2,548 Brands 529 Categories All Departments

MAnfrottoTripod Head 498rc2 vs 496rc2

Post a reply

Enter the code exactly as it appears. All letters are case insensitive.
:D :) :( :o :shock: :? 8) :lol: :x :P :oops: :cry: :evil: :twisted: :roll: :wink: :!: :?: :idea: :arrow: :| :mrgreen:
BBCode is ON
[img] is OFF
[flash] is OFF
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON
Topic review

Expand view Topic review: MAnfrottoTripod Head 498rc2 vs 496rc2

Re: MAnfrottoTripod Head 498rc2 vs 496rc2

Post by Jne_K on Mon May 24, 2010 8:05 am

For long telephoto work with a 300mm lens, even a small aperture 300, I would go for the heavier head, the 498rc4. It also has the larger QR plate.

Of course, this assumes you prefer a ball head for your work. I'm not a particular fan of ball heads in this price range. They still don't have the stability of a good video or three way head at the same price, since they set the camera too high off the legs for my taste, but mostly because they don't have a large enough ball to support a lot of weight of you plan to add with a good flash and a 300mm telephoto. A ball head that can support that kind of weight and do a good job is a much, much more expensive proposition, usually well over $400. Unless you can afford it, I'd stay with a conventional head, in that price range, such as the 128RC. It won't get you the slick ball head operation, but ti will handle that kind of load, better.

MAnfrottoTripod Head 498rc2 vs 496rc2

Post by chrgeb on Fri May 21, 2010 11:53 am

Hi Joanie,

I'm trying to make up my mind in buying a Tripod legs and a head to go with far i have narrowed it down to the 190XPROB legs and the 496rc2 or 498rc2.My current gear is Nikon D-90, 18-105 lens and SB-800 flash and for future a battery grip and 80-300 lens.what would you recomend for this especially between the heads. Also please let me know if you have suggestions for other combinations.