Site Sponsors
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 51 to 100 of 193

Thread: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

  1. #51
    Subscriber Member tashley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    South of England
    Posts
    3,295
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    Jack, thanks in the extreme for doing that: I think we're all trying to work out how to finesse the last drop of performance from this gear and this really helps. I agree with you and Don: the shots are really really good but there is clearly some movement. Not sure if removing the panning plate would help either.

    I'm now in the wrong place to look at my test files for the Cube on the Arca L plate and won't be back there for ten days but I just looked up my post and weirdly, despite the Arca L in general not being great when attached vertically, at 1/12th it did the best of the combos I tested. Which leads me to think that there are specifics of shake and resonance in each rig that differ. So probably the only way to work out the ultimate 'best combo' would be to head to head the two plates under identical circumstances. I might order an RRS and give that a go.

    I'd say in your shot that there's a one pixel horizontal blur and no vertical - what do you think?

    Thanks again Jack!

    Tim

  2. #52
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Brockton,MA
    Posts
    134
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    34

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    When i can do 3 shot Pano's at 8 seconds per image and get the detail like this with a 150mm than i know i got a rock for a setup.
    Guy,

    the pano is beautiful, the place is just outside of page?

    Blas

  3. #53
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    Quote Originally Posted by tashley View Post
    Which leads me to think that there are specifics of shake and resonance in each rig that differ.
    IME that does not seem to be the case -- even across differing focal plane systems including other formats and even in LF lenses with leaf shutters, that 1/15th region seems to be the most problematic. However what is clear to me, even with perfect techniques, is that differing mounting systems -- meaning plates, clamps, heads and leg-sets chosen -- will allow significantly varying degrees of motion to persist across any given system.

    I'd say in your shot that there's a one pixel horizontal blur and no vertical - what do you think?
    Yes, looking at the original file at 400%, I'd say that's about right.

    Cheers,
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  4. #54
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    Quote Originally Posted by tashley View Post
    Jack, thanks in the extreme for doing that: I think we're all trying to work out how to finesse the last drop of performance from this gear and this really helps. I agree with you and Don: the shots are really really good but there is clearly some movement.
    My pleasure. However, I would correct one point --- many of us have already "worked out" the best methods of capture, processing and technique and are simply trying to share what we've learned with others so they do not have to go through the same experimenting agony we did.

    Cheers,
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  5. #55
    Workshop Member Woody Campbell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    2,120
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    66

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    My cube arrived last week - I finally had a chance to spend a couple of hours with it this afternoon. I've mounted it on a Gitzo GT3541LS. This is a remarkably light and stable combination - the combination weights about 6 lbs 4 oz - a full 1 lb savings over the Kirk ballhead plus Gitzo 3530 that I've been lugging around for the past few years.

    It put my H3D 39 on it with the 150 lens and shot some distant brick walls using shutter speeds from 1/4 t0 1/60 with the mirror locked up. There was no sign of any camera movement at all at any shutter spead. The H3D has a RRS L-bracket that screws to the side of the camera as well as the bottom. It's really rigid.

    The cube is a joy to use - movements are beautifully damped and silky smooth. Knocks on it:

    1. The quick release clamp is really fidgy. Jack - if you read this I'd appreciate it if you could remind me of the spec of the clamp that you replaced it with.

    2. The levels are too small to be useful. I used the pocket level that I always carry around anyway.

    3. The locking levers for rotation are small - if you have large hands they would be a challenge.

    All in all a major and welcome upgrade for me. Thanks to everyone who led me down this path.

    BTW I found a Hasselblad lens bag in my kit that fits over the head nicely.

  6. #56
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    32 31' 37.06" N, 111 6' 0.9" W
    Posts
    4,333
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    Congratulations on the Cube Woody.

    I'm not Jack however the release clamp is adjustable by turning the wheel that's somewhat recessed at the top. It was a trial and error for me with me turning the wrong way and having the thing fly off right after I got it. I been able to get it tight enough now where it really clamps down.

    Or you could replace it with a clamp from RRS.

    Don
    Don Libby
    Iron Creek Photography
    Blog
    Tucson AZ

  7. #57
    ericstaud
    Guest

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    The Arca Clamp is very easy to use, I think it just takes a little practice. It's much safer than the RSS lever clamp, and much faster than a Knob style clamp.

    When I want to undo the clamp I push it in gently and then pull the safety release. I then use my thumb to undo the secondary release inside the handle. The key is not to pull on the clamp when trying to undo the safeties, or they bind. It becomes second nature very quickly.

    I have both knob and lever RSS clamps on different heads here and the Arca quick release is definitely the best designed. A great combination of speed and safety.

    http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...e_Adapter.html

  8. #58
    Subscriber & Workshop Member GrahamWelland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vancouver, WA
    Posts
    5,802
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    564

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    Quote Originally Posted by ericstaud View Post
    I have both knob and lever RSS clamps on different heads here and the Arca quick release is definitely the best designed. A great combination of speed and safety.
    Eric,

    I suspect you may be on your own with this one. I don't yet have a cube but I do have a B1 & Z1 that came with the arca QR clamps and replaced them both with RRS lever clamps after the n'th time when the adjuster & washers went flying. I also found the flex and fiddly locks on the clamp to be a pain to use.

    By comparison the RRS lever and screw clamps are rock solid. Not perfect though but much more robust than the under engineered (IMHO) Arca clamp.

    Each to their own.

  9. #59
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    177
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    Are you guys saying that the lever clamp on the $2400 cube is crap, really? I've heard at least three folks say it is and they replaced it with a RRS including digilloyd in his review. I have four of the RRS clamps and love them, but would hate to have to buy another one - you don't normally have to run out and buy tires when you bring home a new Rolls Royce. Or is this just a matter of some folks not liking the design of the AS clamp while others love it?

  10. #60
    Senior Member stephengilbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Santa Monica, CA
    Posts
    2,275
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    Tim,

    Are you guys saying that the lever clamp on the $2400 cube is crap, really? Yes.

    Or is this just a matter of some folks not liking the design of the AS clamp while others love it? Yes.

    Steve

  11. #61
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    177
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    Thanks Steve, but I guess that doesn't really help a buying decision much!

  12. #62
    Senior Member stephengilbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Santa Monica, CA
    Posts
    2,275
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    Quote Originally Posted by Tim Ernst View Post
    Thanks Steve, but I guess that doesn't really help a buying decision much!
    Exactly. Some people love the AS clamp; others say it's no good. You're going to have to try one for yourself.

  13. #63
    Subscriber & Workshop Member GrahamWelland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vancouver, WA
    Posts
    5,802
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    564

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    Quote Originally Posted by stephengilbert View Post
    Exactly. Some people love the AS clamp; others say it's no good. You're going to have to try one for yourself.
    I'd agree with Stephen on this one. See what you prefer.

    The Arca clasp is small and just a little bit flexible but can be adjusted so long as you are careful not to let it run off the adjuster thread and self destruct.

    The RRS lever clamp works well with RRS/Arca/Wimberley/Acratech plates but you need to be aware of compatibility with some others because they may not grab adequately on them (I have some Kirk plates like that). The clamp can pinch your fingers if you aren't careful. Also it is possible to mess up the RRS clamp if you apply too much pressure to clamp it shut - e.g. I have a Kirk plate on my Gigapan that doesn't quite hold tightly so I used a lens cloth around it to get a firmer clamp which it did but at the expense of compressing something in the RRS clamp so it wouldn't hold a RRS plate any more. Dumb user error. Luckily I had a spare.

    The RRS screw clamp is probably second to none. In future this is what I'd personally stick with.

    However, it's choices choices so what might work for you might be different than works for others. IMHO I was very disappointed with the Arca QR clamps which is quite ironic because just about everything else Arca produces, such as my three tripod heads, are simply superbly made and rock solid engineering.

  14. #64
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    32 31' 37.06" N, 111 6' 0.9" W
    Posts
    4,333
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    I agree with the comments of trying the Cub as is and see if it works for you. I brought an A/S plate the same time I ordered the Cube and use that on the WRS without any hitch. I also used it on the Phase AFD that had a Kirk L bracket. The thing I didn't like was having to adjust the fit between the A/S plate on the WRS and the Kirk. I ended up adding a Novaflex to aid in focusing and ended up not having a problem with the fit any longer.

    I ended up selling the AFD and have kept the Cube as is and continue to use the Novaflex. It took me awhile and after I got it set right I can't see the need of replacing it. Take your time and see for your self if you like the clamp.

    Just my 2 worth.

    Don
    Don Libby
    Iron Creek Photography
    Blog
    Tucson AZ

  15. #65
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,955
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1145

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    I also subscribed to the self destruct learning methodology and almost freaked out the first night. No instructions on correctly using the quick release on the cube. Once I went back and reread Jack's email to me (this time with the cube in hand) where he told me about the second stage unlock I was all set. I've kept the AS plate on mine and I'm happy with it. This week I am going to be using it with a RRS Pano rail (not because I'm unhappy but because I will be doing some panos) and will report back in if my thinking changes.

  16. #66
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    As you can see in my earlier frame of the camera, I have an RRS rail plate on the Cube with a regular RRS *screw* tighten clamp on that rail. I like the RRS screw clamps because it has a big knob and I can work it with gloves on and confirm whatever I have in the clamp is held TIGHT. Also note that RRS makes a rail clamp with the clamp machined in, but my problem with that one is the knob on the clamp is pretty small and the clamp itself is pretty narrow being only as wide as the rail.
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  17. #67
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    32 31' 37.06" N, 111 6' 0.9" W
    Posts
    4,333
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Flesher View Post
    As you can see in my earlier frame of the camera, I have an RRS rail plate on the Cube with a regular RRS *screw* tighten clamp on that rail. I like the RRS screw clamps because it has a big knob and I can work it with gloves on and confirm whatever I have in the clamp is held TIGHT. Also note that RRS makes a rail clamp with the clamp machined in, but my problem with that one is the knob on the clamp is pretty small and the clamp itself is pretty narrow being only as wide as the rail.
    Jack - just curious but did you leave the A/S clamp on and add the RSS rail or did you switch the A/S plate out as well.

    I think your RRS rail plate is performing the same duties as my Novaflex only much cheaper!

    While it's hard to believe at 108 degree weather, I also can see the need for a larger knob for gloves.

    Thanks

    Don
    Don Libby
    Iron Creek Photography
    Blog
    Tucson AZ

  18. #68
    Workshop Member Woody Campbell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    2,120
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    66

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    Quote Originally Posted by Tim Ernst View Post
    Are you guys saying that the lever clamp on the $2400 cube is crap, really? I've heard at least three folks say it is and they replaced it with a RRS including digilloyd in his review. I have four of the RRS clamps and love them, but would hate to have to buy another one - you don't normally have to run out and buy tires when you bring home a new Rolls Royce. Or is this just a matter of some folks not liking the design of the AS clamp while others love it?
    Not crap but the lever is small and you have to slide a safety button on it as you pull it out - it's easy enough to work when there's not a camera on it but the button can be hard to reach when a large camera is on the clamp.

    I've replaced mine with an RRS quick release clamp and I'm happy as a clam.

  19. #69
    Workshop Member Woody Campbell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    2,120
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    66

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    Has anyone had the experience of dropping the head in the sand yet? This is bound to happen to me at some point so for now I'm traveling with a back-up ball head.

