Arca Cube Vs Z1?

[Laurent]

I can easily imagine that working with the Cube is a more appealing option and it is most likely a charm to work with. Is it however worth the extra $1200 more then the Arca Z1 double pan? Do you feel it helps you generate extra money? Is it really worth the investment? Are there some pictures the Cube would allow you to take that the Arca Z1 wouldn’t? I would love to buy the Cube but I find the price a little prohibitive and believe the Z1 would give me the same results. Am I wrong?

 

[GrahamWelland]

What you lack with the Z1 and any ball solution is the geared precision for setting the camera up. If you need speed then that might not be important to you ...

Arca also now have a new solution called the D4 / D4m that provide a slightly cheaper entry point than the cube and with geared/non-geared options.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

I use a Z1 and have no desire for a cube at all. For me i shoot many different things including people and fashion so the cube for me is just to slow to work with. The Z1 on the other hand is very fast to work with and very very solid as well. Really a matter of preference. The cube is easier to get level and has great gearing on it the Z1 has no gears so everything you do it is up to you not the head.

 

[cly]

If it's not a Cube, I would rather look at something like the Z2. IMHO, the big problem with classic ball heads is managing two ways at the same time. If you can adjust them separately (as with the Z2) things get much easier. But: this is still no substitute for geared movements.

Chris

 

[David Duffin]

I have a cube, and both Arca Z1 and P0 ballheads. Because of the excess weight of the Z1, its bulk, and the amount of knob travel necessary to adjust the head position, I find myself almost always avoiding it.

The Arca P0 is smaller, lighter, and a lot easier to work with. Adjustments are rapid and positive. The cube gets used the most tho, it's also very easy to handle and its bubble levels are easily read. Highly recommended!

 

[gazwas]

Geared and ball heads are like chalk and cheese. Completely different in every way and are suited to very different shooting styles. Not sure why wanting a Cube (geared head) would make you consider a Z1 (ball head) just to save money.

Now, if you had said is a Cube worth the investment over a Manfrotto 405/410 then that would be a totally different.

 

[routlaw]

You might also consider another couple of options, links below. The first I have had no experience with but understand its a nice leveling head. The second which I do own and use almost daily is the Linhof 3 way leveling head. Its very light weight, yet quite rigid even for 4x5 field cameras and a Betterlight scan back and once you get used to it, its very easy to use and level your camera with. Also if you can wait awhile Linhof is scheduled to come out with a very similar head to the Cube, but how much cheaper I have no idea.

http://www.thelevelhead.com/

http://www.linhof.de/levelling_heads.html

Hope this helps.

Rob

 

[Audii-Dudii]

Now, if you had said is a Cube worth the investment over a Manfrotto 405/410 then that would be a totally different.

As another data point, I'm in the process of transitioning from a Manfrotto 405 to an Arca Cube and I have to say I'm not yet completely sold on it. For one thing, the 405 has geared movements on all three axes of rotation whereas the Cube has geared movements on only two, which is a bit less convenient for me given my method of working.

I also find the Cube's geared movements aren't linear in terms of the effort required to turn the knobs; i.e., it takes more effort to turn them when they're close to the middle of their range than at the ends, which is sort of annoying, as fine movements around the midpoint require me to use two hands to turn the knobs on each side, rather than one hand to turn the knob on just one side (and this isn't related to the friction adjustments, either, as mine are set at the minimum). Of course, I bought my Cube used, so perhaps this idiosyncracy is unique to this particular unit and not representative of Cubes in general. (Rod Klukas has offered to check it out for me and get it fixed if necessary, so we'll see.)

Overall, though, I suspect I will ultimately embrace it -- what it does well, it does very well indeed! -- but if mine is anything to go by, it's not without its quirks.

 

[Laurent]

What appeals to me with the Z1 is the speed of operation and precision. The Cube seams more precise but since I love to photograph different things I am worried the Cube would be slow to operate in certain cases. I feel the Z1 is more versatile.

 

[woodyspedden]

As another data point, I'm in the process of transitioning from a Manfrotto 405 to an Arca Cube and I have to say I'm not yet completely sold on it. For one thing, the 405 has geared movements on all three axes of rotation whereas the Cube has geared movements on only two, which is a bit less convenient for me given my method of working.

I also find the Cube's geared movements aren't linear in terms of the effort required to turn the knobs; i.e., it takes more effort to turn them when they're close to the middle of their range than at the ends, which is sort of annoying, as fine movements around the midpoint require me to use two hands to turn the knobs on each side, rather than one hand to turn the knob on just one side (and this isn't related to the friction adjustments, either, as mine are set at the minimum). Of course, I bought my Cube used, so perhaps this idiosyncracy is unique to this particular unit and not representative of Cubes in general. (Rod Klukas has offered to check it out for me and get it fixed if necessary, so we'll see.)

Overall, though, I suspect I will ultimately embrace it -- what it does well, it does very well indeed! -- but if mine is anything to go by, it's not without its quirks.

I have the Arca Swiss Cube and love it. The only drawback is the weight. If you use it with a rigid systematic tripod e.g. Gitzo 5541 the combination of the two is very heavy indeed (or at least for a 74 year old like me)

I have started to use a new option for me............the Gitzo 3780. This is a lightweight magnesium head and it has a stud for connection to the camera. Of course this means no QR capability but the stability is terrific and the ball head is extremely easy to use. In order to use in the portrait orientation you must set the ball head to go into the slot which means of course a few minor adjustments to get the same view as the landscape mode. I will know in a few weeks of shooting whether this a minor problem or gives me fits. The Gitzo head is about $350 so not a bank breaker like the new Arca/Swiss D4 and D5 models which can set you back over a grand!

Just another option to consider.

Woody

 

[kdphotography]

If landscape is the only calling, then the Cube is a great head to have albeit at a premium price. It makes things so easy---in contrast think about leveling with a ballhead, wearing gloves, and shivering uncontrollably in the early hours....

I photograph a lot of other things, so three other ballheads are in use in various capacities---and much faster than the Cube.

 

[GrahamWelland]

The situation seems pretty simple to me.

If you want a geared head then you'll have the advantages of precision and hold with micro-adjustment such as is provided by the Cube (& variants) or something like the Manfrotto 405/410. However, this isn't ideal if you want speed and flexibility to move the camera around quickly.

If you want a super stable and smooth ballhead solution, such as the Z1 or lot's of other competitive heads, then you'll have the advantages of speed of movement by hand without having to turn dials etc etc. Personally, I still have an Arca B1G & B1 and they are the smoothest ballheads I've ever owned. I'm sure that the Z1 is probably the latest greatest incarnation of these heads although I'm not sure what the differences really are.

So, as mentioned earlier in the thread, these are really chalk & cheese comparisons. You can certainly do everything with a ballhead that you can do with the geared head, but the problem is with precise movements and potential shift in position when you lock it down. For landscape & still life kind of work the geared head advantages can be significant. For situations where you want to be able to move the head quickly and smoothly and adjust on the fly, the geared head isn't the best choice and a ballhead works very well.

 

[Audii-Dudii]

If you want a geared head then you'll have the advantages of precision and hold with micro-adjustment such as is provided by the Cube (& variants) or something like the Manfrotto 405/410. However, this isn't ideal if you want speed and flexibility to move the camera around quickly.

One nice thing about the Manfrotto 405/410 that I do miss with the Cube is the ability to disengage the geared knobs from the geared tracks by turning large, spring-loaded collars that are coaxial with each knob. In turn, this allows you to then make large movements with the head quickly and when you release the collar(s), the gears re-engage and you can then make fine adjustments. Depending upon how much movement you need to make, this potentially can speed up their operation considerably as compared to the Cube...

 

[etrump]

I agree with comments on the 405. The downside on the 405 is it uses a non-standard plate and cannot easily be retrofitted with one. It is also much larger than a cube and does not pan once leveled with another component.

 

[archivue]

One nice thing about the Manfrotto 405/410 that I do miss with the Cube is the ability to disengage the geared knobs...

for that reason, i will buy an arca D4 when it will be available !

 

[rhsu]

what would be interesting X-breeding of the two above is Z1 (or any lightweight ball heads) on top of a leveller ie Nodal Ninja EZ-Leveler II (1/2 the weight of the Manfrotto 338) different to Acratech leveler!

You get quick action from the ball head and allowing fine adjustment.

I was seriously considering the Cube (or the Korean look alike) and then Linhof 3D (still not released yet). I too needed a quick action and then find tuning and also very LIGHT weight for trekking up mountains!

 

[tsjanik]

I haven't used, or even seen a cube, so I can't comment on that; but I must say it reminds me of a large variation of a gionometer used to position a crystal in x-ray diffraction. I do use a Z1 and can't praise it highly enough. I got it for use with a Pentax 67 and lenses up to 500mm. I can adjust the tension such that I can reposition the camera without any creep or flop. My only regret is that I didn't get the double pan version.

Tom

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Tom you just missed I had the TopPan for sale too. Bummer

The DP is really nice. I agree I have no creep or anything associated with ball heads on the Z1. I have tried them all and like this the best for a ball head. Maybe someday i will get a D4 as a compliment head to have but the Z1 works for me.

 

[yatlee]

I'm curious to find out how the D4 comapring to the Linhof 3D Micro. I have the 3D micro on order.

 

[Laurent]

Looking at the Z1 Double Pan I am confused as to what plate would be good with my H4D-40. Could someone help me a bit on that? Also would the same plate work with a D2X?