Magaliaman wrote:
Okay, this may sound like a silly question BUT...….
I've used ball heads for years, and have no problem with them at all. But I recently got a video head as a gift, and after messing with it, it seems to do everything I use my ball head for, but better. Assuming your tripod is level, I cant imagine where a ball head is better suited than a video head. What am I missing ?
I've been a photographer for YEARS and I cant believe I'm just questioning this. Enlighten me Please.
- A Video Head stays Level (assuming the tripod is level) A Ball head does NOT.
- A Video Head can shoot in Portrait mode providing you have an "L" Bracket on your camera (which I do)
- A Video Head is easy to make small adjustments up, down, left, & right, and do it smoothly (not as precise with a ball head)
The ONLY downside I can see with a Video Head is; it makes it clumsy to look in the viewfinder without the handle poking into your shoulder.
I don't think a Video Head replaces a Gimbal for BIF etc, but now I'm questioning why I ever used Ball heads.
Maybe I'm just overthinking things because I have too much free time on my hands
-Gary
Okay, this may sound like a silly question BUT...…... (
show quote)
You are certainly welcome to use a video head for still photography, if you prefer one. You wouldn't be the first person to do so.
However, for any particular rated weight capacity, video heads tend to be bigger, heavier and more expensive than ballheads.
For example, "medium" duty ballheads are typically rated for around 33 lb. maximum weight, while "heavy duty" are often rated for around 50 or 55 lb.
One of the least expensive video heads with a similar "medium" weight rating at around 39 lb. that I found at B&H photo is the Sirui BCH-30, which is 18" long, 9" wide and 14" tall. It weighs 10 lb. and costs $1000.
Compare that to a Sirui G-20X "medium duty" ballhead they claim is rated for 44 lb., which is approx. 2.5" in diameter 4" tall. It weighs less than 1 lb. and costs $120.
If you want a video head with a heavier rating, more comparable to heavy duty ballheads, the price goes up considerably! For example, a Libec RHP85 Fluid Head with PH-8B handle that's got a 55 lb. weight rating costs over $3000. That's actually one of the more affordable! I couldn't find dimensions for it, but it weighs close to 9 lb.
Even a high-end "heavy duty" ballhead costs a lot less... such as a 50 lb. rated Really Right Stuff (RRS) BH-55 that sells for $489, is rated to handle 50 lb., is about 3" in diameter and under 4" tall, and weighs 2 lb.... or the Kirk BH-1 selling for $389, about 3" diameter and 4.5" tall, weighing a little under 2 lb.
An L-bracket can be used on either a video head or a ballhead.
A video head actually might be a better substitute for a gimbal head, than for a ballhead. A gimbal is used with large lenses that have tripod mounting collars, which would work the same with a video head (no need for an L-bracket on the camera). Video heads are also designed to allow smooth panning and tilt movements, too... much like a gimbal. Weight ratings for gimbals are generally less than video heads. Though there's not as much difference as a ballheads vs video heads... gimbals are typically smaller and lighter... and most are less expensive.
Personally I prefer a pan/tilt head in studio... But I'll keep carrying ballheads, gimbals and gimbal adapters in the field!
EDIT: As shown above, the "Systematic" style tripods can be set up for either still photography or video, depending upon how you accessorize them. In addition to the 75mm or 100mm "bowl" Richard found on the Gitzo shown above, they also have offered all-in-one leveling platforms that serve similar purpose. I use the older Gitzo G1321 on two Series 3 Systematic tripods. Works great to quickly level things on uneven ground, which is important when using a gimbal (but less so with a ballhead).
And, speaking of gimbals... I use a Wimberley Sidekick gimbal
adapter.... which is designed for use with a heavy duty ballhead... not a pan/tilt or a video head.