October 31, 2014, 10:37:45 PM

Author Topic: Manfrotto 055 vs 190, 498 vs 496  (Read 4399 times)

friedrice1212

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 31
    • View Profile
Manfrotto 055 vs 190, 498 vs 496
« on: January 10, 2013, 12:47:50 AM »
Hey folks, I'm in the market for a decent tripod without breaking the bank. Since I made the switch to full frame, everything is heavier and my old Manfrotto compact just doesn't cut it anymore. Now I have a few options in front of me: the 055XPROB vs the 190XPROB and the 498RC2 vs the 496RC2.

I am 5'10 and using a 5D Mark II with the 24-105mm being my heaviest lens. My biggest concern is how the heads will perform at 90 degrees sideways in portrait orientation. Are the extra 2kg of support of the 498 going to be beneficial for me and my 5D2 + 24-105 combo?

B&H has the 190 with the 496 in a bundle for 186$ and the 055 with the 498 for 250$. I'm just wondering if the difference is significant enough to justify the price difference if I only use a 5D2 with a 24-105.

Thanks a lot!

canon rumors FORUM

Manfrotto 055 vs 190, 498 vs 496
« on: January 10, 2013, 12:47:50 AM »

sagittariansrock

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1468
    • View Profile
Re: Manfrotto 055 vs 190, 498 vs 496
« Reply #1 on: January 10, 2013, 01:00:58 AM »
You'd benefit more from an L-plate in your case (if you plan to use portrait orientation a lot) than a sturdier ball-head. In my experience, the Manfrotto ball-heads do not perform very well with the center of mass off-center (they will slightly give over time and eventually AFTER every time you tighten it, the lens will come down a few degrees before being stable).
The other option is to use a better ball-head (i.e., RRS, Arca-Swiss, etc), but I read about not breaking the bank somewhere...
EOS 5DIII, EOS 5D | Rokinon 14mm f/2.8, TS-E 17mm f/4L, EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM, EF 35mm f/1.4L USM, EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM, EF 135mm f/2L USM, EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM, 1.4x III, 2x III | 600-EX-RT x3 | EOS M + EF-M 22mm f/2

sagittariansrock

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1468
    • View Profile
Re: Manfrotto 055 vs 190, 498 vs 496
« Reply #2 on: January 10, 2013, 01:08:45 AM »
Oh, and for 5DII/24-105, the 190 will be more than sufficient- you can just hang your bag from it to stabilize it further.
Personally, I prefer a lighter tripod that I will actually carry, but YMMV. I have the previous version of the 190, I think it was called 3001 or something...
EOS 5DIII, EOS 5D | Rokinon 14mm f/2.8, TS-E 17mm f/4L, EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM, EF 35mm f/1.4L USM, EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM, EF 135mm f/2L USM, EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM, 1.4x III, 2x III | 600-EX-RT x3 | EOS M + EF-M 22mm f/2

friedrice1212

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 31
    • View Profile
Re: Manfrotto 055 vs 190, 498 vs 496
« Reply #3 on: January 10, 2013, 01:15:23 AM »
Thanks for the quick feedback guys! The L-plate thing is not a bad point at all. Never thought about it. But at the same time, I'll be losing a lot of flexibility when doing landscapes... Photography is all about trade-offs...

Nate

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 58
    • View Profile
Re: Manfrotto 055 vs 190, 498 vs 496
« Reply #4 on: January 10, 2013, 03:54:53 AM »
I own the 498RC2 and I dont know about the other head, but this one hold my 5dIII my 70-200 2.8II and a flash at 90degrees. Although I have to mention that If I want it to be for example at 70degrees I have to lock it at about 65 degrees and after its all locket it will move about 5degrees down to 70 degrees.
But with my 20-70 I have no problems.

