Ball-head or Pan-head, which do you prefer ?

simonkit

simonkit

Suspended / Banned
Messages
4,240
Edit My Images
No
I'm just in the process of choosing a new tripod to take along when hiking (Redsnapper is the favourite so far) and wondered which head those interested in landscape photography prefer.

Myself, I initially bought a ball-head but wasn't keen on it in use, I preferred being able to lock/unlock the different axis on the pan-head, just felt a more "positive" setup somehow. Anyway I'm considering whether I should try-out the ball-head again, maybe the 1st one I tried wasn't good enough quality and I therefore got a bad impression ?

Any thoughts appreciated

simon
 
Both have their good and bad sides.

I personally when for the ballhead since its so much more quicker overall to use. One friction lock and thats all you have so if your situation changes very quicky, you dont have to worry about 3 different locks.

However, planning vertically/horizontally is better to start off on a pan head but a good technique can eliminate the need.
 
I've got a Manfrotto ball head, which also allows you to pan in the horizontal axis, the best of both worlds. I can't remember the model number off the top of my head, but can find it if you need me to.

FYI I've got it on the Redsnapper legs.
 
Ball head for me - with one single lock you can move the head in any direction - much quicker. Vital to get a good quality one though.
 
Plenty of ball heads have a separate panning lock Andrew.
 
If you plan on doing any panoramic stitches you need a pan-head really, but most of the time a ball head is more convenient

Don't think that panoramics are only horizontal,some are vertical
 
I have the Redsnapper lags and the ball head - love the ball head, great piece of kit, very versatile and very well put together.
 
Choosing a tripod head is one of the most personal choices! It makes a big difference, depending on what you shoot and how you like to work.

The problem with b&s is that you have to move the camera and not the platform. And because the camera is secured by just a feeble screw on a spongey base, it always moves after you've framed everything carefully. Also, if you forget to lock it (and you will!) the camera slams down onto the legs.

So I often prefer a pan/tilt head, but they are slower. Which is why I usually opt for the Manfrotto joy/stick trigger grip (322RC2) best of both worlds, here: http://www.warehouseexpress.com/product/default.aspx?sku=10912 But I don't expect everyone to agree with me.

For big telephotos, a gimball head is unbeatable :)
 
If its any help, as a new beginner, I managed to pick up a Manfrotto 055v with a 701RCT Head (Pan). I find it extremely easy to use and more than adequate for my wants.
 
andrewc said:
I know, but my 488RC2 does and my 484RC2 doesn't!
Click to expand...

488 does...

And 701 head is only 2-way tilt, not 3-way I think. It's a video head and you can't flip the platform vertical for portrait shots.
 
HoppyUK said:
488 does...

And 701 head is only 2-way tilt, not 3-way I think. It's a video head and you can't flip the platform vertical for portrait shots.
Click to expand...

I have a Manfrotto 386RC2 ball head (I think.. might be 486...it's in the car so too cold / lazy to check) I also have a 234RC tilt head for my monopod. If I were to buy another ball head it would have to have a pan feature as previously mentioned because an unrestricted ball head has nearly caused the entire rig to suddenly flop; it's great for slapping up the tripod on uneven ground and grabbing a picture though. I did consider the Manfrotto 322RC controlled ball head with trigger handle for panning though...not cheap but got good feedback on it
Jamie
 
shoshone said:
...If I were to buy another ball head it would have to have a pan feature as previously mentioned because an unrestricted ball head has nearly caused the entire rig to suddenly flop...
Click to expand...

:lol: Yes! It's scary!

I find any normal tripod head very difficult with my 100-400mm. I really must dig deep and get me a Wimberly gimball head for that. Maybe you should have a look at one for your lens. I've tried one a couple of times and they really transform the handling of heavy lenses. Amazing how a couple of kilos of glass becomes light as a feather!
 
HoppyUK said:
:lol: Yes! It's scary!

