Then there are those who can't even make up their mind whether the composition should be horizontal or vertical, so shoot square format, then ironically think they need a tripod head for that too, but still can't conceive of a picture being diamond-shaped instead. Sheesh! Somebody loan them a film stretcher.... Pleeez
I’ve got an RB67 on the way and need to get a head for my tripod (Bogen 3051) to accommodate it.
What do you guys prefer for medium format, a ballhead or a three-way head? The RB67 has a rotating back, so there’s no need to flip it on its side to take vertical shots.
This will be used out in the field for landscape photography.
It's all basic torque-vector physics. A 37mm fisheye represents a very limited amount of bellows extension. Try the same amount of lens weight on a 400 mm extension and you've got a far greater leverage issue. And ball heads have stems by design, at exactly the worst spot imaginable in terms of vibration resistance. I have trouble figuring out why they even exist. It makes about as much sense as a one-legged chair.
So that's it - either silly-heavy or else wobble-bobble? I can outdo all of em, when it comes to lab gear. The yaw-correctible focus support for my huge 14 ft tall 8x10 color enlarger employs a precisely machined micrometer-driven forged bronze three-way clamping device that would probably cost at least fifteen thousand dollars to make today.
My cost? Zero. It was a discarded military surplus sight mount for a huge WWII ship gun. Want solid? That's it. But nobody in their right mind would tote that into the field.
But talk about luck. The scope it was designed for, which passed through the MIDDLE of it (not atop it like a ball head), is almost precisely the same diameter as a standard Sinar monorail rail. Jerry-rigging heaven!
Well, I even have one of those old monster Bogen (now Manfrotto) cast heads, and even atop my bigger set of Ries legs, a simple tap test instantly tells me the big Tele, or 8x10, or even Sinar 4X5 at long extension, is nowhere near as stable as direct connect of camera to tripod platform. And yes, it certainly can make a difference in the print, especially a big one. But whatever.... I just found all kinds of heads to be redundant unnecessary weight for backpacking purposes, and downright disadvantageous in a number of applications (not all).
I’ve got an RB67 on the way and need to get a head for my tripod (Bogen 3051) to accommodate it.
What do you guys prefer for medium format, a ballhead or a three-way head? The RB67 has a rotating back, so there’s no need to flip it on its side to take vertical shots.
This will be used out in the field for landscape photography.
For medium format I hate a ballhead. On smaller cameras they are ok, but I’ve tried them on a film Hasselblad, and it is maddening to try a little move in one axis. Invariably the whole composition changes. For me 3-way is it.
I've never tried a geared 3-way head. Can the gearing be disengaged to make large movements, or do you have to crank the knobs to make any movements at all?
What's the advantages of a geared head?
A couple of years ago it was getting difficult to lock one of the axis so I took it apart and re-greased with a damping grease. There are a couple of YouTube videos that show how. It now works as good as new and is almost as smooth as a fluid head.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?