Swaro DH101 or Gitzo GHF2W (2 Viewers)

Cambsbirder · Mar 15, 2019

Morning guys, I've been looking in to a new head and tripod for 10 days or so and I'm no nearer to finding the perfect tripod for my ATX 85. Having said that I have been reading up a lot on tripod heads.

Does any one have experience of the Swaro DH101 and Gitzo GHF2W? I've found both for around the £210 mark, but as always would be interested to hear what you have to say.

Many thanks as always. 🙂

Vespobuteo · Mar 15, 2019

Cambsbirder said:
Morning guys, I've been looking in to a new head and tripod for 10 days or so and I'm no nearer to finding the perfect tripod for my ATX 85. Having said that I have been reading up a lot on tripod heads.

Does any one have experience of the Swaro DH101 and Gitzo GHF2W? I've found both for around the £210 mark, but as always would be interested to hear what you have to say.

Many thanks as always. ��

If you want a true fluid video head the Gitzo GHF2W is way to go. The DH101 uses teflon plates not fluid for smoothing out tilting and panning.

GHF2W is 770 grams including the handle, so it's heavier than then DH101 at 550 grams. But still a reasonable weight compared to some other heads with the similar max load. (SIRUI VH-10X, Manfrotto MVH500AH that are close to 1 kg or more).

The GHF2W also is arca-swiss compatible. If it says AS under the foot of your ATX scope it will fit directly.

The DH101 will fit older Swaro feet, but not sure about the later versions with AS foot. So you might want to check that.

On the GHF2W you can also mount longer plates for better balance when digiscoping etc.

If you have an older ATX (with non-AS foot) you will have to mount the extra AS-plate included with the GHF2W.

Not saying the DH101 is not the right choice rather than, what will work best for you is really hard to say.
Some might find the lighter weight most important some will prefer a more fluid and smooth head movement.

lrodrigues · Mar 15, 2019

Cambsbirder said:
Morning guys, I've been looking in to a new head and tripod for 10 days or so and I'm no nearer to finding the perfect tripod for my ATX 85. Having said that I have been reading up a lot on tripod heads.

Does any one have experience of the Swaro DH101 and Gitzo GHF2W? I've found both for around the £210 mark, but as always would be interested to hear what you have to say.

Many thanks as always. 🙂

Hi, I don't know the Gitzo one, but I have also the ATX 85 and the Swaro DH101. For me it's an excellent match. The head is very fluid, operates very well and is small and light. Very light which is an advantage in the field, carrying the scope and tripod, camera, etc.

The scope foot also mounts directly into the head, which is nice also.

Cambsbirder · Mar 15, 2019

lrodrigues said:
Hi, I don't know the Gitzo one, but I have also the ATX 85 and the Swaro DH101. For me it's an excellent match. The head is very fluid, operates very well and is small and light. Very light which is an advantage in the field, carrying the scope and tripod, camera, etc.

The scope foot also mounts directly into the head, which is nice also.

Thanks lrodrigues, can I ask what tripod you're using with the DH101? Thanks.

Tringa45 · Mar 15, 2019

DON'T get the DH-101. It's largely of plastic construction, is not worth half the price and is unworthy of the Swarovski brand. The Gitzo GHF2W looks good but the supplied plate has no anti-rotation pin and there don't appear to be any alternatives available from Gitzo. The safety retention of the Arca-Swiss plates from Novoflex should be compatible with the Gitzo head.

An excellent alternative to both at about the same price would be the Berlebach 510 or, if the budjet can be stretched a little further, the Berlebach 553. I have been a contented user of its predecessor, the 552, for many years.

Other alternatives are the Sirui VA-5 (A-S compatible but a specified 3 kg load capacity) and the Sirui VH-10 (unfortunately not A-S).

John

lrodrigues · Mar 15, 2019

Cambsbirder said:
Thanks lrodrigues, can I ask what tripod you're using with the DH101? Thanks.

With a Manfrotto 055. Very sturdy but heavy. Will change for a lighter one in the future.

henry link · Mar 15, 2019

From limited experience with a friend's DH-101 I would agree with John's opinion about it.

I just bought a Gitzo GHF2W, which appears to be exactly the same head as the new Swarovski CTH Compact, but for considerably less money. So far I'm very impressed with it compared to the other so called "birdwatching" heads from Gitzo (1720/2720), both of which I own. The pan and tilt movements are smoother and the counterweight spring system completely solves a problem I experience particularly with my 1720. It's so loose when fully unlocked that the scope tends to suddenly flop forward or backward if the tilt angle exceeds only about 5-10º from horizontal. If your ATX scope is recent enough to have an Arca-Swiss compatible foot you won't need to use the QR plate that comes with the GHF2W, which (as John mentioned) doesn't have any non-rotation provision except friction.

I notice that while the Swarovski CTH looks just like the Gitzo GHF2W one spec is not quite identical. The Gitzo's maximum load is 8.8 pounds, while the Swarovski's is 11 pounds. I'm not sure what to make of that; some hidden difference between the two or different standards applied to identical heads?

kabsetz · Mar 15, 2019

Henry,

I'm thinking of trying out the GHF2W, partly due to your evaluation. My shopkeeper friend said the counterweight spring is a bit weak for the BTX 95, so it is conceivable that the Swarovski CTH would have a somewhat stiffer spring in an otherwise identical head, and that would also explain the difference in load specs. This is just speculation until both heads can be tested side-by-side with identical loads.

Kimmo

henry link · Mar 15, 2019

Hi Kimmo,

I thought about the spring too. I haven't tried the GHF2W with my 4 kilogram scope yet, but it quite easily supports my wife's Brunton scope, which weighs almost exactly the same amount as the ATX-95. I can move the Brunton scope all the way through the available tilt travel without unbalancing it, but I can see how the BTX might be harder to balance, perhaps ultimately requiring the gimble head.

Henry

Vespobuteo · Mar 15, 2019

No doubt the CTH looks very much lika a rebranded GHF2W. But the control dials have a bit different design. Maybe they managed to shaved a few grams off as well. 570 grams (20 oz) according to specs.

BTW I wrote the wrong weight for the GHF2W in my first post, it should be 720 grams in-use. But spec says 590 grams (without plate and handle).

For the extra € the CTH costs at least you get a bit better max load (5 vs 4 kg), a locking pin on the plate and the Swaro logo.
It might be worth it if you have a heavier scopes I guess.
Those heads usually work best for a load that are no more than 50% of the stated max load.

For the big-guns, as noted above, the swaro gimbal is probably a better solutions.

Cambsbirder · Mar 16, 2019

Thanks everyone, I'm pretty sure I'm going to go for the Gitzo. All that's left to do, is choose a tripod to go with it.lol Again any help there would be greatly appreciated. &#55357;&#56898;

johnf3f · Mar 16, 2019

Cambsbirder said:
Thanks everyone, I'm pretty sure I'm going to go for the Gitzo. All that's left to do, is choose a tripod to go with it.lol Again any help there would be greatly appreciated. ��

I would suggest an older model Gitzo GT3530LS. Lighter than the current models (cheaper too) and it is very rigid. It is the best overall tripod I have found for scope use.
It is about the weight of a Manfrotto 190 and makes the 055 look pathetically bendy. There is a 4 leg section version going on FleaBay at the moment, a few scrapes but, hopefully, shouldn't go for too much:

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Gitzo-GT...m4d8ef34e37:g:ICgAAOSw~gZchSvR&frcectupt=true

Cambsbirder · Mar 17, 2019

Thanks John, I've just been looking at the carbon versions of the Manfrotto 190 and 055, then saw your message!lol

henry link · Mar 17, 2019

I finally ordered a Really Right Stuff Arca-Swiss type quick release plate with an anti-rotation pin after my wife's scope loosened several times from the Gitzo plate just from being transported in a car trunk. It works fine, but I see now I could have saved some money if I had noticed that Swarovski sells a Arca-Swiss style plate for the PTH head that looks just like the Gitzo plate that comes with GHF2W except with the addition of an anti-rotation pin. It looks like the same plate comes with the CTH and oddly enough these Swarovski branded plates are less expensive than the identical looking Gitzo plate with no pin.

https://www.optics4birding.com/swarovski-tripod-plate-for-pth.html

Cambsbirder · Mar 23, 2019

henry link said:
I finally ordered a Really Right Stuff Arca-Swiss type quick release plate with an anti-rotation pin after my wife's scope loosened several times from the Gitzo plate just from being transported in a car trunk. It works fine, but I see now I could have saved some money if I had noticed that Swarovski sells a Arca-Swiss style plate for the PTH head that looks just like the Gitzo plate that comes with GHF2W except with the addition of an anti-rotation pin. It looks like the same plate comes with the CTH and oddly enough these Swarovski branded plates are less expensive than the identical looking Gitzo plate with no pin.

https://www.optics4birding.com/swarovski-tripod-plate-for-pth.html

Hi Henry, thanks for your posts with regards to the new Gitzo 2-way head.

