Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 31

Thread: Tripod Usage?

  1. #21
    Senior Member conropl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    West Michigan
    Posts
    1,466
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Throgmartin View Post
    Based off other reading I had though the modern Arca Swiss ball heads did not play nice with the traditional "standard" Arca Swiss system -- RRS, Kirk camera plates, etc... would not fit.

    Am I mistaken with that point?

    Dave
    If I understand what you are saying, I would say you are mistaken. I have Kirk "L" bracket on my camera, Wimberley plate on a lens foot, and some other off brand on another lens foot. All work fine with my Arca-Swiss ball head.

    As for my tripod... I debated over light vs. stiffness. I also wanted the hieght without jacking up the column. The big and heavy tripod solved more problems for me. I do not mind carrying the weight. The camera and lens are usually on the tripod when I hike. It is extended and I throw it over my shoulder. Or I can fold it and strap it over my shoulder or back pack. I can tear it down and pack it in a suitcase, or I ship it to my destination. I would like a light one as a backup some day... but there are other things before that.
    5DS R, 1D X, 7D, Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6, 24mm f/1.4L II, 16-35mm f/4L IS, 24-105mm f/4L, 50mm f/1.8, 100mm Macro f/2.8L, 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II, 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L, 580EX-II
    flickr

  2. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    South West Ontario
    Posts
    466
    A bit of a follow up. That Auctus 323 weighs around 8 lbs before adding the head. It is far more stable than my older Gitzo 3 LS series especially on a windy day, just a wee bit heavier, about 2x, and far less costly especially when on sale which doesn't happen often enough with Gitzo. Being rated for 40 lbs of load it will take anything I can throw on it. The center column is very rigid with tapered locking mechanisms on both the top and bottom.
    One thing I have noticed looking at newer Gitzos in the stores is that the leg angle locking mechanism seems to have been changed and is no longer as wide nor as steeply angled, with a poorer fit, as it used to be for optimum self-locking properties. The newer travel series have even narrower points of contact with the legs. I am curious as to whether this has affected the overall stability of the tripods?

    Edit: I should add that at least 80% of my shots come from a tripod, or a monopod. The improvements from the stability are very much worth the time and developing the disciplined approach which I did carry over from film and especially MF. Of course if I did street photography, not studio and landscape primarily, I would expect my usage to be VERY different......
    Last edited by jrw; 09-10-2015 at 04:17 AM.

  3. #23
    Senior Member conropl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    West Michigan
    Posts
    1,466
    Quote Originally Posted by jrw View Post
    ...The improvements from the stability are very much worth the time and developing the disciplined approach which I did carry over from film and especially MF. Of course if I did street photography, not studio and landscape primarily, I would expect my usage to be VERY different......
    This is a good point. I do a fair amount of manual focus (MF). I do this on a lot of my landscapes, and 100% of the time at night. I find the heavy sturdy tripod to be far less frustrating when zooming in 10X on a star to MF.

    Plus, if it gets windy I can hang a weight from the center column and the legs do not splay out a all. I also regularly set up the tripod in 5 feet of water and let the camera sit about 8 inches above the water for extended periods of time... the reason I now use a wireless remote (my wired remote took a fatal bath). I would not hang that much money of the water if I did not trust the tripod.

    Having said all that... I am not a small person and I usually have my wife with me and she does not seem to mind carrying my gear (mostly lenses). Over the years I have learned to bring less with me... filters, remote, 2-3 lenses (a couple are quit heavy), 1D X, and tripod/head. If I want a monopod... then I do not open the legs of the tripod. So with the help of my wife, the heavier gear is not that big of a problem. But if I was by myself a lot or was hiking 8+ miles, then I would re-think this.

    For this shot, I hiked a difficult/rough 7-8 miles with everything I owned on my back and around my neck because I was not sure where I would be able to shoot from. I had just injured my heal and was limping around when we decided to go to Spray Falls... I was never so happy to get back to the car, and I probably did not stay and shoot as long as I would have if I was not so beat. This is one of the cases that I would have loved to have a lighter load.

    Spray Falls by Pat Conroy, on Flickr
    5DS R, 1D X, 7D, Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6, 24mm f/1.4L II, 16-35mm f/4L IS, 24-105mm f/4L, 50mm f/1.8, 100mm Macro f/2.8L, 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II, 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L, 580EX-II
    flickr

  4. #24
    Super Moderator Kayaker72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    New Hampshire, USA
    Posts
    5,675
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Throgmartin View Post
    Based off other reading I had though the modern Arca Swiss ball heads did not play nice with the traditional "standard" Arca Swiss system -- RRS, Kirk camera plates, etc... would not fit.

