[Ratmagiclady]

I'll disagree a bit here, but only specifically -- generally, the statement is accurate, though, IMO.

Basically, a nice ballhead is a dream, and a crappy one is enough to put you off ballheads. Kind of like Scotch, that way.

I used to like Amvonas because they were dirt cheap -- mine cost $13-17 for the small and medium sized A S compatible units, but after some use, the design faults of these made them pretty much unusable. They look good, but are junk inside.

The thing about Amvona is that they seem to rebrand everyone else's seconds, or whatever they can get, and they aren't a 'maker' or even 'outlet' for anyone in particular. Everything with the name on it isn't crap, but I wouldn't chance it for what they're asking lately, anyway, not by a long shot. (Or deal with their customer service again on a bet, never mind pay to. )

I lucked out for my fifteen bucks, as I mentioned, when things were going cheap, (even after getting gouged for separate shipping: I also got legs which had nuts and bolts loose in the bag, but I chose legs I could service myself for a reason.) My only caution here is, this name has such a terrible reputation at this point, don't miss out on the fact that *some of them gotta work.* I'd trade mine to any student with a clear conscience, (More likely keep in car) but I wouldn't say 'Go buy one.' Distinction, there.

Ballheads you can stick a long lens on, never mind a gimbal, (Shouldn't the latter be redundant, anyway?) though, are a somewhat different matter from what's likely to do for a generic starter tripod. With a long lens, you might notice any little hitch or irregularity, not to mention likely putting more stress on the thing than I do.

If you're more like me, who likes modest focal lengths, usually substantial camera bodies, and a generally-let's just-have-it-feel-nice-and-hold well attitude, I think you can be quite happy with a decently-sized Arca-ball clone that many long-tele-and macro shooters might justifiably turn up their noses at.

Which isn't to say anyone's wrong. Certainly, if you have the coin, a nice ballhead...just feels nice, for any dollar you spend. Just does. It's like a really nice pair of shoes. May not 'improve your walking performance' appreciably, but you'll want to put them on. Quality shows.


Still, what's a horror for people with big teles or wanting to stitch panoramas might be really sweet for *you.*

[GoremanX]

My favourite part about ball heads: they're almost always smaller and lighter than a comparable head of any other type. The small difference may not matter much to some, but when you're hauling all this stuff on your back while riding a mountain bike, every gram counts. My travel tripod weighs 1.9 lbs (862 grams), ball head and all. And it's 18.75" (47.5 cm) long when folded. Sure, it's not as sturdy as heavier tripods, and the ball head doesn't have fancy features. But it all works well and allows me to travel easily.

[Ratmagiclady]

My favourite part about ball heads: they're almost always smaller and lighter than a comparable head of any other type. The small difference may not matter much to some, but when you're hauling all this stuff on your back while riding a mountain bike, every gram counts. My travel tripod weighs 1.9 lbs (862 grams), ball head and all. And it's 18.75" (47.5 cm) long when folded. Sure, it's not as sturdy as heavier tripods, and the ball head doesn't have fancy features. But it all works well and allows me to travel easily.

That does sound like a nice setup.

How do you carry it, while cycling, out of curiosity? I'll eventually be in the market for something similar, I expect: it's not very practical for me to ride where we are right now, (Can't make the long hills or open stretches in the heat and sun that are between me and almost anywhere to go: if only the buses had bike-carriers here.... The last place I was was hilly, but I could go places by bypassing or traversing all but a few steep climbs that'd punish my knees too much to stay mounted for, so I'd just walk em. ) but I still love to ride where I can.

Bicycle-carryable is a bit down the list of priorities, but I think it's probably compatible with what I'm tending to want to look for, anyway. Which'll be in the 'travel' class, I think. Obviously with one of the ball-heads this thread's about: I think that's one of the great virtues of this type.

I'd still love to find a way to mount one of these heads and some kind of extendable leg to make a tripod out of the bicycle itself, for scenics and such.

[GoremanX]

How do you carry it, while cycling, out of curiosity? I'll eventually be in the market for something similar, I expect

My backpack has a tripod mount. I use a medium-sized backpack, to help reduce the amount of weight. But I still need room for my camera gear, my bike gear, alternate gloves, and a few other things.


This was taken today, using the tripod I brought with me:


Sure, a fancier head with more features would be nice, but I appreciate the lightened burden on my back, especially when the riding gets rough.

I'd still love to find a way to mount one of these heads and some kind of extendable leg to make a tripod out of the bicycle itself, for scenics and such.

Wow, you just got my head buzzing with all kinds of ideas...

---

Last edited by GoremanX; 01-10-2010 at 02:24 PM.

[raider]

If I am not wrong, I recognized the tripod u have attached to your bag as the Slik Sprint pro. I got the same one for wifey (but it comes with a 3-way head instead - as we wanted). It is also attached to wifey's backpack which incidentally also have a tripod mount (the Lowepro versapack)

[Ratmagiclady]

My backpack has a tripod mount. I use a medium-sized backpack, to help reduce the amount of weight.

Sure, a fancier head with more features would be nice, but I appreciate the lightened burden on my back, especially when the riding gets rough.

Heehee. At least, I'm mostly concerned with the street. We've got kind of a hybrid-designed road bike (basically a road bike with a straight fork and a straight bar: I forget the nomenclature, but I like it. ) I think a real trail bike would be neat, but those seem to invariably cost a fortune.

Mostly am inclined to use a messenger bag, (Fittingly, as I actually once was a bike courier, it's just kind of what I'm used to, and I'm not too fond of backpacks.) Working a tripod into that is...potentially-problematic, though.



(on making the bike into a tripod.)

Wow, you just got my head buzzing with all kinds of ideas...

Hee. It's kind of one of my favorite puzzles. I think that ideally, it'd be fixed to the front fork so you could extend it, kick it down and also immobilize the front wheel in the process. One could probably attach the head, appropriately-enough, to the headset.

Also, aha. *That's* what a 'Kona Hoss' is. Nice to see your face, too.

[GoremanX]

If I am not wrong, I recognized the tripod u have attached to your bag as the Slik Sprint pro. I got the same one for wifey (but it comes with a 3-way head instead - as we wanted). It is also attached to wifey's backpack which incidentally also have a tripod mount (the Lowepro versapack)

Yep, that's the one. It's a compromise in many ways. It has 4 leg sections, but the bottom ones are spindly. It's light, but it doesn't support much weight. It gets very tall, but it gets wobbly when I have the viewfinder at standing eye-level (I'm 6'1" ). For biking purposes, it's perfectly adequate. For "studio" work, I use a much heavier and less versatile tripod.

My wife is all about "saving the environment" and stuff, so she insisted on getting the Lowepro Primus due to its use of recycled materials for the outer shell and its support of polar bears. Personally, I don't want to see any polar bears in my back yard...

[GoremanX]

Also, aha. *That's* what a 'Kona Hoss' is. Nice to see your face, too.

I'm not showing much face there, the goggles tend to overwhelm everything.

I love my bike! I built it from scratch using a bare frame. It got pretty expensive by the time all was said and done, but it's the best bike I've ever owned. I have as much pride in my bike as I do in my camera, because both took me months of meticulous saving to get.

The tripod wasn't very expensive. At $84.50, it seemed reasonable for what I got. Yet another small benefit of ball heads, they're cheaper too.

[Ratmagiclady]

I'm not showing much face there, the goggles tend to overwhelm everything.

I love my bike! I built it from scratch using a bare frame. It got pretty expensive by the time all was said and done, but it's the best bike I've ever owned. I have as much pride in my bike as I do in my camera, because both took me months of meticulous saving to get.

I suppose there's nothing like one you build yourself, anyway.

A few nice components on even a basic bike, and you're cruising, I think.

[brofkand]

To me, the ballhead is another example of "well, all the forums and podcasts recommend one, so it must be great!"

Not for me. I much prefer the head on my Tiltall to any other head I've ever used.

[24X36NOW]

I actually hate ball heads, too, despite having purchased a quality example (an Acratech V2, which they appear to no longer make since they've added more features since, though strangely they still make their original "Ultimate" ballhead).

