Modifying a centerpost to get your tripod lower

I used a fairly good, inexpensive aluminum tripod for many years.  It was stable enough under most conditions (especially with the legs not extended... this is common for me as I shoot a lot of closeups).  But as I got better gear, longer lenses, became pickier about sharpness and so forth, I decided it was time to both cut the weight and increase the steadiness.  I had read a lot of good things about carbon fiber tripods.  I did some research, including hands-on visits to the local store, and became convinced it would be a significant upgrade over the old tripod.  I picked the Gitzo 3530 because it had similar size/dimensions to my older tripod, which fit me well.  I was completely underwhelmed when I opened the box because it looked so similar to the old tripod, but I was astounded by the difference in quality.  Night and day really.  When I had my 300mm mounted on the aluminum tripod, legs fully extended, I could tap a leg and watch it wobble in the viewfinder... literally for seconds.  The Gitzo, under the same conditions, didn't budge.  No wobble whatsoever.  You can see vibration from the tap, but it stops immediately.  So I recommend a carbon fiber for anyone, regardless of the size tripod you need.

Gitzo has many models designed for many uses.  I wanted one that would do just about everything, from going to ground level, to fitting me standing up, while supporting my telephoto lenses.  Now, in a properly fitted tripod, when it is fully extended, you should not need the centerpost to look through the viewfinder.  No stooping, no stretching... with a head and camera mounted, it should just work for you.

The only problem is, the centerpost of the 3530 is way too long to get to ground level.  My old tripod had a split centerpost... you could use just a short part of it if you didn't need or want all 18" of it. Gitzo makes a number of models without centerposts, but, as I do a lot of closeups, I find a bit of centerpost adjustment very convenient, much easier than adjusting the legs (In closeup work, a tiny movement is a huge change in composition).  Gitzo's solution is to allow the user to remove the centerpost entirely.  The 3530 has a hook on the bottom of the post, and that can attach directly to the mounting plate.  It works, but it isn't convenient... you either have no vertical adjustment, or you have to take it apart in the field.  Gitzo sells short centerposts... but after spending over $600 (USD), I was reluctant to spend another $100 on another part.

I decided to cut the post to fit.

First, I measured how much centerpost I would actually use in the most extreme of situations, like standing up with the camera aimed skyward.  I found 8" (5" of travel) would do the trick, while still letting me get as close to ground level as I'd done with the old tripod.  Please don't assume my numbers will work for you... anyone who does this will need to make their own measurements. Measure twice, cut once. Obviously, once you make the cut, that's it.  By the way, carbon fiber is very easy to cut.

I didn't want to lose the hook, or lose the ability to remove the centerpost entirely.  There is a mount at the bottom of the centerpost where the hook screws in, and it is firmly epoxied to the interior of the centerpost.  I had to remove the epoxied part that was stuck to the mount by sanding it off the mount, which took some time and patience.  Once done, I simply epoxied the mount into the bottom of the shortened post.  It fits perfectly, and almost looks professional (I can see a hint of the white epoxy I used).  It seems to be just as strong as the original.   I can still remove the centerpost entirely if I want to get lower, I still have the hook, and I have all the centerpost I need.

Some say having a model without a centerpost makes the tripod more stable.  I have not noticed any problems in using the centerpost even at 1:1 magnification, or with a 400mm telephoto. I also have not personally seen any physical evidence that a centerpost, lowered all the way, is any less stable than a flat plate or a leveling base.  If someone learns of such evidence, please point me to it, I'd love to see it.    Gitzo tripods are well-built and the carbon fiber is excellent at absorbing vibrations.  As I write this, I've had the 3530 for over 8 years and it is still solid.

Review of the Kirk BH-1 ballhead

I've read some mixed comments online about the Kirk BH-1, and thought it was time to share my experience the ballhead.

I bought the Kirk BH-1 in early 2003. I've had it more than long enough to know it well, and to have given it a few dings and wear off a bit of finish. It works just like it did the day I unwrapped it, even if it isn't quite as nice looking. Strong, solid, smooth. I have 100% confidence that it will hold anything I can put on it. In a nutshell, it works very well and I like it. I have never regretted the purchase. It works and doesn't get in my way; I give it no thought in use and that's the way it should be. I've had other heads that would shift, slip, or poke me, so having something so well made is wonderful. My version is old enough that Kirk changed the clamp design, but I'm not sure if anything else is different vs the current model.


Prior to the BH-1, I had a Bogen/Manfrotto 3038 heavy ballhead. The 3038 was very strong, but not smooth, and so heavy that I did not carry my tripod as often as I should (the 3038 head weighed 4 lbs alone). The raves about Arca-Swiss style heads convinced me to upgrade.

One of the reasons I picked the Kirk over other models (such as the Arca-Swiss B1), was the orientation of the drop notch. Many competing models had the controls on the wrong side relative to the drop notch. I hold the camera with my right hand, so I want the ballhead controls easily usable with my left, with the drop notch opposite from me. I shoot a lot of closeups, and end up aiming down frequently. Only subsequent to my purchase have other brands followed that model.

