• 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.
Where premium quality meets exceptional value. ZEISS Conquest HDX.

Gitzo long plate for G2380 video head (2 Viewers)

Saxatilis

Well-known member
Italy
Hi all, I have a Gitzo G2380 head with its original GS5370MC medium plate. To find the balance point of the Nikon Fieldscope ED82A, which is a little bit front-heavy, I have to bring back a bit the GS5370MC in the top plate casting of the head, protruding by one centimeter. Nothing serious of course but I was wondering if a longer plate like the GS5370LC could help me better balance the weight of the spottingscope: however, first of all this is very expensive (±120euros) and maybe even too long for my case (14cm). Does anyone have any experience with this plate? Thanks
 
Last edited:
Hi Saxatilis,

I wuldn't worry. The G2380 is an excellent head and would normally clamp the QR plate over its full 82 mm length.
For comparison the 110 clamp, which is standard on the little Berlebach 510 head (rated 6 kg), has a clamping length of less than 40 mm and it can still hold a 2 kg scope securely.
I wish however that Gitzo/Manfrotto would in future standardize on Arca-Swiss for their small and medium heads. It's utter confusion at present with at least four different widths!

John
 
I wish however that Gitzo/Manfrotto would in future standardize on Arca-Swiss for their small and medium heads. It's utter confusion at present with at least four different widths!
I hope not. Arca-Swiss is utter chaos. you need an Excel sheet which you keep up-to-date on a weekly basis to list which plates work with which heads. I very much prefer the Manfrotto PL-200 system for general use, and the PL-501 system (the standard for video heads) for big video heads. Very secure and fast with very little chance you may make a mistake when you're in a hurry.

Hermann
 

I hope not. Arca-Swiss is utter chaos. you need an Excel sheet which you keep up-to-date on a weekly basis to list which plates work with which heads. I very much prefer the Manfrotto PL-200 system for general use, and the PL-501 system (the standard for video heads) for big video heads. Very secure and fast with very little chance you may make a mistake when you're in a hurry.

Hermann
Nonsense.

Arca-Swiss is not chaos if you use proper parts. RRS, Kirk, Markins, Wimberley and most others including cheaper chinese products work very well. The only parts I have encountered that do not work as intended come from Gitzo and Sirui. They have introduced silly custom safety pin solutions (improvements?) which often makes normal combinations incompatible. Most Arca plates, have safety screwheads in the ends as a safety measure. This works without pins, springs and other delicate parts and works very well with most standard clamps = clamps adapted for plates with screwheads. Sirui and Gitzo “Arcastyle“ clamps require their own custom plates and may or may not fit standard Arca plates. If standard Arca plates fit they must be longer than necessary due to the lack of screwhead channels in the clamps. Removal of the safety pin in the clamp may also be required. Custom safety pins are not necessary with properly designed clamps. My Sirui clamp uses a springloaded pin in one location, my Gitzo “Arca” video head uses a fixed safety screwhead in another location.

Proper Arca compatible parts should be recognized as such. It’s a pity that a few manufacturers make their own custom variations pretending that they are Arca compatible when in fact they are not. The clamping channel dimensions may be Arca but the rest is not! If you understand how Arca-Swiss clamps and plates are supposed to work is it not difficult to spot the “fakes”.

With heavy equipment it is big advantage if the clamp channel can be loaded from above. Inserting the plate from the end of the clamping channel is really akward and should best be avoided.

Arca and other plates have to be long enough to allow proper balancing of the equipment. Some manufactures obviosly do not understand that. Plates have to be attached with two screws to scopes and lens feet to avoid twisting, a location pin is simply not good enough. My big Kowa scope has provision for two screws, thanks for that! My 65mm Swaro scope has not.

The nice thing about the Arca system is that it works with spotting scopes, lens feet and plates, camera plates, focusing rails, l-brackets, cages, flash brackets and a lot of other things. Manfrotty video heads may work for video, long tele lenses and spotting scopes but very little else. I use both cameras and spotting scopes and want tripods and heads to be usable for both, from long tele to macro.

Regarding Arca-Swiss as standard from Gitzo/Manfrotto. I hope not. If they adapt the “standard” they will probably only add to the confusion with further stupid incompatible variations of a really good concept.
 
Nonsense.
Oh, thanks. Always nice to meet a polite guy on this forum.
Arca-Swiss is not chaos if you use proper parts. RRS, Kirk, Markins, Wimberley and most others including cheaper chinese products work very well. The only parts I have encountered that do not work as intended come from Gitzo and Sirui. They have introduced silly custom safety pin solutions (improvements?) which often makes normal combinations incompatible. Most Arca plates, have safety screwheads in the ends as a safety measure. This works without pins, springs and other delicate parts and works very well with most standard clamps = clamps adapted for plates with screwheads. Sirui and Gitzo “Arcastyle“ clamps require their own custom plates and may or may not fit standard Arca plates. If standard Arca plates fit they must be longer than necessary due to the lack of screwhead channels in the clamps. Removal of the safety pin in the clamp may also be required. Custom safety pins are not necessary with properly designed clamps. My Sirui clamp uses a springloaded pin in one location, my Gitzo “Arca” video head uses a fixed safety screwhead in another location.
And that's not chaos? There have been complaints about incompatibilities for years on end. At least for a decade. BTW, I don't know whether they fixed this, but some time ago Novoflex plates also didn't work properly with quite a few clamps.
Proper Arca compatible parts should be recognized as such. It’s a pity that a few manufacturers make their own custom variations pretending that they are Arca compatible when in fact they are not. The clamping channel dimensions may be Arca but the rest is not! If you understand how Arca-Swiss clamps and plates are supposed to work is it not difficult to spot the “fakes”.
As long as there's no accepted industry standard - and there isn't, quite obviously - things won't change.
With heavy equipment it is big advantage if the clamp channel can be loaded from above. Inserting the plate from the end of the clamping channel is really akward and should best be avoided.
The two Manfrotto systems I favour can also be loaded from the top. In fact, the 200PL can only be loaded from the top.
Arca and other plates have to be long enough to allow proper balancing of the equipment. Some manufactures obviosly do not understand that. Plates have to be attached with two screws to scopes and lens feet to avoid twisting, a location pin is simply not good enough. My big Kowa scope has provision for two screws, thanks for that! My 65mm Swaro scope has not.
Agreed. You can use two screws with the 501PL plates, not with the 200PL. Pity, that so few manufacturers make their scopes with provisions to use two screws. Good to hear Kowa did it with their big scopes.
The nice thing about the Arca system is that it works with spotting scopes, lens feet and plates, camera plates, focusing rails, l-brackets, cages, flash brackets and a lot of other things. Manfrotty video heads may work for video, long tele lenses and spotting scopes but very little else. I use both cameras and spotting scopes and want tripods and heads to be usable for both, from long tele to macro.
Well, yes, the Arca system is more versatile. However, I've never been in a situation where my Manfrotto systems didn't work for me.
Regarding Arca-Swiss as standard from Gitzo/Manfrotto. I hope not. If they adapt the “standard” they will probably only add to the confusion with further stupid incompatible variations of a really good concept.
Yes, it is a good concept. But its present incarnation is a mess. At least IMO. You will not agree.

So I guess we have to agree to disagree.

Hermann
 
I hope not. Arca-Swiss is utter chaos. you need an Excel sheet which you keep up-to-date on a weekly basis to list which plates work with which heads. I very much prefer the Manfrotto PL-200 system for general use, and the PL-501 system (the standard for video heads) for big video heads. Very secure and fast with very little chance you may make a mistake when you're in a hurry.

Hermann
Hermann,

Before I realized that Saxatilis basically has no problem, I searched for compatible plates from Sirui, Leofoto and Benro to no avail.
The only one that would fit his 2380 is the Manfrotto 501PL, but that's about the same length as the present Gitzo GS5370MC. Gitzo offer four of these plates in 38 mm width from 38-200 mm but at extortionate prices for the long ones, and Manfrotto just the one.

Apropos chaos, I have a Manfrotto catalogue in front of me with a double sided table of 13 (!!) different plate types for 80 different heads.
With Arca-Swiss the few compatibility problems are mainly with safety retention. I had a long Novoflex plate where the underside was not milled out deeply enough for the safety pin on my Berlebach heads and passed it on to another member here, who needed a long plate for his Gitzo GHF2W. He reported back that it worked well.

Regards,
John
 
Hermann,

Before I realized that Saxatilis basically has no problem, I searched for compatible plates from Sirui, Leofoto and Benro to no avail.
The only one that would fit his 2380 is the Manfrotto 501PL, but that's about the same length as the present Gitzo GS5370MC. Gitzo offer four of these plates in 38 mm width from 38-200 mm but at extortionate prices for the long ones, and Manfrotto just the one.

