palerider
super member
Reged: 06/19/08
Posts: 100
Loc: Rancho Cucamonga, CA
|
|
I'm not sure if this is the right place to post this so feel free to move it to a more appropriate forum. That said, I'm looking to try some widefield astrophotography with my Canon XSi piggybacked on my SV102ED/CG5-ASTG combo. Maximun weight with XSi and longest lens is around 6-8 pounds.
I'm looking at a V-Series dovetail bar VDUP-11 to bolt to the top of my SV RS102 rings and a VDPA Vixen Dovetail Plate Adaptor from ADM to mount the ball head on the bar. Or, I suppose it could also be bolted directly to the VDUP-11. ADM also has a V-Series Bogen Camera Mount with a Bogen 3262 Ball Head. It does support up to 8 pounds but I've read that this ball head isn't all that sturdy and suffers from ball head creep. Another advantage of this configuration is that I can also use ADM's guidescope rings to mount a guidescope to the bar if I decide to move onto prime focus later one. All I would need in the rings plus adaptors. Trying to plan ahead as best I can.
I've looked at tons of ball heads from Kirk, AcraTech, Arca Swiss, Markins, RRS, Bogen, Gitzo, Giottos, etc. Most of them are far too expensive and seem like overkill for what I want to do. The two I'm considering at the moment are the Manfrotto 486RC2 and the 488RC2. Both will support the maximum weight adequately, The 488 is half a pound heavier but it has separate pan and tilt locking mechanisms, where the 486 only has one lever for both. Of course the 488 is around $30.00 more than the 486 but well worth if it provides more stability. I can see the camera ending up in some very odd positions depending on the target and more flexibility to frame the object seems like a good thing to me.
So, any thoughts or feedback on this or experience with either of these ball heads (or ADM accessories)? Recommendations for other ball heads/bars/adaptors that might work as well? I won't say that money is no object or spare no expense. However, I'm one of those guys who believes in over-engineering stuff to make sure it doesn't break. Thanks for your help.
--------------------
Daniel B. Milliken Planetarium
@ Chaffey College in Rancho Cucamonga, CA
|
Doubleglaze
sage
Reged: 11/01/07
Posts: 201
Loc: Pacific NW
|
|
Hi Rider -
I have the Manfrotto 488RC2 and it works great. It has a full range of motion and is pretty sturdy. I've had it in all sorts of positions to frame a shot and the biggest issue I have is keeping the center of the camera field aligned with the scope axis so that I know what it is I'm pointing at. Takes a couple of minutes to dial it in sometimes.
No issues with ball head creep - the knobs tighten down very snugly and I've never had an issue with the position slipping. I use an Canon40D with the biggest lens so far being a 100mm f2.8. I just ordered a 200mm f2.8 so looking forwards to using it to capture the birds and stars, I'm sure I wont see any issues with the ball head in this configuration.
I do sometimes have problems with the 3/8 to 1/4-20 adapter ring at the bottom side - the head is tapped for 3/8-24 so it can be used with a tripod and there is an adapter ring that you can use for 1/4-20 bolting. In my case I have it bolted onto the top of one the rings of my guide scope, which has some counter bores for 1/4-20 bolts. I use the ball head for day time photography a lot so I'm taking it on and off constantly. If I forget to really torque the adapter down it sometimes slips. Good thing I always remember to set the strap of my camera so that if something slips it wont fall off the scope. I'm thinking of getting a second head just to avoid this, but I'm also thinking of using the counterweight shaft of my mount to hold a camera.
I've got a couple of ADM accessory plates and they are very well machined and finished. I have the VDUP-11 as the main plate under my Pentax scope and its nicely made, and I think the plate I have under my guide scope is the Vixen plate you mentioned. I'd recommend any of the ADM plates and adapters highly, its a nice surprise when you receive something that's well made and is at fair price - I do a lot of work with local machine shops and I couldn't get any of the ADM parts made with the same quality and cost as ADM offers.
