Manfrotto 128rc head (1 Viewer)

[pimpelmees]

Anyone using this head with a Swarovski ATX 85 or 95 scope ?

 

[4 The Birds1]

I have, with ATX 95.

I upgraded to Berlebach 553. Which I believe you also own? Wondering why you are looking for an alternative if you still own this, or did you get rid of it?

Manfrotto 128 does NOT allow for different lengths of plate. So if you find your scope is poorly balanced then it will NOT suit you.

 

[leonardo_simon]

Yes I have it.

what is the question?

 

[pimpelmees]

Yes I have it.

what is the question?

Is de scope balanced on this head or is the scope falling to the back of front immediately when you loosen the controls on the head ?

 

[leonardo_simon]

It works fine for me - I have ATX 85

scope stable but I have not tested what happens if I loosen head controls without holding the arm! I have no complaints about it

I.e I have not tested the balance but I have had no need to. I can’t see how it would balance

 

[Hermann]

I don't have an ATX. However, I used the 128 for years, and nowadays I would not recommend it for a heavier scope. There are better alternatives, like the MVH500AH that I use with my Nikon ED82.

Hermann

 

[leonardo_simon]

I don't have an ATX. However, I used the 128 for years, and nowadays I would not recommend it for a heavier scope. There are better alternatives, like the MVH500AH that I use with my Nikon ED82.

Hermann

Yes there are probably more appropriate heads for heavier scopes. Have had the head longer than the scope and have not seen a need to replace it yet.

 

[phaxman]

I went all the way (for my Swaro 115mm with magnification extender and ATX), and found out two things:
First, the Swaro balance rail does not work ... in fact, it makes the scope much shakier! I immediately returned it.
Second, I found the Swaro CTH to be outstanding - very easy and intuitive to use, and has both fluid smoothed movements and a counterbalance , which even works with the 115, which is about as front-heavy as you would expect!
I totally agree that the CTH price is beyond costly, but it is an amazing piece of equipment - very light, works intuitively, and ... the scope foot just snaps into the shoe on the CTH! No messing with extra rails, etc., etc.
(I am in no way associated with Swarovski, except for that large portion of my bank account which is now in their hands!)

 

[Bill Atwood]

The Gitzo GHF2W is the same head as the Swaro CTH and is somewhat cheaper. It's what I use for a Swaro ATX95.

I might use the 128RC for the ATX85, but I've not tried it. Definitely would not use the 128RC for the ATX95.

 

[phaxman]

Wow - significantly less expensive ... and looks pretty much identical ... Funny, Swarovski never mentioned that one in their ads ....

 

[pimpelmees]

the 128RC is very good for the ATS 80HD, i saw that today

 

[jring]

the 128RC is very good for the ATS 80HD, i saw that today

Hi,

were you able to aim the scope so you could feel whether it was in balance?

Joachim

 

[pimpelmees]

Yes it was not far out of balance ….

 

[mayoayo]

I used to have the 128 LP ,with a fixed long plate, but that was long time ago.It has not been in production for years.It is a very good head,but of course you had to attach the scope with the screw each time you used it,and it was a bit more inconvenient

 

[HeadWest]

The Gitzo GHF2W is the same head as the Swaro CTH and is somewhat cheaper. It's what I use for a Swaro ATX95.

I might use the 128RC for the ATX85, but I've not tried it. Definitely would not use the 128RC for the ATX95.

Interesting. I have both the 128RC and the Gitzo GHF2W head for my Kowa 883. I find the 128RC is much better suited to a heavy scope like this. THe GHF2W feels much more appropriate for a lighter scope to me, and I do not use it for the Kowa.

 

[Bill Atwood]

Interesting. I have both the 128RC and the Gitzo GHF2W head for my Kowa 883. I find the 128RC is much better suited to a heavy scope like this. THe GHF2W feels much more appropriate for a lighter scope to me, and I do not use it for the Kowa.

How good of a fit do you get with the 128RC plate and the 883? Does it allow any side to side movement?

I'm having some pretty strong second thoughts about the ATX95 on the 128RC. I just tried it out again and it was much more secure and usable than I thought. My ATX95 has the foot that does not require a plate. It does take some care to get the scope seated properly. Perhaps my previous opinion was based on an old 3130 head. Or that I didn't get proper seating due to the 2 tabs that intrude from the sides of the head's seating socket. The scope is front heavy and will flop, but the 128RC is heavily damped and the motion is restrained enough to keep the kit from going over. At least here in the flatlands.

 

[HeadWest]

How good of a fit do you get with the 128RC plate and the 883? Does it allow any side to side movement?

I'm having some pretty strong second thoughts about the ATX95 on the 128RC. I just tried it out again and it was much more secure and usable than I thought. My ATX95 has the foot that does not require a plate. It does take some care to get the scope seated properly. Perhaps my previous opinion was based on an old 3130 head. Or that I didn't get proper seating due to the 2 tabs that intrude from the sides of the head's seating socket. The scope is front heavy and will flop, but the 128RC is heavily damped and the motion is restrained enough to keep the kit from going over. At least here in the flatlands.

The 1288RC plate fits the 883 very nicely. It's mostly been a great head for this optic. More recently the tension in the pan has become a bit wonky, and finally last week the whole thing broke when it became stuck to my tripod and I tried using a wrench to remove it. Yesterday I replaced it with the Manfrotto MVH500AH. I've only used it once so far, but it seems great.