Spec me a tripod head please...

King Damager · 16 May 2013 at 17:50

I'm sure he'll chime in in a bit

kd

dannyjo22 · 16 May 2013 at 18:02

Thanks KD, quite cool that he did a video while windsurfing

Interested to hear how this stacks up against the similar priced Manfrotto 54 or 55

mrk · 16 May 2013 at 18:12

How dare you post my video!!!

It's a great head the Calumet, for £109 it's certainly way above in terms of performance and features. I'll be giving it a full workout over Europe next month so will post back after that but for now it's been used for regular stuff.

I checked out some of the Manfrotto heads on sale at Calumet's London store in Drummon Street the other week and they seemed very good for what they offer but not for the price they're commanding IMO. I don't remember if I looked at the models you mention above but they had a selection on display which you could play with.

Similarly I didn't feel that Calumet's smaller siblings of the 7049 were all that either, they felt a bit light and too small whereas the 7049 is kind of beastly in size without the weighty bulk it appears to carry.

Raymond Lin · 16 May 2013 at 22:36

dannyjo22 said:
Sorry for the bump but I remember this thread and need another ball to replace my 496. What attachment plate did you get that with Raymond? I presume it's the 055 series?

Trying to decide whether to get that or the 054. Then there's the different plates RC4, Q2 or Q5!

I got the RC4 and to be honest I am not a big fan of it, you need a coin to lock and unlock it. Should have got a Q2.

dannyjo22 · 16 May 2013 at 22:39

Thanks mrk and Ray, food for thought.

Raymond Lin · 16 May 2013 at 22:43

p.s. I have a video head with Q5 plate too...not sure why they are so expensive as it's awkward to put on, Q2 is the most convient for me on a shoot.

But I don't think the MH057M0 comes with a Q2 plate.

dannyjo22 · 16 May 2013 at 23:13

Ah right I didn't realise your's was a 57 I assumed it was a 55. Damn I thought the 55 over the 54 was overkill weight wise for me

dannyjo22 · 26 Jul 2013 at 21:44

mrk quick question about the 7049, the panning function how sloppy/slack can you make it and is it smooth and adjustable panning?

D.P. · 26 Jul 2013 at 22:27

On the higher budget end I have a Really Right stuff BH-55. A BH-40 might b just what you are looking for. A finer head you wont find.

mrk · 26 Jul 2013 at 22:45

dannyjo22 said:
mrk quick question about the 7049, the panning function how sloppy/slack can you make it and is it smooth and adjustable panning?

In words?
It can go from this:
[_ _ _ _]

To this:
[___ ___ ___ ___]

On a serious note, you can make it smooth as you like really, it is dampened quite well:

Edit*
Lol just realised that video was done in ISO3200... Noiseless in HD. I do love this sensor.

dannyjo22 · 27 Jul 2013 at 01:43

D.P. said:
On the higher budget end I have a Really Right stuff BH-55. A BH-40 might b just what you are looking for. A finer head you wont find.

They look very nice, bit more than I want to spend really

mrk said:
In words?
It can go from this:
.

Awesome thanks, ditched the idea of getting another manfrotto and will get the 7049 instead

Raymond Lin · 27 Jul 2013 at 02:06

Just checked mine and it's fine, like mrk's ball there.

Must be your ball head, bad copy i guess.

Although I have to confess that I have it not on a tripod, but this monopod. In this video, the head on the monopod is a video head and it this video head has no panning feature, yet they are able to pan due to the ball joint on the feet. So it actually pan at the bottom. Therefore I never had to unlock the panning lever before (I did to test it out tonight though).

http://vimeo.com/26869155

dannyjo22 · 27 Jul 2013 at 03:32

Yeah I think mine is definately a friday afternoon build. The whole friction adjuster is just awful. The pan undone it's impossible to turn the pan in your hands, it has to be mounted and still take quite a few pounds of force. Then there is the broken lever

It's nice and light though