I decided to go for it and it arrived this morning. I noticed a small amount of green/yellow lubricant on the base of the head, near a moving edge. Did you notice any such lubricant when you got yours? I'm hoping that it is just lube and not the contents of the dampening system.

Also, does the Swaro arca swiss plate with anti rotate pin work with the Gitzo head?

Thanks.

henry link · Mar 23, 2019

I just assumed the Swaro PTH plate would fit the Gitzo head, but I don't know it for certain. I have a friend who uses the PTH head. I'll try fitting her scope on the my GHF2W the next time I see her.

On my head I've only seen lubricant on the shaft of the pan locking control when I completely unscrewed and removed it. It seems odd that the pan locking knob on mine has no stop to block complete detachment like the tilt knob has. Preventing accidental detachment seems to depend entirely on the many turns required to unscrew the long shaft. Does yours also lack a stop?

Henry

Cambsbirder · Mar 23, 2019

henry link said:
I just assumed the Swaro PTH plate would fit the Gitzo head, but I don't know it for certain. I have a friend who uses the PTH head. I'll try fitting her scope on the my GHF2W the next time I see her.

On my head I've only seen lubricant on the shaft of the pan locking control when I completely unscrewed and removed it. It seems odd that the pan locking knob on mine has no stop to block complete detachment like the tilt knob has. Preventing accidental detachment seems to depend entirely on the many turns required to unscrew the long shaft. Does yours also lack a stop?

Henry

Sorry about that Henry, I think I miss understood. Which really right stuff release plate did you go for? Does it work OK?

I'll have a play with the Gitzo head and get back to you.

Thanks.

henry link · Mar 23, 2019

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

Saxatilis · Mar 25, 2019

henry link said:
From limited experience with a friend's DH-101 I would agree with John's opinion about it.

I just bought a Gitzo GHF2W, which appears to be exactly the same head as the new Swarovski CTH Compact, but for considerably less money. So far I'm very impressed with it compared to the other so called "birdwatching" heads from Gitzo (1720/2720), both of which I own. The pan and tilt movements are smoother and the counterweight spring system completely solves a problem I experience particularly with my 1720. It's so loose when fully unlocked that the scope tends to suddenly flop forward or backward if the tilt angle exceeds only about 5-10º from horizontal. If your ATX scope is recent enough to have an Arca-Swiss compatible foot you won't need to use the QR plate that comes with the GHF2W, which (as John mentioned) doesn't have any non-rotation provision except friction.

I notice that while the Swarovski CTH looks just like the Gitzo GHF2W one spec is not quite identical. The Gitzo's maximum load is 8.8 pounds, while the Swarovski's is 11 pounds. I'm not sure what to make of that; some hidden difference between the two or different standards applied to identical heads?

Henry
I also own a Gitzo GH1720QR that use on a carbon tripod for supporting a Vortex Kaibab 15x56 HD, a 1,25 kg binoculars.
A good head, but for my purposes I am a bit disappointed with it because the GH1720QR leans suddenly backwards whenever not fully or adequately locked (the Vortex is geared in a small supporting barrel): so the risk that the Kaibab flops on the ground is serious each time! Until now I got good...
Wanting to increase balance, and to minimize this risk, I had bought the longer plate Gitzo GS5370MC but the underlying problem remains.
With a spottingscope this problem is less important and certainly the risk of falling isn't there.
So my question is: would the new GHF2W with its counterweight device resolve my problem?
I really hope so, because the Kaibabs only weigh 1,2 kg and the GHF2W counterweight should balance it.
Thanks

henry link · Mar 25, 2019

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

Swaro DH101 or Gitzo GHF2W (2 Viewers)

Active member

Well-known member

Member

Active member

Well-known member

Member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Active member

johnf3f

Active member

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread