2008 January 17th, 01:45
Manfrotto 560B or 561B?
I've been looking for a lightweight tripod for my HV20 that I can take with me travelling. Then I thought that perhaps a Monopod like the Manfrotto 560B or 561B may be the best of both worlds (offering mobility, panning, and stabilization). I realize I can't 'walk away' from the monopod.
I like the fact they have a fluid-cartridge base to allow for smooth panning.
Does anyone have any experience with these two models that can shed some advice? I notice the 561B has a head with panning arm... is this important?
I think the head with pan arm would be nice for tilting the camera. Supposedly the head on the 560B is the 3229 which allows for 'tilting' but how do you tilt it with no arm? Are you supposed to grip the camera body firmly with your hands and then tilt it while attached to the head?
Not sure which one I should go for so any help would be appreciated. Thanks!
2008 January 17th, 11:24
I have the 560b since this christmas
You can pan easy with this monopod but you really have to practice with it, or your pans will not be so smooth.
The tilt function is for static use only (you put it in the angel you wish and then tight the screw).
I hope to put some footage online soon. I'm a real amature so still learnig how to film steady and stuph.
Good quality monopod by the way!
2008 January 17th, 15:23
oo oo I've got a video for you
2008 January 17th, 15:41
Thanks DVTodd, I have seen that video. Just wasn't sure if it was worth the extra $80. Also thanks to HV who owns the 560b.
Originally Posted by dvtodd
The other thing I was thinking... although the price is probably getting up there... is what if I went with the Manfrotto 681B Monopod $55.95 and the Manfrotto 701RC2 Fluid Video Head $110.95
Would this kind of a setup be ok? Or do you recommend just going with the 561B? I was trying to save a bit of money while getting fluid pans and tilts and still having a monopod setup.
Please advise. Thanks everyone.
2008 January 17th, 16:31
You could do that set-up.
I don't see you getting as smooth pans as the 561. You wouldn't be about to keep it as steady Those 3 little legs grab it
really well. I think you would be more happy just springing for the 560 or 561. If you use dvgeartalk coupon on the 561 you get 10 off.
2008 January 20th, 02:27
Originally Posted by dvtodd
OK, the one thing that has me worrying is the WEIGHT of the 561B (4.4 lbs) compared to the 560B (about 1.6 lbs). Don't you think the 561B is overkill for the HV20. I guess the pro to going with the 561B is that should I get a prosumer camera like the Canon XHA1, it will handle it. But, I am worried about weight for travelling and carrying the thing around.
What would you think about this setup:
1) Bogen 560B Video Monopod with Head and Quick Release $148.95
Davis & Sanford V-12 Fluid Video Head $39.95
Slik 504QF-II Video Fluid Head $59.95
This way, I would be getting the advantages of the 560 monopod with a fluid head and a lighter weight?
Please let me know your thoughts.
2008 January 21st, 15:01
Sorry for the slow response! I didn't get on all weekend.
Ither of those set ups would work really well. Keep in mind thos heads arn't true fluid head. BUT! the way the 560 or 561 works is it pans on the little ball head on the bottem on the monopod by the feat. SO, you could just lock down the head that you by and you'd be set. Light weight and it will do the job. If you DO get a cam. like the A1. you will want to get the 561B head and pop it on the 560.
I hope this helps!
Have a good one!
2008 January 23rd, 10:58
I own the 560B, and you can see some of my bad panning in this video I created:
The problem is this:
While panning is very smooth, the ball socket below the panning thing has a tendency to move with any lateral motion unless you have the screw in real tight (which means you have to apply great force to level the rod on slopes).
Our hands are not designed to rotate without a lateral (pushing) force, and also they are not designed to rotate more than about 90 degrees in one full motion.
However I like mine because I think its easier to use when time is limited. With the HV20 LCD turned out, the unit also gets a lot of rocking due to wind forces.
2008 January 23rd, 20:45
Originally Posted by blondandfun
The clarity of the picture for most of the film is awesome. I can't believe how nice a job the HV20 does. I have mine but have not really shot anything with it yet.. just waitin go get some accessories.
I saw the panning... and yes, it did not turn out very well, which brings me to three points:
1) You shot this film in 24P... do you notice that while you're panning the buildings distort (look like they are being stretched/twisted?? Is this what 24P mode does during panning/movement? If that's true for all footage, I'm a little scared because I read everyone ranting about 24P mode. What is causing this wavy distortion?
2) What software did you use to extract the 24P from the 60i footage? For example Cineform or did you use Method 1 or 2 of Eugenia Loli's 'Canon HV20 24p Pulldown' tutorial?
3) Would you recommend against the 560B or 561B for panning then? Because I was thinking of perhaps going with the Manfrotto 681B 3 Section Monopod $55.95 and perhaps attach some sort of fluid-effect head to it such as the Davis & Sanford V-12 Fluid Video Head $39.95. What do you think?
I realize I still may get some lateral movement (from either my wrist or even my body swaying slightly), but aside from using a tripod, I don't see a way to eliminate that.
Thanks for any feedback my fellow members can provide,
2008 January 23rd, 21:23
I was thinking of getting a 560B, and I need a handle. Is this fine?
I will be using the base for panning, so I think I'm going to be fine with a simple head. Anyone think otherwise?
2008 January 23rd, 21:40
Originally Posted by heyrobert
That is a 3-way head and has no fluid efect (for tilting up or down). The specs say it is for lightweight cameras so my guess is that it is made for digital cameras. If you look at the base, there is no pin for keeping the video camera 'locked' from sliding left or right.
Why not spend the extra $12 and go for the head I mentioned above?? You can lock it from panning left and right (and use the base of the 506B) but you will get a fluid motion for tilting.
Davis & Sanford V-12 Fluid Video Head
2008 February 5th, 20:05
"what causes this wavy distortion?"
If you read in the HV20 manual, you find that the CMOS sensor has some "phenomenons." One of these quirks is wavy or distorted video. here's what it says:
"this is a phenomenon typical of CMOS image sensors. When a subject crosses very quickly in front of the camcorder the image may seem slightly warped."
In my experiences, boosting the shutter speed can remedy this quirk to some extent. You just have to decide for yourself if this is acceptable or not.
2008 June 15th, 01:51
I'm loving my new 560b, but I had a problem today. I unlocked the bottom section, and when it slid to full extension, the entire bottom "tripod" base fell off! I put it back on, and it will stay, but even a slight tug will the pull the entire bottom off. From what I can tell there is no way to tighten it either.
Anyone else have this problem, or did I just get a lemon?
2008 June 16th, 06:09
Wow, that shouldn't happen. Take it back.
2008 June 16th, 10:49
2008 June 16th, 20:51
Thanks guys. It's on it's way back for a replacement. I love this thing too much!
2012 June 21st, 04:47
I have been testing the 562b-1 (same as 561b, but use your own tripod head) in the past few days.
Some thoughts: sturdy and heavy, seems well made. The panning mechanism at the base works well. You have the choice of using it, or the head's panning function. The ball/socket mechanism at the base works smoothly with a bit of adjustment. Totally eliminates DSLR jitters, longer (unstabilized lens) focal lengths are now usable.
I like this thing because it allows the use of unstabilized lenses with no (tripod) setup time and without the restrictive tripod esthetic when it is undesirable.
2012 September 11th, 10:26
I loved my 561B, using it all the time for the wedding and event. So lightweight and robust.