Travel tripod to match Markins Q10

Started Jul 9, 2012 | Discussions
dodgyexposure
Regular MemberPosts: 233Gear list
Like?
Travel tripod to match Markins Q10
Jul 9, 2012

I have a Markins Q10 ballhead, which I use with my Manfrotto 055cxpro3 legs at home and close to home/car.

I am looking for a travel tripod, and would prefer to use my Q10 with it, both to save the cost of purchasing a new ballhead and because I really like the Q10.

I have seen a few threads (both here and elsewhere) that lead me to believe that the base diameter of the Q10 (62mm) rules out any travel tripods where the legs fold up over the baseplate/head (e.g. Feisol transfunctional, Gitzo 1541T), unless the centre column is so long that the ballhead is outside the folded legs (e.g. Gitzo 1542T), which defeats one of the objectives of the upward folding travel tripod - minimising folded length.

Apart from purchasing a smaller head (like a Q3T) specifically to match the tripod, does anyone have a suggestion for a travel tripod that would work well with my Q10?

My main use would be trekking and general bushwalking, so size (folded length) and weight are important.

I don't currently have heavy lenses, but I would prefer quality and stability that would enable me to use a tripod with future gear.

Thanks.
--
Cheers,
Damien

 dodgyexposure's gear list:dodgyexposure's gear list
Sony RX100 Olympus Tough TG-2 Canon EOS 600D Canon EOS 6D Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM +6 more
Pentax Q10
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
mosswings
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,827Gear list
Like?
Re: Travel tripod to match Markins Q10
In reply to dodgyexposure, Jul 10, 2012

dodgyexposure wrote:

I have a Markins Q10 ballhead, which I use with my Manfrotto 055cxpro3 legs at home and close to home/car.

I am looking for a travel tripod, and would prefer to use my Q10 with it, both to save the cost of purchasing a new ballhead and because I really like the Q10.

I have seen a few threads (both here and elsewhere) that lead me to believe that the base diameter of the Q10 (62mm) rules out any travel tripods where the legs fold up over the baseplate/head (e.g. Feisol transfunctional, Gitzo 1541T), unless the centre column is so long that the ballhead is outside the folded legs (e.g. Gitzo 1542T), which defeats one of the objectives of the upward folding travel tripod - minimising folded length.

Apart from purchasing a smaller head (like a Q3T) specifically to match the tripod, does anyone have a suggestion for a travel tripod that would work well with my Q10?

My main use would be trekking and general bushwalking, so size (folded length) and weight are important.

I don't currently have heavy lenses, but I would prefer quality and stability that would enable me to use a tripod with future gear.

Thanks.
--
Cheers,
Damien

You've got the basic problem identified. With travel tripods (like the Feisol 3341/3441) the ballhead pano base has to be 53-54mm or smaller for the legs to fold parallel to the center column. What I do is extend the center column a bit to fit the ballhead so that the QR is flush with the feet rather than inside them. Gives you enough clearance to move the legs inward a touch.

 mosswings's gear list:mosswings's gear list
Olympus XZ-1 Nikon D90 Nikon D7100 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
dodgyexposure
Regular MemberPosts: 233Gear list
Like?
Re: Travel tripod to match Markins Q10
In reply to mosswings, Jul 10, 2012

mosswings wrote:

You've got the basic problem identified. With travel tripods (like the Feisol 3341/3441) the ballhead pano base has to be 53-54mm or smaller for the legs to fold parallel to the center column. What I do is extend the center column a bit to fit the ballhead so that the QR is flush with the feet rather than inside them. Gives you enough clearance to move the legs inward a touch.

Which tripod do you have?

Can you explain a bit more what you mean by extending the centre column in this circumstance? Let me explain. So far as I am aware, the travel tripods that fold upwards do so with the centre column in the fully extended position (so that none of the centre column extends below the baseplate, therefore minimising the folded length. If that is the case, then there doesn't seem to be any scope for further extending the centre column in order to place the ballhead flush with the tripod feet.

Please let me know if that isn't clear, and I'll try to rephrase.

-- hide signature --

Cheers,
Damien

 dodgyexposure's gear list:dodgyexposure's gear list
Sony RX100 Olympus Tough TG-2 Canon EOS 600D Canon EOS 6D Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
mosswings
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,827Gear list
Like?
Re: Travel tripod to match Markins Q10
In reply to dodgyexposure, Jul 10, 2012

dodgyexposure wrote:

mosswings wrote:

You've got the basic problem identified. With travel tripods (like the Feisol 3341/3441) the ballhead pano base has to be 53-54mm or smaller for the legs to fold parallel to the center column. What I do is extend the center column a bit to fit the ballhead so that the QR is flush with the feet rather than inside them. Gives you enough clearance to move the legs inward a touch.

Which tripod do you have?

Can you explain a bit more what you mean by extending the centre column in this circumstance? Let me explain. So far as I am aware, the travel tripods that fold upwards do so with the centre column in the fully extended position (so that none of the centre column extends below the baseplate, therefore minimising the folded length. If that is the case, then there doesn't seem to be any scope for further extending the centre column in order to place the ballhead flush with the tripod feet.

Please let me know if that isn't clear, and I'll try to rephrase.

-- hide signature --

Cheers,
Damien

I have the Feisol 3441S. This tripod has a dual-section center column. The outer section is stored fully extended, but the inner section is collapsed, allowing for some adjustment room. The Feisol 3441T and the short column version of the 3441 don't have a two-section column and can't do this trick. You wind up with something that looks like this with a Q10 class ballhead:
http://reallybigcameras.com/Feisol/Tall_Traveler.htm

I should note that the 3441/3442 were really designed for the CB-30C ballhead, whose body is only 40mm in diameter. With even something like the Q3T the legs will barely parallelize using a 2-section center column, and with a Q3E they'll splay slightly.

If you want a relatively compact tripod that can handle a Q10, you should consider the Feisol 3442:
http://reallybigcameras.com/Feisol/Tournament_Class.htm

This tripod's legs reverse fold for a carry length of around 19", but you of course grow the diameter of the package. No way around that.

 mosswings's gear list:mosswings's gear list
Olympus XZ-1 Nikon D90 Nikon D7100 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
dodgyexposure
Regular MemberPosts: 233Gear list
Like?
Re: Travel tripod to match Markins Q10
In reply to mosswings, Jul 10, 2012

Thanks, mosswings, you have been very helpful. To top it all off, it would be great if you could show a photo of your set up in folded up, fully compact position, showing the placement of the Q10.

How do you find the quality of the Feisol tripod? No retailer here has them, so I can't lay my hands on one to see and feel it. For terms of comparison, I have a Manfrotto carbon fibre 055cxpro3, if that helps.
--
Cheers,
Damien

 dodgyexposure's gear list:dodgyexposure's gear list
Sony RX100 Olympus Tough TG-2 Canon EOS 600D Canon EOS 6D Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
mosswings
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,827Gear list
Like?
Re: Travel tripod to match Markins Q10
In reply to dodgyexposure, Jul 11, 2012

dodgyexposure wrote:

Thanks, mosswings, you have been very helpful. To top it all off, it would be great if you could show a photo of your set up in folded up, fully compact position, showing the placement of the Q10.

How do you find the quality of the Feisol tripod? No retailer here has them, so I can't lay my hands on one to see and feel it. For terms of comparison, I have a Manfrotto carbon fibre 055cxpro3, if that helps.
--
Cheers,
Damien

I'd love to do that, but I don't run a Q10 on the 3441S/T; it doesn't fit. I'm sorry if the wording of my comments led you astray. My comments were not specific to the Q10; any ballhead that you mount on the 3341/3441 will benefit from the partial center column extension trick I described.

The Q10 absolutely won't fit on the 3341/3441 tripod without a large amount of leg splay. That's why I suggested the Tournament series for Q10 and larger ballheads, and provided the link showing a Q10-class ballhead mounted with the legs reversed over it. The largest ballhead that one can mount on the 3341/3441 without a lot of splay is a Q3. If you visit this link:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1164700

you can see how a Q3 Emile-size ballhead (the PhotoClam PC-36NS) fits. The PC-36NS has a panning base diameter of 53.5mm, the Q3 Emile 56mm. The PhotoClam ProGold (with a 38mm ball like the Q3) also works. The big issue is that panning base diameter; that's what makes the Q3T so nice since the panning base projects only 1mm beyond the housing rather than 4mm. Finally, here's some pictures of the Q3T on a 3441T:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=929662

You can see that if the 3441S with the dual section center column were used, the ballhead could be moved about 1.5" farther towards the leg ends and would allow the legs to close in a bit more. By judicious extension a Q3 Emile can fit by tucking the projecting panning base between the leg twist-locks.

Overall, I am very impressed with the Feisol tripods. They're of high quality and the large diameter legs make for a very stable platform capable of carrying a lot of weight. Even the center column is pretty solid, though not as solid as a direct spider mount. My tripod does not feature the anti-rotation legs. Some like them, some not. The price difference is 30% for that feature, and I would consider buying a better ballhead first.

 mosswings's gear list:mosswings's gear list
Olympus XZ-1 Nikon D90 Nikon D7100 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
dodgyexposure
Regular MemberPosts: 233Gear list
Like?
Re: Travel tripod to match Markins Q10
In reply to mosswings, Jul 11, 2012

Thanks for your informative reply. I have found a few very useful tripod/head reviews over at POTN.

It looks like I may have to give up on the dream of using my Q10 on a travel tripod . . . unless someone else can come up with an alternative.
--
Cheers,
Damien

 dodgyexposure's gear list:dodgyexposure's gear list
Sony RX100 Olympus Tough TG-2 Canon EOS 600D Canon EOS 6D Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads