I use manfrotto sticks with a 501 head for my XL-1, and I think maybe a fluid head can be overkill. Pans are ok, but sometimes tilting can be a little jerky. Maybe the XL-1 is too light for such a heavy duty head - although I did try a 501 once that was really nice and smooth even with an XL-1..

Please allow me a general observation; this is directed at no-one in particular here. I've been producing a DV filmmaking project that involves eight groups making their own shorts over a weekend, and having seen the results a few times and chatting informally with the filmmakers I've noticed a trend. There seems to be a pattern of chopped-off heads or actors moving in and out of the frame in the films, and when queried several of the filmmakers reported "well, the tripod I'm using is sort of jerky, so it seemed better to just set the shot and leave it alone rather than try to follow the action".

This to me is a tremendous shame. The recent advancements in technology have brought us affordable cameras that are good enough to make theatrically-releasable films. Placing such a camera on a flimsy, jerky tripod is a huge step backward. If the motivating reason to spend the money on an XL1 or VX2000 over a $250 VHS-C camcorder is the image quality, I then wonder if, as far as the viewer is concerned, the framing has just as much impact on the image as the choice of camera...

A good head should be like an extension of the body--it should let you guide the camera to exactly where you want it to go with a minimum of force, and keep it there when you let go. You should be able to apply and release the brakes without a jerk in the shot. You should be able to start a pan or tilt without the head sticking and then jumping. The head should allow you to make a clean diagonal move (panning and tilting with equal velocity). The legs should be heavy-duty enough that they don't twist or shift when you pan quickly.

I guess I'm suggesting saving up one's pennies to buy the absolute best tripod you can afford is a truly worthwhile investment. At least as important as your choice of camera--and you will probably own that tripod over the life of several cameras, realistically. Maybe the notion of a head that costs half as much as the camera or even more is not so crazy after all.

You also should really try the camera that you're actually using on the head. I know that sounds like common sense, but with the trend to by online and over the phone, you might get tempted.

My old Bogen didn't work very well with my XL1, but it was good for heavier cameras. My Sachtler DV8 works well with a fully loaded XL1 or GY-DV500 but with the standard XL1 set up you might have to fight the counter balance a little.

So try it out with your rig.

Good points Charles. Are there any you would suggest for an
XL1 camera? I've been looking at manfrotto a bit, but by the
sound of it, they might not be good enough? I've been saving
for quite some time to get me an XL1 and I was hoping to get
a very good tripod for it without having to save another 6
months or a year. If that is needed, so be it, but it would be
nice if don't need to. I'll visit some shop here that has Manfrotto
tripods to try some out.

I've actually considered just weighting down my head a little bit somehow.. I honestly think that the xl-1 is simply too light.

Think I might just trade it in for something else..

Excellent points Charles Papert - very very true! I, like Rob would also be interested to know what you, in your experience, would recommend for the Xl1...

There is a trick to balancing the cam on a 'pod. I use a 501 with the camera set as far back in the plate as possible. I also use the ma-100 with the metal pieces in place (for a wireless set-up) even though they are only there for extra weight.

I shoot downward. So there is a different amount of drag needed to keep the cam from drooping, but it's not too bad. If I shot on a more level shooting area, I'd be better off. Test out the tension adjustments!

I like the 501 so far and in consideration of the price (pretty cheap compared to the 503) it's great.

PS- oO, if anything from the problem you suggest, it's the xl1 that's too heavy for the head, not the other way around.

I heard a lot of people on here say that manfrotto is good for
an XL1 with a 501 or 503 head... so tell us Charles. heh

I use the Manfrotto 503 head (on an old 3021 tripod) with my XL1s and am very happy with it. Just the other day I had to do a 360 pan for a real estate shot and it was as smooth as glass.

Folks, I apologize but despite my rantings earlier I'm not an expert on all the different heads that are sized for DV cameras. I haven't used the Manfrotto line personally.

I work with an O'Connor 1030 that I bought used, it's actually designed for somewhat larger cameras. O'Connor makes a fantastic product line, their top-of-the-line unit is the film industry standard for fluid heads. They do have a smaller unit called the Ultimate DV which has the features of the larger heads and something like an 18 lb maximum payload (and adjustable counterbalance--more later on that!) As I said earlier, you get what you pay for--this head retails for $2500, and that's without the legs. Of course I recognize that this is out of the reach of most of our forum participants, but I do stand by my point that you will own a quality head for many years. Sachtler makes fine products also.

The point about counter-balance--this is a feature built into more expensive heads that allows you to fine-tune the head for the particular weight of your camera. It's generally a dial or series of pins or latches that shift the position of an internal spring. The goal is that when you tilt forward, the head will hold the camera exactly where you leave it. If it keeps tilting forward on its own, you need more counterbalance; if it wants to settle back toward horizontal, you need less counterbalance.

This is different than sliding the camera fore and aft on the mount; that is a quick way to optomize the attitude that the head takes for a particular shot such as pointing down for an extended period of time, as JoPhoto pointed out. When you tilt back up it will require more force if set this way, and it will want to return to the tilted down position. It is also different than cranking up the tilt tension, because although that will reduce the effects an un-counterbalanced setup can cause, it will also impact your photography (you want to be able to set the tilt drag at the specific setting that is appropriate for the move).

So between counter-balance settings, pan and tilt tension and proper fore-and-aft balance, eventually you can get to that sweet spot where the camera almost floats on air, and the resulting moves are graceful as can be.