RRS BH40 w/ 200-400?

Discussion in 'Other Cool Gear, Camera Bags, Camera Straps' started by LaZoo, Apr 28, 2007.

  1. LaZoo


    Apr 16, 2007
    Has anyone used the RRS BH 40 with the 200-400f/4? I hate to go with the BH 55 if I don't have to, for both cost and weight. I plan on putting it on 3540LS legs.

    Any help would be appreciated.

  2. dagored


    May 4, 2005
    I personally have not, but. There is always one of those. I ordered the BH 40 from RRS Thursday. I talked to Casey and gave him my lens lineup. My biggest is a 70-200vr. He told me that 300 was their recommended limit.

    I bought the 40 because I ordered the Gitzo 2530 from B & H. The Gitzo 2540/30 has a base plate of 2.5 inches-the tripod weighs 3.1 lbs. The RRS - 55LR has a base circumference of 2.9 inches-1.9 lbs. The RRS - 40LR II has a base of 2.1 inches -1 lb +

    I freaked when I payed $1500 for the 70-200. I can't imagine paying for the bigger lens. So, that was my selection. It took me 2 months to make up my mind.

    I would call and ask. I called twice before I ordered and was treated very nice each time.
  3. I would say an emphatic NO..... that 200-400mm is a long, heavy lens and you will need all the support you can get for it! The BH-40 is meant for lighter, shorter lenses. You will need the BH-55. Actually, I would look at gimbal heads rather than a ballhead for use with that lens. Wimberley, Jobu, Manfrotto all make gimbal heads....
  4. LaZoo


    Apr 16, 2007
    I am able to shoot from my car at the wildlife refuge near my home. I am thinking of a kirk window mount. I will need a ballhead with it. I do plan on a wimberley II also. Maybe the 55 is what I need

    Thanks for yor help
  5. I've never used a Kirk window mount so don't know how that would work, but your idea certainly sounds like a plan. I think the BH-55 ballhead would be your best bet in general, for use with your other lenses when tripod-mounted, and if you're planning to get a Wimberley II, you'll be all set. There is a size difference between the BH-40 and the BH-55, and probably it's best to go with the sturdier, heavier, larger ballhead for more versatility with all of your current lenses and those you'll be getting in the future. The Wimberley will definitely be the thing to use with that 200-400mm VR. I don't know enough about the window mount thing to be able to say if that works fine with the BH-55 and the 200-400mm VR or not.
  6. fishlips


    Apr 20, 2007
    Puyallup, WA
    I use the 200-400 in more settings than any other glass that I have. I have both the RRS BH40 and BH55. The BH55 is the one you want with the 200-400. Be sure to use their plate. I also use the quick release plate. Makes things happen very fast.
  7. I couldn't agree with Connie more. I had the 200-400 on a Markins but the Wimberly is the only way to go, if not handheld.

  8. LaZoo


    Apr 16, 2007
    Thanks to all. I will go with the wimberly and the RRS 55.

    Thanks again, Skeeter
  9. strawman


    Mar 24, 2006
    Missoula, MT
    I use the 200-400 w/ a Markins M20 and Wimberley Sidekick and it works just fine. I feel it's a much more versatile combination (not to mention cheaper) than having a Full Wimberley for long glass and a seperate head for the rest. You'll either need two tripods or you'll need to swap heads frequently.
  10. yifeng


    Jan 23, 2007
    I've a Arca-Swiss Z1 with sidekick for 200-400 and works fine. More versatile if you need the ballhead sometimes.