• 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.

Video head for long hikes (1 Viewer)

Hermann

Well-known member
Germany
I've been using aluminium Gitzos with Manfrotto 128 LP heads for many years. However, after a shoulder injury a couple of years ago I'm increasingly feeling the weigh, especially on long hikes. I therefore got a Gitzo carbon tripod a couple of days ago, a GT2341, to cut down on the weight.

The problem is the head. I'm using angled Nikon scopes, mainly the EDIII and the ED82, both of which are back heavy. So far I've been balancing the scope on the 128 LP using an ancient Gitzo quick release system that is both very stable and indestructible. It's also unfortunately quite heavy - it weighs about 200 gr. So the whole setup (128 LP with a shortened handle+quick release) is about 950gr. I'll carry on using this head with my ED82 on my old aluminium Gitzos, but I really need something lighter for longer hikes with the GT2541 and the Nikon EDIII.

Now, I've tried a lot of different heads over the years. Most of them didn't really work. Too many problems with vibrations, insufficient dampening and so on. Some were fine at first, but deteriorated within a few months to the extent they were unusable, so I always went back to the 128 LP.

What I'm looking for is a head that

- weighs no more than 650 gr including a secure quick release system

- is reasonably vibration free, ideally as good as the 128LP

- allows balancing back heavy scopes

- is solid and trouble-free in long term use

The only head that comes to mind is the Gitzo 2180, however, opinions on the Gitzo seem to be divided here. It also got a bad review at the Twentse site.

Has anyone got any ideas? I even thought about using a ball head for such trips (like the Arca Swiss), but I much prefer video heads.

Hermann
 
My friends use the Manfrotto 701HDV which is a light video head where the balance plate can be adjusted forward or backward to balance the setup. Benro makes the similar sized S4.
 
The 701HDV is a good, reasonably-priced video head.

However at 830g, it does not give you much weight saving compared to your current set-up.
 
Hermann, I would suggest if you want to make any significant reductions in weight that you get a smaller ED50 which when combined with a suitable lightweight tripod totals ~1.5kg, or about the same as your EDIII w/eyepiece alone.

If you feel that is not an option then I say ignore the naysayer and that frequently mentioned ill-conceived silly test that is always referenced, and go ahead and get a G2180 from a dealer with a liberal return policy and see for yourself if it meets your needs.
 
Last edited:
Hermann,

First off, I don't think the word "silly" is in any way justified in describing Jan Meijerink's test of video heads. It is now however somewhat outdated as a number of new products have been introduced since 2007.
One of them is the Berlebach 510, which weighs 700 g and was introduced at Photokina last year.
Like the somewhat heavier and more expensive 552, which I own, it is excellently made and will accept Arca Swiss plates.
Pan and tilt can now be locked in a single operation.
My Swaro 65 is also tail-heavy and Berlebach modified a 117 mm plate at no additional cost to fit (5 mm video pin at the front and a shortened 3/8" screw to fit the too shallow blind hole in the Swaro foot).
87 mm or 117 mm plates would only add another 40 or 60 g to the overall weight.

John
 
The 701HDV is a good, reasonably-priced video head.
However at 830g, it does not give you much weight saving compared to your current set-up.

My friends use the Manfrotto 701HDV which is a light video head where the balance plate can be adjusted forward or backward to balance the setup. Benro makes the similar sized S4.

Two votes for the 701V ... :) Having tried one in the field for a day I agree, the 701HDV is a nice head, but, just like Weekend Birder wrote, the weight saving compared to the 128 LP doesn't seem to be worth it. Also, I find the quick attachment adapter a bit large large for use on a monopod. I don't really fancy switching the quick attachment plate whenever I want to use the scope on my monopod, something I quite often do when watching birds from inside the car.

Thanks for your ideas ... :)

Hermann
 
Last edited:
Hermann, I would suggest if you want to make any significant reductions in weight that you get a smaller ED50 which when combined with a suitable lightweight tripod totals ~1.5kg, or about the same as your EDIII w/eyepiece alone.

If you feel that is not an option then I say ignore the naysayer and that frequently mentioned ill-conceived silly test that is always referenced, and go ahead and get a G2180 from a dealer with a liberal return policy and see for yourself if it meets your needs.

Thanks, Rick. I've got an ED50 as well. That's a really nice scope, no doubt. However, I find I only really use it on special occasions like long hikes, usually on a monopd, when I don't expect to be using a scope all that much. Despite the high quality of the ED50 I find the EDIII quite clearly better. I also use fairly high magnifications on a regular basis. The ED50 is already pretty marginal at 40x on dull days, I find.

