-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Tripod Help
- Thread starter ClaudioG
- Start date
George Payne Jr
Leading Member
I as well am looking for a tripod and head...great info here. Thanks!
--
D200,D80,D50
18-200 VR, 50mm 1.8
SB800
--
D200,D80,D50
18-200 VR, 50mm 1.8
SB800
LilKnytt
Veteran Member
Claudio,
for some reason they just called me & the price is $ 10.00 each. I've canceled my order for now & they've refunded my money.
I've also showed my husband the sticks. He's a film cameraman working for the studios here in Los Angeles. He's the one running the camera & he knows sticks.
He's very impressed with them. Very high quality as far as he's concerned.
Just thought you'd like to know what a professional cameraman thought of them.
I may still get the spikes........ I'll think about it a little more. I've not ever worked with spikes & my husband actually think they can be of help, but the sticks are so good in many ways he feels I won't need them.
Lil
for some reason they just called me & the price is $ 10.00 each. I've canceled my order for now & they've refunded my money.
I've also showed my husband the sticks. He's a film cameraman working for the studios here in Los Angeles. He's the one running the camera & he knows sticks.
He's very impressed with them. Very high quality as far as he's concerned.
Just thought you'd like to know what a professional cameraman thought of them.
I may still get the spikes........ I'll think about it a little more. I've not ever worked with spikes & my husband actually think they can be of help, but the sticks are so good in many ways he feels I won't need them.
Lil
uwe_r
Senior Member
I have the CT-3471 (4 sections) and it is extremely stable - also, unless you are very tall there is no need to extend the 4th section - I am 6' 4" and never extended it even once. 3 sections extended plus ball head (M-20 in my case) gives sufficient height.
The centre column is actually not bad at all and very stable. I remove it when shooting the 70-200VR with a TC, but leave it on otherwise. When shooting groups or series of portraits it saves a lot of time without degrading image quality IMHO.
Cheers,
Uwe
Claudio:
1. No problem. But, keep in mind that I just wanted a very good solution, that foremost had to be of high quality; yet, still simple, light-weight, and VERY easy to carry. Your requirements are more than likely different, and in those cases, you should probably go with a good heavy one, as you won't need to lug it around...
2. Next alternative, for me, would have been a dedicated "Hiking-Tripod", such as the" Kirk Low Boy"; you, can check out on their web site (same as with their BH-1Ball Head & Plates), and like these photos from that site: (I left out the ones with the woman kneeling to use it, and the picture of her on her belly using it)
3. And here is an example of what feet for your Tripod will look like (Got mine from B&H, the ones below are from the Kirk Site and for their "Low Boy" Hiking Tripod---- best Hiking Tripod available according to many, just that I don't like having to kneel, or sit to use it):
--
BRJR....(My cameras & lenses are listed in my profile)
1. No problem. But, keep in mind that I just wanted a very good solution, that foremost had to be of high quality; yet, still simple, light-weight, and VERY easy to carry. Your requirements are more than likely different, and in those cases, you should probably go with a good heavy one, as you won't need to lug it around...
2. Next alternative, for me, would have been a dedicated "Hiking-Tripod", such as the" Kirk Low Boy"; you, can check out on their web site (same as with their BH-1Ball Head & Plates), and like these photos from that site: (I left out the ones with the woman kneeling to use it, and the picture of her on her belly using it)
3. And here is an example of what feet for your Tripod will look like (Got mine from B&H, the ones below are from the Kirk Site and for their "Low Boy" Hiking Tripod---- best Hiking Tripod available according to many, just that I don't like having to kneel, or sit to use it):
--
BRJR....(My cameras & lenses are listed in my profile)
LilKnytt
Veteran Member
Yes, glad we caught that on time for you. So sorry..... I feel the ad is a little confusing.
So now I have to decide if I need them or not. I can't make up my mind - again.
I've not ever had them & as much as I see use for them, if I've always gotten away without needing nor wanting them.......
Lil
ClaudioG:
I forgot to add that the "Kirk Low Boy", a dedicated "Hiking-Tripod", is really a cut down version of my Tripod, with some other Kirk modifications, resulting in this highly regarded "Kirk Hiking Tripod"
--
BRJR....(My cameras & lenses are listed in my profile)
I forgot to add that the "Kirk Low Boy", a dedicated "Hiking-Tripod", is really a cut down version of my Tripod, with some other Kirk modifications, resulting in this highly regarded "Kirk Hiking Tripod"
--
BRJR....(My cameras & lenses are listed in my profile)
NRothschild
Veteran Member
Uwe,
If you have a pair of calipers, could you measure the diameter of the 4 leg sections? With the top 3 sections extended and the last section fully retracted, what is the height of the plate from the ground?
TIA!
--
Regards,
Neil
If you have a pair of calipers, could you measure the diameter of the 4 leg sections? With the top 3 sections extended and the last section fully retracted, what is the height of the plate from the ground?
TIA!
--
Regards,
Neil
NRothschild
Veteran Member
Appreciate the images. I use a Tundra bag, for storage and transport. I keep my G1228, Feidol monopod, and Sidekick in there, plus any other parts related to the tripod. My G1410 doesn't have a comfy home.
--
Regards,
Neil
--
Regards,
Neil
uwe_r
Senior Member
No calipers on hand, but I can borrow some tomorrow and report back; will also measure the height with 3 sections extended.
Cheers,
Uwe
uwe_r
Senior Member
Seems nobody here has a pair of calipers available - so I improvised with a c-clamp and 2 pieces of wood and measured the inner distances: 37mm/33mm/29mm/25mm - maybe 1 mm tolerance.
The 3471 with 3 sections extended (4th collapsed): height of base plate 117 cm
dto. with collapsed centre column - base: 122.5 cm
dto. plus M20 with standard clamp: 133 cm
dto. plus D200 with battery grip and Kirk L-plate - viewfinder height: 147 cm
HTH,
Uwe
NRothschild
Veteran Member
Thanks, Uwe! Your measurements sound about right. It's interesting that the 4th section is only 2mm diameter smaller than the TOP section of my G1228 (2 series- 27mm). That's a nice fat leg for a 4th section. It is probably comparable to a Gitzo 3 series 3rd section, old style 1325 or new style 3530 but I've never gotten the dimensions on those inner legs. That puts some perspective on the 3 section vs 4 section decision.
I need about 5" more height than the top 3 legs would give me, but that wouldn't be an issue other than another set of collars to play with
Last night I was thinking about all the CF laternatives to Gitzo, especially as it relates to the decision making process in this thread. There aren't many, if any, alternatives to a Gitzo 3 series in the $350 range. I see an occasional 4 section 3 series Benro on Ebay at about $450, but with a center column. I think the Induro C313 is a 3 section 3 series equivilent, also with a center column, but it sells for $540 (Adorama) and that isn't much less than a Gitzo. In the Velbon line, there is the 630 El Carmagne, with a center column, and that comes with a pan/tilt head at $330, but I don't know the leg dimensions so it's difficult to class it. Giottos has a 3 series 3 section (MT8170) for $340, but again it has a center column. There are also Bogen and Slik's, around that price range, but all with center columns.
The above is just to say that whenever I consider these alternatives I always come back to the Feisol 3x71. Although my G1228 center column performs well with 70-200 size lenses, I've never even tested it with a Sidekick and the performance of other maker's center columns is just unkown. I like the idea that I can put my head on a simple flat plate and avoid the uncertainty of the performace impact of a center column, especially when I consider my Sidekick. Plus the extra beefiness of the 4 series diameter 37mm legs. Tough legs to beat
Regards,
Neil
--
Regards,
Neil
I need about 5" more height than the top 3 legs would give me, but that wouldn't be an issue other than another set of collars to play with
Last night I was thinking about all the CF laternatives to Gitzo, especially as it relates to the decision making process in this thread. There aren't many, if any, alternatives to a Gitzo 3 series in the $350 range. I see an occasional 4 section 3 series Benro on Ebay at about $450, but with a center column. I think the Induro C313 is a 3 section 3 series equivilent, also with a center column, but it sells for $540 (Adorama) and that isn't much less than a Gitzo. In the Velbon line, there is the 630 El Carmagne, with a center column, and that comes with a pan/tilt head at $330, but I don't know the leg dimensions so it's difficult to class it. Giottos has a 3 series 3 section (MT8170) for $340, but again it has a center column. There are also Bogen and Slik's, around that price range, but all with center columns.
The above is just to say that whenever I consider these alternatives I always come back to the Feisol 3x71. Although my G1228 center column performs well with 70-200 size lenses, I've never even tested it with a Sidekick and the performance of other maker's center columns is just unkown. I like the idea that I can put my head on a simple flat plate and avoid the uncertainty of the performace impact of a center column, especially when I consider my Sidekick. Plus the extra beefiness of the 4 series diameter 37mm legs. Tough legs to beat
Regards,
Neil
--
Regards,
Neil
Uwe, we were having a discussio with neal about the appropriateness of mounting the d200 on a tripod with the mb200 battery grip. The concern was that the attachment of the grip to the camera body flexes back and forth a little bit and this may introduce some instability. It seems that you are using the mb200 on the tripod, what is your impression on this?
--
ClaudioG
--
ClaudioG
Neil in view of those dimensions, is seems that the 4 section tripod should be almost as stable as the 3 section. Uwe is very tall and still manages to use only 3 sections on his tripod but he uses the center column (I understand). Would you trade at this point the improved usability of the 3 section model with the incrased portability of the 4 section?
(I could still email feisol and get the 4 section. ( - ).
I have a trip to rome planned in june and I think I will have to consider buiyng additional more portable legs. What do you think of the small feisol? it is cheap. Would it work with the m20 ballhead?
Cheers
--
ClaudioG
(I could still email feisol and get the 4 section. ( -
).I have a trip to rome planned in june and I think I will have to consider buiyng additional more portable legs. What do you think of the small feisol? it is cheap. Would it work with the m20 ballhead?
