Slik 330 or Cullmann Magic for G1/2?

lobster · Mar 16, 2002

I am trying to decide on a all-purpose tripod for my G1 (same as G2, just a little older -- in case anyone forgot what a G1 was). I have two candidates: Slik 330 and Cullmann Magic (Video?).

Can any one share your experience with either of the two tripods? Any other suggestions/comments are also welcome.

Many thanks in advance.

Lobster

Ruffian · Mar 16, 2002

lobster said:
I am trying to decide on a all-purpose tripod for my G1 (same as
G2, just a little older -- in case anyone forgot what a G1 was). I
have two candidates: Slik 330 and Cullmann Magic (Video?).

Can any one share your experience with either of the two tripods?
Any other suggestions/comments are also welcome.

I'm set for myself on a Bogen 3001D/3262QR combo; my fluffy coat is already a tank anyway, so it makes little difference for me carrying another half a kilogram.

--Underbid the competitors and then, after the customer is committed, say, 'Oops, you really need to buy more stuff to make this work. Did I forget to mention that?' -- Scott Adams =[ The Dilbert Future ]=Goto http://www.printerboyweb.net/G2 for my own little gallery. =)

lobster · Mar 16, 2002

Thanks PB for your info. Bogen combo is very nice, but as you pointed out very heavy (I am estimating 6-7 lb?). I am not as strong as you (as evident from the leading candidates of tripods).

Is the 3001 reversible? I mean, can you mount the camera head down under the center column? If you can, do you find it useful?

Lobster

PB said:
lobster said:

I am trying to decide on a all-purpose tripod for my G1 (same as
G2, just a little older -- in case anyone forgot what a G1 was). I
have two candidates: Slik 330 and Cullmann Magic (Video?).

Can any one share your experience with either of the two tripods?
Any other suggestions/comments are also welcome.

Click to expand...

I'm set for myself on a Bogen 3001D/3262QR combo; my fluffy coat is
already a tank anyway, so it makes little difference for me
carrying another half a kilogram.

--
Underbid the competitors and then, after the customer is committed,
say, 'Oops, you really need to buy more stuff to make this work.
Did I forget to mention that?' -- Scott Adams =[ The Dilbert Future
]=
Goto http://www.printerboyweb.net/G2 for my own little gallery. =)

Dick S · Mar 16, 2002

Take a look at the Gitzo Ezplorer 2220.

About $200 but verrrry well worth it. Does many more things than any other pod on the market that I am aware of. (Keywords--"aware of" ;-)))--**** S, Temecula, CA'Capturing The Essence'

lobster · Mar 17, 2002

Thank you ****.

I have heard of good things about the 2220. But I am having trouble finding its specs on the web. Searching B&H on "Gitzo 2220" also failed. Can you point me to some webpage or give me some specs?

Thanks.

Lobster

**** S said:
Take a look at the Gitzo Ezplorer 2220.
About $200 but verrrry well worth it. Does many more things than
any other pod on the market that I am aware of. (Keywords--"aware
of" ;-)))
--
**** S, Temecula, CA
'Capturing The Essence'

lobster · Mar 17, 2002

Never mind **** for the request on more info on 2220. I searched this forum and found some of your previous postings.

By the way it is not a light tripod: 5 lb just for the leg.

What is your recommendation on heads? Not that I am sold on the Gitzo idea (expensive and heavy, but a great piece of work), just want to get the whole idea. Thanks.

Lobster

**** S said:
Take a look at the Gitzo Ezplorer 2220.
About $200 but verrrry well worth it. Does many more things than
any other pod on the market that I am aware of. (Keywords--"aware
of" ;-)))
--
**** S, Temecula, CA
'Capturing The Essence'

ADSinger · Mar 17, 2002

I'm one of a number of Cullman users on the forum. I have the Magic 2 and think it's ideal for our cameras: relatively light, quite stable, packs small, and reasonably priced. I bought the photo version with QR ball head, but found the QR more trouble than it was worth. I ended up getting a small Stroboframe ball head for it. Were I to do it again, I'd get the Video version with pan head, and still go ahead and buy the Stroboframe, thus having two head styles. But I must say I am very pleased with the Cullman. It's a wholly different animal from other moderately priced light tripods. It is built different and functions different, the lightness come from the design, not from flimsy materials.

alan.

lobster · Mar 17, 2002

Thanks, Alan.

Cullmann and Stroboframe, obviously you are a big fan of German engineering and manufacturing.

It is a very important piece of info that you didn't like the QR on the Magic. Can you describe what exactly went wrong? QuickRelease is a good convenience and I intent to use it.

Lobster

ADSinger said:
I'm one of a number of Cullman users on the forum. I have the Magic
2 and think it's ideal for our cameras: relatively light, quite
stable, packs small, and reasonably priced. I bought the photo
version with QR ball head, but found the QR more trouble than it
was worth. I ended up getting a small Stroboframe ball head for it.
Were I to do it again, I'd get the Video version with pan head, and
still go ahead and buy the Stroboframe, thus having two head
styles. But I must say I am very pleased with the Cullman. It's a
wholly different animal from other moderately priced light tripods.
It is built different and functions different, the lightness come
from the design, not from flimsy materials.

alan.

