Tripod head for a beast of a lens

[lordcranny]

I've just acquired a 600mm f4 manual focus lens, which I am planning to use with a Nikon D300 for wildlife stuff, when I can summon the strength to lift it. I already have a heavy Benbo tripod, which seems more than capable of taking the strain, but I'm wondering where to start with a search for an appropriate head.
All advice gratefully received.

Thanks

Chris

[Malcolm_Stewart]

I would have no hesitation in using a Manfrotto 393. It's a gimbal head (despite Manfrotto's marketing etc.) and I use one with my EF 300 f2.8L.

What you do need to check is whether your lens diameter (around where the tripod foot is) will fit between the two vertical standards. This gap on mine is slightly over 6" (165mm). Mine cost around £110. Again, ignore the Manfrotto illustrations, it's perfectly happy with both of the U shaped items open to the sky - so you can lower your lens in, rather than having to post it in with the risk of scratching the lens' sides.
393 illustration

I've had mine for around 2-3 years, and it's magic with these long and heavy lenses, allowing finger tip control. The friction is adjustable as is the horizontal pivot point. The adjustable plate (with auto-lock to stop lens falling out!) allows easy balance variation when you add an extender to your lens.

HTH

[lordcranny]

Brilliant! Thank you so much for taking the trouble to reply.

Chris

[Malcolm_Stewart]

Here's 3 shots showing mine in use shooting wild-foul just over a year ago. Eos 1D Mk III, EF 300 f2.8L IS & a 2x extender.

As you can see the horizontal pivot axis passes close to the centre of the lens, and balance is pretty good. (There are other positions which I guess wouldn't be so close.) In the first image you can see the cheap bulls-eye level which I added. This aids getting the tripod's vertical axis true, and helps keep horizons level during panning etc.


Manfrotto 393 from rh rear
From side
From LH rear

Have fun.

[beejaybee]

I would have no hesitation in using a Manfrotto 393.

Seconded. The only sane alternatives are several times the price & don't function any better (Wimberley).

[johnf3f]

I am currently using a Canon 600 f4 is(5.3 Kilo) and was using a 400 f2.8 Mk1 (6.1 Kilo)until very recently and can thorougly recomend the Manfrotto 393. However there is a catch (there always is!) the 393 does an excellent job at a fraction of the price of it's competitors but it has two disadvantages. These are 1. Limited friction adjustment (none in horizontal mode). 2. It does no lock.
I am now using a Wimberley Mk2 which does both of the above but I am afraid to say it's about 5 times the price in the shops! (I picked mine up very cheap which is the only reason I bought one). If you can strech to one they are the excellent - if not have a look at the Sidekick from Wimberley.
Another possibility are the Chinese copies. TRIOPO make versions of both the Wimberleys and they look pretty good on paper - at half the price! However I have not used them, though I have some of their other product which I am very pleased with - check them out and good luck with your new lens!

[beejaybee]

1. Limited friction adjustment (none in horizontal mode). 2. It does no lock.

Not an issue in practise. A gimbal type head requires to be used with the axis (more or less) vertical, so friction / lock in yaw isn't important, and there is sufficient fore-and-aft balance adjustment to make friction adjustment in pitch essential. You can't use any 600mm class lens carelessly, when used with care the 393 does the job.

If you really want to blow 5x the money without getting significant extra performance or functionality, by all means go ahead.

[johnf3f]

As stated I picked up the Wimberley very cheaply (ie just under twice the cost of the 393). Whilst I like the 393 and feel it represents very good value mine has now been sold - the Wimberley is simply much better and covers all needs with virtually any lens with a rotating foot. It is simply better - £400 pounds better - NO! £90 more YES! Nuff said?