Ballhead choice

Sorry for posting this here, but failing the presence of a "Support" forum, I'll put this up here (I have a D200).

I've just about decided to get a RRS BH-55 but am unsure about which clamping arrangement to purchase, the quick-release lever type or the screw-down setup that appears to deliver most clamping force.

I'll be purchasing the necessary L-plate for the camera and whatever one suits my old 300/4 ED-IF.
Any input would be greatly appreciated.
--
Cheers,
Peter.

If you decide to use other brands of plates you would be better off with the screw type clamp. RRS even makes mention of that in their information on the BH-55 ballhead. I decided on the screw clamp for that reason and the fact it will give me more flexability in the future.
--
Jeff
http://www.jeffcole.smugmug.com

I also use the screw-type clamp, mainly because it clamps more tightly. Yes, lever clamps are faster to use, but I prefer the clamping mechanism to result in a rock-solid mating.

If you go the screw-clamp route, one word of caution: Don't let go of your camera and lens (once you've screwed the clamp down) until you give the camera a good shake. You can sometimes screw down the clamp but only have one edge of your camera's plate clamped down in the groove. It will feel right, but when you let go of the camera, it could go tumbling to the ground.

I use a Markins M10 with screw clamp, and an M20 with lever clamp.

A screw clamp has fewer issues. It only takes a couple seconds more to work a screw clamp. As mentioned above, it is very easy to mis-thread a screw clamp; I had a few near tragedies with a 300 2.8 until I learned to do the shake after clamping. It would be a lot harder to mis-thread the plate on a lever clamp; maybe impossible but I don't want to say anything is impossible

If you ever consider a Wimberly Sidekick gimbal, read Wimberly's advice on their site regarding RRS lever clamps. You may need a $43 adapter, which was the route I went.

(I also prefer Wimberly lens plates because they are longer and generally more flexible in terms of positioning, and they are more generic so can be used with future lenses. Wimberly thought through the issues of precise balancing more thoroughly than RRS because they make gimbals. I just converted two collared lenses to Wimberly plates. I have some RRS plates for sale )

I have a Kirk 300/4 replacement collar that DOES work with my lever clamp and I have seen other reports here where Kirk plates were successfully used with the RRS lever clamp. The compatibility issue is probably more theoretical than real but if you have a lever clamp, you always have that uncertainty hanging over you if you use other plates. Also, with time and use, either the plate and/or the clamp could wear, I guess, and a non-problem today could , in theory, become a problem over time. Plus, you never know what plates you may want to buy in the future and who makes them, etc., etc.

Some people are concerned about the lever being accidentally opened, for example, walking through the woods and getting a vine or branch caught on it. I've never seen a report of it actually happening. Some lever users are concerned that a screw clamp could spontaneously loosen; I have never had that happen myself, and I used the M10 screw clamp exclusively for over two years. My own attitude is that lightening could strike either clamp design.

If you are still on the fence after all this, consider how often you will actually work the clamp. If your shooting style is to set up and leave things that way most of the day, the choice is somewhat irrelevent in terms of convenience. If you have an L bracket and you are constantly flipping from landscape to portrait mode, you will more appreciate the convenience of a lever clamp. A lot of my work is with collared lenses so I don't get the full benefit of a lever clamp.

--
Regards,
Neil

I have a RRS ballhead with the quick release clamp and it works just fine with my Kirk L bracket.

Chifley said:

Sorry for posting this here, but failing the presence of a "Support"
forum, I'll put this up here (I have a D200).
I've just about decided to get a RRS BH-55 but am unsure about which
clamping arrangement to purchase, the quick-release lever type or the
screw-down setup that appears to deliver most clamping force.
I'll be purchasing the necessary L-plate for the camera and whatever
one suits my old 300/4 ED-IF.
Any input would be greatly appreciated.

Click to expand...

I just got a BH-55 along with the PCL panning base and the 192 Precision Plus so I can use the setup for panoramas, macro focusing rail, and gimbal head. I tried out my 300mm f2.8 and D200 and it was pretty nice as a gimbal head. I've never tried any Wimberly products but everyone loves them too.

.. everyone for your considered replies (particularly you, Neil).

All along I was leaning towards the screw-clamp and in light of your feedback. I've decided to go this way. If it becomes tiresome I can always order a lever-clamp and swap.
While we're at it, what are people's feelings about Markins vs. RRS heads?
--
Cheers,
Peter.

One nice thing about RRS heads is that the clamps are easy to swap.

I have an M10 and an M20; I'm very happy. Between those and a BH-55, if you do a search here and nikonians.org, you will see conflicting opinions. You won't discover an Ultimate Truth here.

They have very different ergonomics. Personally I like the Markins set screw tension limiter because it is impossible to accidentally back off the tension limit by confusing knobs. That could be catastrophic, especially with a big lens. OTOH, the position and size of the knobs on the BH-55 would make that relatively difficult to do, although I've done some stupid things when my eye is glued to the viewfinder and the action is fast. I also like the design of the tension limiter because it conceptually simplifies the controls. The main locking knob is the only control on the ball tension. The tension limiter simply sets a limit on the travel of the main locking knob so that a minimum tension is established. I can set my minimum tension in less than 5 seconds although I am able to set a tension that works for a wide range of payloads so I don't often have to change it. Some users never have to change it. I like to tweak it, myself.

Some don't like the tension limiter; I suspect many who don't like it have never actually used it. The Markins is lighter, the BH-55 is shorter.

You can order a Markins with two different control layouts. I prefer the R version, which places both controls to my left. I use an L bracket. If you don't use an L bracket you would want the L version. RRS puts the pan lock opposite the main locking knob which forces you to use both hands to lock things down.

My M10 is 3 years oll this month and except for a minor nick in the clamp, cosmetically it looks like it just came out of the box. Whatever they do to the finish is very impressive. It's had a lot of use and gotten knocked around.

One of Markins selling points is that you do not have to lock down the head to shoot. I think that is an important attribute and I never lock my head down, or the pan base, to shoot. My heads actually perform better without the pan base locked down (more so with the M10), something I have carefully tested. I think the BH-55 can be shot without locking down but I don't have any direct experience with that.

The Markins is generally known for it's smoothness in the sweet spot (although you will find a few who claim otherwise). I think the opinions of the BH-55's smoothness are much more mixed and I don't know what to make of it. I don't know if it's sample variation or user variation. I have played with one in the field and I thought that sample was very smooth.

If you do get a lever clamp, it evens out the economics a bit because it is expensive to put one on a Markins, for example, raising the cost to about the same as a BH-55. Otherwise the M20 is less expensive and the M10 significantly less. An M10 is the same price as a BH-40 but I used mine with a 500/4P for almost 3 years and still do when the need arises. It is so close in performance to the M20 that I am not sure I could always tell the difference in a blind test, even using my 500/4P.

Both have very loyal users and both are very good ballheads. RRS has a 30 day money back return privilege, MarkinsAmerica has a 10 day; not sure about Nikonians policy.

--
Regards,
Neil

.. plenty to digest. Your detailed responses are much appreciated.
Cheers,
Peter.

Good luck with your decision. Let us know how it turns out!

--
Regards,
Neil

FWIW, I have been a long time Markins user (M10) and love it. However, I recently bought a RRS 55 to go on my heavy tripod, and use the Markins on the traveler I just bought. The RRS 55 is an amazing head. It is even more stable than the Markins in my set up, which I didn't think was possible. HOWEVER, you can't go wrong with the Markins for lighterweight and value while still getting one heck of a head. There is no denying the mass of the RRS 55 though, and it's extremely fine build. I admit I love the two vertical flop slots, eventhough I use an L bracket.

The RRS QR will not work with Arca plates (I only have one, on my 4x5 and was disappointed to find that out).

YMMV, but they are both great. The weight difference is quite noticeable though. You really need both!

David in Phoenix

I believe I'll go with the BH-55 with the screw clamp (B2 ProII) and an L-plate for the D200. Also a lens foot for the old 300/4 (I think the RRS part is B83). I'll probably go for the smaller L-bracket as I have a love/hate relationship with my MB-D200. At the moment I'm in a "hate" phase. The vertical shutter release is not a big deal as far as I'm concerned - it certanly doesn't compensate for the added bulkiness and mass.

Anyway the bank balance has suddenly taken a hit with a vet's bill for a canine (pug) corneal ulcer. A graft was needed and it's about AU$2700 so far. Ramen is looking like a luxury at the moment!
I'll let you all know when the purchase goes ahead and I get the goodies.
Once again thanks all for your help.
--
Cheers,
Peter.

dstefan said:

The RRS 55 is an amazing
head. It is even more stable than the Markins in my set up, which I
didn't think was possible.

