I shoot ‘urbanism’ and a little landscape with a Canham DLC 4x5. I’ve mostly used a Manfrotto 410 geared head - which has been great over nearly 20 years of ownership. But it’s heavy at over 1.2kgs and bulky. I started leaving it home and relying on a very basic Gitzo 75mm leveling base on my systematic tripods. It’s light at 600gms and very low profile. But it’s so spartan in terms of control that it’s not precise enough for architecture.
So I’m finally looking at ball heads as a compact, but friction dampened option. In particular I’m drawn to the FLM CB 48/58 FT II heads. Sure there are both cheaper and even a few more expensive options - but I’m not looking for advice on brands.
What I’d like to know is if there is any operational advantage in using a larger diameter ball head like the 58mm over a slighter lighter ( minus 200gms) 48mm head, or even a 43mm diameter ball. They each have sufficient load capacity for my uses, and are otherwise identical. Cost difference is modest. So would a larger diameter ball be easier to make controlled adjustments on, or is that a negligible advantage?
This is coming from a geared head user, looking to shoot lots of buildings etc in the field. I shoot 72 - 210mm focal lengths.
So I’m finally looking at ball heads as a compact, but friction dampened option. In particular I’m drawn to the FLM CB 48/58 FT II heads. Sure there are both cheaper and even a few more expensive options - but I’m not looking for advice on brands.
What I’d like to know is if there is any operational advantage in using a larger diameter ball head like the 58mm over a slighter lighter ( minus 200gms) 48mm head, or even a 43mm diameter ball. They each have sufficient load capacity for my uses, and are otherwise identical. Cost difference is modest. So would a larger diameter ball be easier to make controlled adjustments on, or is that a negligible advantage?
This is coming from a geared head user, looking to shoot lots of buildings etc in the field. I shoot 72 - 210mm focal lengths.