I hope it helped
5D3, 17-40 mm L, 24-70 mm L, 70-200 2.8 IS II, 50 mm 1.4, 2x 600EX-RT

albron00

  • Rebel SL1
  • ***
  • Posts: 96
    • View Profile
Re: Manfrotto 055 vs 190, 498 vs 496
« Reply #5 on: January 10, 2013, 04:40:14 AM »
I've owned 055XPROB and 498RC2 head, and have to say that 055 is very good sturdy tripod.
Two remarks: it is heavy (it could be good or bad, depends of your use) and fairly big.
Combine with the 498RC2 head and 7D I did not have to extend the central column; in some cases even it was little bit on the high side. Something I did not really like it. I'm 182 cm or 6' tall.
498RC2 is good head and, as it has been said, for 70 degrees you have to lock it about 65 degrees to obtain correct angle.
Eventually I've sold 055 and got 190CXPRO3 (smaller and lighter = portable) with photo/video MH055M8-Q5 head.
If I did not get photo/video head I'd probably go with MH055M0-Q2 head. Its cost little bit more but you have more satisfaction at the end of the day.
« Last Edit: January 10, 2013, 05:00:02 AM by albron00 »

paul13walnut5

  • Guest
Re: Manfrotto 055 vs 190, 498 vs 496
« Reply #6 on: January 10, 2013, 05:54:34 AM »
055 much more substantial.  More stable, especially extended.  Heavy camera combo, go for the 055.

Get the pro version, as the versatile column could be handy for the little premium.

When you get it, unscrew, grease and tighten all the clamps.  I had a 055XDB fail on me last year, just out the box.  Clamp wasn't assembled properly so worth checking, to be fair I have and have used loads of manfrotto gear over the years and this was my first problem.

Heads.

I hate b&s heads (except the mircoball) I find the 3 way heads much more useful, and easier to adjust.
I have the 498 RC on a table top dolly, very solid, but I just find them cumbersome to use, generic to their type.

As I recall from when I was buying the main difference between the 496 and 498 was the panoramic etchings around the base of the 498.

If you want a rapid adjust head I would look at a pistol grip type instead, but thats just my preference.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Manfrotto 055 vs 190, 498 vs 496
« Reply #6 on: January 10, 2013, 05:54:34 AM »

rj79in

  • Guest
Re: Manfrotto 055 vs 190, 498 vs 496
« Reply #7 on: January 10, 2013, 05:57:11 AM »
Hey folks, I'm in the market for a decent tripod without breaking the bank. Since I made the switch to full frame, everything is heavier and my old Manfrotto compact just doesn't cut it anymore. Now I have a few options in front of me: the 055XPROB vs the 190XPROB and the 498RC2 vs the 496RC2.

I am 5'10 and using a 5D Mark II with the 24-105mm being my heaviest lens. My biggest concern is how the heads will perform at 90 degrees sideways in portrait orientation. Are the extra 2kg of support of the 498 going to be beneficial for me and my 5D2 + 24-105 combo?


Both will be fine for 5D2 and the 24-105. The 190 will be almost half a kg less in weight and will be shorter (when folded) which will make a big difference if you need to go hiking with it.

Regarding the angle shift of almost 5 degrees on the 498 ball head, it will certainly be an issue. I didn't like the 5 degrees shift so I got a geared head.

eLroberto

  • Power Shot G7X
  • **
  • Posts: 21
    • View Profile
Re: Manfrotto 055 vs 190, 498 vs 496
« Reply #8 on: January 10, 2013, 06:56:13 AM »
I had exact the same problem by finding the right tripod. Like you, I wasn't sure if the 055 or the 190 is right one for me. I really searched a lot but found quite less interesting information. After testing both of them, it was quite clear for me to by the 055. Now, after approximately two years of using the 055, I'm still very fine with my decision. You can fit it into nearly every corner, which makes it even more awesome. You can switch the central column to 90° and you are even able to use it upside down (against all other opinions). All in all I can really recommend it. It's maybe a bit heavy, but you'll get used by it for sure :).

I hope you guys understand everything I’m saying. My English is a little bit out of order :)

Kind regards, eL
Kind regards, eLroberto

7D | 50 f/1.4 | 17-40L | 24-105L | 70-200L IS II | 580 EX | 580 EX II | Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 | TC-80N3 | Manfrotto tri- and monopod | many filters

Promature

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 101
    • View Profile
Re: Manfrotto 055 vs 190, 498 vs 496
« Reply #9 on: January 10, 2013, 07:37:28 AM »
Well, I went through the pain of trying to decide what kind of tripod to get two months ago.  I settled on the 055 aluminum basic legs and a Markins ball head.  I got the basic legs because the other versions of the 055 aluminum were longer and heavier. 

Anyway, after about two weeks I couldn't stand how big the 055 was and so I got the 190 carbon 4-section and love it.  It supports my T2i with 70-200 f2.8 without a problem and is much easier when carrying with a backpack.

Also, the 190 carbon has lever locks, while the 055 aluminum had screw tighting legs, which made setup and take down a lot slower.

With all that being said, I have a 055XDB available if you want it for cheap, as I couldn't return it.
70D, 10-22mm, 24-105mm f4, 50mm f1.8, 85mm f1.8, 70-200 f2.8, 430EXII

wayno

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 228
    • View Profile
Re: Manfrotto 055 vs 190, 498 vs 496
« Reply #10 on: January 10, 2013, 08:16:47 AM »
Being 6 foot 2, I chose the taller 055XPROB. I rate it highly - it's heavy but I'm used to it now and in many ways its weight is reassuring. It's been going strong for 18 months and I've bad to tighten one of the legs once - which was easy.

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 14800
    • View Profile
Re: Manfrotto 055 vs 190, 498 vs 496
« Reply #11 on: January 10, 2013, 08:25:23 AM »
The 498 head will settle a little - agree with the ~5° estimate, depending on load.  It makes precise positioning a challenge.  The other issue I find with the -RC2 Manfrottos is that there is a little play in the clamp/plate junction.  It has a secondary locking pin, so there's no risk of it coming out, but 'locked down' isn't - the plate can be shifted in the clamp when it's locked.  Makes precise positioning even more of a challenge.

Depending on budget, my recommendation is to go with an Arca-Swiss compatible system.  That's better for L-plates, too, since the Manfrotto offerings there are weak, Kirk or Really Right Stuff are much better, and AS-compatible.

Note that some Manfrotto heads can easily be conveted to AS-type - I did that with a Manfrotto 468MGRC2, replacing the RC2 clamp with a Wimberley C-12 clamp.  A list of Manfrotto heads that can be converted is [img=http://www.tripodhead.com/products/C12-compatibility.cfm]http://here[/img] - note, for example, that the 498RC2 cannot be converted (the clamp is integrated) but the plain 498 head can.

Thanks for the quick feedback guys! The L-plate thing is not a bad point at all. Never thought about it. But at the same time, I'll be losing a lot of flexibility when doing landscapes... Photography is all about trade-offs...

How do you figure you'll be losing flexibility for landscapes with an L-bracket?  An L-bracket incorporates a base plate (on the bottom of the camera for landscape-orientation shots) and the side of the L allows you to clamp in in portrait orientation.  You actually gain flexiblity for landscape shooting - one problem with a regular bottom plate is that when you use the ballhead drop notch to get to portrait orientation, you cannot shoot a panoramic shot.  The L-bracket puts the center of the lens over the center of rotation, meaning you can take a pano in portrait orientation, which is often desirable for landscape shooting (a taller image without needing a full multi-row pano head).
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

Don Haines

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3389
  • Posting cat pictures on the internet since 1986
    • View Profile
Re: Manfrotto 055 vs 190, 498 vs 496
« Reply #12 on: January 10, 2013, 06:10:39 PM »
I backpack a lot, so I ended up with the 190 Carbon..... but it is a bit light when using heavier lenses. I added an eyelet to the bottom of the collumn so that I could rope it down to the pack to stabilize it when shooting. The rest of the time I use a heavier tripod.

The L bracket is a very good idea. Without one your camea and lens is off center... and that just begs to fall over. Plus, if you are shooting panoramas you really want the lens centered over the axis of rotation or you will have parallax problems when stitching your images. It works even better if you can adjust the camera forwards/backwards to get the focal point over the axis of rotation as well, but unless you are dealing with very near objects it will not be noticeable.... I don't think I have seen that on a comercial L plate, I machined my own to be able to do it.
The best camera is the one in your hands

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Manfrotto 055 vs 190, 498 vs 496
« Reply #12 on: January 10, 2013, 06:10:39 PM »

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 14800
    • View Profile
Re: Manfrotto 055 vs 190, 498 vs 496
« Reply #13 on: January 10, 2013, 06:32:39 PM »
The L bracket is a very good idea... It works even better if you can adjust the camera forwards/backwards to get the focal point over the axis of rotation as well, but unless you are dealing with very near objects it will not be noticeable.... I don't think I have seen that on a comercial L plate, I machined my own to be able to do it.

I've not seen one, either. The 'usual' solution (barring access to a machine shop) is a nodal slide. I use an MPR-CL II from RRS.
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Manfrotto 055 vs 190, 498 vs 496
« Reply #13 on: January 10, 2013, 06:32:39 PM »