did I do ok (1 Viewer)

S

statestat

Well-known member

• Dec 4, 2011

• #1

found out at the last minute that the local photo shop had specials and got a Manfrotto 055 CF Q90 tripod for my Zeiss 65mm. my old tripod head stripped the tripod screw and broke a few days after getting the scope. once the nice lade handed me the 055, I knew it was going home with me, super light.

trouble is they ran out of heads that I recognized, with a handle, and needed something qui, the nice lady had an idea so I ended with a little head, No a Manfrotto 494cr2 mini-ball. she said why carry a bigger unit w/handle, just grab the scope to move it. it seems ok so I got a little head.

question will this hold up,, I have an old scope that is smaller maybe switch at some point, but to what?

 

J

John Russell

Well-known member

• Dec 4, 2011

• #2

I really think that's a bit too flimsy for use with a 65 mm scope. Manfrotto's blurb describes that head as being suited to compact 35 mm cameras and small digital cameras.
I have used ball heads with a scope but they had adjustable friction and I don't think the 494 has that.
Nevertheless, a pan and tilt video head is a much more comfortable solution and I would suggest ordering a Manfrotto 701HDV. The store should really take back the 494 as you have been poorly advised.

John

 

S

Simon Wates

Well-known member

• Dec 4, 2011

• #3

John Russell said:

as you have been poorly advised.

Click to expand...

Definitely - a scope on a ball head takes ages to get on a still bird and is very frustrating on a moving or flying birds. Definitely swap it for a video type head as John says.

 

S

statestat

Well-known member

• Dec 4, 2011

• #4

thanks for the advice, it seemed flimsy but she said it was rated for up to 8 lb. it has a friction adj but I think you are right I'll take it back or could use for smaller scope like the Bushnell Spacemaster and use for moon observvation thanks

 

I

IvanCavallazzi

Well-known member

• Dec 5, 2011

• #5

I actually use that exactly head... and it is nice. It has the friction and all.

Work fine for small Scopes and DSLR. I just sometimes have a bit of problem to follow things at the night. But for all the rest it is great, actually(for me, I guess)

 

S

statestat

Well-known member

• Dec 8, 2011

• #6

ok swapped the Manfrotto 700 video head and it is much much better. thanks for the excellent advice. I should choose my words more carefully, the ball head wasn't really flimsy but harder to manuver and adjust to find the right amount of friction.

 

mooreorless

Well-known member

• Dec 17, 2011

• #7

Stat, Is that the Manfrotto 701 head? I have the 501 head and might get the 701 head some day. The 501 is great, but would like a lighter wt. one once in a while.

 

S

statestat

Well-known member

• Dec 18, 2011

• #8

mooreorless said:

Stat, Is that the Manfrotto 701 head? I have the 501 head and might get the 701 head some day. The 501 is great, but would like a lighter wt. one once in a while.

Click to expand...

yes it is the 701, while not a fluid head (teflon disks), it works well and is very smooth. Would like a shorter handle but the 701 is light weight and stable.

 

mooreorless

Well-known member

• Dec 18, 2011

• #9

If the 701 is even half the head the 501 is, yes you did 0k!

 

P

pimpelmees

Well-known member

• Dec 18, 2011

• #10

i have also the 701 hdv head and its great for my 65mm leica ..