Cheers
--
ClaudioG
uwe_r
Senior Member
I would agree that the fit of the MB200 is shameful (having so much play with a two point connection is a true engineering marvel) and it tends to loosen itself... Still, it gives the camera a better balance and if you tighten the screw frequently it is acceptable.
On a tripod my impression is that the grip (if tightened properly and using a cable release) is not causing problems, just the opposite: with heavy lenses without collar (28-70/2.8, 105VR) it gives a better balance and you can set the friction control a little stiffer as you can move the ball more easily due to better leverage / higher centre of gravity, with long lenses with collar the grip has no stability effect anyhow and the additional weight makes the setup less nose heavy. I will leave it on.
Cheers,
Uwe
TrekSF6
Senior Member
Why not the B40? It should be more than enough to handle the equipment you have. And it won't be so huge. I ordered one last week. Should be delivered soon.
Getting this tripod next:
The Neo Tec leg system sold me on it.
--
Scott A.
TrekSF6
Senior Member
NRothschild
Veteran Member
Claudio,
Yea, I think the 4 section would be fine, especially with a 70-200. It is actually a bit of overkill, to the extent that the ideal single leg set for you would be either 2530 (if you want to err on the side of portability) or maybe 3540S if you wanted to err on the side of stability with a 3 series, but then picking a 4 section to further split the difference
You and I talked about "future lenses". My feeling about the small Feisol is that for a 70-200 (not allowing for TC's- that would be more complicated maybe) it is fine for travel. It is just a little less than I would ideally want for all around use. I'm trying to balance travel verses the ideal home and local use setup.
I think we already decided that the 3x71 series is surely overkill for travel, and my recent post is a meandering way to say that, all in all, even though it's overkill for your current lens, I think it makes a lot of sense just because there aren't many alternatives that make me happy (and I am obsessive about this). I came to the conclusion that the 3x71 is saving you $300, at the cost of about 1-2 LB, but more importantly (to me at least) a bit of extra bulk from the 4" base and 37mm fat legs. The compromise is almost certainly not stability, either relative to, say, a Gitzo 3 series or for the lens you have now. It's size and weight.
Actually, come to think of it, I tried to steer you to the 4 section, but you came back like a stability maniac (like me) saying you wanted the 3 section. Just to be clear- you talked me into that, I didn't talk you into a 3 section, or at least that wasn't my intent.
Regards,
Neil
Regards,
Neil
Yea, I think the 4 section would be fine, especially with a 70-200. It is actually a bit of overkill, to the extent that the ideal single leg set for you would be either 2530 (if you want to err on the side of portability) or maybe 3540S if you wanted to err on the side of stability with a 3 series, but then picking a 4 section to further split the difference
You and I talked about "future lenses". My feeling about the small Feisol is that for a 70-200 (not allowing for TC's- that would be more complicated maybe) it is fine for travel. It is just a little less than I would ideally want for all around use. I'm trying to balance travel verses the ideal home and local use setup.
I think we already decided that the 3x71 series is surely overkill for travel, and my recent post is a meandering way to say that, all in all, even though it's overkill for your current lens, I think it makes a lot of sense just because there aren't many alternatives that make me happy (and I am obsessive about this). I came to the conclusion that the 3x71 is saving you $300, at the cost of about 1-2 LB, but more importantly (to me at least) a bit of extra bulk from the 4" base and 37mm fat legs. The compromise is almost certainly not stability, either relative to, say, a Gitzo 3 series or for the lens you have now. It's size and weight.
Actually, come to think of it, I tried to steer you to the 4 section, but you came back like a stability maniac (like me) saying you wanted the 3 section. Just to be clear- you talked me into that, I didn't talk you into a 3 section, or at least that wasn't my intent.
Regards,
Neil
--Neil in view of those dimensions, is seems that the 4 section
tripod should be almost as stable as the 3 section. Uwe is very
tall and still manages to use only 3 sections on his tripod but he
uses the center column (I understand). Would you trade at this
point the improved usability of the 3 section model with the
incrased portability of the 4 section?
(I could still email feisol and get the 4 section. ( -
I have a trip to rome planned in june and I think I will have to
consider buiyng additional more portable legs. What do you think of
the small feisol? it is cheap. Would it work with the m20 ballhead?
Cheers
--
ClaudioG
Regards,
Neil
Actually I was almost sold on the 4 section one but Lil's post made me think that it must be a real pain in the butt, day in and day out to screw and unscrew all those locking stuff on the 4 section. I believe that for my present and future need stability would have been just fine with either one.
As far as portability both 3 and 4 sections are big mamas and I dont see myself strolling around with those. For travel I definitely need something lighter. With this consideration in mind I went with the one which could make my life easier in a normal day.
Do you think the m20 would fit the small feisol?
--
Claudio
As far as portability both 3 and 4 sections are big mamas and I dont see myself strolling around with those. For travel I definitely need something lighter. With this consideration in mind I went with the one which could make my life easier in a normal day.
Do you think the m20 would fit the small feisol?
--
Claudio
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum