What Ball-head for my 100-400 please?

[nikovich]

Hi guys,

I've decided that for some shots from within my hide, it is about time I started putting my tripod to use, so need advice on what ball head will go on my Manfrotto legs and that will support the weight of a 350D ,100-400 lens with a kenko 1.4 tc attached.
My budget is only about 300 Canadian max, so anything decent in that range would be great.
Cheers for any help !

Nick

[Outboard]

Check out the Markin's ball heads. They are not too far from you in BC.

http://www.markinsamerica.com/MA5/index.php

[gmax]

Hi guys,

I've decided that for some shots from within my hide, it is about time I started putting my tripod to use, so need advice on what ball head will go on my Manfrotto legs and that will support the weight of a 350D ,100-400 lens with a kenko 1.4 tc attached.
My budget is only about 300 Canadian max, so anything decent in that range would be great.
Cheers for any help !

Nick

Why a ball-head (personally disappointed ... )? I'd go with a videohead ... the Manfrotto 128RC2 is a good start (sturdy enough for your kit), at a price within your budget :smoke:

[Roy C]

I use a Manfrotto 488RC2 ball head with my 400mm f5.6, works well.

[simon]

Why not look at a junior gimbal from jobu http://www.jobu-design.com/gimbals.html
I use the black widow and a friend uses the junior both very good heads, well built and excellent service from the company

[vkalia]

Markins Q3 - or if you can stretch your budget a wee bit, the M10. Best bang for the buck. Except for superteles, the M10 will hold pretty much any telephoto. The Q3 will hold lighter teles like the 100-400 quite easily.

IMO, you dont need a Gimbal head for the 100-400. I have a Sidekick and a Wimberley, but rarely use them with a 100-400. For action, it is best used handheld and for other stuff, a ballhead works just fine.

If you buy a ballhead, get one which has adjustable friction on the head - it prevents lens flop when you loosen the locking knob. The Markins is a great buy.. I am getting one myself, actually, as a lighter alternative to the Arca Swiss B1.

Vandit

[nikovich]

Thanks for the replies guys. I already own a decent video head , but I use that for my scope. The ballhead will be much quicker to use for action shots I think..

[Highcountry]

Get a decent ballhead and later if you upgrade your lens to super tele, you can add a sidekick to your kit.

[Jaff]

I use a 488RC2 for my 100-400 and no complaints here.

[tiberius]

Why a ball-head (personally disappointed ... )? I'd go with a videohead ... the Manfrotto 128RC2 is a good start (sturdy enough for your kit), at a price within your budget :smoke:

I agree totally, ball heads are a blasted nuisance, since if you release them enough to move the camera, they just slop about all over the place. The Manfrotto 128 or 701 heads can be set to give just enough friction to move easily, but not to let the camera move on its own when you let go and the horizon stays level. I've got an expensive ball head just sitting in the cupboard doing nothing because I found using it so frustrating.

[michha62]

I see you are in Canada. Take a look at the products here...

http://www.jobu-design.com/index.html

Fabulous company to deal with, and superb quality gear. I use a BW gimbal - it may be overkill for the rig you describe but the jobu junior should be perfect. Not a ballhead, but once you have used a gimbal you will see the advantages.

[Kevin Conville]

I agree totally, ball heads are a blasted nuisance, since if you release them enough to move the camera, they just slop about all over the place.

tiberius chastising folks from another thread:
"I find it difficult to understand why many of you post on this forum when you obviously know nothing about the matter that is being discussed."

Right.

The already mentioned Markins heads don't flop. Arca-Swiss heads don't flop.
There's two examples. There are others.


addendum: While gimbal type heads are very good for long lenses with ring mounts they, like the video heads that would be most suitable to your application, don't have adjustment for horizon. This missing axis limits their usefulness with lenses without a mount ring. A good ballhead is a good compromise IMO as it functions well with many long lenses like your 100-400 and brilliantly with shorter lenses. Once one gets into larger lenses like the 500 F4 or 400 F2.8, then a gimbal head really shines.
I also don't know of any video heads that accept Arca-Swiss compatible plates like all the good ball heads and gimbal heads, which is the de facto standard.

For ball heads I'd look at the Markins M10 and the Arca-Swiss Z1, though both are a little bit more than your budget.

[vkalia]

+1 Markins.

The Q3 ought to do the job for you but if you can, spring a bit more for the M10 which is a very good ballhead and will handle everything except superteles. RRS and Kirk are two other options for you - and a benefit of them is that you will probably get really fast and efficient service if you need it.

A Gimbal is a bit much for a small tele like the 100-400, IMO.

Vandit