Really Right Stuff BH-55 LR + Stackshot

[johan]

Before I press the inevitable 'buy' button on this quite pricey tripod ball head to match a STABIL macro tripod, would anyone have any experience that they could share about the Really Right Stuff BH-55 LR ballhead and having a stackshot & bellows set up on it?

Looks to me like Stackshot will fit straight into this ballhead and then I can mount a bellows or other optical arrangement on the stackshot in the usual way.

Many thanks for input

[nielsgeode]

I have the BH-55 (this one to be precise: http://reallyrightstuff.com/ProductDesc ... Pro&key=it)

The ballhead is exactly the same, only the clamp is different. Indeed, the stackshot fits straight on the ballhead. Although, I rarely have the stackshot on it, I use it a lot for my 100mm macro (outside, with the novoflex castel) and I love this ballhead. The weight of the stackshot + heavy camera + heavy bellows is absolutely no problem at all for this ballhead. It is expensive, but highly recommended!

[johan]

Thanks Niels, much appreciated, that's what I was hoping to hear =). Quite surreal to have an answer from someone in Groningen - I grew up there (grote beerflat). Small world

Thank you again

[Scott Murray]

Is this ballhead also good for general photography? I am thinking of replacing the one on my Manfrotto.

[nielsgeode]

I say absolutely, although I would not recommend it for long telephoto lenses (e.g. 600mm).

[Peter De Smidt]

A photographer I assist for has a BH55 head. It is a terrific head: well made, smooth to operate, and sturdy. My main ball head is an Arca B1. I prefer the BH55. For general photography with a DSLR it would be terrific. If you get into really special use areas, there might be better choices, such as using an 8x10 view camera, a Sinar, super telephotos....

[johan]

Thank you Peter. I ordered one. I confess to feeling a frisson of excitement... at a tripod head can you believe it. Christmas present from me to me. Let's hope Mrs Johan doesn't look too closely at my bank statement!!!

[rayB]

I own a BH-55 along with some other RRS heads. Expensive, yes, but an absolute joy to use. I don't regret one dollar that I've spent buying these heads.

rayB

[Chris S.]

I say absolutely, although I would not recommend it for long telephoto lenses (e.g. 600mm).

I agree with not recommending this head for big telephoto lenses, but would extend the recommendation to avoid all ball heads and pan/tilt heads for huge lenses, like a 600mm f/4. A lens like this is large, heavy, and--I think--dangerous, if not safely mounted. For me, "safely mounted" means a full gimbal (as opposed to a ball head, pan/tilt head, or semi-gimbal head, such as a Wimberley Sidekick). For folks unaccustomed to the difference between a ball head and a gimbal head: A ball head orbits a point below the lens; a gimbal head orbits around a point above the lens. So a lens/camera on a ball head, if one lets go, can easily fall forward or backward--potentially breaking equipment or crushing a finger; but with a properly balanced gimbal head, on the other hand, if one lets go, the assemblage gently swings to a neutral horizontal position beneath the head, unlikely to damage anything.

--Chris


----Admin was here----

[johan]

I say absolutely, although I would not recommend it for long telephoto lenses (e.g. 600mm).

I agree with not recommending this head for big telephoto lenses, but would extend the recommendation to avoid all ball heads and pan/tilt heads for huge lenses, like a 600mm f/4. A lens like this is large, heavy, and--I think--dangerous, if not safely mounted. For me, "safely mounted" means a full gimbal (as opposed to a ball head, pan/tilt head, or semi-gimbal head, such as a Wimberley Sidekick). For folks unaccustomed to the difference between a ball head and a gimbal head: A ball head orbits a point below the lens; a gimbal head orbits around a point above the lens. So a lens/camera on a ball head, if one lets go, can easily fall forward or backward--potentially breaking equipment or crushing a finger; but with a properly balanced gimbal head, on the other hand, if one lets go, the assemblage gently swings to a neutral horizontal position beneath the head, unlikely to damage anything.

--Chris


----Admin was here----

Just to update now that I actually have it, this RSS ballhead has a trick up its sleeve regarding Chris's observation. It operates in two ways - the first being the conventional one where you use the big knob to tighten and untighten the tension on the ballhead - so you could forget to tighten like Chris says and it might drop.

But it also has a second method, continuous tension, which means you set continuous tension on the ballhead but you can still move it. I have it on a tripod with sigma 150-500 and there's no danger of it dropping and I can also move it to whatever position I want. So what Chris says, yes for most ballheads, but not all. I can let go when set, and it doesn't fall forward or backward at all.

[NikonUser]

I have a Kirk BH-1 ballhead with the same feature

http://www.kirkphoto.com/ball-heads.html

In addition there is an ASC snap collar which absolutely prevents tipping while still allowing full rotation and limited tilting. Easily and quickly attached/removed.