Cheers
Mark
--------------------
Vixen VMC260L / Sphinx SXD
Pentax 75 SDHF
Canon 40D / 50mm f1.4 / 100mm f2.8 macro / 28-135 f/3.5-5.6 / 200mm f2.8L
http://www.astrophotogallery.org/showgallery.php/cat/500/ppuser/166
|
zAmbonii
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 01/19/08
Posts: 848
Loc: Ypsilanti, MI
|
|
I bought a Manfrotto 484 mini-ball head to do some widefield stuff...but the thing is that I havent really done that much with the ball head in the past year. About the only thing I have to show for it is this image of M31 I did with my 300D + 70-300mm USM III zoom about a year ago.
Although the 484 is rated for 8 lbs, it seemed I had to crank the lever down quite a bit to make sure it stayed. The other thing is that with that zoom attached it was a bit unwieldy in trying to line up the shot. Because I needed to crank it down a bit to get it to stay, it was difficult to make small adjustments in the position of the camera. Trying to hold the camera in one position while locking/unlocking was tough. You almost needed three hands (two for the camera, one to unlock).
I have no experience with the other ball heads, but if you have the money, I would go ahead and get one that has the quick release + seperate pan and tilt locks. I think it would make things a lot easier in positioning the camera, plus I think the two locks would be more able to lock the camera in place. I think the quick release would be great because you could take the camera off do a minor adjustment and put it back on instead of fumbling with things all at once.
I would be a bit weary with the mount that is on the ADM site. The site says the ball head has a capacity of 8 lbs *BUT* they show the 482 ball head which I think only has a capacity of 4.4 lbs, and I think it wouldn't handle a camera + decent sized zoom.
Don't have much to say about the dovetail stuff, I have some homemade type of stuff on my mount. Someone else would have to fill you in there 
--------------------
Check out my Astrophotos on Flickr
C6-N 150mm f/5 Newtonian
CG-5 ASGT mount
Canon 300D self modded + IDAS LPS-P2 FF
Meade 70AZ + Meade DSI for autoguiding
|
Patrick
Postmaster
Reged: 05/16/03
Posts: 7811
Loc: Franklin, Ohio
|
|
Quote:
The 488 is half a pound heavier but it has separate pan and tilt locking mechanisms, where the 486 only has one lever for both.
Looks like you have everything well in hand. Regarding the ball head, I like one that has both the pan and tilt controls. I have the 488RC0 and can tell you it's plenty beefy.
Patrick
--------------------
10" f/6 Truss Tube Newtonian
Celestron C6S-GT SCT
AT66ED Refractor
Oberwerk Ultra 15x70 Binocular
475B Geared Tripod & 501HDV Head
Celestron Regal 8x42 Binocular
Canon XSi; Meade DSI;SPC900-NC
Vixen GP2 Photo Guider Mount
My Astronomy Pages
|
palerider
super member
Reged: 06/19/08
Posts: 100
Loc: Rancho Cucamonga, CA
|
|
Doubleglaze,
Thanks for the feedback. Exactly what I was looking for. I knew I was going to need some sort of 1/4-20 to 3/8-24 adaptor with the 488RC2. I have no qualms about buying from ADM. I've read too many good things about Anthony, his customer service, and quality products.
--------------------
Daniel B. Milliken Planetarium
@ Chaffey College in Rancho Cucamonga, CA
|
palerider
super member
Reged: 06/19/08
Posts: 100
Loc: Rancho Cucamonga, CA
|
|
Quote:
I have no experience with the other ball heads, but if you have the money, I would go ahead and get one that has the quick release + seperate pan and tilt locks. I think it would make things a lot easier in positioning the camera, plus I think the two locks would be more able to lock the camera in place. I think the quick release would be great because you could take the camera off do a minor adjustment and put it back on instead of fumbling with things all at once.
