Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Really Right Stuff Lever QR Clamp - Any Con's?  (Read 13377 times)
apq65
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 12


« Reply #20 on: July 25, 2009, 05:41:39 PM »
ReplyReply

In 2+ years of using the lever clamp I never had the issue of the clamp opening unintentionally. There is a fair amount of resistance. The lever has the advantage of having two opening positions--in the second position, the plate can be placed into the clamp directly, without sliding in sideways. This is a particular advantage if you want to quickly change from landscape to portrait using an L plate on your camera. It takes maybe two seconds, even with a heavier lens. Apart from the potential of bending the bolt mentioned above, this is really an ingenious device coupled with precision manufacturing.
Logged
David Sutton
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 880


WWW
« Reply #21 on: July 25, 2009, 06:42:28 PM »
ReplyReply

Ditto to what has been said. I have the 60mm quick release clamp on a monopod with a Manfrotto 243 (just copes with a 40D and 400mm lens) and the 80mm on a Q3 and tripod which copes fine with anything I put on it. I don't look after them that well: they lie in the back of the car, get used in all conditions and sometimes get cleaned, and NEVER give any problems. I have the clamp part under the lens so I operate it with the left hand so when changing the camera from landscape to portrait, the 2 stage lever gives good feedback and is fast enough that my eye hardly leaves the viewfinder.
I like the longer plate in particular in case I get very cold and get confused and take the lever to the half open position without supporting the camera properly (which has happened more than once), the camera is still held securely.
 David
Logged

madmanchan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2108


« Reply #22 on: July 25, 2009, 09:20:07 PM »
ReplyReply

The only con I can think of (and have actually encountered) is that when using 1-series bodies and lenses with their own L-plates (such as the 70-200), the bottom of the 1-series body can block the lever when attempting to open or shut the lever. This would only happen if positioning the lever on the "left side" -- i.e., the side on which the IS on/off, AF/MF, etc. switches are for the lens. I prefer to use the lever on the left side, because I often hold the camera in my right hand and operate the lever with my left hand. You can minimize the issue by positioning the lens a little farther back, so that the front part of the lens plate sits in the clamp; this offers a bit more clearance. There are other workarounds and ways to minimize this issue.

Logged

DaveCurtis
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 454


WWW
« Reply #23 on: July 25, 2009, 11:16:40 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: madmanchan
The only con I can think of (and have actually encountered) is that when using 1-series bodies and lenses with their own L-plates (such as the 70-200), the bottom of the 1-series body can block the lever when attempting to open or shut the lever. This would only happen if positioning the lever on the "left side" -- i.e., the side on which the IS on/off, AF/MF, etc. switches are for the lens. I prefer to use the lever on the left side, because I often hold the camera in my right hand and operate the lever with my left hand. You can minimize the issue by positioning the lens a little farther back, so that the front part of the lens plate sits in the clamp; this offers a bit more clearance. There are other workarounds and ways to minimize this issue.


I have discovered the same thing Eric.

I use both. I prefer the QR clamp at us it most of the time.

I switch clamps if I'm using my Sidekick with the BH-55.
Logged

Paul Sumi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1217


« Reply #24 on: July 26, 2009, 01:54:56 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: DaveDn
I have discovered the same thing Eric.

Eric and Dave, thanks for that little tidbit of information.  I'll have to borrow a local friend's BH-55 with lever clamp to see whether this is a problem for me or not.

Paul
Logged

Paul Sumi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1217


« Reply #25 on: July 26, 2009, 11:40:33 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Taquin
I like the longer plate in particular in case I get very cold and get confused and take the lever to the half open position without supporting the camera properly (which has happened more than once), the camera is still held securely.
 David

David, other that the confusion issue   , does the longer clamp add significantly more security in normal use?

Thanks,

Paul
Logged

brianrpatterson
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 34


WWW
« Reply #26 on: July 26, 2009, 03:04:04 PM »
ReplyReply

I'll put in another vote for the lever release RRS Clamp - got one perched on a Markins N20 ballhead.

I have the lever oriented in front of the camera body so it's a push/pull operation to disengage the L-bracket on my D300. Clamps plenty tight even with the 14-24/2.8 Nikor which is pretty heavy - use a foot RRS plate on the 70-200 VR and swing the ballhead over on its side as a pseudo-gimbal mount. Sweeeeet!
Logged

Brian Patterson
Knoxville, Tennessee
BRP Marketing Design
BRP Publications [Print-on-Demand]

Nikon D300 | Nikon D40
Wayne Fox
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2823



WWW
« Reply #27 on: July 27, 2009, 01:15:29 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Dustbak
Wayne, why do you prefer the lever over the knob? I need to buy some plates anyway so I might also get a lever clamp to check it for myself but I always love to hear from people that have already tried various options.


