• 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.

Swaro DH101 or Gitzo GHF2W (1 Viewer)

While any Arca-Swiss plate will fit any Arca-Swiss compatible head (they are all 39 mm wide with a 45° dovetail), the safety retention systems (I don't mean the anti-rotation pin) are not always compatible amongst different manufacturers.
There is a risk that an inadvertantly loosened clamp could result in a scope or binocular crashing to the ground. IIRC the Gitzo GHF 2W has a small vertical pin on the head and a corresponding recess under the plate. To remove the plate the clamp would have to be loosened sufficiently for the inside edge of the plate to surmount the pin. Novoflex has a similar system.
Berlebach has an ingenious system, which retains the plate as soon as it is slid into the head. The heads will aso retain some Novoflex and Sirui plates but the Berlebach plates cannot be safely retained on other systems. Other manufacturers offer long plates with screws protruding on the underside at both ends but here the clamp has to be sufficiently loosened to drop the plate in from the top.

John
 
henry link said:
I'm pretty certain it would.

My wife's scope weighs 2.27 kg. With the GHF2W's tilt control fully unlocked and the counterweight system engaged the scope displays no tendency at all to suddenly flop backwards or forwards as it does on the GH1720QR. It stays put at any tilt angle up to about 45º up or down from horizontal, then tends to drift up or down very slowly when the counter weighting supplied by the spring is no longer sufficient to completely balance it. Partially locking of the tilt control allows balance over the complete tilt range while still retaining decent fluid motion. However, if the counterbalance is turned off the scope will flop just as easily on the GHF2W as it does on the GH1720.

Henry
Click to expand...

Thank you Henry

I have just ordered a new Gitzo GHF2W.

I join a couple of pics to better explain my technical problem with the combo Gitzo GH1720QR/Vortex Kaibab attachment to the hollow barrel which gives me the fear about the risk of see the big binos dropping disastrouly.

The Gitzo 1720 head in itself is fine, I have no doubt it works very nicely with a regular scope
 

Attachments

  • DSCN0661.jpg
    DSCN0661.jpg
    173.2 KB · Views: 213
  • DSCN0664.jpg
    DSCN0664.jpg
    213.9 KB · Views: 177
Last edited:
Yipe! That looks seriously unbalanced. Is that the way you normally mount the binocular? It seems that the column should be farther forward on the plate and the plate farther forward on the head.
 
henry link said:
Yipe! That looks seriously unbalanced. Is that the way you normally mount the binocular? It seems that the column should be farther forward on the plate and the plate farther forward on the head.
Click to expand...

No, I just did it at home to show the whole thing
I observe the raptor migration and use the Kaibab on a tripod for distant sights of birds approaching, looking for them in flight.
The problem is that a little backward tilt may be enough (if the pan/tilt knob is not tight enough) that the binoculars with all its weight start to incline backwards, so the support of the binos at the end of the strike slips away from its barrel.
It may happen that, throughout 9/10 hours of observations, I forget to tighten the GH1720qr knob every time I use the binoculars: or that someone wants to look through my binoculars without knowing this "danger".
In the absence of a counterweight system, these are the most risky situations
 
Last edited:
Hello
by picking up a Gitzo rebate, yesterday the new GHF2W fluid head arrived to me.
As for the first impressions, let's start from the few and really minor downsides: compared to the tiny and sleek GH1720QR, this is bigger and maybe a bit heavier.
As someone has already stated, the pan movement appears to be not as smooth as I would like, but this may be a subjective matter.
But, most important of all, thanks to the counterweight system, I have found the balance point for my Vortex 15x56.
My equipment now does not move, nor it leans suddenly backward, overcoming the problems and risks of accidental falls.
I repeat, these issues did concern my large binoculars and particularly its unusual metal mount to the head plate, made up of two modular parts: the Kaibabs were at risk of falling backwards, due to the exceeding tilt angle of the GH1720 head (difficult to monitor continuously), leading to the disconnecton of these two components.
Otherwise, I don't see problems that are just serious in use with the Gitzo Gh1720QR, a fine product that I'm not going to get rid of.
 