I'll definitely have a long look at the G2180. My local dealer is expecting one sometime next week, and I'll check it out. Not sure about the Dutch test though, with regard to tripods I found Jan's results pretty much spot on. But I'll really have to see how the G2180 works myself. I am prepared to compromise to some extent in order to save some weight.

Hermann
 
One of them is the Berlebach 510, which weighs 700 g and was introduced at Photokina last year.
Like the somewhat heavier and more expensive 552, which I own, it is excellently made and will accept Arca Swiss plates.
Pan and tilt can now be locked in a single operation.

Thansk, John. That's a head I overlooked. I will have to have a look at that head, looks interesting ... :)

Hermann
 
Hermann,

I'll add a qualified recommendation of the Gitzo 2720 fluid head. It's quite stabile and vibration free for such a light head, easily superior to the Manfrotto 128 RC and nearly equalling the Gitzo 2380 in my own vibration damping tests. It comes with the same long sliding QR plate as the 2380, so there is considerable balance adjustment. I use a 4 kg scope on it without any problem.

My reservations about it are that there is very little drag adjustment and, while the tllt motions are nice and smooth, the pan motions on mine are somewhat stiff and jerky (perhaps that's been improved or other units may be better). I've mostly adjusted to its quirks and find myself choosing to use it in spite of its drawbacks more often than my 2380 because of the low weight.

Henry
 
I'll add a qualified recommendation of the Gitzo 2720 fluid head. It's quite stabile and vibration free for such a light head, easily superior to the Manfrotto 128 RC and nearly equalling the Gitzo 2380 in my own vibration damping tests.

Thanks, Henry. So there's another one I'll have to look at. The Gitzo sounds very promising, "superior to the Manfrotto 128", that's not bad at all.

I'll also try to have a look at its smaller brother, the 1720, although that's probably not quite stable enough for my Nikon ED82. But it's even lighter ...

Hermann
 
Right, it's been some time since I posted the original question. In the meantime I've had a long look at various video heads, and in the end I settled on the Gitzo 2180, mainly because of its low weight. I got one at a very competitive price with two quick release plates.

Having used it quite a bit with my scopes (mainly the Nikon ED III and the ED 82) and after some extensive comparisons with the Manfrotto 128 LP I know very well I feel it's been the right choice. It's pretty smooth, and the balancing system works quite well with my rear heavy scopes. The weight saving is about 500 gr, that's quite a lot, I think, especially when you carry your scope for hours on end. It's also very well made, like all the Gitzo stuff I've been using over the years.

However, it's a head that works best with reasonably light scopes. With the ED 82 it's marginal at best, and I think I'll continue using the Manfrotto 128 LP on a largish aluminium Gitzo or a *really* heavy wooden tripod with the ED 82. But then I'm not likely to carry the ED 82 over long distances anyway.

The Gitzo 2180 also doesn't dampen vibrations all that well and is considerably worse than the Manfrotto 128 LP in that respect. Jan Meijerink's test seems me to be spot on. It's clearly not the best head to use in a howling gale at the coast ... :) But it's very smooth with no significant backlash, an important consideration for my purposes, and it's light. The quick release system is also pretty good and very secure.

Thanks again to everyone who replied to this thread ... :)

Hermann
 
Hi Hermann, glad you found the G2180 "good enough" for your needs and I agree that an 80mm class scope is pushing its load limits. I have a few recommendations that may help mitigate vibrations with the Nikons.

A problem with the ED82/EDIII are their relatively tall foot mounts. It acts as a lever that magnifies vibrations. Ideally you can get the Gitzo long QR plate with a "Y" brace like you see in my attached pic. This lens support bracket can be found in photography supply stores. I have also jammed a tightly rolled up towel in place of a "Y" brace on the long QR plate with good results.

The other issue is the Catch-22 of the G2180's low mass/small QR plate. Heavier mounts naturally dampen vibrations better. If you are carrying a pack you can hook it over the scope and across the tripod legs or suspend it from the center column hook if you have one. If you don't, you can buy a tripod stone bag that hangs between the legs to suspend any handy weight (like rocks) in. The idea is to add as much weight/mass to the mounting system as you have at hand, without having to actually carry more mass/weight if that makes sense.

Both of these together will make a big difference in the performance.
 

Attachments

  • Y-brace.jpg
    Y-brace.jpg
    30.3 KB · Views: 122
Last edited:
Warning! This thread is more than 11 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.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top