Click to expand...

Can you expand on the "more stable" part? I'd be very interested in reading your observations.

--
Regards,
Neil

Hi there,

my Markins M10 is awesome. I have it over 3 years now and had never a problem with it.

Timur
--
Visit http://www.voider.net

Chifley said:

I believe I'll go with the BH-55 with the screw clamp (B2 ProII) and
an L-plate for the D200.

Click to expand...

Chifley said:

Cheers,
Peter.

Click to expand...

I use a BH-40 with the quick release clamp and have been very pleased. I also use a PCL panning clamp and love the convenience of leveling the ballhead and panning without having to adjust the legs. I don't own any of Nikon's big guns but when that day comes, I'll buy a BH-55 and directly attach my PCL clamp (ie, no quick release or secondary clamp). You might consider this option.

dave

Could you describe it in details? I'm seriously considering Markins M10 and it is very interesting to me.

dstefan said:

FWIW, I have been a long time Markins user (M10) and love it.
However, I recently bought a RRS 55 to go on my heavy tripod, and use
the Markins on the traveler I just bought. The RRS 55 is an amazing
head. It is even more stable than the Markins in my set up, which I
didn't think was possible.

Click to expand...

--
Rumpis )

dasams said:

I don't own any of Nikon's big guns but when that day comes, I'll buy
a BH-55 and directly attach my PCL clamp (ie, no quick release or
secondary clamp). You might consider this option.

Click to expand...

I would think twice and consult with RRS before using a Pano clamp directly on a BH-55 with a big lens. The BH-55 is rated for 55LBs. The Pano base is rated for 15LBs, less than your BH-40. Without knowing any more than that, I would personally not want to "cripple" my BH-55 with a less than robust pano base. I think that base was designed for typical landscape lenses, not a 600/4 or whatever. Again, I'm just reading specs and noting that as a point of research. I considered this option myself, but decided not to because I use a sidekick and didn't think the pano base would add value to that configuration. Plus, I would have had to permanently bond it to my Markins head, which would not be an issue for you, right? I think RRS clamps are held on by screws instead of Loctite?

--
Regards,
Neil

Tim and I have the very rare, and very collectable, early M10s with red decals on the locking knob. The unwashed masses must now satisfy themselves with the 18% gray decal

voider said:

Hi there,

my Markins M10 is awesome. I have it over 3 years now and had never a
problem with it.

Timur
--
Visit http://www.voider.net

Click to expand...

--
Regards,
Neil

I have the BH-55 on my Gitzo tripod and then I have the screw clamp on my monopod. I also have the D200 with the RRS L-Bracket. While both are excellent clamp choices I really like the convenience of the quick release clamp. I have used it with Big glass (Nikon 200-400 f/4 VR) and never felt at risk at all while carrying this tripod and lens combination.

I'd be happy to answer any other questions if you have them.

Don

NRothschild said:

dasams said:

I don't own any of Nikon's big guns but when that day comes, I'll buy
a BH-55 and directly attach my PCL clamp (ie, no quick release or
secondary clamp). You might consider this option.

Click to expand...

I would think twice and consult with RRS before using a Pano clamp
directly on a BH-55 with a big lens. The BH-55 is rated for 55LBs.
The Pano base is rated for 15LBs, less than your BH-40.

Click to expand...

I didn't realize the pano base had such a modest rating. Jeeze, I've always thought of it as oversized and overweight and wondered why they haven't released a smaller version.

NRothschild said:

Without knowing any more than that, I would personally not want to "cripple"
my BH-55 with a less than robust pano base.

Click to expand...

With this info, I'd keep the pano base separate and clamp it on when needed.

NRothschild said:

I think that base was
designed for typical landscape lenses, not a 600/4 or whatever.
Again, I'm just reading specs and noting that as a point of research.
I considered this option myself, but decided not to because I use a
sidekick and didn't think the pano base would add value to that
configuration. Plus, I would have had to permanently bond it to my
Markins head, which would not be an issue for you, right? I think
RRS clamps are held on by screws instead of Loctite?

Click to expand...

I believe the clamps are held by screws and loctite.

dave
--