• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

First impressions of Gitzo "Birdwatching" Head (1 Viewer)

H

henry link

Well-known member
I just received my Gitzo GH2720QR head and wanted to report some initial reactions even though I haven't had time for much testing.

Certainly the most controversial aspect of this design is its very limited drag adjustment. The big knob on the side twists to lock and unlock both pan and tilt together. The fully unlocked position appears to be intended as a "one size fits all" drag setting. It actually seems to work pretty well over a very wide range of scope weights which would include even the heaviest birding scopes. A little extra drag can be applied before the head locks but the motion becomes increasingly sticky and jerky especially for the pan function which can't be adjusted separately.

The obvious disadvantage in such an idiot proof arrangement is that the user is unable to tweak the drag settings for personal preferences. For instance, I would prefer slightly less pan drag and a little more tilt drag but as far as I can tell there's no way to achieve it. One other disadvantage for my purposes that include casual astronomy is that the fixed tilt drag setting is not quite sufficient to prevent even my lightest, shortest telescope (4 pounds, 16") from slowly flopping at very high and low tilt angles much beyond 45 degrees. High elevation sky views need extra tilt drag, but that makes the pan motion too sticky. Of course it's possible to rebalance the scope with the sliding QR plate for high elevation views and shorter, lighter birding scopes should do better.

The build quality is typical Gitzo and so far the head appears to be quite vibration free. Rapping the tripod, head and scope at various spots produced only a small amplitude quick oscillation which dissipates in less than 0.5 seconds.

As time allows over the next week I'll try to do some field testing and comparisons to other heads I have around like the Gitzo 2380 and Manfrotto 128LP.
 
Thanks, Henry.

From your description I understand the head lacks the built-in counterweight balance of the Gitzo 2180 head?

I'd rather have seen an upgraded version with better dampening for vibrations and one-lock-all pan handle, providing an ease of handling like a gimbal head and one twist to lock, but you can't have it all. It sounds as if this new head is more of a conventional head.

Best regards,

Ronald
 
Ronald,

That's right, no adjustable counterweight, but as I continue to work at optimizing the balance and drag friction i'm finding that it's possible to get better results than I did initially. So, pimpelmees, don't jump to conclusions too quickly and remember the 2380 is twice as heavy as the 2720.

Henry
 
Last edited:
henry link said:
Ronald,

That's right, no adjustable counterweight, but as I continue to work at optimizing the balance and drag friction i'm finding that it's possible to get better results than I did initially. So, pimpelmees, don't jump to conclusions too quickly and remember the 2380 is twice as heavy as the 2720.

Henry
Click to expand...

Ok, thanks Henry.

How much does the 2720 weigh? Is it about the weight of the 2180?

Best regards,

Ronald
 
I spent some time yesterday comparing the 2720 head to a Gitzo 2380 and the venerable Manfrotto 128LP.

With a scope load of 72 oz (2.25 kg) to represent the heaviest birding scopes the 2720 essentially duplicated the 2380’s freedom from induced vibration. Raps to the tripod legs (Gitzo 3530S), head, pan handle and both ends of the scope produced only a very small oscillation that quickly dissipated in less than one half second. The same raps induced a much larger oscillation in the 128LP which took about 2 seconds to dissipate.

I further explored the tilt behavior described in post #1 by modifying a small astronomical refractor to vary its weight from about 50 oz (1.4 kg) up to 72 oz. As you might expect the scope load limits the degree of tilt before the scope flops forward or backwards. At weights below about 55 oz (1.58 kg) with a properly balanced scope there is plenty of tilt available with the pan/tilt knob fully unlocked, over 100 degrees total. At 64 oz (1.82 kg) the range is limited to about 85 degrees and at 72 oz the range is about 60 degrees. I found the most useful tilt range results from balancing the scope to be a little front heavy so that flopping forward occurs at about 20 degrees of forward tilt. That leaves the greater part of the operating range above the horizon. To my surprise I found that the 2380 was not hugely better. With a 72 oz load and its tilt friction adjusted to match the 2720 its range was about 80 degrees. The 128LP was the champ for this. It allowed well over 100 degrees of tilt with a 72 oz load. The great disadvantage of the 128LP is the need to reset the friction for pan and tilt every time the scope is moved to a new spot.

After some experimenting I found I could, after all, usefully increase the tilt friction of the 2720 before the pan motion became too sticky. I was able to arrive at a setting that works pretty well with a very heavy 9 pound (4 kg) scope and the same kind of tweaking could be used to increase the tilt range in lighter scopes. In the right photo below you can see some little pieces of white tape I attached to the head to make this setting easy to repeat.

I still haven’t had the 2720 in the field, but these static tests have left me very impressed with its stability vs weight. Fluid motions could be a bit smoother, but freedom from vibration and stability are quite outstanding for such a light head. I don’t think the tilt performance is likely to be troublesome for visual use, but I imagine very back heavy digiscoping loads could present a problem.
 

Attachments

  • DSC_1193.JPG
    DSC_1193.JPG
    162 KB · Views: 1,932
  • DSC_1195.JPG
    DSC_1195.JPG
    176.4 KB · Views: 1,847
Last edited:
Thanks for this helpful review. This head sounds so far like it would be just about ideal for my planned future spotting scope purchase (probably either a Kowa TSN-883 or the new 85 Diascope). I'll be curious to hear how the 2720 does out in the field.
 
henry link said:
I spent some time yesterday comparing the 2720 head to a Gitzo 2380 and the venerable Manfrotto 128LP.

With a scope load of 72 oz (2.25 kg) to represent the heaviest birding scopes the 2720 essentially duplicated the 2380’s freedom from induced vibration. Raps to the tripod legs (Gitzo 3530S), head, pan handle and both ends of the scope produced only a very small oscillation that quickly dissipated in less than one half second. The same raps induced a much larger oscillation in the 128LP which took about 2 seconds to dissipate.

I further explored the tilt behavior described in post #1 by modifying a small astronomical refractor to vary its weight from about 50 oz (1.4 kg) up to 72 oz. As you might expect the scope load limits the degree of tilt before the scope flops forward or backwards. At weights below about 55 oz (1.58 kg) with a properly balanced scope there is plenty of tilt available with the pan/tilt knob fully unlocked, over 100 degrees total. At 64 oz (1.82 kg) the range is limited to about 85 degrees and at 72 oz the range is about 60 degrees. I found the most useful tilt range results from balancing the scope to be a little front heavy so that flopping forward occurs at about 20 degrees of forward tilt. That leaves the greater part of the operating range above the horizon. To my surprise I found that the 2380 was not hugely better. With a 72 oz load and its tilt friction adjusted to match the 2720 its range was about 80 degrees. The 128LP was the champ for this. It allowed well over 100 degrees of tilt with a 72 oz load. The great disadvantage of the 128LP is the need to reset the friction for pan and tilt every time the scope is moved to a new spot.

After some experimenting I found I could, after all, usefully increase the tilt friction of the 2720 before the pan motion became too sticky. I was able to arrive at a setting that works pretty well with a very heavy 9 pound (4 kg) scope and the same kind of tweaking could be used to increase the tilt range in lighter scopes. In the right photo below you can see some little pieces of white tape I attached to the head to make this setting easy to repeat.

I still haven’t had the 2720 in the field, but these static tests have left me very impressed with its stability vs weight. Fluid motions could be a bit smoother, but freedom from vibration and stability are quite outstanding for such a light head. I don’t think the tilt performance is likely to be troublesome for visual use, but I imagine very back heavy digiscoping loads could present a problem.
Click to expand...

Thanks, Henry. Nice pictures, it seems the 2720 has a lever for securing the safety lock of the qr plate, instead of a screw like in the 2380.
Also it seems that the panhandle attachment angle can be adjusted in the 2720. With bins mounted, the angle has to be able to change to get the long panhandle down and away from your face. The 2380 won't allow that and gets in the way, as far as I can see.

Nice thinking those little white tape markers! I'll have to remember that.
I don't know yet if I'm going after this head, it seems to have a similar quick release plate mounting as my former 2180 head. That was rather awkward to click in on the head, because of the bulk of the Canon 18x50 bins. Besides, the edges of the qr plate dented the rubber armouring of the bins considerably every time I screwed it on.

Best regards,

Ronald
 
Ronald,

You have to unscrew the panhandle to change the the angle, which can be done with a coin or key in the field. It works for me to simply point the panhandle forward rather than backward when I use binoculars on a tripod.

Henry
 
Thanks, Henry.

That's what I thought from looking at the left picture; the 2180 head has a similar attachment of the panhandle. By loosening the screw with a coin you can adjust the right angle, then tighten again and the panhandle is firmly attached under the right angle.

To me this is important, I've tried pointing the panhandle forward but I couldn't get used to it.

Oh, and on a different note a tip for anybody who's looking to buy the 2720 head and wants to shorten the long panhandle with a saw: you can't do that. The attachment is different than on a Manfrotto head, where it seems quite popular to saw off a piece of the panhandle.

Best regards,

Ronald
 
Warning! This thread is more than 14 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

K
confused about tripod head types for birding scope
2
Replies
23
Views
2K
Peregrine Took
P
P
Tripod/head recommendations for Leica Televid 77
Replies
8
Views
477
phototroph
P
S
New tripod and head for Kowa TSN-66A
Replies
9
Views
1K
fazalmajid
fazalmajid
B
Best tripod head for spotting scope?
2
Replies
25
Views
6K
Elkhornsun
E
H
A survey of the current heavy-duty ball heads
Replies
0
Views
1K
hiepphotog
H

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top