Tripod help please !

Hi Folks,

I have a D50 and heaviest lens is 80-200 2.8. This combination with a SB-600 on top would weigh around 2 Kg. I currently have a tripod with a load of 2 Kg, so even without the flash not exactly a steady set-up !

I am off to Utah in June and think that as it's a special trip I could get myself a more sturdy tripod for those vast landscape shots. I presently don't use my tripod that much, but realise I should more so I can use slower shutter speeds for creative purposes etc. If it was too heavy I would not use it much. I'm thinking of the following combination:

1) Feisol CT-3401 + Manfrotto 488RC2 ballhead = £170

Max. load head - 8 Kg, load legs 7 Kg, head weighs 670 g

Max. height is 141 cm (to 168 cm with column), folded 49 cm, weighs 1.5Kg; total weight 2.2 Kg

-Anybody have this combination?
-Is the weight prohibitive (I'm a small guy -weight only 65 Kg !!)?
-I'm 173 cm tall - will this set-up be tall enough?
-Will it be able to happily hold my D50, 80-200 and flash?

-Anyone have this combination....does the set-up all fit in the Feisol shoulder bag that comes with the tripod?
-Would I need to buy the Feisol panning base?

Any opinions on the CT-3441B:

http://www.feisol.com/english/feisolen.htm

Would the lack of a tension knob be significant? The high minimum height would be restrictive?

Sorry for all the questions !!!!!

Thanks for your input.

Graham

Meekyman said:

1) Feisol CT-3401 + Manfrotto 488RC2 ballhead = £170

Click to expand...

Meekyman said:

-Anybody have this combination?

Click to expand...

A friend of mine have this combo, apart from that he chose the RC4 QR. He seems pretty happy with that combo. The main disadvantage of the 488 is it's weight, IMO. It's a pretty good ballhead for the money otherwise.

I went for the Kirk BH-3, mainly because I like the arcastyle QR better, but also for the weight.

Meekyman said:

-Is the weight prohibitive (I'm a small guy -weight only 65 Kg !!)?

Click to expand...

Probably not. My friend is just 5kg hevier than you, and approx the same lenght and he does not think so, at least, but he hasn't been hikiong with it really.

Meekyman said:

-I'm 173 cm tall - will this set-up be tall enough?

Click to expand...

I'm 183cm and think it's okay. It's a bit on the short side for vertical shots though.

Meekyman said:

-Will it be able to happily hold my D50, 80-200 and flash?

Click to expand...

Yep.

Meekyman said:

-Would I need to buy the Feisol panning base?

Click to expand...

No, the 488 have a built in "panning base".

Dumbo,

Thanks for your answer !

dumbo said:

A friend of mine have this combo, apart from that he chose the RC4
QR. He seems pretty happy with that combo. The main disadvantage of
the 488 is it's weight, IMO. It's a pretty good ballhead for the
money otherwise.

Click to expand...

You think the 488RC2 is too heavy? Maybe I could "survive" with the 486RC2 - it's under 0.5Kg, load is 6 Kg, guess this will still be stable enough? Wow, the Kirk BH-3 is pricy !!

Cheers

Graham

Meekyman said:

You think the 488RC2 is too heavy?

Click to expand...

Not really, but the "thing" about getting a CF tripod is, IMO, to keep weight down and a "heavy" ballhead does not help in doing that.

Meekyman said:

Maybe I could "survive" with
the 486RC2 - it's under 0.5Kg, load is 6 Kg, guess this will still
be stable enough?

Click to expand...

I would chose the 488 over the 486 since it's more stable and also have a seperate lock for panning. Then, the rated maximum load should be taken with a pinch of salt... It' surely can take the load if the camera rests right on top of it, but what if you want to want to tilt the camera... There is a reason why the more expensive ballheads are rated at 40kg, or even more...

Wow, the Kirk BH-3 is pricy !!

Well... it's not exactly cheap, but it's really nice. If I could have justified it I would have gone for the Markins M10, though, but you have to draw the line somewhere...

I thinks the 488 will do fine. You might want to take a look on the Feisol ballhead to... I cannot recall the price on it though, and I haven't tested it...

I have the 486rc2 (on manfrotto 190pro legs). with a d80 and 70-300VR there is a little creep after locking the head. It seems stable after that but the creep is there. I assume it would be worse with a heavier lens.

Cheers Dumbo:

dumbo said:

I would chose the 488 over the 486 since it's more stable and also
have a seperate lock for panning. Then, the rated maximum load
should be taken with a pinch of salt... It' surely can take the
load if the camera rests right on top of it, but what if you want
to want to tilt the camera... There is a reason why the more
expensive ballheads are rated at 40kg, or even more...

Click to expand...

Ah I think I'm beginning to understand !

dumbo said:

I thinks the 488 will do fine. You might want to take a look on the
Feisol ballhead to... I cannot recall the price on it though, and I
haven't tested it...

Click to expand...

The Feisol Ballhead CB-50HN is a little more pricy than the Manfrotto, but has a maximum load of 19Kg !! For the life of me I can't understand if it also hsa the separate panning lock.....looks like it but not sure. Can anyone confirm if it does? ANy users out there?

http://www.feisol.com/english/feisolen.htm

It's slightly more expensive than the Manfrotto 488RC2 but weighs only 100g less.....worth it?

Cheers

Graham

Anyone ??

Sorry for the shameless bump !

Graham

Meekyman said:

The Feisol Ballhead CB-50HN is a little more pricy than the
Manfrotto, but has a maximum load of 19Kg !! For the life of me I
can't understand if it also hsa the separate panning lock.....looks
like it but not sure. Can anyone confirm if it does? ANy users
out there?

http://www.feisol.com/english/feisolen.htm

It's slightly more expensive than the Manfrotto 488RC2 but weighs
only 100g less.....worth it?

Click to expand...

Graham

Meekyman said:

Manfrotto, but has a maximum load of 19Kg !! For the life of me I
can't understand if it also hsa the separate panning lock.....looks
like it but not sure. Can anyone confirm if it does? ANy users
out there?

Click to expand...

As I understand their website correctly there is one knob for locking and unlocking the complete ballhead, includig panning. Then there is one knob that only locks the ball, and not the panning.

Dumbo,

Thanks for that...I think I'm understanding !

Graham

I am not sure about the leg set from Fiesol, but I will offer my suggestion on a ball head. I have just purchased the Giotto's MH1000-652 ball head, and I have to say, it was hands down a big winner over the Manfrotto 488 RC2 or RC4. It has a tension knob on it, so that is nice, but it will also hold more weight, and I believe weighs about the same as the Manfotto head. Same price too. I have it on a set of Manfrotto 3021PRO legs, and I love the combination. That would be heavier then you want, but that is because of the legs.

[U] Doug_B said:

I have the 486rc2 (on manfrotto 190pro legs). with a d80 and
70-300VR there is a little creep after locking the head. It seems
stable after that but the creep is there. I assume it would be
worse with a heavier lens.

Click to expand...

I used a rather heavy 70-210 f4 on it last year with a Tamron 1.4x ... once you sling it out that far, it sags annoyingly every time it is locked down.

I've just ordered Feisol legs and a Markins ball head to replace the Manfrotto.

--
http://letkeman.net/Photos [/U]

Thanks for that....I'll look into the Giotto's MH1000-652 head !

Cheers

Graham

Out of interest Kim, which legs did you order?

Graham

Hi folks,

I know this seems like penny-pinching, but if I actually get the giottos MH-1000-652 from B&H it's much cheaper than buying in the UK. Now I will be in the US for a week before my trip to Utah - I will be in Houston.

Anyone think it's possible for me to order from B&H and ask them to deliver it to my hotel in Houston? I'm pretty sure I can work out how to use the head without weeks of practice and I'd save a few pounds.

Graham

Everyone,

My current tripod only has a load capability of 2 Kg, which is about the same weight as my D50, 80-200 2.8 and flash !

I'm off to Utah and imagine I will be using the 80-200 2.8 at Arches National Park. Makes sense?

Well I am tempted to get myself a Feisol CT-3401 and Giottos MH100-652 Ballhead (max load 10 Kg with panning lock). This combo seems a good balance of weight/stability and cost. I don't want to have to buy another tripod in the future.

Some simple questions:

1) A good combo?

2) Never used a ballhead....will it be fine for taking landscape and macro photos?

3) I am 173 cm tall (just under 5'10"). The tripod+ballhead, without centre column, will be around 153cm tall at maxiumum extension. Add on the camera and you're looking at 163cm....reckon this will be too short?

4) Anybody in the Uk bought direct from Feisol? How long did delivery take? Were you stung by VAT/import duties?

Cheers

Graham

Meekyman said:

2) Never used a ballhead....will it be fine for taking landscape
and macro photos?

Click to expand...

A ballhead is faster and easier to work with, but for macro use a 3-way head or even a geared head might be the best solution. I use a ball head for macro, though, and have no problem, and I go to 2:1 magnification quite often. At 4:1 it's a little more tricky.

Meekyman said:

3) I am 173 cm tall (just under 5'10"). The tripod+ballhead,
without centre column, will be around 153cm tall at maxiumum
extension. Add on the camera and you're looking at 163cm....reckon
this will be too short?

Click to expand...

I am 183cm and find the height of the CT-3401 okay. If you stand for a long while looking into the VF there can be a little stress on the back. When shooting in vertical format it's more of an issue.

Meekyman said:

4) Anybody in the Uk bought direct from Feisol? How long did
delivery take? Were you stung by VAT/import duties?

Click to expand...

I remember others from different places around the world, including the UK how have the tripod about 1 week from the order was placed. A few people have had to wait longer.

Meekyman said:

Out of interest Kim, which legs did you order?

Click to expand...

Didn't see this question the firts time around. I decided to bite the bullet and get the tall ones in 4 sections ... with the 39mm first section ... HUGE. I must say ... this sucker is stable. Great big platform for the ball head, no need for a column since it opens taller than me before the ballhead and cam go on.

--
http://letkeman.net/Photos

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/272449-REG/Bogen_Manfrotto_486RC2_486RC2_Compact_Ball_Head.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/275103-REG/Slik_613329_Pro_330DX_Tripod_legs_only_.html

the above combination is the lightest but sturdy enough for my need as my latest acquisition. this, after i actually went to b & h and tried several dozens. i'm tired of heavy tripods and ballhead. i need to enjoy my outdoor experience without feeling like a pack mule. below is my combo (heavy at around 10 lbs) before this last purchase.





also my work indoor (video and photo for friends and family) will require me to use my d70, 18-200vr, sb800 attached to a stroboframe camera flip bracket (approximately 5-6 lbs total).



this is me at the b & h store this weekend. thanks.

Victor,

Hope you like your purchase, but 10lb is way too much for me to carry out and about. No wonder you felt like a pack-mule !!

The combination I am looking at weighs in at around 1.9Kg, around 4lb, with ballhead load of 10 Kg and legs of 7 Kg. I think that's a good balance of stability and weight.

To be honest my current tripod produces photos sharp enough for me at the moment with lighter lenses although don't know what would happen if I printed and got enlarged, e.g D50 with Tamron 17-50, 5s exposure:



I wonder how much sharper this would be with a more stable tripod?

But when I put the 80-200 on this tripod, it suffers. I don't generally use a tripod, but I'm off on a good trip, will have a car and don't wnat to come back thinking "damn I wish I'd bought a more stable tripod" or words to that effect.

Graham

Thanks Dumbo !

Graham