Richard P.86467 · Mar 17, 2002

I bought the Magic 2 two days ago and I'm liking it for it's purpose--compact and lightweight. I've decided to leave the QR plate screwed to my G2 all the time--it doesn't get in the way. The ball head is good for quick adjustment. With a spirit level in the hot shoe, panos are easy because the center column will rotate.

lobster said:
Thanks, Alan.

Cullmann and Stroboframe, obviously you are a big fan of German
engineering and manufacturing.

It is a very important piece of info that you didn't like the QR on
the Magic. Can you describe what exactly went wrong? QuickRelease
is a good convenience and I intent to use it.

Lobster

--Keep An Eye OpenRichard P.

ADSinger · Mar 17, 2002

Hey, I don't ride BMWs for nuthin'.

The QR on the Cullman is such that it must be placed on the camera before the camera can be set onto the tripod. Thus you either leave it on the camera all the time, or have to remove the QR, screw it into the camera, then mount the camera for each tripod use. It also is a little clumsy in the mounting, or maybe I am, but it just wasn't convenient. I tend to not use the tripod for every shot, and didn't like the idea of keeping the QR on the G2.

I still feel having the pan head AND a standard ball is the way to go, ready for anything. In fact I had made a deal to swap my Cullman QR ball for a Cullman video pan head, but it fell through, so if anyone wants to swap, let me know.

Different strokes....Anyway, the tripod is excellent, set it up however you like it.

alan.

lobster said:
Cullmann and Stroboframe, obviously you are a big fan of German
engineering and manufacturing.

It is a very important piece of info that you didn't like the QR on
the Magic. Can you describe what exactly went wrong? QuickRelease
is a good convenience and I intent to use it.

Lobster

ADSinger said:

I'm one of a number of Cullman users on the forum. I have the Magic
2 and think it's ideal for our cameras: relatively light, quite
stable, packs small, and reasonably priced. I bought the photo
version with QR ball head, but found the QR more trouble than it
was worth. I ended up getting a small Stroboframe ball head for it.
Were I to do it again, I'd get the Video version with pan head, and
still go ahead and buy the Stroboframe, thus having two head
styles. But I must say I am very pleased with the Cullman. It's a
wholly different animal from other moderately priced light tripods.
It is built different and functions different, the lightness come
from the design, not from flimsy materials.

alan.

Click to expand...

Kind · Mar 17, 2002

I have the cullmann magic II , it works good.
I have the QR plate, and leave it on the G2
it hasnt bothered me yet.

Blue60407 · Mar 17, 2002

I am pleased with the Slik U9000 for use with my G1, N65. Sturdy without being heavy (about 3.5 lb).

lobster said:
I am trying to decide on a all-purpose tripod for my G1 (same as
G2, just a little older -- in case anyone forgot what a G1 was). I
have two candidates: Slik 330 and Cullmann Magic (Video?).

Can any one share your experience with either of the two tripods?
Any other suggestions/comments are also welcome.

Many thanks in advance.

Lobster

--Blue http://www.pbase.com/image/784655

lobster · Mar 17, 2002

Blue:

Thank you. Finally some reply from the Slik side.

Does the U9000 have a QuickRelease plate? How do you like it?

Lobster

Blue said:
lobster said:

I am trying to decide on a all-purpose tripod for my G1 (same as
G2, just a little older -- in case anyone forgot what a G1 was). I
have two candidates: Slik 330 and Cullmann Magic (Video?).

Can any one share your experience with either of the two tripods?
Any other suggestions/comments are also welcome.

Many thanks in advance.

Lobster

Click to expand...

--
Blue
http://www.pbase.com/image/784655

lobster · Mar 17, 2002

I do intent to leave the QR on the camera so I guess I should not have any problem then?

On videohead vs. ballhead debate, I thought Vidohead has better control but has too much weight. So I plan to go with Video since I am getting a light pod and can afford a few ounces. Am I missing some point?

Lobster

ADSinger said:
The QR on the Cullman is such that it must be placed on the camera
before the camera can be set onto the tripod. Thus you either leave
it on the camera all the time, or have to remove the QR, screw it
into the camera, then mount the camera for each tripod use. It also
is a little clumsy in the mounting, or maybe I am, but it just
wasn't convenient. I tend to not use the tripod for every shot, and
didn't like the idea of keeping the QR on the G2.

I still feel having the pan head AND a standard ball is the way to
go, ready for anything. In fact I had made a deal to swap my
Cullman QR ball for a Cullman video pan head, but it fell through,
so if anyone wants to swap, let me know.

Different strokes....Anyway, the tripod is excellent, set it up
however you like it.

alan.

lobster said:

Cullmann and Stroboframe, obviously you are a big fan of German
engineering and manufacturing.

It is a very important piece of info that you didn't like the QR on
the Magic. Can you describe what exactly went wrong? QuickRelease
is a good convenience and I intent to use it.

Lobster

ADSinger said:

I'm one of a number of Cullman users on the forum. I have the Magic
2 and think it's ideal for our cameras: relatively light, quite
stable, packs small, and reasonably priced. I bought the photo
version with QR ball head, but found the QR more trouble than it
was worth. I ended up getting a small Stroboframe ball head for it.
Were I to do it again, I'd get the Video version with pan head, and
still go ahead and buy the Stroboframe, thus having two head
styles. But I must say I am very pleased with the Cullman. It's a
wholly different animal from other moderately priced light tripods.
It is built different and functions different, the lightness come
from the design, not from flimsy materials.

alan.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

ADSinger · Mar 17, 2002

I don't think anything matches a ballhead for quickness and ease of use. There's a single adjuster for movement in all planes. The video head has separate adjustments for each plane of movement, good for stitching panos, poor for most every other use (except for panning a video camera, of course). Most every pro uses a ball head, there must be a reason.

alan.

lobster said:
I do intent to leave the QR on the camera so I guess I should not
have any problem then?

On videohead vs. ballhead debate, I thought Vidohead has better
control but has too much weight. So I plan to go with Video since
I am getting a light pod and can afford a few ounces. Am I missing
some point?

Lobster

Mike K · Mar 17, 2002

Pan heads are easier to use for horizontal vertical panoramas. However, the video head is a 2 way pan head, and this is a big disadvantage as one cannot mount the camera in portrait orientation (vertically). a 3 way pan head gets rid of this issue. I have the ball head version. One can even buy seperate ball heads that pan too. Here is a big thread on the Magic II tripod topic.
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1010&message=2194799
Mike K

lobster said:
I do intent to leave the QR on the camera so I guess I should not
have any problem then?

On videohead vs. ballhead debate, I thought Vidohead has better
control but has too much weight. So I plan to go with Video since
I am getting a light pod and can afford a few ounces. Am I missing
some point?

Lobster

Terry A. Austin · Mar 17, 2002

Lobster,

Be sure you caught Mike's earlier comment.

I bought the Cullmann Magic2 Video. I adore the tripod but I dislike the video head. It is, as Mike pointed out a two way pan. It WILL NOT allow you to turn the camera on it's side for a portrait orientation shot.

I've bought a Bogen ball head to replace the video head. Now if I can find someone who is interested in the Video head. I'll probably take it to eBay.

Terry
--Terrywww.pbase.com/[email protected]

Dick S · Mar 18, 2002

lobster said:
What is your recommendation on heads?

OK, you asked.

I have a Bogen/Manfrotto 3 way ball w/pan and a 3 way pan both with Q/R, a bunch of bubble levels etc.
What do I use---

Well, I'm lazy I use a $25 Bogen 3009 Mini ball 90% of the time unless in a studio environment with my big dog 3046 pod. I have three of them--you can put them in your pocket, put your flashes on them, play catch with them, juggle them etc. They are plenty sturdy enough for my G1 (Shhhhh-I have even used them with my Mamiya 645 stuff---Definitely Not Recommended, though it worked).

Get the Bogen/Manfrotto 3008 Table Top Tripod w/Mini Ball Head for $38 from B&H and included is the 3009 and the 3007 table pod. Neat combo!
Now aren't you sorry you askled???????
Regards--**** S, Temecula, CA'Capturing The Essence'

Blue60407 · Mar 18, 2002

Yes, it has a quick-release plate along with a bubble level. I really, really like it. Seems like I got it for about $46.

lobster said:
Thank you. Finally some reply from the Slik side.

Does the U9000 have a QuickRelease plate? How do you like it?

Lobster

Blue said:

lobster said:

I am trying to decide on a all-purpose tripod for my G1 (same as
G2, just a little older -- in case anyone forgot what a G1 was). I
have two candidates: Slik 330 and Cullmann Magic (Video?).

Can any one share your experience with either of the two tripods?
Any other suggestions/comments are also welcome.

Many thanks in advance.

Lobster

Click to expand...

--
Blue
http://www.pbase.com/image/784655

Click to expand...

--Blue http://www.pbase.com/image/784655

NKH · Mar 18, 2002

actually, the bogen 3001D is only 3.7 lbs. (legs only). the center column does not reverse BUT, even better, the legs can be spread horizontal and there is a low angle adapter so you can take photos just about 7 inches off the ground. the 3001D also has quick-action lever leg locks for quick action. if you went with the 3001PRO, the center column can be positioned vertically or horizontally at a slight weight and size expense (0.5 lbs. heavier and 1.25" longer folded. i've got my eye on one of those along with a 3029 head (i personally don't care for QR plates/heads) to complement my velbon maxi 343e.

i'm not familiar with the slik 330 but i do own 3 sliks and they're "okay" although i don't like the extensive use of plastic parts...the tension collar on one of mine is cracked.

good luck.

--norm

Slik 330 or Cullmann Magic for G1/2?

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Leading Member

Forum Enthusiast

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Member

Veteran Member

Forum Enthusiast

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Well-known member

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Keyboard shortcuts