I use the RRS L bracket for all of my cameras, including the H1.  I like the lever because it's faster to switch back and forth between horizontal and vertical.  I was worried about how secure the camera would be, but haven't ever had a problem.
Logged

bradleygibson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 829


WWW
« Reply #28 on: July 27, 2009, 09:52:41 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: PaulS
If so, is there a special reason you got this version?

Yup, I mention this briefly in the last sentence of my initial reply.

To explain further, I have found that with a short clamp, and a telephoto lens, the system can be front-heavy (eg. 300/2.Cool, which requires sliding the lens foot further and further back in the clamp to get the system balanced.  I have often found myself in a situation where the majority of the foot was sticking out of the clamp--I decided that for better safety and vibration dampening that I wanted a longer clamp.

If this hasn't occurred with the type of shooting you do, I'd ignore this and go for the standard length clamp.

Best regards,
-Brad
« Last Edit: July 27, 2009, 09:56:41 PM by bradleygibson » Logged

bradleygibson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 829


WWW
« Reply #29 on: July 27, 2009, 09:55:06 PM »
ReplyReply

<double-post removed>
« Last Edit: July 27, 2009, 09:55:59 PM by bradleygibson » Logged

MarkL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 334


« Reply #30 on: July 28, 2009, 06:30:04 AM »
ReplyReply

I use my Acratech V2 ballhead with all my cameras. The 70-200 is a bigger lens then I usually use but for anyone that has tried this and the RRS head, is stability and sharpness much improved?
« Last Edit: July 30, 2009, 01:02:46 PM by MarkL » Logged
Paul Sumi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1217


« Reply #31 on: July 28, 2009, 09:25:34 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: MarkL
I use my Acratech V2 ballhead with all my cameras. The 70-200 is a bigger lens then I usually use for for anyone that has tried this and the RRS head, is stability and sharpness much improved?

MarkL,

I'll be able to tell you shortly.  I just ordered a RRS BH-55 with screw knob clamp and I own an Acratech V2.  The V2 will now become my backup and hiking balllhead.

I've been very happy with the V2 when using Canon 1 series bodies and the 70-200 f/2.8L IS.  The only issue is a small one - with heavier lenses there is a tiny but perceptible amount of ballhead "creep." That is, the lens would dip a tiny amount after tightening the controls.  

Paul
« Last Edit: July 28, 2009, 10:17:43 AM by PaulS » Logged

David Sutton
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 880


WWW
« Reply #32 on: July 29, 2009, 03:36:27 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: PaulS
David, other that the confusion issue   , does the longer clamp add significantly more security in normal use?

Thanks,

Paul
I don't think so, it just feels like it does. But it does give more options when attached to a telephoto (see Brad's post above)
Logged

MarkL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 334


« Reply #33 on: July 30, 2009, 02:28:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: PaulS
MarkL,

I'll be able to tell you shortly.  I just ordered a RRS BH-55 with screw knob clamp and I own an Acratech V2.  The V2 will now become my backup and hiking balllhead.

I've been very happy with the V2 when using Canon 1 series bodies and the 70-200 f/2.8L IS.  The only issue is a small one - with heavier lenses there is a tiny but perceptible amount of ballhead "creep." That is, the lens would dip a tiny amount after tightening the controls.  

Paul

If you could do some comparison shots that would be much appreciated!
Logged
Peter McLennan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1675


« Reply #34 on: July 30, 2009, 07:07:13 PM »
ReplyReply

The RRS BH55 PCL offers only the screw-type clamp.  Other than being slower to load and unload the dovetail, are there any other disadvantages to the screw clamp?  It seems to protrude more than the lever type, and might be a little easier to use with gloves.  

I love the panning capability of the PCL head, but don't want to hate the screw clamp.

Logged
kers
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 728


WWW
« Reply #35 on: July 30, 2009, 09:06:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Peter McLennan
The RRS BH55 PCL offers only the screw-type clamp.  Other than being slower to load and unload the dovetail, are there any other disadvantages to the screw clamp?  It seems to protrude more than the lever type, and might be a little easier to use with gloves.  

I love the panning capability of the PCL head, but don't want to hate the screw clamp.


I use the BH-40 with the PCL-1

I find the BH40 strong enough- only there is little space for the levers to turn because it is so compact.

Doing architecture I find the PCL1 very nice to work with-  just put it level and you are done!  and the RR levels are precise; usually my photos are within  0,3 degrees from level.

I can imagine the camera might drop when you work ( too) fast- but it is just a matter learning the right behaviour and it will never happen.
Just let the camera go after you are convinced it is secure- that is all.




Logged

Pieter Kers
www.beeld.nu
Dustbak
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2363


« Reply #36 on: July 31, 2009, 01:29:37 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Peter McLennan
The RRS BH55 PCL offers only the screw-type clamp.  Other than being slower to load and unload the dovetail, are there any other disadvantages to the screw clamp?  It seems to protrude more than the lever type, and might be a little easier to use with gloves.  

I love the panning capability of the PCL head, but don't want to hate the screw clamp.


I use the PCL-1. I really like it. The screw is large and does protrude making it easy to grab even with gloves. The knob gives a true feeling of sturdiness . For my H body it might even protrude a bit more so I can grab it even more easily. The things I noticed are; I should not have the screw-knob at the front side of the body since it will touch (or almost touch) 'fat lenses'. The marking of aligning the L-bracket with the PCL-1 should also be on the outerside of the PCL-1 or a bit better readable. Especially with larger bodies it is quite hard to see. The only time you really want this is when doing pano's. Besides mentioned points I have not found things I don't like. I have been using the thing for almost 2 years now.

I use the PCL-1 on top of my Burzsynski head which is a lovely combination but not always ideal to set level quickly. This is why I am looking into trying another head. (Cube, 405,401 or something like that. Not sure yet which).
« Last Edit: July 31, 2009, 03:00:08 AM by Dustbak » Logged
aaykay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 359


« Reply #37 on: August 02, 2009, 08:49:07 AM »
ReplyReply

I replaced the screw-type clamp on my Arca-Swiss Z1 with the RRS lever clamp.  Could not be happier.   I have now used it for over a year now and have had nothing but positive things to say about it.  

After having used the lever-type "Quick Release" clamp, for the world of me I can't figure out why they call the screw-type clamp as a "quick release" clamp.....should call it a "slow release" clamp, in reality.
« Last Edit: August 02, 2009, 08:49:54 AM by aaykay » Logged
Paul Sumi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1217


« Reply #38 on: August 10, 2009, 12:02:12 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: MarkL
I use my Acratech V2 ballhead with all my cameras. The 70-200 is a bigger lens then I usually use but for anyone that has tried this and the RRS head, is stability and sharpness much improved?

Quote from: PaulS
MarkL,

I'll be able to tell you shortly.  I just ordered a RRS BH-55 with screw knob clamp and I own an Acratech V2.  The V2 will now become my backup and hiking balllhead.


Quote from: MarkL
If you could do some comparison shots that would be much appreciated!

Part 1 of 3

MarkL,

I did a quick and dirty comparison today between the Acratech V2 and RRS BH-55 ballheads.

I used a Gitzo 1348 carbon fiber tripod with Canon 1Ds Mark 2, and 70-200 f/2.8 L IS with 1.4x teleconvertor.  The teleconvertor was used to increase magnification and the maximum focal length to 280mm to hopefully make any differences more obvious.

The camera was set to manual and I used Singh-Ray's Vari-ND filter to to maintain the same shutter speed (1/15th sec) and aperture (f/8).  I used MLU and 2 sec delay for all shots.

The attached image shows the site where the test was conducted.  The reddish square shows the area shown in the cropped images to follow in the next messages.
« Last Edit: August 10, 2009, 12:41:26 AM by PaulS » Logged

Paul Sumi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1217


« Reply #39 on: August 10, 2009, 12:13:31 AM »
ReplyReply

Part 2 of 3

Continued

These next two images are of my control shot, full frame (left) and cropped (right).  This was shot at f/8 at 1/250 sec on the tripod using the RRS ballhead.  Again, the reddish square shows the area in the cropped images.

All RAWs were processed in Phase One Capture 1 Pro v4.81 as 300 PPI, 16 bit tiffs in Prophoto color space.  The cropped frames were NOT sharpened in Photoshop, and were saved as 8 bit JPGs in sRGB.
« Last Edit: August 10, 2009, 01:24:06 AM by PaulS » Logged

Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad