Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/11/15
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I have both the ball head as well as the traditional 3 way. I use both. The ball head works well for light cameras or longer lenses. I also use a limited ball head ( Linhof thing that is probably older than I am) on my Hasselblad. This combo works well, maybe mostly because of the camera-at-waist-level viewing position. The operation is stable because i tend to cradle the camera in my hands as I adjust the position. The same is true of how I use a 35mm long lens... I cradle the lens in my arms, using my weight to stabilize the camera. For the Field 4x5 camera, I have tried using the ball head... but it does not easily move in a rectilenear direction. It tends to adjust in the other plane as well as the one I want. The camera makes the thing unstable unless the tension is just right on the ball head ( I use an NPC ball head, about 4 pounds or more). Aother possibility, as I think about it , is that in each instance that I am happy with the head, the other truth is that the center of gravity is LOWER and "more compact" to the center of the movement. This could be the real issue of satisfaction.... Now the rant..... if you can knock 3 pounds off the weight of a tripod set of legs using carbon fiber, why can't some intelligent engineer make a similar reduction in the weight of a tripod head? The things are made from steel. A change to aluminum would seem better, and titanium, better yet! Rant over. Frank Filippone red735i@earthlink.net