Magaliaman Loc: Magalia, CA

That's true but if you watch the video Dave posted (heres the link) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epPSQaYnU8M you'd believe the video head is the one size fits ALMOST all.

Yes, its ALMOST a versatile as a gimbal, and will do everything a ball head will. I Dunno, time will tell, but I think I'm going to put my Ball Head in the drawer for a while and stay with the Video Head. To prove myself right or wrong I guess.

Although I value the opinion of others, I'm not convinced a ball head is all that I thought it was.

Bill P

Finally, video heads are damped, so quick movement from one position to another is hampered.[/quote]

But, Alfred, That's the whole point of a fluid head. Fluid head favors smooth movement over jerky.

Dik

For birds in flight ball heads make the least sense. Conowingo Dam has BIF photographers lined up tripod to tripod shooting Bald Eagles this time of year. The Big Glass seems to be mostly on gimbal heads, followed closely by large video heads. Very few ball heads.
I use a gimbal head on my home made gimbal chair. It lets me track birds whichever way they fly.
The chair and counterweighted boom do the large movements and the gimbal head is balanced and damped for smooth tracking. The dot sight makes tracking BIF with very long lenses almost easy.

(Download)

RLSprouse Loc: Encinitas CA (near Sandy Eggo)

I too used a ball head for years, but missed the precise control of a studio camera support system. (Back in my Pro days I was a commercial studio photographer.) But studio setups and even video heads tend to be bulky and awkward for everyday shooting "out in the world".

Finally I discovered what is a nearly perfect solution for my use, at least - a compact geared head from some outfit called Arca-Swiss (ever heard of them? ;-)

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/966748-REG/arca_swiss_870103_d4_monoball_fix_geared.html

I don't miss my ball head in the least.

RLSprouse Loc: Encinitas CA (near Sandy Eggo)

Cool setup, Dik!

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

I believe you are right when you said, "Maybe I'm just overthinking things because I have too much free time on my hands".
My thought is, everyone has the right to do what is right for them. For me personally, a video head is cumbersome and hard to view because of that pole that hits me when I try to view through the viewfinder. I use a ball head for landscape because it can more easily be positioned vertically and at all points in between.

joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois

They are also known as fluid heads, although some have mechanical bearings in place of fluid pads. I prefer the functionality of my Manfrotto fluid head over all other tripod heads. Its also less expensive than the better ball heads and gimbals.

I have several ball heads but rarely use them. The fluid head is less bulky than a gimbal...nothing to get in the way of the camera. All my lens/camera combinations balance easily. The handle is totally unnecessary for still photography so mine is still in the box. Sold my Wimberley some time ago.

The only down side for me is it tends to become stiff in freezing weather. I don't shoot often in very cold weather.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

I don't like ball heads (Sorry!). I prefer a tilt & pan head. I can set one level and then set the other. Of course, T&P is ideal for shooting video.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Yes! Fluid heads are great. I have a couple of Vantage Tracker 4 tripods with "fluid heads" that contain no fluid. I guess you could say they are faux fluid heads. They are extremely smooth moving in any direction, unlike some other tripods I have.

Dik

For camera in motion applications, video heads and gimbal heads, - for fixed camera applications, can't beat a geared head.

Blair Shaw Jr Loc: Dunnellon,Florida

For my taste it only becomes an issue with respect to the Artillery placed upon it. The sheer weight of some equipment require a more substantial mounting. And as for the handle situation you can use a flip screen or tethered tablet mount for videos as some do or simply reverse the rig 180 degrees with the handle in front of you if you must use a viewfinder. Live view on a screen is better for me personally.

Like everything else, it takes a while getting used to new and different equipment and practice making perfect is never on time ......time on your hands is the only blessing some of us have left it would appear....hahahaaa. at least you have a choice and that's a great thing !

Richard Engelmann Loc: Boulder, Colorado

At a garage sale, I picked up this Gitzo video tripod with a leveling bowl. I bought the matching Manfrotto leveler that allows instant adjustment without messing with the tripod legs. It provides the full-motion advantages of a ball head.

(Download)


(Download)

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

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.

chrissybabe Loc: New Zealand

Video heads, although very nice to use, are a pain to carry around unless you remove it from the tripod. A ball head is much smaller. A carbon fiber tripod attached to your pack works much better when teamed up with a ball head. So use whatever head works for the current job.
I have a good solid arca swiss clamp on the tripod, and 3 good arca swiss plates attached to a ball head, a gimbal and a video head. I can quickly swap between which ever is the best for the job. Works at home and when car based. When tramping only the ball head goes. There is no good reason to lock yourself into one specific head.
In passing I do have quite a good Manfrotto video head but did find that some combinations of hardware caused it to be less than stable (it sagged because of the weight) whereas a ball head didn't. This particular video head might have been better if it had provision to allow the camera to be rebalanced on the head but that means even more hardware.
Another problem with video heads is some of them can be harder to make into universal mounts. Not impossible but harder. I had to machine the top of the Manfrotto to allow adding an arca swiss clamp on top instead of a QR Manfrotto plate. But it worked. Also possible to add an arca swiss clamp onto the QR plate as an adapter but the permanent change is better.
Another disadvantage of a video head (mine anyway) is you use your right hand to adjust the horizontal movement but your left hand to adjust the vertical movement. This can be annoying.
So depending on what you are photographing, where you are photographing it, weight limitations etc make sure you can use any of the head types and can swap them quickly. Then you are using the best tool for the job.

Rich1939 Loc: Pike County Penna.

Add a panning clamp (and maybe a tilting mono-pod clamp) to the leveling bowl and you will have a pretty versatile set up