imagemeister wrote:
All video heads are 2-way pan/tilt !
.
You're right, but there's good pan/tilt and there's bad. I'm probably more familiar with fluid heads than most of you as I spent several years shooting TV newsfilm with one. In those days they were big but very good and very dependable..
jradose wrote:
I understand that a "pan and tilt" tripod head is designed, and best used for video shooting. But, does anyone use a pan and tilt tripod head for still photography? If so, any recommendations on ease of use and product to consider?
Lots of people do. There are two types of "pan and tilt" heads. Video heads have fluid damping and balancing springs for smooth motion and to keep the camera from flopping about. Other heads do not have damping, are usually designed for monopod use where you don't want the camera flopping over to the side.
The drawback with these heads is that you have to level the tripod. Most photo tripods do not have built in levelers, so you either add a leveler or you adjust the legs (using a bubble level). With practice, leveling a tripod by adjusting the legs can be done pretty quickly; just not as quickly as leveling with a leveler or a ball head. The other drawback is that video heads can be pretty big and heavy.
But there are a lot of folks that swear by these heads.
My recommendation for photo use is to get a head that has Arca compatibility. Sirui makes Arca compatible video heads; I have one of their smaller ones and love it. But for still photography I usually use an Acratech ball head or a gimbal head (with big lenses shooting wildlife).
Bill P wrote:
You're right, but there's good pan/tilt and there's bad. I'm probably more familiar with fluid heads than most of you as I spent several years shooting TV newsfilm with one. In those days they were big but very good and very dependable..
They were BIG because the cameras were ! - Today, not so much !
.
[quote=jcboy3]The drawback with these heads is that you have to level the tripod. Most photo tripods do not have built in levelers, so you either add a leveler or you adjust the legs (using a bubble level). With practice, leveling a tripod by adjusting the legs can be done pretty quickly; just not as quickly as leveling with a leveler or a ball head. The other drawback is that video heads can be pretty big and heavy.
My Manfroto tripod includes a bubble level as does my 3-way Manfroto pan/tilt head.
I use a pan and tilt head with a red dot sight on my Df for birds in flight
jradose wrote:
I understand that a "pan and tilt" tripod head is designed, and best used for video shooting. But, does anyone use a pan and tilt tripod head for still photography? If so, any recommendations on ease of use and product to consider?
A pan and tilt is not best for video shooting, for that a fluid head is best! A pan and tilt is mostly used for still shooting, and it was designed for it!
jradose wrote:
I understand that a "pan and tilt" tripod head is designed, and best used for video shooting. But, does anyone use a pan and tilt tripod head for still photography? If so, any recommendations on ease of use and product to consider?
I use 3-way pan/tilt heads whenever my lens has a rotating tripod mount. I have a Manfrotto 391RC2, Bogen 3030 and Bogen 3047 - the one I use depends on which camera or lens I’m using.
Gene51
Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)
jradose wrote:
I understand that a "pan and tilt" tripod head is designed, and best used for video shooting. But, does anyone use a pan and tilt tripod head for still photography? If so, any recommendations on ease of use and product to consider?
I purchased an Arca Swiss Z1 ball head after my Cambo geared head, which I used to use with my view camera, wore out. Aside from the savings in weight, I found the Z1 to be more than adequate and easier to set up and use. I also use a gimbal when I go out with a long, collared lens and I know I won't be moving much. Cheap ball heads, like cheap tripods that people often mount them on, are a complete waste of time and money. Anyone who dislikes ball heads probably has never used a Markins, RRS or Arca ball head. They are not the same as the under $200 crop of ball heads.
rmalarz wrote:
I have used a pan/tilt head exclusively for 65 years, or so. I wouldn't use anything else.
--Bob
Agreed! I have never sat around contemplating my navel while wondering, "Would a ball head improve my photographs?"
aellman wrote:
Agreed! I have never sat around contemplating my navel while wondering, "Would a ball head improve my photographs?"
Wow! May I congratulate you on your wise approach to a non-problem, we need more of this good thinking. Too many here are constantly wailing over first world problems.
speters wrote:
A pan and tilt is not best for video shooting, for that a fluid head is best! A pan and tilt is mostly used for still shooting, and it was designed for it!
A fluid head IS a 2-way pan/tilt ! - and, it is best for video !
Bill P wrote:
Wow! May I congratulate you on your wise approach to a non-problem, we need more of this good thinking. Too many here are constantly wailing over first world problems.
We all determine our own priorities. World events and politics mean nothing to me. The issue of tripod heads fascinates me.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.