I find any normal tripod head very difficult with my 100-400mm. I really must dig deep and get me a Wimberly gimball head for that. Maybe you should have a look at one for your lens. I've tried one a couple of times and they really transform the handling of heavy lenses. Amazing how a couple of kilos of glass becomes light as a feather!
Click to expand...

Or save yourself a few bob and get a Manfrotto 393 gimbal. ;)
 
CT said:
Or save yourself a few bob and get a Manfrotto 393 gimbal. ;)
Click to expand...

It's big and ugly, but does the job for sure. I didn't realise it was only £100 or so. Still a crazy price for a piece of Mechano, but better than £500!
 
Thanks for the replies, made my mind up that I'm sticking with a 3 way pan-head - it takes a bit longer to setup but it gives me a better feeling of security if that makes sense...

now all I need to decide is whether to stick with the Redsnapper one or go with something else, would appreciate model numbers on the Manfrotto ones. If I've read the Redsnapper thread correctly the quick release mechanism on the pan head is a little cumbersome ??

simon
 
CT said:
Or save yourself a few bob and get a Manfrotto 393 gimbal. ;)
Click to expand...

HoppyUK said:
It's big and ugly, but does the job for sure. I didn't realise it was only £100 or so. Still a crazy price for a piece of Mechano, but better than £500!
Click to expand...

I have one and love it,especially the price............:thumbs:
 
HoppyUK said:
The problem with b&s is that you have to move the camera and not the platform. And because the camera is secured by just a feeble screw on a spongey base, it always moves after you've framed everything carefully. Also, if you forget to lock it (and you will!) the camera slams down onto the legs.
Click to expand...

That is not quite true. If you have a ballhead with ball tension control then you can find a tesnion suitable for your combination of the camera+lens so it stays fixed but not locked. This will allow to move the camera freely in any dimension yet you don't need to tighten the screw after that. Now try to persuade me that there is anything more versatile and quicker than that ;-))

But of course I agree that the choice is personal ;)
 
I've used Ball heads and pan heads with some pretty chunky video gear (XLH1's mostly), and I must say the bigger/more off-centre your setup, the more of a hassle a ball head becomes (and can lead to some pretty funky unexpected dutch angle shots when you're not paying enough attention).


For most camera work though should be a piece of cake, I've not had that experience yet
 
HoppyUK said:
It's big and ugly, but does the job for sure. I didn't realise it was only £100 or so. Still a crazy price for a piece of Mechano, but better than £500!
Click to expand...
It does look a bit industrial, but it's very well engineered, I use one with the 500mm most of the time.
 
I will be completely contrary and suggest the third option, a trigger head. I have the manfrotto 322 which is a doodle to use and you can adjust the friction according to need. It certainly holds the D300, sigma 120-300 and 1.4 TC nice and stable. I admit its on the table for a possiblt sale as I would like a gimbal type head now for wildlife, but as a general purpose head, very good indeed. I would recommend a hotshoe level with it though if getting spot on horizons are absolutely vital to you though [I have never bothered tbh], and it is not lightweight, but then neither are good quality P&T or b/h's either.
 
so whats the general recommendation for a ball head that pans with a price range of £50 (preferably cheaper) or there abouts?
 
i have a markins Q3 ballhead and its the bees knees! also have the l-plate and that's damn useful too
 
ricky1980 said:
so whats the general recommendation for a ball head that pans with a price range of £50 (preferably cheaper) or there abouts?
Click to expand...

there isnt a ball head for £50 that you will want to keep, the good ones are around £250 plus
 
I'll go against the grain here and say my preference is a pan and tilt head. More complicated and slower but speed isn't essential for the kind of landscape stuff i do. However i spend 50% of my time shooting vertical and a few pano's so for me it's the best option on a budget - but I would love that manfrotto trigger head.
 
I have this ball head which is a shameless copy of the Kirk B1 head costing around 400 quid, but this was a quarter of the price and at least 95% of the quality.

CLICKY
 
ricky1980 said:
so whats the general recommendation for a ball head that pans with a price range of £50 (preferably cheaper) or there abouts?
Click to expand...

Manfrotto 488RC2 £60
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top