    Am I mistaken with that point?

    Dave
    I am not sure what you are reading. There may be some truth to it, or maybe not. All "arca swiss" style plates made by different manufacturers are not actually the same size. This is somewhat irrelevant if your head/plateform is a screw in type as each time you screw in the clamp, you "customize it" to the specific plate. But, for example, I have a Really Right Stuff "L bracket" plate and a Markins "quick release" ballhead/platform. Different manufacturers, potentially slightly different sizes. But, my quick release clamp/platform is customizable and I have it set up to Really Right Stuff's dimensions. I might not be able to take a Kirk plate and put it on my ballhead as that might have slightly different dimensions (for example).

    So, if this is what you are referring, that the "arca swiss" plates can be slightly different between manufacturers, the solution is to:
    1. Have a screw in clamp
    2. Have a customizable quick release clamp and use plates from the same manufacturer (this is what I do)
    3. Buy ballheads and plates from the same manufacturer.


    A bit more on this can be found here and here.

  5. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,156
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Throgmartin View Post
    Based off other reading I had though the modern Arca Swiss ball heads did not play nice with the traditional "standard" Arca Swiss system -- RRS, Kirk camera plates, etc... would not fit.

    Am I mistaken with that point?
    I too find this surprising to hear. I've got a mixed system from three manufacturers with no show-stoppers:

    RRS: L-brackets on 2 cameras, screw clamps on monopod and tripod, lever clamps on floor plate, leveling head, dovetail plate under 4 heads
    Wimberley: dovetail plate for 3 cameras, dovetail plate for 4 lenses, gimbal head
    Markins: screw clamp on ballhead

    I do find that there's some compromise with the mix&match when it comes to safety features: the Markins head has a retractable pin for a safety catch, and the RRS L-brackets don't engage the pin.

    I do like that the RRS lever clamps are very intelligently made: the lever has basically three "happy positions": fully clamped, half-open which is slide ONLY (so any plate with safety stop screws is still captive; anything else is slide out but not flop out), and full-open which is obviously completely un-captive.
    We're a Canon/Profoto family: five cameras, sixteen lenses, fifteen Profoto lights, too many modifiers.

  6. #26
    Senior Member Dave Throgmartin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Northern Illinois
    Posts
    1,061
    Sorry, what I should said is the Arca Swiss ball heads do not appear to be made with customization in mind. I read of glued fasteners holding the clamp on and of the Slidefix QS and Fliplock being proprietary style.

    Dave

  7. #27
    Administrator Sean Setters's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Savannah, GA
    Posts
    3,366
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Throgmartin View Post
    Sorry, what I should said is the Arca Swiss ball heads do not appear to be made with customization in mind. I read of glued fasteners holding the clamp on and of the Slidefix QS and Fliplock being proprietary style.

    Dave
    The Arca-Swiss Monoball Z1's QR is in fact glued into the ball head now. I ran into an issue when I bought one and tried to replace it with an RRS QR clamp (which is possible, but you have to jump through hoops to get it done).

  8. #28
    Senior Member Dave Throgmartin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Northern Illinois
    Posts
    1,061
    Thanks for the information Sean.

    The Manfrotto ball head I'm using is nice, but the RC2 system seems unstable and I think is causing some sag right after tightening the ball head. I've wanted to get into the Arca Swiss clamping system so I picked up a used 6D plate off Lens Authority and a new Wimberley C-12 clamp that I intend to use to replace the RC2 on my 498 ball head.

    If this doesn't work out I will plan to use the Wimberley plate on a higher end ball head, but I don't want the $300+ answer unless it is necessary.

    Dave

  9. #29
    Administrator Sean Setters's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Savannah, GA
    Posts
    3,366
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Throgmartin View Post
    If this doesn't work out I will plan to use the Wimberley plate on a higher end ball head, but I don't want the $300+ answer unless it is necessary.

    Dave
    If your original plan doesn't work out, you may want to take a look at the Top Ball Heads Comparison that DPReview did. It's actually very informative.

  10. #30
    Senior Member Dave Throgmartin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Northern Illinois
    Posts
    1,061
    Quote Originally Posted by Sean Setters View Post
    If your original plan doesn't work out, you may want to take a look at the Top Ball Heads Comparison that DPReview did. It's actually very informative.
    My Wimberley clamp came in today and I attempted to replace the 498RC2 clamp, but it ended up not working out. I think Manfrotto must be using some type of thread locker because the hex shape in the screw rounded before the screw came loose.

    I'm not sure what direction to go now. Decisions, decisions...

    Dave

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •