I do not like ball heads for large lenses. I know a lot of people on this
list do. I prefer a gear head (Walt's fine recommendation) when conditions
permit. When a lot of quick movement is required I use a fluid head with the
shutter button on the handle of the head. Another good choice, especially on
a monopod, is the Bogen Lens Cradle with a sliding 3273 plate assembly. I
use that plate assembly on most heads for large lenses as it permits me to
balance the lens/camera assembly quickly. It will also work well on ball
heads. I have tried most of the Bogen ball heads and didn't like any of them
for large lenses. The brands you mention are all supposed to be good.
Sometimes there are just too many choices and it's hard (expensive) to try
them all. The three-axis heads work well but take a lot of hands to
manipulate the controls if one is in a hurry.
I have a new Bogen 3221WN tripod for sale (EB*AY item 7569667019) with a
3030 head. I would sell the legs or head separately if someone wanted. I
also have several camera bags left and can discount them for list members.
See a list at:
<http://myweb.cableone.net/jmac25/eqforsale.htm>
/jmac
-----Original Message-----
From: olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx]On
Behalf Of Martin Walters
Sent: Monday, December 05, 2005 7:35 AM
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [OM] Re: Wildlife Photographer of the Year (OT)
Now that the topic of "big glass" is out in the open, I have a question
for those using these types of lens. What tripod heads do you hang them on?
I've recently acquired a Tamron 300/2.8 and, while I do have a monopod,
I now have to get a tripod and head, and I am looking for a reasonable
solution to the stability/weight/price equation. Too heavy and the
tripod will never leave home; too expensive and there will be questions
from my better half (who's eyes popped when she saw the size of the
lens!); and too flimsy and unwowrkable etc. And, yes, I've seen the
many threads on tripods on Photo-net.
I've more or less decided on the legs; however, the real challenge (from
price perspective particularly) is an adequate ball head. The easy (and
expensive) choices are Arca-Swiss, Kirk BH-1, Wimberley, and Acratech
(is it sturdy enough?). I expect that I will likely not be straying far
with this lens/tripod, and would likely hang some smaller lenses (Tamron
180 and shorter) on it too. Camera will be an OM+winder. Also, is it
realistic to consider getting something relatively cheap and then
upgrade, though this would no doubt be more expensive. So,are there
others that I might get away with (e.g., Giottos 1000)? Grateful for
your views.
Martin
Moose wrote:
>Chuck Norcutt wrote:
>
>
>
>>Jeff mentions a 400/4 Tamron, a lens I'm not familiar with. What's the
>>best deal in an OM mount 300 or 400mm f/4 or similar fast glass? 2.8 is
>>probably too fast meaning expensive and heavy.
>>
>>
>>
>You've already heard about some of the big, fast, heavy and relatively
>expensive options.
>
>The Zuiko 300/ 4.5 is an excellent lens. Only 1 stop slower than the big
>guns and significantly smaller, lighter and cheaper.
>
>One of my favorite lenses is the Tamron SP (adaptall) 60-300/3.8-5.6. It
>is smaller and lighter than any of the primes mentioned so far and nice
>and sharp even at 300mm. The best example I have on the web is soemthing
>I've posted before for other reasons
><http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/tech/PrintvsScan/ScanvsPrint.htm>.
>Wide open at 1/60, resting on a car window (engine off!) on Kodak Royal
>Gold 400. This was scanned on the FS2710 at 2720 dpi. I don't know if
>there is any more detail to be pulled out, but I'm impressed as it is.
>
>Downsides are speed, 2 stops down from the big gun f2/8s and one down
>from the Zuiko, and the lack of a tripod mount. It's not heavy enough to
>challange an OM lens mount, but can make the lens/body combo unwieldy
>for really small, light tripods. But even there, I've had good results
>with care. Great for use with a monopod.
>
>Upsides besides size, weight and cost? It's sharp wide open, which is an
>advantage over some other long lenses. Sure, it's a little better at f8,
>but awfully good wide open. I wouldn't be surprised to find that it's
>better than some of the slow 300mm lenses many folks made back in those
>days.
>
>Although all 300mm and up lenses take real care to get good hand held
>results, it's relative light weight helps. I think it's as easy to hand
>hold at 300mm as the 80-200/2.8 at 200mm, but others with stronger arms
>and more stamina may feel differently. Pair it with a nice wide to mid
>zoom and cover pretty much everything. With the 19-35 and a 50/1.4, you
>really cover everything.
>
>It does killer macro. And as a mid to long zoom, it means I have the
>longer reach available more often. I don't have to decide to take the
>big gun along and then have the time and patience to take it out and
>mount it. I just push the zoom ring, find something to lean myself
>and/or the lens against, if possible, and shoot away. Here are some more
>shots with it.
>http://galleries.moosemystic.net/Yosemite/pages/02043031.htm
>http://galleries.moosemystic.net/Yosemite/pages/02043A21.htm and the one
>following
>http://galleries.moosemystic.net/Yosemite/pages/02050102.htm and the one
>following
>
>The other thing for me about long lenses is that about all extra speed
>buys in many circumstances is a brighter viewfinder. DOF gets so shallow
>at long fls that shooting above f8 or so often doesn't give enough DOF
>anyway. I found myself wanting the stop down ring on the Sigma 600/8 for
>just that reason recently. It was nice and bright, and f16 would have
>been better for the shot.
>
>Moose
>
>
>
>
>==============================================
>List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
>List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>==============================================
>
>
>
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|