Is This The New King Of BallHeads??


Status
Not open for further replies.

Del_CtrlnoAlt

Senior Member
Feb 15, 2003
16,268
0
0
Outside the Dry Box.
Visit site
#2
normally i would consider RRS as overpriced item... even thou it looks rather 'cool' i think unless your setup is damn heavy, otherwise... no use for a US350-450 ball head... rough estimate would be at least 600-800 cost...
 

bernardsia

New Member
Sep 30, 2004
314
0
0
#3
I just bought a Markins M-10. It's fantastic. I am going to use it until I die, leave it to my son.
 

bernardsia

New Member
Sep 30, 2004
314
0
0
#5
hah. You have no chance for this one. It's a keeper for life. :blah:
 

smallaperture

Senior Member
Jan 5, 2004
2,441
0
0
Catchment Area
#6
Every now and then, the current ultimate ballhead is overtaken by another one, better design, better material and so forth and somehow higher price and many photogs fall for it.

For me, the ultimate is a simple video head with fluid movement - just a simple pan and tilt head will do and it cost me just a tad over $100/-. Fabulous for wild life and actions/sports.

Just my 10cents worth of view. 2 cents are hardly used these days. :bigeyes: :bsmilie: :cool:
 

espn

Deregistered
Dec 20, 2002
21,905
0
0
Planet Nikon
#7
smallaperture said:
Every now and then, the current ultimate ballhead is overtaken by another one, better design, better material and so forth and somehow higher price and many photogs fall for it.

For me, the ultimate is a simple video head with fluid movement - just a simple pan and tilt head will do and it cost me just a tad over $100/-. Fabulous for wild life and actions/sports.

Just my 10cents worth of view. 2 cents are hardly used these days. :bigeyes: :bsmilie: :cool:
Can see that you really know nothing about the importance of the right equipment for the right job...
 

Stereobox

Senior Member
Dec 21, 2003
2,116
0
0
Cocteau Twins
#8
what espn said is right...never overlook the importance of every single piece of photographic equipment that you have, be it lens, filter, camera body, tripod, ball-head etc.

there will be times you need to set the camera on super long shutter speeds, or capturing identical frames over and over again. you cannot afford to have the tripod head slowly slidding down over time (these are minutes changes which you cannot detect via naked eyes until it is too late). that is when you start cursing yourself...

then again, if you forsee you don't require such high quality, i don't see why one can't settle for a cheaper piece of equipment. different needs, different uses, different purchases.

im making such redundant statements nowadays :sweat:
 

Gymrat76

Senior Member
May 10, 2004
1,606
0
0
41
#9
bernardsia said:
hah. You have no chance for this one. It's a keeper for life. :blah:
Ya, same here... my Markins M-10 is going to be a permanant accessory :)
 

bernardsia

New Member
Sep 30, 2004
314
0
0
#12
I checked the Acratech again at CP. Nah. Tilting forward is too clumsy. With the M-10 at 100g more, the load is another 3x. The list price of the M-10 is cheaper too? I must be going blind.
 

bernardsia

New Member
Sep 30, 2004
314
0
0
#13
smallaperture said:
Every now and then, the current ultimate ballhead is overtaken by another one, better design, better material and so forth and somehow higher price and many photogs fall for it.

For me, the ultimate is a simple video head with fluid movement - just a simple pan and tilt head will do and it cost me just a tad over $100/-. Fabulous for wild life and actions/sports.

Just my 10cents worth of view. 2 cents are hardly used these days. :bigeyes: :bsmilie: :cool:
After spending thousands upon thousands on bodies and lenses. I find your advice is terrible. Do you advice using one of those $40 'ultimate tripods' as well? They are cheap and light. Disposable too. Beat that.
 

Del_CtrlnoAlt

Senior Member
Feb 15, 2003
16,268
0
0
Outside the Dry Box.
Visit site
#14
bernardsia said:
After spending thousands upon thousands on bodies and lenses. I find your advice is terrible. Do you advice using one of those $40 'ultimate tripods' as well? They are cheap and light. Disposable too. Beat that.
din u know?... it supports automatic downward or backward tilting service as well... over the time... better than anything you ever see on the movies... :bsmilie:

anyway i still contemplating... 20D, Dynax 7D or the now cheaper D70... den will i think of a better head... :blah:
 

fengwei

Moderator
Staff member
Aug 25, 2004
14,462
12
0
Queenstown
www.pbase.com
#17
espn said:
$545.

(10 chars)

Wow :eek:

Guess I'll need to save up for a while and skip the 70-200 f2.8 lens to get this baby, plus a better and heavy tripod ;p . Mean time doing a lot of exercises to keep up with the added-on weight :bsmilie:

I'm still using a Slik Sprint Pro GM :(
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom