends to "squeegee" the ball clean, rather than drawing dirt into the gap between ball and clamp. Don't know about "V2", but the original Arcatech is a very clean design.

The downside is that there are no L brackets with fore-aft dovetails, just simple plates like the Markins. But my personal view is that the L bracket is both poor ergonomics and the enemy of sharp pictures, so it should be avoided at all costs...

--
Normally, a signature this small can't open its own jumpgate.

Ciao! Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

Ed Ingold said:

The Acratech is cheap and light, but the ergonomics are poor. The
BH-40 is much easier to use, and the BH-55 even better. Don't go
cheap.

Click to expand...

Huh?

The Arcatech with rubber knobs, the double threaded (quick release) clamp, and spring loaded pin safety releases is $300. I don't think that's "cheap", it's in the same class as the $375 BH-40.

Now, as far as as poor ergonomics, well, you're an engineer, you should appreciate this issue. If you only use lenses that do not have their own tripod mounts on a rotating collar, and always mount to the tripod via a mounting plate or L bracket on the camera, then the Arcatech and the RRS are pretty close in ergonomics. If you frequently switch between lenses that have tripod collars and ones that don't, then there's simply no comparison.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=20747395

With a Markins plate on the camera and an Arcatech head (or an Arcatech clamp on a RRS head) to change lenses, all you have to do is change lenses. And the tripod and clamp actually help this process, because the lens and camera plates are oriented in the same direction.

With an RRS lever clamp, you have to perform a complicated tribal voodoo dance around the tripod, turning everything 90 degrees, then reorienting the camera after you change lenses.

Ed Ingold said:

The larger the ball, the smoother the operation

Click to expand...

That's part of it. As an engineer, you know there are many factors. Aside from the larger the ball: the cleaner the ball, the smoother the operation. The Arcatech (at least V1, not sure about V2) has a better "squeegee" action for keeping itself clean than any other ball head I've ever used.

Ed Ingold said:

and the tighter the lockup.

Click to expand...

Clamp design figures in that, too. I think the Arcatech "band clamp" has the best locking action.

Ed Ingold said:

You won't regret moving from Bogen QR to the
Arca-Swiss type.

Click to expand...

Agreed. Well, I do miss Bogen's $12 plates and $25 releases that I can put on everything. I've got one plate on each three bellows, a plate and clamp on each of two focusing rails, two clamps and a plate on a home made camera to lens bracket for long lenses with teleconverters (or for coupling two bellows), two clamps and a plate on my stereo bracket, a plate and clamp on my stereo slide bar, plate and clamp on the flash bracket, plate and clamp on the vertical bracket, plate and clamp on my VR (panorama) bracket, clamp on the goniometer on my optic bench, etc.

All in all, about 15 Bogen releases and 25 plates. I'm still in the process of the systematic replacement of all that with Arca clamps, which will ultimately run over $2000.

--
Normally, a signature this small can't open its own jumpgate.

Ciao! Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

Hi Joseph,

Joseph S Wisniewski said:

With the camera plate and the lens plate running in the same
direction, you've got all sorts of tricks available. The tripod and
mount become a "third hand" to help you change lenses, instead of
something you fight with. Say you're shooting your 70-200mm, and
you decide that the scene needs the "magic" of the 85mm f1.4. Grab
the big zoom firmly with one hand, release the Arca clamp with the
other, and slide the 70-200mm out of the clamp, and the camera's
plate into the Arca clamp, will holding everything by the lens.
Lock the arca clamp, hit the lens release button on the camera, and
dismount the lens. You've never changed your grip on the lens, and
there's the camera, level, pointed in the right direction, all
ready for you to twist and lock the 85mm f1.4. Takes about 15
seconds for the whole changeover.

Click to expand...

hmmm.... intresting. I've never read anyone mentioning this before. You have successfully complicated the selection process. ) I'd have to give this feature a thought.

Joseph S Wisniewski said:

Before I discovered Markins plates, I used to use plates meant for
lenses on the camera, so the plate runs fore and aft, just like a
lens plate, and a square plate with grooves on all four sides on
the bellows). The Markins plates are even more convenient. Most
have "bidirectional" dovetails. The dovetail portion of the plate
is 36mm square, the dovetail being machined on all four sides of
the plate. This means you can use the plate with that fore-aft
trick I mentioned for changing lenses, or also use them with
equipment like the Novoflex Castle-Q or RRS macro rails that
require a sideways lens plate. Don't worry that the Markins playe
only gives you 36mm (about an inch and a half) of dovetail, vs
50-60mm (2 inches) for a "really rong" sideways plate. You don't
realize just how strong 36mm of milled aluminum tongue and groove
plate mated into an Arca clamp is. It's sturdy enough to tear the
camera to pieces before you'd twist the plate loose. Engaging 2-3
inches of sideways plate is overkill, for no good benefit, at all.

Click to expand...

I never realized the base of the Markin's plate was square. I just checked their site, and it says, bidirectional! It is indeed a feature I have overlookd, although I only have one lens with tripod colloar and it is still not likely to be a deal-breaker for BH-40. Also, when I see the photos of plates from the both comapnies, I see RRS plate has fringe on two sides and seems a lot more secure, which according to you is nonissue since Markins' is strong enough.

RRS plate



Markins plate



Thank you for taking the time to post. Now, I'll be able to make decision based on more throrough info.

Naoki
--
http://my.reset.jp/~takagaki/galleries/india_2002/india_2004/index.html

Joseph S Wisniewski said:

The downside is that there are no L brackets with fore-aft
dovetails, just simple plates like the Markins. But my personal
view is that the L bracket is both poor ergonomics and the enemy of
sharp pictures, so it should be avoided at all costs...

Click to expand...

This is a first post ever I read that says the use of L bracket goes aginst acquiring sharp pictures. How do you figure that?

Naoki
--
http://my.reset.jp/~takagaki/galleries/india_2002/india_2004/index.html

Hi,

I have considered BH-55 and I don't ming getting it if it gives me more stability and helps acquire sharper images, I use Gitzo 1228 and it seems it would get too top-heavy.

Naoki

Alex2003 said:

I'm using Bh-55, I think it's the best head actually, I'm very
pleased with it.
If you don't use big and heavy lenses I think you can go with the
BH-40 but if you want the ultimate product consider the BH-55 and
you'll never regret.

Alex

Click to expand...

--
http://my.reset.jp/~takagaki/galleries/india_2002/india_2004/index.html

no text

Bernard Waxman said:

I have the BH-40 and I am very pleased with it. I use it with the
Gitzo 1227 legs and like the combination. It is used with my D2x
with lenses up to a 300mm F4. Since I take the tripod with me
hiking, I wanted something that is not too heavy. I assume that
the BH-55 would be better on something like the popular Gitzo 1325
with larger lenses, but that would add several more pounds of
weight. Not being a young guy anymore, I wanted a lighter tripod
even though the camera is not so light. I have absolutely no
complaints regarding the BH-40. It is a great ball head.

Click to expand...

--
http://my.reset.jp/~takagaki/galleries/india_2002/india_2004/index.html

Some of the best shooters i know don't use the kind of gear you are talking about. Will any of these heads give you a measurably better photo? Does anyone have any tests that i could look at. Before I change my Bogen 3040 and 3047 head for a $500 gitzo and $400 ballhead I'd like to see the difference.

--

Have a system to achieve work you are proud of, that can absorb the problems that inevitably happen when you are in a hurry.

rv for Jesus said:

Some of the best shooters i know don't use the kind of gear you are
talking about.

Click to expand...

What kind of gears do some of those best shooeter you know use? And why not use the same gears as those shooters?

Naoki
--
http://my.reset.jp/~takagaki/galleries/india_2002/india_2004/index.html

Naoki

Thanks for your sugestion, it is a reasonable one. The truth is that I am using some of the same stuff as my photographer friends. I don't mean to hassle you or anyone else and I apologize if you think I have been out of line or off topic but I am trying to determine how much sharpness can be achieved by equipment and how much by technique. And how I should deal with the sloppy lens mount problem on my D2X with the 70-200VR as that has a huge direct bearing on IQ.

Bogen 3047 heads are pretty common among the pros I know, as are the older vertical Manfrotto pistol grips for faster moving work outside of the studio. In the studio, we have Majestic heads and had an enormous (2.5"?) ballhead that we used to use to hold view cameras. I'm trying to get the info on what kind it was for you. Most of the photographers I know, and work we do, is commercial stuff--product photography and the like. I do more sports and theatre event photography now. The fast moving stuff with long lenses has a much different set if problems than studio work. I assisted a photographer years ago, who had an 11x14 Deardorff with a Packard pneumatic shutter. We could let things calm down for a few seconds afer tripping the shutter with a dark slide in front of the lens, pull the dark slide out of the way and just use the shutter to close. I was pretty good at counting seconds in my head. We would make 8x10 B&w contact prints that were sharper than we can print now on our Lightjet which is my current primary job.

Moving to follow an actor on stage and locking a head on a tripod is a different kettle of fish, but I am trying to get the best quality i can so we can take the prints up to some pretty large sizes--maybe 30x40. It seems ridiculous for me to try using a cable release while following action, or even a .4 second mirror delay.

Although it is a small part of what I do photography has been part of my job since I was 12, but I still feel like I have a lot to learn. I am just trying to avoid spending too much money when the problem may be with my technique (breath control, shaky hands, body position-- or too loose of a system.)

I do respect your opinion. Whatever help I have received has been appreciated, and I thank you in advance if you offer anything else. May the Lord give you success in your photographic endeavors.

I'll post example pictures when i can.

Rick
--

Have a system to achieve work you are proud of, that can absorb the problems that inevitably happen when you are in a hurry.

I have a 1228 and 1410, which I use with an M10 and sometimes a sidekick.

I have used the M10 with a 500F/4P + TC14B and TC301. I don't think anything is sturdy enough at 1000mm (a joke, sort of) but I am very comfortable with the M10 at 700mm (with the 1410, not the 1228):

http://www.pbase.com/nrothschild/image/69593199

http://www.pbase.com/nrothschild/image/69594317

I also shoot with a 300 2.8 AFS and 70-200VR and use both with the 1228. I think at 280mm, with the 1.5 DX crop, that you are just approaching, if not actually into, the "big leagues" of long lenses and all the stability issues. You're right there with the 300 (without a TC of course).

The M10 handles very well and is very smooth. I'm thinking about an M20 for the 1410, just because anything that adds stability is a good thing and I'm tired of swapping the M10 back and forth and I don't think it is good for the pan lock. If you ever add a 300 F/4 and/or a TC17, you will be shooting up to 500mm, which is a very serious FL, and if you get the BH40 you might then start thinking about a larger ballhead.

I put the Markins TB20 on the 1228, replacing the center column with a much more stable platform, something very roughly similar to the systematic plates. I always hang my camera bag on the center hook when the legs are fully extended, which I think helps a lot. I am 5'6" and I think the height, with TB20, is just perfect and I wouldn't want it a half inch shorter. I guess I'm saying that at least for me, "low profile" is not a big deal and might be counterproductive in terms of height.

--
Regards,
Neil