NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Other => Topic started by: Ilkka Nissilä on December 29, 2018, 17:10:16
-
Hi everyone,
I got the 500 PF a month ago, and have been trying it out on suitable subject matter which includes birds, sports and landscape details.
I find that it's difficult for me to hold the focus point on the subject for a longer period of time when hand holding, and I've mostly used the lens on a monopod. However, the monopod doesn't stabilize the lens in the lateral direction and pointing the lens up or down requires my to unlock the monopod head, tilt, and then tighten. This is OK for static or slowly moving subjects, and I appreciate the really light weight of the kit, but I want to try to use a tripod with this lens.
I mostly use Arca Z1 ballhead on tripod but this isn't ideal for moving subjects. I have looked into some gimbal and fluid heads but I suspect many of them are overkill for the 500 (because of the light weight of the lens), and I would like to hear if there are any suggestions of heads that I should try.
I have a Wimberley Sidekick and an inexpensive Manfrotto fluid head that I managed to buy second hand that I can start with. The problem with the gimbal is that while it's more stable than hand-holding, and allows easy movement, it's not quite a stable as using just a ball head, so I am interested in looking into options that dampen vibrations while hindering movements as little as possible. I will try both moving and static subjects with the different heads that I presently have and see if I can come to some conclusions.
2kg head weight is too much for me, I would like to stay as close to 1kg as possible (1.5kg may still be ok). Compactness is also a beneficial characteristic as I try to limit the amount of gear I carry. I will probably use the new head both on monopod as well as tripod.
I don't have tripod legs with a bowl but I could get an adapter.
Thanks for your suggestions.
-
You may want to look into the Acratech ballheads (https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?ci=10835&origSearch=acratech&phd=4291623875&cp=15293%2b10835&). The manufacturer states that with the clamp dropped over to the side, the ballhead can be used as a compact gimbal head. I used this feature to photograph the America's Cup races in 2013 and it worked quite well. I was using the Nikon 70-200/4 with TC which is lightweight but also fairly short. These ballheads weigh under 1/2 kg and are quite compact. They are well made and operate very smoothly.
Another possibility is the Acratech long lens head (https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/736364-REG/Acratech_1160_Long_Lens_Head.html). I found this head to be very usable with a small telescope when star gazing.
The problem is that whether or not these items would meet your needs would have to be determined by actually trying them out. They tend to not come up much in used markets.
-
I suggest the Jobu Jr.3 Deluxe gimbal head. It is very lightweight at 680g and can easily handle the 500 PF. Check it out here: http://www.jobu-design.com/Jobu-Jr-3-Deluxe-Kit_p_16.html (http://www.jobu-design.com/Jobu-Jr-3-Deluxe-Kit_p_16.html)
-
Ilkka, your statement that a gimbal is not quite as stable as a ball head suggest that you are not properly balancing the 500mm + camera on the gimbal. If you are not already familiar with this see the video below on balancing.
https://www.tripodhead.com/products/WH-videos.cfm
-
Ilkka, your statement that a gimbal is not quite as stable as a ball head suggest that you are not properly balancing the 500mm + camera on the gimbal. If you are not already familiar with this see the video below on balancing.
https://www.tripodhead.com/products/WH-videos.cfm
Thanks for the pointer to the video. The gimbal I have is the Sidekick so it doesn't have the vertical adjustment. Horizontally I do use the lens in the correct position where it stays in whatever orientation I point it at. In that sense it is easy to use.
I was referring to vibrations when the shot is taken. I got the impression that with the Sidekick, there is some more vibration from the shutter/mirror than when using the ball head by itself but that was just not a result of a rigorous test. I will try to do more controlled testing when the weather co-operates.
-
Thanks for the suggestion of the Acratech heads. They seem to be difficult to find in Europe, but I did find a store in the UK that I could order from. However, there is no easy way for me to get to try them out without purchasing. I am intereted in the Long Lens Head as it would allow keeping the lens on top of the head rather than off center, as would be the case with the ballhead in the gimbal orientation.