The reason I hate ball heads is that, ability to control tension notwithstanding, it's still a ball that can - and will - move in any direction when you only want it to move in one direction, i.e., fore-and-aft or side-to-side. Unless you happen to be blessed with a perfectly balanced camera and lens combination - with every lens you own, (highly doubtful on either count) you're going to have unwanted off-axis movement every time you try to position things as you want them.

My favorite head is in a class of its own, the NPC Pro Head. This head is based on an artificial elbow joint (an "Amrus Shpigel Joint") which allows separate movement on the two desired axes by loosening a single knob. A second knob provides panning ability, and a "knob within the knob" that loosens the fore-and-aft and side-to-side axes provides tension control. With this head, I can point and level my camera and lens MUCH quicker than I can with any aggravating ball head.

Unfortunately, the NPC Pro Head seems to be out of production right now; it seems to come and go. I really wish Acratech would make a head using the Amrus Shpigel Joint, as I'm sure they'd make it nice and light and lower in profile. My only (minimal) complaint about the NPC Pro Head is that it is very tall (which does provide tremendous range of movement, but since I use an L Plate for vertical flipping, more range than I find is needed). Beyond that little niggle, it is by far my favorite head for non-tripod mount lenses. For big glass, I prefer a Wimberly Gimbal head, since you haven't lived until you've experienced the joy of a long lens under fingertip control...

I like the Arca-Swiss B2 as well, though that ball-within-a-ball head uses two separate controls, which makes it slower to use. Unfortunately, that thing is the size of a soup can, and completely covers the levels of my leveling bases! I also like a quality 3-way pan like the Tiltall, but only for smaller lenses that don't have a tripod mount.

[pxpaulx]

24x36 - A tip I found works well (while watching a video on youtube about the photoclam head that I have) is to set the tension control on the ball with your camera tilted at a 30 degree angle - doing that at a more extreme angle than what is likely to be used allows a better lock when the camera is set to a normal, horizontal shooting position.

[ajuett]

I just bought a Manfrotto 496RC2 head and love it. I went 1 size larger than recommended as there is no such thing as over-built.

[snostorm]

The reason I hate ball heads is that, ability to control tension notwithstanding, it's still a ball that can - and will - move in any direction when you only want it to move in one direction, i.e., fore-and-aft or side-to-side. Unless you happen to be blessed with a perfectly balanced camera and lens combination - with every lens you own, (highly doubtful on either count) you're going to have unwanted off-axis movement every time you try to position things as you want them.

Hi 24x36,

An alternative way to use a ballhead is to drop the shaft of the ball into the "portrait" slot (so it will be horizontal). Since you use an L bracket, you can position the cam in either portrait or landscape perspective in this position. Now the ball will only rotate vertically, and the panning base will allow only horizontal motion. I've used this "faux gimbal" mode after somehow leaving my Sidekick at home. . .

Scott

[24X36NOW]

24x36 - A tip I found works well (while watching a video on youtube about the photoclam head that I have) is to set the tension control on the ball with your camera tilted at a 30 degree angle - doing that at a more extreme angle than what is likely to be used allows a better lock when the camera is set to a normal, horizontal shooting position.

Thanks. I don't think that would prevent off-axis movement, though it might give you a better feel for the right amount of tension.

Hi 24x36,

An alternative way to use a ballhead is to drop the shaft of the ball into the "portrait" slot (so it will be horizontal). Since you use an L bracket, you can position the cam in either portrait or landscape perspective in this position. Now the ball will only rotate vertically, and the panning base will allow only horizontal motion. I've used this "faux gimbal" mode after somehow leaving my Sidekick at home. . .

Scott

Interesting idea. You'd have to have the base perfectly level to use it in that mode without a tripod collar on the lens, though. I don't like the idea of having the weight hanging off to the side of the head, either, since it tends to be less stable (weight no longer centered on the tripod legs), not to mention you'd have to make sure the clamp holding the L Bracket was mighty tight since the load would be pulling straight down on it...

Actually, I could do vertical format with the NPC head and no L plate (it has enough range of motion), including the ability to level it, but that presents the stability issues, and of course requires a complete reposition of shot if changing from horizontal.