Last edited:
Glad to hear that the GHF2W worked out for you. I had my doubts when I saw how back heavy your set up is.

The pan motion on my GHF2W is really quite smooth, certainly just as smooth as my GH1720, smoother than my GH2720. Is the pan locking knob on your GHF2W free to completely unscrew from the head as mine is?

Henry
 
henry link said:
Glad to hear that the GHF2W worked out for you. I had my doubts when I saw how back heavy your set up is.

The pan motion on my GHF2W is really quite smooth, certainly just as smooth as my GH1720, smoother than my GH2720. Is the pan locking knob on your GHF2W free to completely unscrew from the head as mine is?

Henry
Click to expand...


Yes, completely unscrewed.

I will try my new Gitzo GHF2W with the Nikon Fieldscope ED 82A and the Velbon GEO N630 carbon tripod although I am doing just great since 2009 with the Manfrotto 701HDV, a pretty underrated model
 
Last edited:
henry link said:
I bought a B26 plate. It works fine with my wife's Brunton scope, but one of the longer plates listed by Alexis Powell in the post below (or the Swaro plate) would probably have been better for balancing with a variety of loads.

https://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=3828987&postcount=18

Doesn't the foot of your ATX scope fit directly into the Arca-Swiss type clamp on the GHF2W?

Henry
Click to expand...

Hi Henry, my ATX does have the foot that can fit directly on to an Arc-Swiss clamp. I think I would rather keep the foot in mint condition, you never know what the future hold. I imagine that clamping it will tarnish the finish.
 
Gitzo GHF2W

Glad you like your new Gitzo head as much as I do!
forent said:
I bought the GHF2W two weeks ago and up to now I am very satisfied. The head takes my ATX 95 without any problem so far: no vibrations, no wobbling, due to the counterbalance spring no tilting. The material (die cast magnesium?) is strong yet lightweight and superior to the reinforced plastic of the G2180. The movements are smooth and well damped. The horizontal plane has slightly too much resistance for my tastes even fully unfastened and the twist grips provide only 1 cm of slideway to adjust the friction. Left and right from this small area the two axes are either fixed or completely open. As I tend to leave the grips loose while observing (because the head/scope combo stops in every position I want it to) these issues are peanuts for me. I can imagine that some people would prefer a beefier fluid head weighting >1kg especially on a heavy tripod but as I said at the beginning: I am very satisfied.
Click to expand...
Concerning the AS Arca-style foot of the ATX: Maybe they have changed the design recently or there is considerable sample variation but the AS foot of my one year old ATX 65 lens is slightly to narrow for the clamp of the Gitzo GHF2W while the foot of my new ATX 95 lens fits just fine. I had to glue a 1mm thick metal plate under the 65 foot to solve this issue.
 
Last edited:
forent said:
I had to glue a 1mm thick metal plate under the 65 foot to solve this issue.
Click to expand...

That sounds dodgy and there's probably no safety retention anyway. If the clamp loosens you are likely to have an expensive accident. Put Arca-Swiss plates on them with the appropriate safety retention.

John
 
Tringa45 said:
That sounds dodgy and there's probably no safety retention anyway. If the clamp loosens you are likely to have an expensive accident. Put Arca-Swiss plates on them with the appropriate safety retention.
John
Click to expand...
I don't think that "dodgy" is the appropriate description. ;)
 

Attachments

  • ATX_AS_foot_plate.jpg
    ATX_AS_foot_plate.jpg
    100.8 KB · Views: 151
Alexis Powell said:
Maybe the right word is "shimmy" :) --AP
Click to expand...
Sorry, but the subtleties of the English language are beyond my poor school knowledge. I suspect that "shimmy" too means "bricolage". ;)

Let's face it, Arca-Swiss plates are no rocket science. A solid steel sheet exactly tailor-made for the ATX foot and glued with extremely strong 3M double-sided adhesive tape is rather a reinforcement than a degradation. Moreover, the cut-out still allows for locking the foot with the safety pin of the Gitzo clamp. I can't imagine a screwed-on additional QR plate could be more safe. But everyone to his taste! B :)
 
Last edited:
forent said:
Sorry, but the subtleties of the English language are beyond my poor school knowledge. I suspect that "shimmy" too means "bricolage". ;)...
Click to expand...

No, no, my joke was meant entirely respectfully. I was making a non-standard English adjective out of the noun "shim". A shim is a perfectly valid and very robust solution for making clamped connections more secure. The joke was that although being a technically correct English adjective, the resulting word if mistaken as a noun or verb means something like "wiggly", which is obviously not desired here, nor is it the result of your excellent work.

I am also a great admirer of 3M VHB adhesive film and tape.

--AP
 
Last edited:
My opinion on the Swarovski DH101 after owning one: I wouldn’t touch another with a ten meter cattle prod. A tripod and scope tip over which damaged my Swarvoski scope totally destroyed the DH101 head. Completely inoperable. Only a one year warranty. Of course, the head was past the warranty period. Swarvoski “generously” replaced the non repairable head with a very used copy. This for the owner of one each of their binoculars and spotting scopes purchased new from authorized dealers. As was the head and the Swarvoski tripod to which it was attached. I shortly after bought Gitzo and have remained happy ever after!

Addendum: Swarvoski charged me for the scope and eyepiece repairs. None of their famous freebies here. Took them two tries to get the eyepiece right. My dealer, the late, lamented Eagle Optics offered to intercede but I figured I was wearing big boy pants and could handle my own affairs. I really miss EO! As I later found out from Ben, EO was going to replace the DH101 from their own stock and take the financial hit themselves and deal with Swarvoski at a later date. One of the reasons they eventually went out of business. Along with WAY too many taking advantage of their generous “try and return” business model.

Also looking back on posts on Birdforum of contributors picking up Swarvoski binoculars in dismal condition and “convincing” Swarvoski to return them to as-new state for free may well have had something to do with a less than generous attitude on their part.
 
Last edited:
So which gitzo head did you end up with? I tried asking my magic 8-ball, but all it would say is that the dh101 was no good ;)
 
Gitzo GH2720... the larger of their two “birdwatching” heads; as Gitzo then were marketing them. I also bought a three section 2-series Gitzo tripod at the same time and am very pleased with the combination. The Gitzo warranty is also much longer on their tripod heads. The Swarovski tripod and replacement DH101 head have been relegated to backup status. I should have bought Gitzo or Really Right Stuff from the get-go. The Swarovski gear really wasn’t any cheaper! I haven’t tried the newest Gitzo heads, but retirement doesn’t let you replace perfectly fine gear just to have the very latest until the older stuff gives out.
 
I'm working with a Leica branded Gitzo tripod head (DH1). Still works good but sometimes it creeps and well it's starting to show a bit of age.
So I'm starting to look for an upgrade should a discount opportunity arise. So far the gitzo gh2720 and the berlebach 530 are on the shortlist, but I've yet to see either of them in the field.
The Berlebach is hard to see, it's not a big brand so very few stores carry it, and I was unlucky with the gh2720, they were out of stock on the two shops I went to try it out.

I did see the 'new' swarovski tripod head the CTH but from what I hear it's another more expensive gitzo rebrand. It worked nice though so it's also on the list.
 
Please be sure that Swarovski gives as long a warranty period as Gitzo on a so-called “rebranded” item. You may wind up needing the warranty and you don’t want to hassle with Swarovski over a short warranty period.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 4 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

R
Gitzo Traveler series 2 for seabirds?
Replies
17
Views
1K
MiddleRiver
MiddleRiver
S
New tripod and head for Kowa TSN-66A
Replies
9
Views
1K
fazalmajid
fazalmajid
C
Manfrotto 190GOA4 + 128RC compatibility with Kowa 883, plus backpack/transport question
2
Replies
25
Views
2K
Chris C
C
M
Comparing GT2545T and LO-324C
Replies
8
Views
2K
Saxatilis
Saxatilis
Nick Leech
Tripod/head options for Swaro ATX95 with old (non-AS) foot
Replies
12
Views
5K
zebardee
Z

Users who are viewing this thread

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