-
I suggest the Jobu Jr.3 Deluxe gimbal head. It is very lightweight at 680g and can easily handle the 500 PF. Check it out here: http://www.jobu-design.com/Jobu-Jr-3-Deluxe-Kit_p_16.html (http://www.jobu-design.com/Jobu-Jr-3-Deluxe-Kit_p_16.html)
Thanks for the suggestion. It seems amazingly light.
-
What I'd do is look at lightweight video heads like the Gitzo heads for birdwatchers. I use the Gitzo 2180 for my scopes, and I've used it with a 400mm on a monopod as well. Works very well. And it's lighter and more compact than any gimbal head.
Hermann
-
Thanks for the pointer to the video. The gimbal I have is the Sidekick so it doesn't have the vertical adjustment. Horizontally I do use the lens in the correct position where it stays in whatever orientation I point it at. In that sense it is easy to use.
I was referring to vibrations when the shot is taken. I got the impression that with the Sidekick, there is some more vibration from the shutter/mirror than when using the ball head by itself but that was just not a result of a rigorous test. I will try to do more controlled testing when the weather co-operates.
As to vibrations from taking the shot solutions are offered by a number of firms. RRS has their "Long Lens Support"
http://www.reallyrightstuff.com/plates-brackets/long-lens-support
These items are generally described as providing an additional 10% of IQ when deployed. In my expierence, that 10% or so improvement in IQ is there. I use the RRS support with a 800mm lens and with test subjects at 150 yards that subect IQ is clearly there.
-
What I'd do is look at lightweight video heads like the Gitzo heads for birdwatchers. I use the Gitzo 2180 for my scopes, and I've used it with a 400mm on a monopod as well. Works very well. And it's lighter and more compact than any gimbal head.
Hermann
Thanks. I am hoping to buy an Arca-Swiss QR compatible head. I'm considering this one:
https://www.manfrotto.us/gitzo-2-way-fluid-head
It seems to be a new model but in stock in one UK store that I found so far, and the price and weight are something I could digest.
-
I have used some two-point supports and agree it does help.
-
Thanks. I am hoping to buy an Arca-Swiss QR compatible head. I'm considering this one:
https://www.manfrotto.us/gitzo-2-way-fluid-head
It seems to be a new model but in stock in one UK store that I found so far, and the price and weight are something I could digest.
Yes, that's a new head. Mine is a few years old, 5 or 6 or so, and it still has one of Gitzo's proprietary quick release systems. These small Gitzo heads have got quite a good reputation in the birding community.
Hermann
-
I have the RRS monoball head that tilts only in one direction and has a screw-down Arca fitting, not their quick release which I believe the current model is. Mine is (or was) a discontinued model (do not have it with me at the moment as I am 4 to 5K miles from home). Found it on their site - http://www.reallyrightstuff.com/MH-01-Monopod-Head?quantity=1&custcol60=3 Maybe they are making them again. It works well. I also have an old Kirk monoball head that also works but is not quite as elegant. I have used them mainly with a Gitzo CF monoball - the large diameter model. I bought it a number of years ago specifically to use with a vintage 400/2.8 Nikkor as it is quite heavy. It is easier to hold this lens by the "handle" with the handle upwards in my dominant hand (right) and to attach the monopod to it rather than the other way around. I use my left hand to hold the monopod in an inverted position above it. Being CF it makes light weight it easy for my left hand to do this job. Enough free fingers on my right to lock the Arca fitting. With the monopod collapsed but locks loose, I have done this inside a vehicle (makes for a good blind) so I am almost ready to shoot on getting out. Much of our wildlife in AK will tolerate vehicles but not people outside them for long!
-
Thanks again for everyone for your suggestions.
I decided to for the time being work with the Wimberley Sidekick (mounted on Arca Z1) and see if I get used to the side mounting concept. In the past I haven't felt it was as vibration free as using the ball head directly but then I was using a 3-series Gitzo CF tripod and now I have a stiffer 4-series, and that seems to make a big difference in a vibration free experience. What I like about the Sidekick is that one has the regular head always available for shorter focal length shots and of shots of static subjects.
With the bigger tripod, Z1, Sidekick and 500 PF I find myself quite satisfied with the experience once it has been properly set up. If I use the D850 without vertical grip, the balancing is easy enough, but if I use a body with vertical grip then I have to reverse the quick release plate to find the right balance point and I find that sometimes my right hand fingers are a bit annoyed by the narrow gap between the camera's grip and the end of the QR plate. When working with a head where the tripod collar stays below the camera, there is no such annoyance. Admittedly it is a minor point but I want the shooting experience to be comfortable. :-)
Once I had a situation where in the -20C temperatures the Arca was getting a bit frozen up and stiff and because of this I had not noticed that the head was not fully locked, and the Sidekick and mounted lens started to turn downwards but I caught it before it hit the tripod legs or anything. In some ways I find the Sidekick not quite to the same user experience as a normal gimbal head where the lens collar is below the lens. I have to be more careful when using it, for sure.
So, when I take care and use it properly the Sidekick seems up to the task of supporting the 500 PF and D850 and the ease of turning the lens up and down, and left and right is nice. And I don't have to carry a separate head for shots with other lenses. On the lighter 3-series I find that if I extend the legs, there is quite a bit of vibration but if I kneel down, even that gives a good experience. So I will probably be using the 4-series with the 500mm lens most of the time, because I like to shoot from a standing position. With knee pads shooting from a lower position is ok, but I sometimes forget to bring the pads along.
I love the experience of shooting the 500mm from a tripod; when I started using the lens, I worked with a monopod and also did some hand held shots, but I just prefer the tripod experience because one doesn't have to hold the rig while waiting for something to happen. When aiming the 500mm hand held, although it is a light weight lens, it's still frustrating to try to keep the focus point squarely on the subject. On a solid tripod and gimbal, it's just wonderful and I can wait while the tripod does much of the work. :)
I will probably continue to study the question of the ideal head to use, but for now I found that what I already have is quite good for the purpose, given the mentioned precautions.
Here is a recent photo from the D850 and 500 PF taken with the Sidekick and 4-series Gitzo. It was f/5.6, 1/640, ISO 1000, so a bright sunny day (the winter is starting to be quite good now, with lots of snow and some bright days). The image was cropped from the 45MP image to 3060 x 3060, so it's about 2-3x crop. As I am inexperienced with bird photography, I am very happy to get such a result in such a short time of use of the new lens. I can say that if I had purchased the 500/4 G, my back would have done a whole lot of complaining already. ::)
-
I am late here - and the decision is already made
nevertheless my 3 cents:
I would recommend the Acratech long lens head it is compact and lightweight and more than capable of stabilizing the 500 PF. It is not a true gimbal (so is the Sidekick) but thats not a disadvantage under all circumstances. Bought it for opportunities when i need compactness that can't be provided by my fLuid head and the Wimberley, it can stabilize also heavy long lenses and working with it is faster than with any ballhead.
-
I am late here - and the decision is already made
Well, yes and no. For the time being I'm using the Sidekick but plan on revisiting the purchase of a new head at a later time. I figured I needed more experience with the lens and so I'm using what I could find in my closets. ::) Thanks for the advice on the Acratech.
-
I got a chance to try out the Gitzo GHF2W at a camera fair and it was offered at a discounted price so I ordered it. It seemed to offer very fluid movements and I generally liked the design of it. I noticed there was a safety pin to prevent accidental slipping of the plate so in order to remove the lens from the head the locking screw had to be opened up more fully. I guess this might not be compatible with third party A-S compatible plates and feet. Hopefully the pin can be removed.
Once I get it I will report back on how it works with the 500 PF in practical use.
-
I got a chance to try out the Gitzo GHF2W at a camera fair and it was offered at a discounted price so I ordered it. It seemed to offer very fluid movements and I generally liked the design of it. I noticed there was a safety pin to prevent accidental slipping of the plate so in order to remove the lens from the head the locking screw had to be opened up more fully. I guess this might not be compatible with third party A-S compatible plates and feet. Hopefully the pin can be removed.
Once I get it I will report back on how it works with the 500 PF in practical use.
