• 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.

berlebach 553 (1 Viewer)

P

pimpelmees

Well-known member
anyone using a berlebach head 552 or 553 together with a swarovski ATX 85 mm
scope , and is it balanced with the plate (50mm) that comes with the head ?
 
Hi,

I have used a Berlebach 552 for many years and am completely satisfied. I believe amother member on this site, OhWeh, has both the 552 and 553.

Mine was initially bought for a Swarovski ATM 65HD, which is very tail-heavy. Berlebach customized a 117 mm plate by drilling and tapping a hole for the 5 mm anti-rotation pin (usually 4,5 mm) at the other end and shortening the 3/8" screw to allow clamping, due to the ridiculously short blind tapped hole in the scope foot -all at no extra cost.

The head is now often used for my Kowa 883 with the standard 57 mm plate, which provides good balance. The counterweight would prevent any unwanted scope/tripod contact anyway.

Berlebach's products and service are beyond reproach.

John
 
Today I took delivery of a Berlebach 510 head for a new Novoflex tripod. I shall be reporting on both after some field experience.
Berlebach have upped the rating of the 510 from 5 kg to 6 kg, i.e. the same as for the 552/553. My first impression is that the 510 is equally as well suited for use with a large scope as the 552, but is lighter and less expensive.

John
 
We use a 552 and a 553 with ATX 95 and Harpia 95 alternating. All combinations are well balanced with the plates coming with the head.
 
No, no need. My wife uses less friction, I prefer more friction, but this is independent from the balance.
 
Friction may be a matter of personal taste, but nevertheless balance is the first priority. You achieve that with a longer QR plate if the scope foot is not directly underneath its centre of gravity.

John
 
John -

looking forward to your detailed comparison of 552 vs 510!

I am in the market for a lighter head for use with ATX95. I mostly use a Manfrotto 128, which could be improved upon. I also have a Berlebach Pegasus. She can carry any scope with great ease and authority, but she is a bit of a fat pony to bring on longer treks!

Over in Juelich's, popular opinion appears to favour the 552/553 over the 510 for use with bigger scopes, but it doesn't look as if anyone has actually compared the two for that intended load. (There is a detailed report by a participant who did compare and opted for the 510, but his was a 65 mm scope)

The spring suspension safety feature of the 553 is attractive, but I am less sure whether I fancy the 2 separate locking screws/handles for vertical and horizontal movements. Besides, as you say, it is a bit heavier and dearer.

The 510 does it all with just one screw, but I am wondering how well it handles a big scope - and whether you miss the "load pick-up spring" ? (sic! ...there must be a better english translation than what Berlebach came up with).

thanks very much

Achim
 
Hi Achim,

What goes up......... So I wish you a soft landing!

I'm off to the wader-lovers' paradise (Meldorfer Speicherkoog) this coming week and will report back on my return.

Regards,
John

PS:- Welcome to birdforum.
 
Pegasus

In the interest of accuracy and mythological gender correctness, I wish to correct my above statement about Pegasus. HE is a fat pony . συγνώμη !
 
i have the berlebach head 553 but i replaced the shorter plate with a longer (50/87mm) because i could not balanced the ATX 85mm with the shorter plate.
 
Pegasus would be overkill for 15*56 binoculars.

553 or 510 both have advantages and disadvantages, and you will have to decide yourself which set of features suits your needs better.

553 is more expensive, a bit heavier and has 2 separate levers / mechanisms for clamping the tilt movement and the panning movement. (I wish it had just one) . 553s stand-out feature is the counterbalance (which can be activated or deactivated).

510 is cheaper and a bit lighter. In my opinion its big advantage is that you have to turn just one screw to clamp both panning and tilt movement.
510 has no counterbalance. If you have the tilt friction set to minimum AND you let go of everything WITHOUT tightening the clamping screw, then the head could tilt forwards or back, and potentially your scope or bins could strike the tripod and get damaged.

I opted for 553, but I was buying for use with a 95 mm scope rather than for binoculars. For use with bins I would probably go 510.

John (Tringa 45) is our resident expert, he has both heads , here's a link to a post of his:
www.birdforum.net

Berlebach 510 Video Head vs. 552

For several years I have used a Berlebach 552 head on a Sirui M-3204 carbon fibre tripod and recently purchased a Berlebach 510 as a lighter alternative to go on a Novoflex TrioPod. One previously associated Berlebach with solid but somewhat rustic products (wooden tripods) so the introduction...
www.birdforum.net www.birdforum.net
 

Similar threads

B
Best tripod head for spotting scope?
2
Replies
25
Views
6K
Elkhornsun
E
T
Berlebach Service
Replies
1
Views
855
WRL
WRL
T
Berlebach Report Wooden Tripod
Replies
1
Views
2K
Saxatilis
Saxatilis
C
Manfrotto 190GOA4 + 128RC compatibility with Kowa 883, plus backpack/transport question
2
Replies
25
Views
2K
Chris C
C
Steve Babbs
Manfrotto XPRO Fluid Video Head
Replies
4
Views
818
Steve Babbs
Steve Babbs

Users who are viewing this thread

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