  20. #70
    Administrator Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona
    Posts
    4,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    367

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    I actually like the arca clamp, except when I am wearing gloves. The two stage release once you get the hang of it is easy to use and secure as long as you are using plates of the same manufacturer as there seem to be size variations that require clamp adjustment.
    I have replaced mine too with the RRS screw clamp, but remind myself to be careful when tightening it to be sure that the dovetail is well seated.
    -bob

  21. #71
    Administrator Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona
    Posts
    4,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    367

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    I dropped mine in sand once, shook it off, blew it out, and all was well.
    Also dropped it in sea water, then washed it off under the tap after the shoot.
    The only damage done was when I smashed it into the front doors of MIT which are made of bronze. Just nicked a bit of one of the corners resulting in purely minor cosmetic damage. The door suffered more for the experience.
    -bob

  22. #72
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    177
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    I can't stand the screw clamps - they take far too much time (for me) to screw and unscrew (and in my work sometimes a second can mean the difference between getting the shot or not), and then you never really know if the darn thing is tight or loose later on - with the lever clamp it is easy with one glance to know if it is locked - but with a knob you have to handle it to know, and that takes more time. I have a pile of screw clamps in the back of the closet - one for every ballhead I've ever purchased, but I was hoping to avoid that additional expense and pain if I bought one of these uber-expensive ballheads that already had a lever clamp (and some of you say the bubble levels are no good too? Good grief, sounds like an e-bay special instead of the best and most expensive ballhead ever made). I've used Kirk and RRS L brackets and lens plates for eons and have never had an issue with any of them on any of the RRS lever clamps. I've never used gloves that were so large I could not operate the lever clamp, even at 40 below - I have to operate the camera controls with whatever hand protection I wear and those require much more finger control than the lever clamp. Although Don at 108 degrees I may need really thick gloves when touching hot metal

    One thing I found surprising about the RRS lever clamp - they can't repair a previous model - told me they don't stock parts for them. But they were nice enough to sell me a new model at a reduced price when one of mine went bad.

  23. #73
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    4,043
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1253

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    don't expect the cube to be as fast to rough aim compared to a ball head or even a typical x/y pan head. where it shines is not in speed but in accurate fine adjustment, plus the goniometric design keeps the lens more or less centered when adjusting. i use the RRS screw clamp and find it is very secure, offers physical confirmation when tight, fits various bases without fine adjustments, is not fussy and is quick enough for my needs. I can't imagine a circumstance where the time difference between lever and screw (3 seconds?) would matter, but to each his own.

    the bubble levels are substandard, but get you close

  24. #74
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    177
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    I wonder how you can tell if the screw clamp is tight - I'm guessing you have to reach out and twist it to see if it is tight, which takes precious seconds and also takes your attention away from the subject at hand - and then how often would you need to do this? Way too slow for me. And yes, a second or two or THREE can and often does make the difference between getting the shot and not getting the shot (or between a snapshot and a work of art - ever heard of "Moonrise?"), and that certainly matters to me - guess I am weird that way. As noted, I have used different brands of L brackets and lens plates with many different RRS lever clamps and never had an issue with any of them being tight, other than the one I dropped over a cliff one day that got slightly bend out of whack! I'm a lever man and that really isn't my question here since I don't plan to use the slower knob types - it is about the AS lever clamp and now also the bubble levels.

    I'm still in a little bit of shock that such an uber-expensive and highly-touted ballhead seems to have a substandard lever clamp and bubble levels that don't work. Isn't the whole point of a bubble level to get the rig LEVEL? "Close" is not really good enough if you need it LEVEL - I can get very close without a bubble just by looking - hence the reason for not one but two built-in bubble levels - so that you can get it actually level. I guess that is asking too much though in today's marketplace - to have the bubble levels actually work (really, they are useless unless they are accurate, right?). I hardly ever use bubble levels anyway so that is not a big deal to me but it just seems odd to pay that much money for such fine workmanship and not have them work. The Korean model is looking better and better all the time I guess...