The Acratech clamp that I recently bought for my monopod head has a detent pin in it and that pin is compatible with my RRS L plates. Plus, it's spring loaded so it will collapse, if need be, negating compatibility issues. The Acratech website says "Compatible with Kirk, Arca-Swiss and many other Arca-Swiss style quick release plates". I like the added safety of the pin to prevent my gear from inadvertently sliding out of the clamp. HTH
-
Some (but not all!) Arca-style clamps have a recessed channel that prevent the camera- and lens-plates from slipping-out provided that you have inserted two little safety screws to the under-side of the lens-plate.
All my clamps and plates are of this type but I was horrified when I rented a $10,000 lens that it arrived with a plate without those retaining screws.
Even though I had bought insurance, I immediately changed the rental company's plate for one of my own.
For safety reasons, I prefer to use camps which close with a screw instead of using a quick-release lever.
-
Some (but not all!) Arca-style clamps have a recessed channel that prevent the camera- and lens-plates from slipping-out provided that you have inserted two little safety screws to the under-side of the lens-plate.
All my clamps and plates are of this type but I was horrified when I rented a $10,000 lens that it arrived with a plate without those retaining screws.
Even though I had bought insurance, I immediately changed the rental company's plate for one of my own.
For safety reasons, I prefer to use camps which close with a screw instead of using a quick-release lever.
I too like the screw clamps, but the Acratech lever clamps have a safety catch on them to prevent accidental release.
-
I finally got the Gitzo GHF2W. I had to remove the stud in order for the Kirk plate for my 500mm to fit. I'm a little concerned about Gitzo's implementation of the Arca-Swiss compatible QR system as the dovetail is really shallow and I have to look carefully to convince myself that it will hold, which it does. I could of course use the Gitzo plate on the 500mm but it doesn't have a feature which would ensure that it doesn't rotate at all (the Kirk plate does); the Gitzo has this strips of softer material which goes against the tripod foot and makes it easier to screw it tight without a tool. I think the design is quite elegant though.
It seems to hold the 500mm really steadily, I can't see any vibration in the viewfinder and panning and tilting are very smooth. The head is really lightweight (about 0.6kg) and feels sturdy.
There is an internal counterweight system with +-3 steps available. Using my 500 PF + D5 I set it one step forward and it seems to be close the correct balance (2 steps is too much). However, I noticed that if I want to really lock the head so that there can be no drift at all, it requires turning the locking knobs with a firm grip. I guess it is not really designed for long exposures.
Interestingly in the Manfrotto web site product page for the head, they mention lenses up to 200mm can be used. ;-) Although I have 2.5x the specified focal length, the weight is about the same as a 70-200/2.8 would be, so I should be safe in that respect. I don't see any problems so far with the 500mm but it is raining or snowing and I am not able to put it to a field test yet.
My overall impression is quite positive, I am impressed with how smooth the movements are and how steady it seems to hold the lens.
-
A few additional comments about the Gitzo head. I think I now understand why they specify it up to 200mm.
With the 70-200, it really behaves very nicely. With 500 PF, if I use both hands to hold and steer the lens and camera, it is smooth to pan and tilt and for viewfinder AF it is precise enough. However, if I use live view and pinpoint focusing, the image is a little "drifty" at that magnification (with 500mm). This impression is accentuated if the TC-14E III is also used.
Here is a shot at 700mm, f/8, 1/500s, EFCS, Qc, ISO 2000 (D850, 500 PF, TC-14E III), the image is cropped by approximately 2x (so the field of view is like you'd get with a 1400mm lens without cropping). I used pinpoint focusing on the eye, well at least I attempted to. I think the image quality is acceptable but I would say getting the shot was tricky. I used live view to focus because it allowed me to be more selective about where the focus is placed and the bird wasn't moving much about.
For viewfinder photography with the 500mm PF without TC, I think the head works quite well but perhaps it is at the upper limit of its capabilities, and sometimes one can get some unintended drift in the image if the head is not locked tight (when mounting the QR plate it is difficult to balance the rig so precisely that there is no drift in any tilt position). I do appreciate the light weight of the head and the smooth controls. I think I will continue to use the Arca Z1 + Wimberley Sidekick as my main head for tripod use of the 500 PF, but this is a lightweight alternative when weight is a priority and if one is careful, it can work, but it's not quite as carefree in use as the gimbal setup.