I would be a bit weary with the mount that is on the ADM site. The site says the ball head has a capacity of 8 lbs *BUT* they show the 482 ball head which I think only has a capacity of 4.4 lbs, and I think it wouldn't handle a camera + decent sized zoom.
zAmbonii,
I agree completely with you about the RC2 quick release system with the secondary security lock. One of the reasons I decided to go with either the 486RC2 or 488RC2. I ruled out the V Series Bogen Camera Mount on the ADM web site. Even though the description says it will support 8.8 lbs, the Bogen 3262 just doesn't seem that substantial to me. I could be wrong but better safe than sorry.
--------------------
Daniel B. Milliken Planetarium
@ Chaffey College in Rancho Cucamonga, CA
|
palerider
super member
Reged: 06/19/08
Posts: 100
Loc: Rancho Cucamonga, CA
|
|
Thanks, Patrick. I agree. I just can't see one lever for both pan and tilt being that secure or easy to use. I can live with the additional half pound for features and beefier support.
--------------------
Daniel B. Milliken Planetarium
@ Chaffey College in Rancho Cucamonga, CA
|
Samir Kharusi
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 06/14/05
Posts: 989
Loc: Oman
|
|
My simple advice: Do NOT piggyback! Just remove the scope, etc and attach the camera +lens directly to your mount, assuming you are using a GEM. Piggyback is really only for forkmounted outfits. Any mount will perform far, far better when it carries only a quarter or a tenth of its design capacity. So, if your mount is a GEM, then the question to ask is what dovetail or accessory you need to mount your camera+lens. Perhaps I can give you more pointers if you specify which lens or lenses you wish to use.
If your mount is a fork then you do need a sturdy ballhead, but most folk do this all wrong and end up with major headaches with balancing. So, is it a GEM or a fork? Which lenses?
--------------------
Bored? Peruse my website:
http://www.samirkharusi.net/
|
justabob
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 05/05/07
Posts: 1685
|
|
I agree with Samir. For short fl lens's I just use an old dovetail with a 1/4 20 screw. For longer fl or if I want to guide I put the small guide scope on the mount and use this.
--------------------
http://www.pbase.com/rkn/astro&page=all
Vixen Sphinx SXW
Meade sn6
Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM Lens
Hutech 1000d
Self modded 350d
ST8300c on order
DSI PRO II
Bob
|
palerider
super member
Reged: 06/19/08
Posts: 100
Loc: Rancho Cucamonga, CA
|
|
Quote:
My simple advice: Do NOT piggyback! Just remove the scope, etc and attach the camera +lens directly to your mount, assuming you are using a GEM. Piggyback is really only for forkmounted outfits. Any mount will perform far, far better when it carries only a quarter or a tenth of its design capacity. So, if your mount is a GEM, then the question to ask is what dovetail or accessory you need to mount your camera+lens. Perhaps I can give you more pointers if you specify which lens or lenses you wish to use.
If your mount is a fork then you do need a sturdy ballhead, but most folk do this all wrong and end up with major headaches with balancing. So, is it a GEM or a fork? Which lenses?
The mount is a CG5-ASTG and I have several Canon lenses: a 50mm f/1.4 USM, 24-105 f/4L IS USM, 100-300mm f/3.5-5.6 II USM. The 100-300mm is ok, not great, but it was part of my "starter kit" so to speak. I'm thinking about replacing it with a 100-400mm f/3.5-5.6 L IS USM. I'm also looking at some primes like the 85mm f/1.4 USM and a 200mm f/2.8 L II USM, or maybe a 300mm f/4.0 L IS USM, etc. I do a lot of daylight photography so I need to figure out what lenses I need to cover the types of shooting I do. I'm hoping that I can also use some/all of these lenses for widefield as well.
P.S. I do know that IS isn't necessary for tripod shooting. It's more for the daylight stuff I do.
