• 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.

Tripod head advice please (1 Viewer)

crs

Well-known member
I am using Canon 400D camera + EF 400/5.6 + TC 1.4X for photographing birds. I also use Manfrotto monopode 681B + 234RC head.

I am very happy with the monopode when walking. When sitting in the hide there is a lost of time till camera is prepared to shoot when birds apear.

Therefore I would like to buy a light tripod. I have decided to buy Manfrotto 190CXPRO3 tripod and Manfrotto head.

Would Manfrotto 496RC2 head be suitable for the above mentioned camera and lens?

I would appreciate receiving your oppinions.

Thank you,
Cristian
 
As far as know the 496RC2 ball head is the new version of 486RC2 from Manfrotto.

Does any body used this older head? Is it suitable for using with D400+EF 400/5.6?

Is tripod Manfrotto 190CXpro3 and head good for the above mentioned gear?

Thank you,
Cristian
 
Salut Cristian

I've never used the new CX models, but I understand they're quite good.
The 190 series is a tad short (~1.2m without column extended) and you might want to look at the 055 series too, if you need the extra height.
I personally like Manfrotto tripods and still use (after 2 years) the 055MF4.

Never heard till now about the new heads from Manfrotto. No their fan for this line of products.
I have some experience with the old 486rc2 and 488 RC2.
I found the 486 rather weak and unstable for my 40D + Sigma 50-500. I sold it after a week.
The 488 is more solid, but sags a bit when locked down and it's not so smooth to use (very jerky when set to a minimum friction).
I used it a while longer until I've tried (and then bought) a Giottos head - MH1300, which I think is great. Holds my gear steady and has smooth motion.
 
Cristian, sorry if this is a little late, but I own both the 190XPROB and the 055XPROB pods, as well as the older 486RC2 ball head. If lightweight is what you want, the ball head is a good choice. I've used it successfully with my slightly larger and heavier Sigma 150-500 for almost a year. Only recently did I switch to main use on a 393 Gimbal (monopod bracket), because I was tired of the top heavy tendency that is inherent to the ball head design. That said, the 496 should work well with your 400 5.6.

As for the 190, I use it mainly for macro work with a smaller camera setup, as it just doesn't keep the vibrations down on a kit the size of yours as well as the 055 tripod does. With IS this wouldn't be as big of a deal. But alas, as you already know, the 400 5.6 is "IS-less". Stefan's comment regarding extended height is accurate as well, and might be something to consider.
 
Thank you for your oppinions.

I would like to have a light tripod but also sturdy enough to hold my gear. Tripod 055CXPRO3 and a suitable head will have slightly more than 2 Kg.

I own a wooden tripod (produced in former GDR and 25 years old) I like very much. This one is strong enough for my gear and tall enough for me. Its weight is about 3 Kg.

Would it make sense to buy a carbon tripod for a difference of about 0,8 Kg?


Cristian
 
Thank you for your oppinions.

I would like to have a light tripod but also sturdy enough to hold my gear. Tripod 055CXPRO3 and a suitable head will have slightly more than 2 Kg.

I own a wooden tripod (produced in former GDR and 25 years old) I like very much. This one is strong enough for my gear and tall enough for me. Its weight is about 3 Kg.

Would it make sense to buy a carbon tripod for a difference of about 0,8 Kg?


Cristian

If you are going to be hiking with the tripod then I think spending the money to shave off roughly two pounds is probably worth it. In the book Nature Photography by Tim Fitzharris he reckons that paying (roughly) double the price for a tripod just to get carbon fiber over some metal alloy is well worth the tradeoff for a nature photographer, and he claims that almost all nature photographers will agree with this.

My reasoning is that if you make keeping all your gear lightweight a high priority then it wont be long before your investments in lightweight gear add up to you carrying 20 pounds or so less than you would have and that's a huge deal to me (I'm scrawny haha).