Apropos chaos, I have a Manfrotto catalogue in front of me with a double sided table of 13 (!!) different plate types for 80 different heads.
With Arca-Swiss the few compatibility problems are mainly with safety retention. I had a long Novoflex plate where the underside was not milled out deeply enough for the safety pin on my Berlebach heads and passed it on to another member here, who needed a long plate for his Gitzo GHF2W. He reported back that it worked well.

Regards,
John
Tringa45
In my case it would be enough for the plate, equipped with a 1/4" camera screw slider and its locking pin, to have an adjustment range to find the balance point, as is also found on Velbon plates of similar size (left plate with cork cover at the base, see pic). In any case, it is a matter of little importance for me and also solvable.
 

Attachments

  • 20240816_175516_resized.jpg
    20240816_175516_resized.jpg
    378.4 KB · Views: 11
Last edited:
Some information regarding the much vaunted Arca-Swiss system and its only sensible alternative, Uniq/C. Personally, I do not consider Manfrotto and their proprietary system an option at all.
 
After a few months, convinced by a very attractive price deal, I ended up buying the Gitzo GS5370LC plate also because I found a used Nikon Fieldscope Camera-Attachment 800mm for which I need a better balance.
Its build quality and balancement is very good.
Since I still own a Gitzo GH1720QR birdwatching head on a lightweight Sirui tripod for my Fieldscope ED50 or the Kaibab 15x56HD, the three plates (GGS5370C, GS5370MC and GS5370LC) of different lengths are compatible and interchangeable.
 
Last edited:
Well, I've been using it for a long, long time. Well over 25 years. And I find it's the best system out there ... :cool:

Hermann

Yeah, I used it for a long, long time.

To be objective, I wouldn't use a plate for a scope that didn't have an anti-rotation pin, or that wasn't long enough to allow for small adjustments in order to balance the scope. For birding, that's where the 200PL system fundamentally fails, IMO.

Very secure and fast with very little chance you may make a mistake when you're in a hurry.

Couldn't disagree more - it's the only system I know of where user error is compounded by poor design. If you're in a hurry and forget to flip the little brass locking pin, there's a danger of accidentally releasing the larger thumb lever (by getting your light meter strap caught, in the case of a photographer) and dropping your camera/scope on the deck. It's the sort of design that says: 'If it can happen, one day it will happen'.

I use a Manfrotto long plate from an MVH500AH with my Gitzo GH1720 head, if that helps OP.
.
 
Yeah, I used it for a long, long time.

To be objective, I wouldn't use a plate for a scope that didn't have an anti-rotation pin, or that wasn't long enough to allow for small adjustments in order to balance the scope. For birding, that's where the 200PL system fundamentally fails, IMO.



Couldn't disagree more - it's the only system I know of where user error is compounded by poor design. If you're in a hurry and forget to flip the little brass locking pin, there's a danger of accidentally releasing the larger thumb lever (by getting your light meter strap caught, in the case of a photographer) and dropping your camera/scope on the deck. It's the sort of design that says: 'If it can happen, one day it will happen'.

I use a Manfrotto long plate from an MVH500AH with my Gitzo GH1720 head, if that helps OP.
.
This is the one from the Manfrotto MVH500AH 500Plong. That’s what I’ve got.
 
To be objective, I wouldn't use a plate for a scope that didn't have an anti-rotation pin, or that wasn't long enough to allow for small adjustments in order to balance the scope. For birding, that's where the 200PL system fundamentally fails, IMO.
The "modern" 200PL plates do have an anti-rotation pin. And whether you need or don't need to be able to make small adjustments, depends solely on your scope and the head you're using.
.. it's the only system I know of where user error is compounded by poor design. If you're in a hurry and forget to flip the little brass locking pin, there's a danger of accidentally releasing the larger thumb lever (by getting your light meter strap caught, in the case of a photographer) and dropping your camera/scope on the deck. It's the sort of design that says: 'If it can happen, one day it will happen'.
Well, it's still a user error. And quite frankly, there's no system that is foolproof. Not the 200PL-system, nor the 501-system nor Arca Swiss. If you make a mistake, you'll drop your gear. Simple as that.

Hermann
 
The "modern" 200PL plates do have an anti-rotation pin. And whether you need or don't need to be able to make small adjustments, depends solely on your scope and the head you're using.

Of course it depends on your scope, but I'm not sure why you're banging on about the 200PL system. We're here to answer OP as best we can - and in his original post he is enquiring about long plates to balance his Nikon. Did you read the original post, or just jump straight in on Tringa and Figge for their enthusiasm for Arca-Swiss?
.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top