What are anybody's thoughts on this little marvel of modern day retro engineering and craftmanship? I truly admire its style of artistic expression within the realm of an otherwise ample plethora of mundane choices for hiking cane jewelery. It very well may be a paradoxically fleeting ideal where function meets form and style denies to take a back seat. It just simply seems to scream class while demanding that it be mounted high atop the Gitzo hiking stick monopod.
#1. "RE: Acratech Ballhead" | In response to Reply # 0BJNicholls Charter MemberThu 29-Nov-01 10:00 PM
It looks like a great design with a creative mind tackling the ballhead problem from a fresh perspective. Any idea if there's a way to set a minimum ball tension?
I wish someone would come up with a true lever action quick release for the Arca-type clamp, rather than the knob-and-stick that they all use. And a safety interlock would be nice too. The Norstar folks came up with a nice concept, but they unfortunately didn't make the clamp so it would work with existing Arca plates:
Plus the Northstar plates are pretty lame looking compared to Kirk or RRS plates.
#2. "RE: Acratech Ballhead" | In response to Reply # 1SnakePlissken Basic MemberThu 29-Nov-01 10:43 PM
I'm not sure about the minimum ball tension spec's, but when looking at the picture it appears the ball cradle is lined with a rubber bushing. I would assume the lower large adjusting knob could possibly vary ball tension from loose to the fully tightened state. The manufacturer guarantees the ball would not move when fully tightened. I would assume there must be degrees of tension in between.
I agree with your want and/or need of a lever action release for Arca style clamp w/safety pin or clip. A person would think that a manufacturer would realize this shortcoming as a marketing advantage and adopt such a design into there ballhead systems. Can they be so ignorant of such a useful idea or is there some reason they do not want to adopt and develop the concept? The lever action would be so much more convenient and maybe provide another degree of safety since the lever would either be completely off or on with a simple flip of the lever.
Maybe users need to start voicing displeasure to these manufacturers about some of these design shortcomings and then they may start to think more intensely about these new concepts. I think the lever action would be a great new addition to the Arca clamp design.
#3. "RE: Acratech Ballhead" | In response to Reply # 0
#4. "RE: Acratech Ballhead" | In response to Reply # 3BJNicholls Charter MemberFri 30-Nov-01 01:09 PM
I'd like to know as well. The Acratech is rated at 25lbs and the Markins at over 90lbs. I'll never load the Markins to even 25lbs, but I believe the "excess" capacity is part of why the tension adjustment is so precisely controllable for "flop free" articulation. The lesser rated ballheads I've owned all tended to be either tightened down firmly or too loose to let go of my camera - with the Markins (and I believe other high load rated heads) there is a lot of middle ground.
My favorite aspect of the Acratech design is the way it is open to easy transition from horizontal to vertical orientation. No need to align the platform post with a slot in the clamping body.
#5. "RE: Acratech Ballhead" | In response to Reply # 0
Now you've done it. Here I was all ready to convert my p/t head to an A-S style QR, and you go and tempt me with absolutely delicious looking ball head. Now THIS appeals to me. The range of motion and freedom of use looks to be far superior to other designs. It looks like an ideal outdoor, hiking friendly mount. Looks like I might convert the p/t QR mount, and reserve it for studio use.