--------------------
Daniel B. Milliken Planetarium
@ Chaffey College in Rancho Cucamonga, CA
|
Samir Kharusi
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 06/14/05
Posts: 989
Loc: Oman
|
|
OK, so it is a GEM. Get yourself a dovetail that has a hole through which you can use a 1/4" x 20 hex head screw. This will match the standard tripod socket. For short lenses, < 100mm, you simply use the tripod bushing of the camera. However, framing your composition gets restricted, so you can use any medium-sized ballhead to aid in framing. For lenses 100mm or longer, ballheads are, generally, not sturdy enough for astro. A far better solution is to use a rotating tripod collar for your lens. Canon sells these at exhorbitant prices but often you can find generic ones on ebay at a quarter of the price. The longer Canon lenses come with a rotating collar included. Future lens purchases. After 50 years of photography I never use zooms for any serious work, daytime or astro, and I simply purchase my primes at 2x steps; 14mm, 28mm, 50mm, 100mm, 200mm, 400mm. This gives sufficient flexibility, combined with the highest possible optical quality at a price no more expensive than trying to do it all with much slower L-zooms. Even L-zooms (and many primes even) are out-resolved by the latest mucho megapixel sensors. Why deliberately handicap your print sizes, daytime or astro?
--------------------
Bored? Peruse my website:
http://www.samirkharusi.net/
|
Patrick
Postmaster
Reged: 05/16/03
Posts: 7811
Loc: Franklin, Ohio
|
|
Quote:
I just can't see one lever for both pan and tilt being that secure or easy to use. I can live with the additional half pound for features and beefier support.
I'm not following you. The 488RC0 is exactly the same as the 488RC2 except for the camera plate.
Samir,
When you say 'rotating collar' are you referring to something like this Wimberly gimbal?
I also don't care much for piggybacking a camera to a scope because of balance issues. If you want to autoguide, I've found a side by side arrangement to work out better.
Patrick
--------------------
10" f/6 Truss Tube Newtonian
Celestron C6S-GT SCT
AT66ED Refractor
Oberwerk Ultra 15x70 Binocular
475B Geared Tripod & 501HDV Head
Celestron Regal 8x42 Binocular
Canon XSi; Meade DSI;SPC900-NC
Vixen GP2 Photo Guider Mount
My Astronomy Pages
|
zAmbonii
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 01/19/08
Posts: 848
Loc: Ypsilanti, MI
|
|
I think this is the type of collar Samir is talking to. Put it on the lens so the balance would be more even for the camera.
--------------------
Check out my Astrophotos on Flickr
C6-N 150mm f/5 Newtonian
CG-5 ASGT mount
Canon 300D self modded + IDAS LPS-P2 FF
Meade 70AZ + Meade DSI for autoguiding
|
palerider
super member
Reged: 06/19/08
Posts: 100
Loc: Rancho Cucamonga, CA
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
I just can't see one lever for both pan and tilt being that secure or easy to use. I can live with the additional half pound for features and beefier support.
I'm not following you. The 488RC0 is exactly the same as the 488RC2 except for the camera plate.
Patrick
Patrick, you are correct about the 488C0 and the 488RC2 being the same except for the camera plate. I was referring to the 486RC2 versus the 488RC2 in my post. Sorry for the confusion.
--------------------
Daniel B. Milliken Planetarium
@ Chaffey College in Rancho Cucamonga, CA
|
Samir Kharusi
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 06/14/05
Posts: 989
Loc: Oman
|
|
Quote:
I think this is the type of collar Samir is talking to. Put it on the lens so the balance would be more even for the camera.
Exactly. Canon still seems to charge $150+ for such collars whenever they are not included with the lens. But then, they also charge $500 for a lenshood for the 600/4...
--------------------
Bored? Peruse my website:
http://www.samirkharusi.net/
|
justabob
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 05/05/07
Posts: 1685
|
|
Just got one on ebay for my 200mm L lens
here
--------------------
http://www.pbase.com/rkn/astro&page=all
Vixen Sphinx SXW
Meade sn6
Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM Lens
Hutech 1000d
Self modded 350d
ST8300c on order
DSI PRO II
Bob
|
Patrick
Postmaster
Reged: 05/16/03
Posts: 7811
Loc: Franklin, Ohio
|
|
Thanks guys...funny, never seen those before.