  25. #75
    Administrator Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Prescott, Arizona
    Posts
    4,492
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    367

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    My levels are accurate within the tolerance of my ability to see an off-center bubble.
    I set the adjustments so the two bubbles on the head indicated level, then mounten an engineers level on the top and swung it around the top pan. Everything is just fine.
    There are an awful lot of "slightly off" levels out there and a lot of folks don't realize that you check them by flipping them end for end and checking that they read the same.
    -bob

  26. #76
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    32 31' 37.06" N, 111 6' 0.9" W
    Posts
    4,333
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    I had my Cube fall off the tripod from shoulder height (6') hitting soft sand as I was returning from a beach shot earlier this year. Almost caused a heart attack however all I had to do was blow it clean and wipe it down. The cause was a loose connector on the tripod.


    Don
    Don Libby
    Iron Creek Photography
    Blog
    Tucson AZ

  27. #77
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    32 31' 37.06" N, 111 6' 0.9" W
    Posts
    4,333
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    I've stopped looking at the bubbles on the Cube and use the ones on the WRS 1000 instead. So far I've never had a problem.

    If I stop and compare the two sets of levels they really never match so I just concentrate on what the camera says.
    Don Libby
    Iron Creek Photography
    Blog
    Tucson AZ

  28. #78
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    Quote Originally Posted by Iron Creek View Post
    Jack - just curious but did you leave the A/S clamp on and add the RSS rail or did you switch the A/S plate out as well.

    I think your RRS rail plate is performing the same duties as my Novaflex only much cheaper!

    While it's hard to believe at 108 degree weather, I also can see the need for a larger knob for gloves.

    Thanks

    Don
    Don,

    Yes, long story, but I had an RRS screw clamp on my Cube -- but a friend had issues with his Arca clamp on a shoot, so I offered to swap it out for him since I always have the RRS rail with screw clamp attached anyway. So now I have the Arca clamp on the Cube, but with the RRS screw clamp on the rail, there is no net difference in use -- and yes, my RRS assembly performs the exact function as your Novaflex rail.

    Jack
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  29. #79
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    32 31' 37.06" N, 111 6' 0.9" W
    Posts
    4,333
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    Tim -

    The tripod can get almost too hot to touch if I'm outside for any length of time! Added a wrap on the legs so I don't burn my hands.

    But it's a dry heat!!

    Don

    It's turning into sweater weather going down to 100 today
    Don Libby
    Iron Creek Photography
    Blog
    Tucson AZ

  30. #80
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    32 31' 37.06" N, 111 6' 0.9" W
    Posts
    4,333
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Flesher View Post
    Don,

    Yes, long story, but I had an RRS screw clamp on my Cube -- but a friend had issues with his Arca clamp on a shoot, so I offered to swap it out for him since I always have the RRS rail with screw clamp attached anyway. So now I have the Arca clamp on the Cube, but with the RRS screw clamp on the rail, there is no net difference in use -- and yes, my RRS assembly performs the exact function as your Novaflex rail.

    Jack
    Thanks Jack - Wish I had thought of that before! Would have saved me big bucks. Oh well....

    Don
    Don Libby
    Iron Creek Photography
    Blog
    Tucson AZ

  31. #81
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    Quote Originally Posted by Tim Ernst View Post
    I wonder how you can tell if the screw clamp is tight - I'm guessing you have to reach out and twist it to see if it is tight, which takes precious seconds and also takes your attention away from the subject at hand - and then how often would you need to do this?
    Tim,

    No offense, but you're tilting at windmills. The RRS screw clamp is a Quick-Turn affair, so a quarter turn open, reorient your camera, quarter twist and locked. You know it's tight because it wont turn in any further... In use i't's far faster than the Arca lever as you don't have the lock pin to fuss with.

    As for the RRS lever, it may be a few 100ths of a second faster, but I have seen a few cameras dropped because of that clamp opening unexpectedly --- and that was because it has no lock pin to hold it shut... One of them was mine, and fortunately it got caught by the hand-strap so disaster was averted. The RRS lever clamp is also NOT adjustable. Works fine with RRS plates, but mount any other brand and it either won't clamp shut or won't lock tight and no way to fix that in the field. At least with the Arca clamp, you can adjust it tighter or looser. Those two reasons together are why I dislike the RRS lever clamp.

    PS note on the Arca lever clamp: While I generally still prefer the RRS screw clamp, the Arca lever is okay since I only need it to hold my rail. However, I have modified it to function better for my uses. If you take it apart -- yes, unscrew it until the lever comes off -- you can file a flat at the 90 degree mid opening point; a diamond fingernail file works great and you want to take it down about half to a full mm. This allows the jaws of the clamp to open a bit more -- meaning you can tighten the lock further on the shut position and now allow the rail to slide, but not come out of the clamp at the half-way open point. Then the secondary opening position, and you can pop the rail right out the top. In use, this may be slightly more convenient than replacing it with RRS screw, as long as you use the a sliding rail of some sort with a screw clamp mounted.

    PPS on sand: The Cube is a very "open" design, meaning you can easily get to the inner guts without disassembly to clean it. Moreover, I lube mine with paraffin candle wax which isn't sticky. Bottom line, drop it in the sand and for the most part, you can blow it clean with your mouth. Wet sand will need canned air, and any salt water, I'd rinse it under the shower with HOT fresh water and then blow it dry, finally re-lubing with a candle.

    Cheers,
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  32. #82
    Senior Member kdphotography's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Carmel/Tucson
    Posts
    2,355
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    Quote Originally Posted by Tim Ernst View Post
    .... I'm a lever man and that really isn't my question here since I don't plan to use the slower knob types - it is about the AS lever clamp and now also the bubble levels.
    I really think it's a matter of preference, Tim. I like the RRS knob-type better (I'm a screw-man?), but I think it's just because that's what I've always had...

    The A/S lever clamp works well on my Cube, but I still prefer the knob. The tolerances are quite tight, and doesn't allow me to simply "drop" my RRS rail into the clamp---it slides in and then the lever secures it tight. I'm used to the RRS knob releases being quite wide, and allows me to simply place my rig on top and tighten down the knob. Rather minor really. Since the RRS rail will stay on top of my Cube, the A/S lever is actually better because it is lower profile. I still have my "RRS knob" (which I prefer) because it is on the RRS rail itself.

    Bubble levels seem fine on my Cube---won't know for sure for a couple days (taking a short trip). The Cube is exceedingly fast to "level" and I think will be fantastic to use in conjunction with the built-in level of the P65+....

  33. #83
    Senior Member kdphotography's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Carmel/Tucson
    Posts
    2,355
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Flesher View Post
    ....PS note on the Arca lever clamp: While I generally still prefer the RRS screw clamp, the Arca lever is okay since I only need it to hold my rail. However, I have modified it to function better for my uses. If you take it apart -- yes, unscrew it until the lever comes off -- you can file a flat at the 90 degree mid opening point; a diamond fingernail file works great and you want to take it down about half to a full mm. This allows the jaws of the clamp to open a bit more -- meaning you can tighten the lock further on the shut position and now allow the rail to slide, but not come out of the clamp at the half-way open point. Then the secondary opening position, and you can pop the rail right out the top. In use, this may be slightly more convenient than replacing it with RRS screw, as long as you use the a sliding rail of some sort with a screw clamp mounted.

    PPS on sand: The Cube is a very "open" design, meaning you can easily get to the inner guts without disassembly to clean it. Moreover, I lube mine with paraffin candle wax which isn't sticky. Bottom line, drop it in the sand and for the most part, you can blow it clean with your mouth. Wet sand will need canned air, and any salt water, I'd rinse it under the shower with HOT fresh water and then blow it dry, finally re-lubing with a candle.

    Cheers,
    Just caught this. You are the man, Jack!

  34. #84
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    32 31' 37.06" N, 111 6' 0.9" W
    Posts
    4,333
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    I personally like using my Arca lever clamp as I know that when I close it it's tight and locked in place. The only time I've ever had a problem was the fault of the tripod and not the Cube. The holding clamp for the tripod base had somehow come loose and I ended up dumping the Cube on the sand (the tripod issue has since been fixed).

    Like Jack I always use my Novaflex rail on the Cube as this allows me a little flexibility in focusing and have never had any concerns there either.

    Just curious but what are you shooting where a one time equipment check of less than a couple seconds would hinder your shot? That question asked I will readily admit that the Cube is not the answer for all types of shooting as it can be slow and if shooting wildlife I'd switch back to my Acratech.

    Don
    Don Libby
    Iron Creek Photography
    Blog
    Tucson AZ

  35. #85
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    177
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    Thanks for the info Jack. I don't know what tilting at windmills means, but it doesn't matter. As I noted I have used a bunch of other brand plates with my RRS lever clamps with no issues at all (guess I've been lucky all these years), including Kirk and Wimberly. And as also noted I could care less about the lever vs. knob discussion - that is something you guys keep talking about in reference to me but I have no interest in. I don't like knobs and won't ever use them and much prefer a lever since it is so much faster and more secure for me - end of that discussion from my point of view. My question here was only about the quality of the AS clamp (and the bubble levels that don't seem to work), that's all, and it does not sound like it is a very good one. Too bad to spend all that money and then have to start replacing things right away! Oh well, 'tis the state of "fine craftsmanship" these days I guess. Thanks for all of your thoughts...

  36. #86
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    32 31' 37.06" N, 111 6' 0.9" W
    Posts
    4,333
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    Jack - I'm ROTFLMAO with the thought of taking the Cube into the shower with me then afterwards enjoying a snack by candle light......

    Thanks for the tip anyway!
    Don Libby
    Iron Creek Photography
    Blog
    Tucson AZ

  37. #87
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    Quote Originally Posted by Tim Ernst View Post
    My question here was only about the quality of the AS clamp (and the bubble levels that don't seem to work), that's all, and it does not sound like it is a very good one. Too bad to spend all that money and then have to start replacing things right away! Oh well, 'tis the state of "fine craftsmanship" these days I guess. Thanks for all of your thoughts...
    Tim,

    You are certainly entitled to your opinion on clamps versus levers, so no argument from me -- I say use whatever works best for you!

    Bubbles: My Cube's bubbles are dead on zero and very easy to see and use, so I am not sure what you are referring to about the bubbles not working. Is it that you can't see them well enough or that they are not accurate???

    Clamp quality: My Arca clamp locks TIGHT, is of very high quality and is adjustable. Yes I've improved it for my uses, but that doesn't alter the fact it is better out of the box solution than the RRS lever clamp simply because it locks IMO.

    PS: If you get an Arca brand Arca plate (they set the standard) and lock it up in your RRS Lever clamp and you'll see what I mean in a nano-second

    Cheers,
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  38. #88
    Senior Member kdphotography's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Carmel/Tucson
    Posts
    2,355
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    Quote Originally Posted by Tim Ernst View Post
    .... My question here was only about the quality of the AS clamp
    Tim, I think the quality of the A/S clamp is fine. It might be nice to have a "choice" of lever or knob, but I don't think A/S is exactly known to be a real "responsive" company.... The main point is, at least you are able to "customize" the Cube the way you like it....

    Eh, I don't know what tilting at windmills means either....


  39. #89
    Senior Member kdphotography's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Carmel/Tucson
    Posts
    2,355
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    Quote Originally Posted by Iron Creek View Post
    Jack - I'm ROTFLMAO with the thought of taking the Cube into the shower with me then afterwards enjoying a snack by candle light......
    Too much information.....


  40. #90
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    Quote Originally Posted by kdphotography View Post
    Eh, I don't know what tilting at windmills means either....
    It's an old idiom taken from Don Quixote that basically means fighting an imaginary enemy. (He attacked windmills with a lance thinking they were "the enemy.") If you google it, it will come up before you even finish typing tilting:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tilting_at_windmills

    Cheers,
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  41. #91
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    32 31' 37.06" N, 111 6' 0.9" W
    Posts
    4,333
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Flesher View Post
    It's an old idiom taken from Don Quixote that basically means fighting an imaginary enemy. (He attacked windmills with a lance thinking they were "the enemy.") If you google it, it will come up before you even finish typing tilting:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tilting_at_windmills

    Cheers,
    Ken - I would have thought a lawyer would have picked up on this!

    And now back to our normal programming
    Don Libby
    Iron Creek Photography
    Blog
    Tucson AZ

  42. #92
    Senior Member kdphotography's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Carmel/Tucson
    Posts
    2,355
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    Quote Originally Posted by Iron Creek View Post
    Ken - I would have thought a lawyer would have picked up on this!

    And now back to our normal programming
    You're right--- I should have picked up on this, but my mind was still a bit messed up with thoughts of you and the Cube taking a shower together....



    p.s. Really, really, really liking the Cube right now.... I think it's time to sell my Cube "alternative"---the leveling base and RRS PCL-1 clamp directly mounted on the tripod.

  43. #93
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    32 31' 37.06" N, 111 6' 0.9" W
    Posts
    4,333
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    Quote Originally Posted by kdphotography View Post
    You're right--- I should have picked up on this, but my mind was still a bit messed up with thoughts of you and the Cube taking a shower together....



    p.s. Really, really, really liking the Cube right now.... I think it's time to sell my Cube "alternative"---the leveling base and RRS PCL-1 clamp directly mounted on the tripod.
    Leave my Cube alone! Besides it's Jacks fault for putting the idea in my head......
    Don Libby
    Iron Creek Photography
    Blog
    Tucson AZ

  44. #94
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    You guys are starting to worry me...
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  45. #95
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    32 31' 37.06" N, 111 6' 0.9" W
    Posts
    4,333
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Flesher View Post
    You guys are starting to worry me...
    Well he started it!
    Don Libby
    Iron Creek Photography
    Blog
    Tucson AZ

  46. #96
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Bill Caulfeild-Browne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Bruce Peninsula, Canada
    Posts
    2,535
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    184

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    My Cube arrived today, same time as the RRS L clamp for the Phamiya.

    Man, I'm in love - though not so deeply that I'm going to shower with it, much less sleep with it.

    I find the clamp and the bubble levels just fine. A huge improvement over the Acratech I've been using.

    I hereby forgive all the posters on this forum who caused me to drop about 20 big ones. You were right. Assimilation IS worth it.

    My first shot with the Cube/P45+ this evening - with a level horizon, no less!
    Attachment 19668
    Last edited by Bill Caulfeild-Browne; 15th October 2009 at 18:23.

  47. #97
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    Welcome to the fold Bill -- and GREAT first Cube image!
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  48. #98
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    32 31' 37.06" N, 111 6' 0.9" W
    Posts
    4,333
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    Good for you Bill - great image!
    Don Libby
    Iron Creek Photography
    Blog
    Tucson AZ

  49. #99
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Bill Caulfeild-Browne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Bruce Peninsula, Canada
    Posts
    2,535
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    184

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    Thanks, guys. I spent most of today shooting with THE CUBE and am getting accustomed to it now. Interestingly, I think it will improve my photography, not only technically but aesthetically too. (Didn't know that I could spell that, did you?). The movements are so precise that I'm (a) working more slowly and contemplatively and (b) framing far more precisely.

    The only downside of THE CUBE is that it's no good for action photography - I shoot a lot of birds and wildlife and my Acratech and my Sony will continue to do that best.

    I might as well weld THE CUBE to my Phamiya.....

    Bill

  50. #100
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    32 31' 37.06" N, 111 6' 0.9" W
    Posts
    4,333
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Cube test versus Manfrotto geared 410

    I think you've summed the pros and cons of working with the Cube very nicely. Great for when you have a somewhat static shot such as product or landscape however if faced with fast action quick changing then you need to rely on a ballhead like RRS, Kirk or Acratech.

    Congratulations again and welcome to the Fraternal Order of the Cube (FOC)

    Don
    Don Libby
    Iron Creek Photography
    Blog
    Tucson AZ

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •