Landscapes, tripods and heads…
Back in January this year Imagez had a guest speaker discussing landscape photography… Chris Palmer. Amongst many other topics he waxed lyrical about his choice of tripod head, namely a Manfrotto 222. HIs main point was that by simply squeezing the lever the camera became free to move, quickly and easily, into any position – and just letting go held the camera solid in place. Clearly no good for wildlife or sports photography where panning might be desirable, but for landscapes (especially on uneven ground) it’s easy to see why he chose the 222.
Now, on to the nub of this post. Manfrotto only sell these heads now through third parties and range in price from £90 to over £100. However Calumet produce their own version that is almost identical in every way – except price. The Calumet Quickgrip Action Head sells for £49.99 which does represent quite a bargain. Although, if you are thinking of going down this route of tripod head it might be wise to consider what camera you put on it. their max load is only around 2.5 kg’s so if you use a weighty DSLR with a whopping lens this will feel very top heavy and might not hold firm, so if you do want the joystick style head, and use a camera that doubles as a bludgeon, then its back to Manfrotto with the 324RC2 or 327RC2 and three times the cost!
*Edit: Changed name from David Newton to Chris Palmer… thanks Danny.
Have to say that I was very surprised when I saw this head being recommended by a landscape photographer, for stability and accurate use my recommendation would be to avoid it like the plague!
The replacement for the 222 that was recommended (the 322rc2) was the very first tripod head I bought after widespread advice. It was also the very first piece of photographic kit I sold! Why?
– No accurate movement, when you release the trigger, no matter how loose or tight it was set, it moved a few degrees. Also there is no fine adjustment, so if you are a couple of degrees out on your horizon it could take forever to get it spot on.
– Using as pictured it takes the centre of gravity away from the top of the tripod by 8- 10 inches or so! Sticking a ‘monopod’ on top of a tripod always decreases stability! Kinda missing the point of using a tripod in the first place.
– The very small quick release plate does not cover a lot of area at the bottom of the camera so this is another weak point especially in direct comparison to a much larger plate.
– Putting a couple of kg kit on the top of that just isn’t stable!
– It was a very frustrating experience!
So what would I suggest? A ball head? Nope, not at all, you cannot make fine adjustments one axis at a time with a ball head. The ideal solution, for me, for landscape work was the Manfrotto 405. A geared 3 way head with very fine adjustments in each axis that can take upto 7.5kg.
This might spark some debate I’m sure and I hope it does as these really should be avoided at all costs! Remember, your definition of ‘stable’ is entirely dependant on your budget!
Danny.
PS Are you sure it was David Newton? Sure he brought a Gitzo and ball head with him?
I’m not sure it was David either, since he mostly uses a Gitzo explorer tripod with a Really Right Stuff BH-55 ball head for his landscapes. The RRS head is a bit more expensive than the Calumet item above… Though for a lighter ball head for travel he’s also been using the Acratech GP head. However Dave is also prone to portraits and landscapes with 400mm lenses so the grip head is not really up to supporting the weight.
http://reallyrightstuff.com/ProductDesc.aspx?code=BH-55-LR&type=3&eq=&desc=BH-55-LR%3A-Full-sized-ballhead-with-LR
Looking back in the programme archive I think it might possibly have been Chris Palmer who suggested this grip head.
Nice reply, in rebuttal – steady can only ever mean steady enough. As long as your picture is sharp then it was steady enough, and if that was obtained by balancing your camera on a willow twig or by anchoring it to a tonne of lead… whatever gets you through the day. Ansel Adams used a tripod that was held together with the sort of nuts and bolts you can buy in B&Q for less than a twenty pence (hardly bleeding edge technology), but he was able to produce some stunning work. Agreed this head will most likely behave poorly with weight, as I mentioned. However the speaker was showcasing slides taken on a film camera which, combined with a prime wide angle lens, would most likely weigh just under a kilo.
I did get to have a little play with this head while I was in Calumet and, as a fan of the Manfrotto 327RC2, I thought that this made an acceptable head for fifty knicker, and I believe I noted some some caveats in the post. The head you suggest as being appropriate has an RRP of £409.95 (eep!), although I’m sure you can get it for a bit less. I’m sure that using this head would feel like tripod heaven, but not many us use medium format Hasselblads either.
For a second opinion have a look at this chaps work http://www.adamburtonphotography.com/profile – a very competent photographer with many awards and achievements to his name; and seems quite happy with the 322 head!
PS… You’re right, it wasn’t David Newton, it was Chris Palmer… all coming back to me now, so I’ve changed the post accordingly.
Thanks for the swift update Ian, and yes tripods do seem to strike up the oddest series of comments. Lets talk about a good deal on an inexpensive head, to here’s some great £500 quid heads to put on top of a set of carbon fibre legs.
My best “tripod” for travel is a manfrotto super clamp, it holds 15kg and you can put whichever head you like on it, only need to find a table, door, scaffolding pole, handrail strong enough to hold all the camera kit that you will clamp to said “location provided supports” 🙂
Well, I did mention that it might spark debate!
You may be right Ian in that steady can only mean steady enough and sure enough my version of this head with a small prime lens was steady enough, it just had very poor control. This is acceptable to some given the price range and I fully understand that, it just is not acceptable to me.
For landscape use, fine control of each axis is important to me. Last night was a good example, I was using my 60-250 for a shot, which weighs over a kg on its own so over 1.7kg in total from a camera well known for how small and light it is. Composition was a breeze and a pleasure to control with the fine adjustments, the same, from painful experience, most definitely cannot be said of the 322.
If this appeared to take away from telling the club about a good deal then I apologise for that as it was not my intention! When you disagree strongly with someone (not yourself in this case!) it is very difficult sometimes to not voice an opinion! To mention another good deal the 405 is currently on Amazon for only £260 just don’t forget to buy thought the club link!
Whilst I’m sure Adam likes his 322, if I had over £4500 of D800 with 70-200 2.8 weighing over 2.5kg, I most definately would not put it on top of a head with no fine control that at its limit is designed to take a maximum of only 2kg! In this context, suddenly a 405 seems sensible, cheap and a very sound investment, with no medium format in sight!
The beauty is of course, none of us are right or wrong, they are only our personal opinions. Some of us value some criteria more than others, some do not take a lot of criteria seriously at all, almost always though they are budget dependant. Of course if anyone would like to use a 405 to find out its qualities than please do ask, I’m willing to accommodate. Just think I could have mentioned an Arca Swiss Cube!
PS, Brian, who mentioned carbon fibre legs? That’s another topic all of its own!