martin kitching
Obsessed seawatcher
Keith Reeder said:Based on the oft-used description of the 393 as a "poor mans' Wimberley (with the similarity of function that implies), I'm pretty sure that some people really do mean that, with the 393 properly set up, balance alone will keep the camera/lens where you leave it...
They do, it will, and I've already described/explained the requirements for this to happen. As you've used a Wimberley head you should realise that if the lens can be moved with so little pressure then, while balanced, it is critically unstable. Setting the head up with the right amount of friction and balance is critical. Increasing friction will increase the pressure required to adjust the angle of the lens but will also make it less likely to be moved by 'accidental' pressure. With lower friction there is also a greater risk of the photographer moving the lens while taking the shot. Using the 393 with the locking nuts set quite tight it still requires only minimal effort to move the lens. I can honestly say that I will never go back to using a pan and tilt head for photography. The great test will come in July when I mount the 393 on a monopod and take it out on the first of this year's Northumberland pelagics (details to be posted soon on 'Sea Watch' forum and 'Northumbrian Birding' thread).
martin