By the way I just went through pickig out a tripod and head that will ultimately hold a 50D/ 400 5.6/ 1.4xTC and the 055CxPRo3 is what I decided on as well, I'm just waiting for the darn camera store in my town to get it in stock :-/

I was looking at manfrotto heads too because of the 50$ rebate on a manfrotto head/leg combo thats going on right now but all the manfrotto heads just rubbed me the wrong way for one reason or another. I settled on the Kirk BH-3. Its $265 but comes with a nice quick release system that would cost at least 50$. It was the only head that I couldn't find anything negative about AND would also mate effortlessly with a Wimberly sidekick in case I decide to go that route in the future.

Anyways I hope this helps you out and I think carbon fiber is the way to go as long as you're actually going to be carrying the tripod while you walk/hike.

Matt
 
I personally do not like the RC2 QR system for tripod use with a long telephoto lens. I would recommend a ball head with an Arca type quick release system. Unfortunately, these are significantly more expensive, but worth the investment IMHO. Markins and RRS have some extra low-weight ball heads that are stable enough for the 400 f/5.6L. Another option is Jobu JR-2 which can be mounted directly on the tripod plate and is very good if you are going to shoot moving (or flying) subjects...
 
After having used a Manfrotto video head (from the spotting scope) and ball head with long lenses (Sigma 50-500 and Sigma 300) I switched to a gimbal head and will never look back. The gimbal is just so much more comfy to use with the long optics.....
I use the head on both a 055 tripod and a monopod, most of the time on the monopod ....
For budget reasons I went for the Indian ebay gimbal sidekick version. After using it for the past 9 or 10 month I have nothing to complain about.

UH
 
When I had a 400/5.6 I used a Jobu Jr gimbal head, this is a lightweight head made specifically for the likes of the 400/5.6, 100-400, 300/4 - absolutely superb piece of kit that can be used as a side kick or full gimbal. Previous to this I used a ball head but for bird photography the Gimbal is streets ahead IMO.
 
Very interesting suggestion Roy! It seems very fine for the 400/5.6

It looks to me that this head is significantly larger than a ball head. Is this not a problem when transporting the tripos?

This head is not significantly influenced by the vibrations of camera's mirror when flipping up?

Cristian
 
Very interesting suggestion Roy! It seems very fine for the 400/5.6

It looks to me that this head is significantly larger than a ball head. Is this not a problem when transporting the tripos?

This head is not significantly influenced by the vibrations of camera's mirror when flipping up?

Cristian
This model is very light compared to most Gimbals. As I now have a much heavier lens I upgraded to the next model up (BWG Heavy duty) which is both larger and heavier than the Jr but carrying is no problem at all.
You can lock the head down or apply varying amounts of tension on both the horizontal and vertical axis's. For tracking a bird that might be moving around or locking on to a stationary bird a Gimbal head is an absolute joy the use. Previously I used a ball head but after getting my first Gimbal there is no comparison IMO I could never go back to a ballhead for birds. Just about all bird photographers who use big prime lenses use Gimbal heads.

By the way, the Jobu Jr also works extremely well on a monopod.
 
Last edited:
Thank you for the comments Roy.

I like using a monopod therefore I will think at Jobu Jr and mo0nopod solution.

Thank you,
Cristian
 
Thank you for the comments Roy.

I like using a monopod therefore I will think at Jobu Jr and mo0nopod solution.

Thank you,
Cristian

Jobu JR is a very good solution for a lighter telephoto lens on a tripod, but I don't think it is a good fit for a monopod. IMHO, the best solution for a monopod is a tilt head like Manfrotto 234 and a Arca capable quick-release clamp. Some photographers also like using a ball-head on a monopod. I find it easier to use a support solution that restricts the movement of the camera/lens in one dimension.
 
I find it easier to use a support solution that restricts the movement of the camera/lens in one dimension.
That's right, when I used the Jobu Jr on a mono pod I would lock the panning movement axis and just used the up and down tilt with a bit of tension applied.
 
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.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top