-
I just wanted to report that I've found the Gitzo fluid head is quite easy to work with when photographing divers taking off with the 500mm lens. The head provides the right amount of resistance to avoid jerky movement and a good amount of support. I really like the counterbalance system also, it permits me to adjust to the presence of lighter or heavier camera body quite easily. However, if using the lens with 1.4X extender, to get 700mm focal length, I find the head is not so easy to work with - in fact I find that no head that I've used is easy with 700mm. I guess it is just a challenge that must be met with improvement of skills.
Anyway I find most of the time I'm shooting mammals with the 500 hand held or by supporting my left elbow on the car door. Setting up the tripod will quickly make deer run away before I have time to take a picture. With birds, I find that I'm more into waiting for the bird to do something and then get some shots and the fluid head seems to work well for that kind of use. Here is an example with red-throated diver taking off (500mm, f/5.6, 1/2000s, ISO 3600, Gitzo GHF2W head and 3-series legs):
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ilkka_nissila/48290896661/in/dateposted-public/
I quite like the 500 PF because it makes it easier to get to the location carrying only so much weight - if I had a 500/4 or 600/4, I suspect my body would quickly start to complain about the necessary hiking in a rocky forest to get to the location. With the weight of the kit that I have this is quite manageable. However, I admit the f/4 would be useful for background separation as well as working in lower light.
I am quite happy working with the tripod for this kind of shots, as there is often quite a long period of waiting before something happens and during those periods I use a slower shutter speed to capture more static shots of the birds (something like 1/200s). Once the bird takes off or is landing I must be quickly ready to take shots with higher shutter speed (1/2000s seems to work well for sharp shots, slower speeds could be used to show movement but I haven't really mastered that). I quickly grew frustrated with the hand-held approach for bird photography, even though it seems very popular now that light weight superteles are around.
-
After several days of photographing red-throated divers in a particular location, finally as I packed up my gear and was ready to go home, one surfaced quite near my position at 10.22 pm. I took out my gear again and was able to get my first close-ups. The light was nice in quality, but not so much in quantity: ISO 12800, f/5.6, 1/100s. I squeeze off some frames and this was one of the ones that came out quite sharp. D850, 500 PF, processed with DxO Photolab 2 PRIME. I cropped about 10% off two sides to recompose the shot. I think for swimming birds, and large birds taking off and flying over the water, the fluid head makes it easier for me to hold a steady velocity during panning and following the movement.
-
Beautiful light on the neck of the loon, very well done considering the ISO.
-
Thanks.
-
Ilkka, That's a beautiful photo, and seems to have remarkable color and dynamic range for ISO12800. I don't think I'd expect such a result with the D810, despite the fact that I've always thought of it as being a very good camera in low light. One other question - was this taken with VR on or off? I'm not sure if the 500mm PF has the kind of VR that can be used on a tripod.
Cheers, John
-
I agree. It is a beautiful capture. Attention is immediately drawn to the bird. The background and the reflections benefit the main subject. Wonderful!
-
VR was OFF. Since the bird was swimming, the sharpness of the shots was mainly affected by how well I was able to maintain the position of the bird in the frame while following the movement. I don't find there to be much vibration with this setup (Kirk lens plate, Nikon original tripod foot, the GHF2W, and 3-series Gitzo Systematic legs at 500mm focal length). I did some lunar eclipse shots with the fluid head with VR NORMAL, SPORT, and OFF, and found the VR OFF shots were slightly sharper than the others, however, this is a bit different shooting condition as I was using a remote release whereas the bird images are shot with my right hand on the camera. With VR NORMAL, the image drifts a bit too much for my taste so I think SPORT is the preferred mode if you want to use VR on tripod. However, I use VR OFF with the fluid head.
When using the Sidekick + Arca Z1, there is a bit more vibration and to counter this, VR SPORT may be used (especially if the tripod is used at full height, and a TC is mounted). VR SPORT makes composition and focusing easier in this case (especially at 700mm). However, I haven't investigated what effects the VR may have on the image sharpness (negative or positive) with the gimbal head. I used it because it made the focus point more steady on the subject!