the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

  • site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge
You are here: Home / The Last Word / LuLand D geared tripod head

LuLand D geared tripod head

December 30, 2021 JimK 2 Comments

I’m going to be reporting on a bunch of geared tripod heads from China, mostly, and two from Switzerland. First up — and by far the worst — is this LuLan D head.

It has non-geared base yaw, and geared pitch and roll. There are locks for all three. You can see the base yaw lock on the right, and the pitch lock is the larger gray ring on the left.

The roll axis has no angle indicator. This is max roll.

 

In the other direction, the maximum roll is limited by the locking knob for the pitch axis.

 

Pitch has a 40-degree scale, but won’t go beyond a pitch of less than 30 degrees’

 

Pitch is symmetric in the other direction.

 

There is only a bubble level for pitch, not for roll.

 

The gears are not well constructed, and the action is not smooth.

 

This is an inexpensive head, but I don’t recommend it at all. It has serious design and construction deficiencies.

 

 

The Last Word

← Field curvature in the Fuji GF 35-70 Arca-Swiss Core 60 Leveler Classic geared head →

Comments

  1. Lars says

    September 15, 2022 at 11:10 am

    A few counterpoints:

    I have another variation (older?) of this head. What seems new is the capping plates mounted with Phillips screws – on mine the design is more open. Presumably this is to protect the gears from dust etc. Mine has a level for roll, in an area now covered by one of those plates.

    Mine has a roll indicator. That area is also covered by a plate.

    That the scales go further than 29 degrees doesn’t bother me a lot – specs clearly stated 29 degrees. It raises questions but is a cosmetic issue at best.

    Roll is typically used for leveling the horizon – if you need more than 10 degrees then you might want to adjust your tripod a bit. There might of course be completely different use cases where you need more than 10 degrees roll – and the precision of a geared head – but I have not encountered such a situation over 40 years.

    The gears on mine are as smooth as on any geared head I have tried. Uneven manufacturing standard is of course a concern.

    Obviously the design was revised, but the scale still goes to 40 degrees. That could have been revised as well. Odd.

    In summary, I’m reasonably happy with mine. It does what I expected it to do, for a good price, and it has been a joy to use. I really like that the friction of gears can be adjusted. If you expect Cube design and quality you will of course be disappointed.

    Reply
  2. Lars says

    September 15, 2022 at 11:17 am

    FYI, In the description of this posting you can see the older, open design.
    The posting photos show the newer design.
    https://www.ebay.com/itm/184923134160?mkcid=16&mkevt=1&mkrid=711-127632-2357-0&ssspo=H5-3nRAvRi2&sssrc=2349624&ssuid=hI9nEeZfStG&var=&widget_ver=artemis&media=COPY

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

June 2023
S M T W T F S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  
« May    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • Good 35-70 MF lens
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • JimK on UniWB on the X2D
  • Ad Dieleman on UniWB on the X2D
  • Christer Almqvist on Specularity, part 2
  • Alan on A deep dive into histograms
  • stephen on Interim thoughts on the Hasselblad X2D 100C
  • Haitong Yu on Histograms, high contrast scene
  • JimK on Histogram example, normal-contrast scene
  • Christer Almqvist on Histogram example, normal-contrast scene
  • JimK on Nikon Z6/7 gotchas and fixes
  • William Mickols on Nikon Z6/7 gotchas and fixes

Archives

Copyright © 2023 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.