Quick Coupler H or ArcaSwiss type cl&

bahngeist

New Member
I currently have a Linhof Profi II ballhead w/quick release cl& attached to a Gitzo 1226 tripod. I have a Linhof generic plate attached to the foot of a 503CW, and find it problematic at times to attach the camera to the cl& (hard to line up, doesn’t catch sometimes, etc.). I am considering having the Linhof cl& replaced with either a Hassy Quick Coupler H or a Really Right Stuff (Arca Swiss type ) cl&. If I go with the latter, I will likely switch out the stock Hassy foot with one that fits an Arca Swiss-type cl&.

Later this week I should have a SWC/M in hand, and by the end of the month should receive a Ries backpacker wooden tripod that I have on order. I am planning to acquire an Acratech ballhead for the latter, and will likely only use the 503 and SWC – and, down the road,a 4x5 field camera – on it. I will be using the Gitzo as a travel and general purpose tripod on which I will mount not only the Hassy’s but also smaller 35 mm. size cameras.

My objective is to standardize on one type of cl& and corresponding camera plate(s). Which would be best long term solution?

1. Mount a Hassy Quick Coupler H on each of the ballheads, and acquire the corresponding Hassy adapter for each of my non-Hassy cameras?

2. Go with an RRS cl& for each of the ballheads, replace the feet on each of the Hassy bodies, and acquire the appropriate RRS plates for my other cameras?
 

curtishight

New Member
> I am a fan of the Hasselblad Quick Coupler and I am using it with other b rands of still cameras and with video cameras. It's low profile, it's high qualit y, and it locks securely. A few years ago I looked at other options and the on ly one that looked like it might work better was the Sachtler Touch & Go syste m, but outfitting tripod heads/brackets and cameras with it was going to be mu ch more expensive, and I supposed that it was going to make my Hasselblad came ras less comfortable to use hand held. (I visited the RRS web site and it looks like they have a great system. I'm not if you'd be gaining anything with your Hasselblad cameras, but it appears that they would be just as good as the Hasselblad coupler when used on other cameras.)
 

bahngeist

New Member
Curtis,

Thank you for your quick reply. In truth I am leaning toward the RRS cl&/plate system given its relative universality and smaller footprint. Conversely, the Quick Coupling H (QC-H) option is attractive given that my primary system is the 'Blads, and the QC-H is tailor-made for them. To go the RRS route would require the expense of replacing the coupling plates on each of the bodies with the ones available through either Markins or Clearsight (I am aware that this is not necessary, but is the more comfortable hand-held option compared to attaching plates to the existing feet). This would add roughly $110 to the cost; otherwise, both options are relatively equal price-wise.

I do have two questions that may influence my decision:

1. Is the spirit level assembly on the QC-H permanently fixed or is it easily removed/remounted?

2. I've looked at variety of pictures of the QC-H, and it appears to have a relatively high and hefty profile. Offhand, do you (or anyone else) know how much it weighs?

Thanks again,

Wayne
 

curtishight

New Member
1. It's permanently mounted. 2. I don't, but if, based on my answer to question 1, you still want to know, post back and I'll weigh it at the grocery store tomorrow:)

Good luck!
 

bahngeist

New Member
Curtis,

Your answer to 1. essentially clinches my going with the RRS option. But since I am waiting for some funds, I will likely vacillate over the two options for a few days longer


There is no real need to go out of your way to weigh the cl&, apart from assuaging my curiousity (and perhaps that of others)


Thank you very much for the timely help,

Wayne
 
Top