Also, around the time I bought the BH-1, the Arca-Swiss B1 was notorious for having lockup problems. My Kirk BH-1 has never had a single problem in operation, and I've used it in every type of weather. As I'm sure most of you know, Arca-Swiss has since resolved the lockup issue.

At 2 lbs, the BH-1 is half the weight of my old Bogen, much smoother, and though I didn't want to admit it, the plates are much easier to deal with than the Bogen hex plates. For the life of me, I cannot understand why Manfrotto has not completely switched to A-S plates (As of 2013, they support a number of quick release systems). With all the more recent advances in ballheads since I bought mine, 2 lbs probably sounds heavy to a lot of people, but the weight certainly falls into an acceptable range where I don't mind hiking with it.

My model is old enough that the clamp does not have any provision for safety stops, nor a level. I simply have to make sure I clamp it down properly. I have a knob release (I am not sure levers existed when I bought it). I have not had any accidents, the clamp is simple and strong.

How strong is it? Once locked, the BH-1 doesn't budge, not one bit. There is zero creep (though there is settling as I let go, but that is tripod flex due to my input; like in all such systems, this is expected and normal). I have never seen a single movement while locked down in 10 years of use. Odd angles? I'd be more concerned about the tripod tipping over than creep. I've had up to a 400mm f/4 on it and it gives just as much confidence with that gear as it does with a compact setup like a Minolta XD-11 with a 50mm (yes, I was shooting film when I bought the BH-1). I've never even stressed the BH-1. Current models are rated at 50 lbs, but I don't recall seeing a rating when I bought mine. Photographers with heavier gear than mine were using this head when I bought it, so I wasn't worried.

How smooth is it? When the tension is on the looser side, it is quite smooth. It beats nearly everything else I have personally used. Only my Arca-Swiss Z1 beats it, but not by much. A number of other reviews I've read claim that there are a few models that are smoother, but if true, I'd say it isn't a concern if you use the ball loose and lock it down tight. If you use your ballhead loose, you'll be happy. I read one review that said the BH-1 is not smooth. All I can say is, my 10 year old model is smooth. That reviewer might have a lemon. However, the BH-1 isn't as nice when the tension is set fairly tight, and clearly the ball isn't as perfectly round as one might expect. As you move the ball around, the resistance increases and decreases, but it is still smooth.

For years, I simply left the tension setting fairly loose, relying on the main knob to tighten the ball. I never gave the tension knob any thought. More recently, I've read about people setting tension on their ballheads so that the ball does not slip even when the main knob is loose. I tried this recently, and found it just isn't workable on my BH-1. The tension knob requires several complete revolutions to go from completely loose to completely tight (so tight you can't move a thing). But the transition from loose to tight is very very short and sudden, and I have not found that "just so" tension setting. The tension control knob is not marked and not indexed, and it is also very easy to turn. My kids change the tension on me all the time. As a result, I expect some of you will decide to pass on the Kirk. This is the one part that Kirk could really stand to improve (maybe they did?). For my use it isn't an issue. FWIW, a close friend has a Really Right Stuff BH-55 and says the tension isn't very workable on that model either. Only the Markins and Arca-Swiss users seem to rely on that feature.

Also, with the tension set fairly high, I found that the BH-1 ball will shift when I tighten the main control, changing the composition (not just settling), depending on the angle. In doing closeups, this is unacceptable, so I just keep it loose. I can't tell you if that is just my copy, or a common design issue. I've read of this shifting/pulling with other brands too. I get the feeling that only a couple of the very highest end ballheads minimize this issue.

The panning knob just works. Loosen it to pan or adjust the location of the drop-notch, tighten it. It moves smoothly and locks tightly. I've carried it over my shoulder with a camera mounted and it has never come loose. No worries.

The bottom line is, this ballhead holds my camera steady with every piece of gear I've ever owned. The BH-1 isn't fancy, but it is a workhorse. It works well enough that I generally don't have to think about it when I use it, which is as it should be. Compared to previous heads I've used, that was a first.

Update:  After I wrote all this, dpreview came out with a very nice test of similar large ballheads. Unfortunately, Kirk wasn't included in this test: Battle of the Titans

Thoughts on a few quick-release clamps

I converted to an Arca-Swiss style ballhead and quick-release system over 10 years ago. As most of you know, this style is a dovetail design and relies on friction to hold a plate in a channel.  When I first started reading about them and took a look, I admit I was nervous about the plates sliding out of the sides.  Once I tried one, I was hooked on them and lost my concerns.  Given a properly-sized plate, they clamp down tightly and are completely secure.

Here are my thoughts on the few clamps I have tried.

Kirk (old style) screw-knob:

The first such clamp I ever used was a simple screw-knob type that came with my Kirk BH-1.  It is a very simple but strong design.  It takes a few turns to lock, but as it tightens, you can feel it grip the plate and you know it is secure.   My model is over 10 years old, and came with no safety stops... no pins, no channels as you find in more modern clamps.  But honestly, it doesn't need it.  Such things are for peace of mind only.  I have tried to push out the plates and was unable to budge them.  This clamp is more than strong enough for any application I have.  I love the large knurled design of the knob; very easy to grip even with gloves.

I have only two gripes with this older Kirk clamp (and they are nitpicks):

First is the length of the knob.  If you use the clamp with the knob pointing back at you, it can poke you in the face.  To be fair, this is common to most screw-knob clamps.  It is apparently a deliberate design decision; I have been told they are long to accommodate more plate styles, but I don't use anything that requires it.  To avoid being poked, I think most people use the knob on the other side, sticking out under the lens.  My old film body was short and the lens was always too close to the knob for comfort, so I solved the problem by using a square plate on the camera body and oriented the knob to the left side.  That worked for me for years until a friend convinced me of the benefits of an L-bracket.  Being poked in the face isn't a problem with larger DSLRs!

My second gripe is the speed of the clamp; it takes a few turns to tighten/loosen the clamp.  This wasn't an issue until I finally bought an L-bracket, and I wanted to switch orientations on the bracket more often.  One purchase leads to another, and the L-bracket got me looking at other clamp designs.

Kirk (new style) fast screw-knob:

The image is from Kirk's website.

Since I'd had such good luck with Kirk and thought I'd prefer a screw knob, I tried Kirk's newer fast speed screw knob.  I didn't like it, right from the start.  It didn't take much of a turn to unlock it, and didn't provide quite the same feedback as my slower screw during tightening.  It's faster, but it just didn't feel secure to me.  Also, I noticed that the clamp pushes the plate out of level when tightened, making the level totally useless.  The new Kirk clamp has channels that act as a safety catch when used with plates that have safety screws on the bottom.  And finally, I didn't like the more-rounded knob; it is harder to grip.

Acratech screw knob clamp:

The image is from Acratech's site

A friend of mine has an Acratech GP, which comes with a choice of either a lever clamp or a screw knob.  My friend has the double-speed screw knob. It has a nice knob and a quality feel to it.  I liked it better than the Kirk fast model, but it still doesn't provide the tactile feedback of my older slow screw knob.  My friend's clamp comes with a safety pin that will catch in the bottom of most plates and will help stop a plate from sliding out if it is partially loosened.

Markins lever clamp:

The Markins lever is nicely made with a quality feel.  It came with a Q20i ballhead I rented.  It is the first lever I tried and it was much nicer than I expected.  I appreciate the speed of locking and unlocking. It requires a bit of force and I don't see it opening by mistake too easily, but you could in theory catch the end of the lever on something.   My only frustration is that apparently my older plates have inconsistent widths and one of them wasn't totally tight.  I was able to push the plate out of the clamp with thumb pressure.  The fix is to get plates from one maker that are all the same width, and adjust it properly.   The Markins has a pin like the Acratech model to act as a safety stop with virtually any plates.

I also don't see the point of a level that is hidden under your mounted camera.  To use it, you have to level the clamp before you mount the camera.

Really Right Stuff lever clamp:

This is the clamp I ended up keeping.  Many people rave about RRS gear and now I understand why. I didn't expect to like lever clamps but RRS changed my mind.  I have the B2 LR II, which, as it was made after 2012, has a self-adjusting design that holds each of my varied plates securely.  I cannot push my thinnest plate out of the clamp they way I could with the Markins clamp.  Every plate (all Kirk plates) I own is 100% secure in this clamp.  I'm not saying every plate ever made will work, just that all of my Kirk plates work.

The lever wraps around the edge of the clamp and always ends up under your camera or lens, giving it more protection from an accidental tug (which requires a fair amount of force anyway).   The safety mechanism is the same as the new Kirk clamp; channels which require screws on the plates to stop an accidental slide.   The build quality is excellent; it feels beefy and secure in use.  While I would like an extra lock on the lever for my own peace of mind, I don't think it really needs one.  In actual use, I never give it any thought; I just know it is secure.

It has a scale on both sides of the clamp with marks every 1mm.  However, my L-bracket is fat enough that it covers most of the marks.  I can see the larger marks, just not every 1mm.

General observations:

A brand I would like to try, but have never had a chance, is Hejnar.  I like the short knob versions.

Another clamp design that looks interesting, but does not fit my Z1, is FLM's SRB-60 screw knob clamp.

In screw knob clamps, I found a trade-off between speed and my sense of security.  I'd rather feel secure.

One of the benefits of the lever clamps (this applies to both Markins and RRS, and a few other brands) is that the lever is low-profile, not jutting out above or below the clamp itself.  I can orient the RRS clamp in nearly every direction in my ballhead without hitting anything (it barely touches the base when the lever side is down in the drop notch, but this isn't a problem in practice).  Screw-knobs can hit the sides, base, or other controls on some heads, making some orientations awkward in use.  An L-bracket obviates most of those issues when they occur. 

On a monopod, I prefer a slow screw knob like my old Kirk clamp.  I think it is easier to tighten in that situation.

On a tripod, since I use an L-bracket, I like the speed of the lever.  If I didn't use an L-bracket, I would not care either way. 

What works for you is a matter of preference.