[petercox]

November 24, 2009 at 6:23 pm

Just noticed this article – sorry, haven’t had much time to lurk here recently.

I put a fair amount of effort into my site to get the natural search results up, but haven’t kept my eye on it lately. I’m sure I could be doing a few things differently. Maybe I should whack Andy over the head and see what he’s doing, although I can probably tell you – he has lots more back links to his site than I do due to his activity in various forums and his media coverage of late.

However, I do get a fair amount of traffic from searches relating to landscape prints. Those don’t translate into many print sales, however. My print sales come from other sources primarily – usually where the person can see the print in person.

Hope that’s helpful.

Cheers,
Peter

[petercox]

October 21, 2009 at 5:39 pm

Indeed, there is no regulation. It’s up to the photographer to decide. Personally, I don’t care for limited editions – it’s an artificial limit. I closed all my limited editions some time ago (even the ones which hadn’t sold out) and now only sell open editions.

Ansel Adams never limited his photographs, and that’s good enough for me!

Peter

[petercox]

October 21, 2009 at 4:57 pm

Yes, the winners are all a little overcooked for my taste. One of mine was commended, no HDR, either :)

http://www.petercox.ie/blog/2009/10/new_award.php

[petercox]

August 27, 2009 at 6:22 pm

The head also looks like one of those industrial strength pencil sharpeners. Bet it weighs a fair amount!

[petercox]

August 27, 2009 at 5:28 pm

I’d say invest in a Manfrotto 055xprob as well and keep your old tripod and head for when you need something lightweight.

Peter

[petercox]

August 27, 2009 at 2:06 pm

Pan and tilt heads are only necessary where you need to limit your movements to one axis – which is rarely the case except in architectural photography. Often this need is mixed with a need for precise movements, and in that case a geared pan and tilt head is what you want.

For most other types of photography, landscapes included, a ball head is perfect. It allows rapid and easy positioning of the camera with just one control to lock or unlock. The better ones have an independent panning base as well, which permits you to rotate the camera about the vertical axis – mostly used for stitching panoramas (with the acknowledged deficiencies of a non-dedicated pano head as described in my exchange with JB).

As far as attachment points go – the Velbon probably has a 3/8″ thread. You could always measure the thread yourself if you’re unsure.

Cheers,
Peter

suspectmonkey wrote:

petercox wrote:

A pan and tilt head is different from a ball head. You want a ball head with an independent panning control. The Manfrotto 488RC4 would be the one I’d recommend if you’re on a budget.

Peter

Peter, what would the advantage be of using a ball head over a pan & tilt, can you not get pan & tilt heads with independent panning/tilt control? I’m interested in replacing the head on my Velbon because the only thing I don’t like about it is not having independent control of the pan/tilt when it comes to making stitched panos. I was just going to replace it with another pan/tilt with seperate control of each function, but now you’ve got me interested in this 488RC4.

I see the attachment thread for the 488 is listed as 3/8″ but I can’t seem to find out what the attachment thread on my tripod legs are (Velbon Sherpa 600R). The head I currently have, supplied with the Velbon, just lists the 1/4″ mount thread, but I assume this is for the camera mount rather than the mount to the legs?

Thanks :oops:

[petercox]

August 27, 2009 at 9:40 am

True, but it’ll last a lifetime, and you’ll definitely see the benefit.

There’s an argument to be made against buying a middle of the road tripod and head – if you’re serious about your photography you’ll probably end up buying the really good one anyway – so getting one now is cheaper in the long run =)

Cheers,
Peter

[petercox]

August 27, 2009 at 9:28 am

Yes John, sorry we polluted the thread with that discussion =)

Get a BH-55 =)

Cheers,
Peter

[petercox]

August 27, 2009 at 9:22 am

JB –
Equally it’d be wrong to make people think they need a pano head to get any successful stitching done. I think we’ve covered both bases adequately at this point.

Cheers,
Peter

[petercox]

August 27, 2009 at 9:07 am

JB –
No problem. I find for landscape panoramics I generally am working at infinity as the movement of the eye through the image is horizontal. Adding a foreground component I find needlessly complicates the composition and adds a vertical movement which is constricted by the shape of the format (I generally shoot in 3:1).

For normal aspect ratios, I’ll very often include a foreground if one presents itself, but then I won’t be stitching.

Thus, for my imagery I find that a panoramic head is unnecessary (except when I’m doing spherical work). Once working at infinity, parallax is all but eliminated – any that remains is so subtle as to not be visible and thus a normal head is ‘good enough’ to get the job done.

Cheers,
Peter

[petercox]

August 26, 2009 at 3:39 pm

JB –
You’ve restated my points almost exactly, although I don’t know why you mentioned images at reduced sizes. If that was in response to my statement about the images on my website, it’s entirely irrelevant. I sell those images as large prints. That’s the reason they’re up there.

Peter

[petercox]

August 26, 2009 at 2:09 pm

JB –
Dedicated panoramic heads are not required for most panoramic photography – I’d only use one if I wanted to make a spherical panorama or if there was something in the immediate foreground. Otherwise the parallax error is not noticeable.

For most of the stitched panoramas on my website I didn’t use one.

Cheers,
Peter

jb7 wrote:

legacydan wrote:

thanks for info guys so a pan and tilt ball head would allow me to pan horizontally without having the vertical postition change, for example when wanting to do a series of of shots to make up a panoramic shot.

Not unless it allows you to rotate around the front nodal point of the lens you’re using-
you’ll want an additional head to be able to do that-
Though perhaps the Slik does that, I don’t know it-

[petercox]

August 26, 2009 at 2:06 pm

Of course, if you want a really high quality head, you should look at the ReallyRightStuff BH-55, or the Markins M-10.

Cheers,
Peter

[petercox]

August 26, 2009 at 1:46 pm

A pan and tilt head is different from a ball head. You want a ball head with an independent panning control. The Manfrotto 488RC4 would be the one I’d recommend if you’re on a budget.

Peter

[petercox]

August 25, 2009 at 10:15 pm

Hi folks –
I’ve written an article on choosing a tripod that you might find useful.

Tripods are the one thing that are consistently undervalued by photographers. Buying a good tripod is one of the major favours you can do for your photography. It should be hard-wearing, rigid, tall enough to use comfortably and reasonably lightweight. Unfortunately, getting all those in a single package means they can be expensive, but the cost is worth it.

Basically, don’t cheap out on this aspect of your photography. If you’re planning to spend the better part of a grand (or more!) on a whizbang new lens or camera body, spend it on the tripod instead. You’ll get better images via that upgrade than you will with the better glass.

As regards heads, I don’t care for the pistol grip style heads. They seem like a great idea in the shop, but in the field they’re just not as good as a high quality regular ball head. The major problem with them is twofold: you need a hand on the grip at all times when repositioning the camera, and there are plenty of occasions where you’d like that hand on the camera instead.

The other thing is that it’s difficult to impossible to make small, fine adjustments to the camera position with them, something that’s important when you’re paying attention to composition, as very small movements make a big impact.

Of those students who come to my workshops with a pistol grip, a large proportion then go on to replace them with a regular ballhead instead.

Hope that helps.

Cheers,
Peter