At any rate, I'm not clear why they would be better than a ball head...perhaps they're used in conjunction with a ball head? It seemed like Samir was saying to use rotating head rather than a ball head...that's what threw me off.
Patrick
--------------------
10" f/6 Truss Tube Newtonian
Celestron C6S-GT SCT
AT66ED Refractor
Oberwerk Ultra 15x70 Binocular
475B Geared Tripod & 501HDV Head
Celestron Regal 8x42 Binocular
Canon XSi; Meade DSI;SPC900-NC
Vixen GP2 Photo Guider Mount
My Astronomy Pages
|
Samir Kharusi
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 06/14/05
Posts: 989
Loc: Oman
|
|
Much more solid than any ballhead. Here is one way I used to mount the stuff using the over-priced Canon collar/tripod foot:
That was in the days when I thought I needed autoguiding with the 200mm/2.8 lens  The stuff hanging underneath at the front is my autoguider, with a 500mm/8.0 mirror lens (about $100) as my super compact guidescope. By the way, for the behemoth superteles (500mm and longer) I found that it is not necessary to add a ring to clamp around the front of the lens. These lenses come with two tripod bushings and being wiser, these days I would just use BOTH the tripod bushings simultaneously, i.e. the 1/4" and the 3/8", that come on the footings for the largest lenses. You get both security and rigidity added by using both the bushings. It's always a scary thought that a moment of inattention could throw a $5000+ lens onto a concrete floor...
|
palerider
super member
Reged: 06/19/08
Posts: 100
Loc: Rancho Cucamonga, CA
|
|
Samir,
Wow, that's quite a set up! I see what you were getting at in your previous posts. However, I do have a couple of questions. Given that I'm not doing any kind of guiding, wouldn't I need to move the camea + lens forward on the dovetail to balance in DEC? Or is that not necessary? Second, is there enough clearance between the camera and the dovetail in case I have to rotate the camera to frame the shot? In your set up, that's not a problem. If you were to move the camera forward, how much could you rotate the camera before it hit the rail? I suppose one could use some sort of spacer block to provide more space.
As an aside, what's your opinion of the Canon EF 200mm F/2.8L lens? I've been drooling over it for some time now. Seems like a great lens for the price. Thanks.
--------------------
Daniel B. Milliken Planetarium
@ Chaffey College in Rancho Cucamonga, CA
|
Samir Kharusi
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 06/14/05
Posts: 989
Loc: Oman
|
|
Get the longest dovetail you can lay your hands on. In time you will get greedy and buy longer lenses or try all wierd configurations (like my autoguiding). Long = flexible. My dovetail was made from a scrap aluminum bar and had holes drilled all the way at 1" intervals. I use it for all my lenses, up to the Canon 600mm/4.0. Because it is so long, I can also use it for autoguiding, but I do not bother to autoguide these days. I found it expedient to stick a piece of cork or rubber over the rear-most hole. This makes the camera/lens less likely to swivel when the tripod foot of the lens has no soft material underneath. Metal to metal is slippery and I felt uncomfortable using a hex key that hard till all risk of swivel is obviated. The cork or rubber allows you to use reasonable torque on the hex key. Balancing is a non issue since you just slide the dovetail back and forth on the mount. The camera rotates 360deg. By the way, drilling the holes on a stock dovetail does not need much skill. Just a hand drill using 2 drill bits, one for the 1/4"x20 to slip through and a larger drill bit for the countersink for the hex bolt-head. You may have to shorten the hex bolt to make sure you do not screw it right into the end of the tripod bushing. I just use a grinder attachment on my hand drill, but you could be lucky and get just the correct length of hex bolt.
The Canon 200mm/2.8L II is excellent and it requires subs only one-minute long even at a very dark site (3-minutes using a narrowband filter at f2.8).
--------------------
Bored? Peruse my website:
http://www.samirkharusi.net/
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
[Re: 