Board index Equipment Digital Cameras Tripod Suggestions

Digital Cameras

Tripod Suggestions

deluca
 
Posts: 2

Tripod Suggestions

Post Mon Jun 09, 2008 12:21 am


Looking for a tripod and head under $300. I'm not sure if I should go with a ball head or a tilt head or something with levels on it. I just need a good recommendation on the best tripod under $300. I'll be using a D80 with something up to a 300mm zoom on it.

djwixx
 
Posts: 1360

Re: Tripod Suggestions

Post Mon Jun 09, 2008 3:10 am


I use a similar setup and love my Bogen 3001 tripod (check for new model with quick release legs clamps - maybe 190XPRO) with a Bogen 322RC2 ballhead. The rapid connect plate is extremely useful and you can probably get the camera on the tripod and a shot framed in less than a minute. The trigger grip is excellent to frame a shot quickly and is also useful to frame close subjects that are on the move.

prinothcat
 
Posts: 662

Re: Tripod Suggestions

Post Mon Jun 09, 2008 4:47 am


I have a Bogen/Manfrotto 190x ProB with a 486rc2 ball head on it with QR. Like it fine. I wouldn't use it with the center column fully extended and the legs fully out and a long lens. It just doesn't feel that solid. I rarely use mine that way so it's a non issue. The 70-300mm balances oddly because it has to mount from the camera body. Not really recommended in my book. The 80-200, 70-200 or any lens with a ring mount on the barrel will balance better. I think it ran me 265usd out the door from my local Ritz.

djwixx
 
Posts: 1360

Re: Tripod Suggestions

Post Mon Jun 09, 2008 1:41 pm


I noticed the 190 seemed very light from some friends who had one, so that's why I like my 3001. I think you can still get them, and if the screw clamps on the legs are an issue, then they can be updated with quick released clamps from bogen's parts department.

celticbhoy
 
Posts: 3

Re: Tripod Suggestions

Post Fri Jul 04, 2008 6:38 pm


djwixx wrote:I noticed the 190 seemed very light from some friends who had one, so that's why I like my 3001. I think you can still get them, and if the screw clamps on the legs are an issue, then they can be updated with quick released clamps from bogen's parts department.


I agree. I had a Manfrotto 190 and found it too light and unstable. Especially in wind and when using longer lenses (70-300). I changed to a Manfrotto 055PRO/486RC2 and found this set up to be far more solid and secure. Although the weight gain makes it a little heavier to carry around. I may consider a carbon fibre upgrade in the future. :D
Nikon D200, Nikon 18-200mm AF-S DX VR, Nikon 70-300VR, Nikon 50mm 1.8D, Sigma 10-20
Nikon SB800 Speedlight
MB-D200
Manfrotto 055PRO & 486RC2
Nikon Capture NX
Photoshop CS3 Extended
Adobe Lightroom
Photomatix Pro

doady
 
Posts: 92

Re: Tripod Suggestions

Post Fri Jul 04, 2008 8:38 pm


I recently purchased the Manfrotto 190XPROB with the 486 head. I didn't even know it had the horizontal centre column option, but I'm glad it does since I do a lot of macro work.

Personally I think it is more than sturdy enough (at least for my use and for my compact camera). Yes, it is lighter than the 055, but you shouldn't equate "heaviness" with "sturdiness". Get the 055 instead only if you need the height.

Since I am Asian, I am short (5'9"), so I don't need the height of the 055 and I prefer to carry less weight anyways.

There is no such thing as a tripod that is too light.

prinothcat
 
Posts: 662

Re: Tripod Suggestions

Post Fri Jul 04, 2008 10:26 pm


doady wrote:There is no such thing as a tripod that is too light.

...unless it fails to support your rig properly.

ken_bat
 
Posts: 23

Re: Tripod Suggestions

Post Fri Jul 04, 2008 10:52 pm


If you are looking to properly support up to a 300mm lens in the majority of shooting conditions (within the stated price range) a tripod worth considering is the Slik 700DX Pro with a matching Slik 3-way pan-tilt head. (The tripod legs can be purchased separately as well.) It's in a similar height/weight class as the Manfrotto 055 (which would also do very well), but instead of aluminum the legs are constructed of a light alloy (aluminum-titanium-magnesium), which though not as light as carbon fibre, is a little lighter than standard aluminum as used in Manfrottos. Also something to consider is that this tripod/head combination has enough height to get the camera eyepiece up to about 5'8" without having to extend the center column. This makes for more overall stability than when using a lot of column extension. And the price is very reasonable.

As far as heads go, choosing between a pan-tilt and a ballhead is more of a personal choice than anything else. A pan-tilt allows individual axis control for both horizontal and vertical placement while the handles generally make fine adjustments a little easier. A ballhead, on the other hand, is more convenient and less bulky. And you can position the camera a little quicker than with a pan-tilt. Keep in mind though, that a ballhead requires two hands to use... you have to hold on to the camera while the ball is loosened and adjustments made. A pan-tilt allows adjustment and panning without have to hold on to the camera.

If I can generalize, a ballhead is a good choice for overall function and convenience while a pan-tilt suits finer control. I own both types of heads and use what I feel is most appropriate for the shooting situation. For example, I prefer a ballhead for portraiture, but favor a pan-tilt head for architectural subjects. As far as levels go, I'd suggest using a small two-way "bullet" level that can be mounted in your camera's flash/accessory shoe (unless, of course, you are using an on-camera flash). I don't recommend a bulls-eye level as they tend to be tricky to adjust. Also, if you anticipate using a level, you will be much better served by a pan-tilt head. I speak from experience here.

A final thought to throw out... Don't scrimp on the head. It is every bit as important as the tripod legs—if not more so. The legs have to hold up the whole issue steadily, but the head is subjected to more wear in the form of loosenings, movements and tightenings. A good one lasts longer and serves you better.

Cheers,
Ken
Last edited by ken_bat on Thu Jul 10, 2008 4:45 am, edited 3 times in total.

doady
 
Posts: 92

Re: Tripod Suggestions

Post Fri Jul 04, 2008 11:54 pm


prinothcat wrote:
doady wrote:There is no such thing as a tripod that is too light.

...unless it fails to support your rig properly.


Are carbon fiber tripods weaker than normal tripods then, just because they are lighter?

djwixx
 
Posts: 1360

Re: Tripod Suggestions

Post Sat Jul 05, 2008 1:44 am


doady wrote:
prinothcat wrote:
doady wrote:There is no such thing as a tripod that is too light.

...unless it fails to support your rig properly.


Are carbon fiber tripods weaker than normal tripods then, just because they are lighter?


No, but they can be more fragile if they gete sharp knocks.

doady
 
Posts: 92

Re: Tripod Suggestions

Post Sat Jul 05, 2008 6:22 pm


According to Manfrotto, the 055 does have higher weight capacity than the 190, but the carbon fibre version of the 190 has exactly the same weight capacity as the regular aluminum version, despite being significantly lighter.

I suggest you look the manufacturer's own provided capacity specifications instead. I am not expert, but I think it is just common sense: judging a tripod's strength merely by its weight is just folly.

Weight is simply not a indication of strength. Look at architecture: their weight isn't what makes bridges and skyscrapers have strong support! There is a good reason that their are entire professions dedicated to designing these structures.

prinothcat
 
Posts: 662

Re: Tripod Suggestions

Post Sat Jul 05, 2008 11:14 pm


doady wrote:
prinothcat wrote:
doady wrote:There is no such thing as a tripod that is too light.

...unless it fails to support your rig properly.


Are carbon fiber tripods weaker than normal tripods then, just because they are lighter?

No, but that's not your contention as I read your original statement..... I will end now, by saying think a bit on what you implied in your statement and see how my response fits. There was no mention of materials, only the statement that no tripod can be too light... Which is completely false if due to its light weight it doesn't do the job required., which is stabilizing your camera and lenses.

prinothcat
 
Posts: 662

Re: Tripod Suggestions

Post Sat Jul 05, 2008 11:24 pm


doady wrote:According to Manfrotto, the 055 does have higher weight capacity than the 190, but the carbon fibre version of the 190 has exactly the same weight capacity as the regular aluminum version, despite being significantly lighter.


but if you stand them side by side with the same load on them in the same conditions, do they support that load the same? Do they damp vibration the same way? Are they equally steady? I don't know and you are contending that strength is the only standard to judge tripods by.

I suggest you look the manufacturer's own provided capacity specifications instead. I am not expert, but I think it is just common sense: judging a tripod's strength merely by its weight is just folly.


Again it''s not just about how much it can hold, but how still, can that load be held.

Weight is simply not a indication of strength. Look at architecture: their weight isn't what makes bridges and skyscrapers have strong support! There is a good reason that their are entire professions dedicated to designing these structures.


True, but comparing apples and apples, in this case Aluminum alloy tripods I bet those that are built with more material, hence heavier, are going to be more stable. Regardless of whether or not the hold that same load or not.

I have an idea, why don;t you go out and side by side all these tripods and report back to the class and then we will bow to your position of knowingness.

bbmphoto
 
Posts: 3

Re: Tripod Suggestions

Post Tue Jul 15, 2008 6:54 pm


Having just gone through the process of getting another Tripod, I have a lot of information gathered to compare. However my purpose may be different than yours. I already own a Manfrotto 3021BPRO and love it! However, it doesn't travel well, due to weight and size. It is extremely cold in winter. And is heavy. over 5 lbs.

My goal was to find a lighter version for travel. What I ended up with was spending a little more than originally planned to get a light weight replacement that would hold the weight needed. The Manfrotto 190CXPRO4. 6 inches shorter packed up, and less than 3 lbs. However this put myself over the $300 mark, but less than $400 including the head.

I firmly believe in spending the money for a solid tripod. I've cut corners before and then found myself not happy with my purchase. Even though I spent $200 more than originally planned, I am VERY HAPPY with my tripod and now have 2 from which to use / select from on photos shoots.

If you stay away from Carbon Fiber and go with aluminum, I think you'll find you can stay under your price range. My 3021 was replaced by the 190 or the 055. Can't remember.

I would recommend either one of the Manfrotto 190xxx or the Induro line, like the A114.

What I liked with the Manfrotto 190 series
- Flip Lever for quickly extending or folding up the legs.
- Cushion pads on legs. Great for cold weather and gripping (not on Carbon Fiber models)
- 3 extensions on the legs is faster and taller than 4 extensions, However for travel 4 legs is more compact that 3 extensions.
- Name and reliability.

Pros for the Induro
- Cushion pads on legs. Great for cold weather and gripping (not on Carbon Fiber models)
- Includes tool kit, carry bag, and spiked feet on most models.
- Less expensive than Manfrotto. Can find a better deal.

For the Head, I like a ball head. I own a Manfrotto 322RC2 and love it. I love the side grip to adjust.
For the Carbon Fiber 190CXPro4, I looked at weight and flexibility. I went with the Manfrotto 484RC2. Have actually really come to like this as much as my old ballhead.

I have a spreadsheet I've put together with many details on different tripods. However it is geared towards my needs. You can modify it to your needs. It includes some heads on it. Send me your e-mail, and I'd be happy to forward it to you.

Going with Aluminum, you can definitely get a complete tripod and head for under $200. For Carbon Fiber, you'll want to raise your sites to $400. That was the biggest step for me. I went from saving money and getting a travel only tripod holding only 5 lbs, to a lightweight replacement tripod able to hold 11 lbs. My old tripod had a 13 lb rating.

Best of luck on your search.

Kris

doady
 
Posts: 92

Re: Tripod Suggestions

Post Thu Jul 17, 2008 2:41 pm


prinothcat wrote:True, but comparing apples and apples, in this case Aluminum alloy tripods I bet those that are built with more material, hence heavier, are going to be more stable. Regardless of whether or not the hold that same load or not.

I have an idea, why don;t you go out and side by side all these tripods and report back to the class and then we will bow to your position of knowingness.


Again, all tripod legs and all heads have a weight capacity according the manufacturer. I am simply saying we should trust that, not my "knowingness" or their weight. Unless you are professionally involved in the field of tripod design and construction and can refute the info provided by the manufacturers themselves, you shouldn't be talking.

bbmphoto wrote:What I liked with the Manfrotto 190 series
- Flip Lever for quickly extending or folding up the legs.
- Cushion pads on legs. Great for cold weather and gripping (not on Carbon Fiber models)
- 3 extensions on the legs is faster and taller than 4 extensions, However for travel 4 legs is more compact that 3 extensions.
- Name and reliability.


This is the tripod I bought very recently: the 190XPROB. IMO,the real selling point of this tripod is the horizontal centre column, which, combined with the legs ability for low position, is great for macro. I wanted a lightweight and compact tripod as well, but I figure I can keep my current tripod as well when I need it, instead of spending an extra $150 or so dollars. The 190 isn't THAT heavy anyways, not like the 055.

Next

Board index Equipment Digital Cameras Tripod Suggestions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron