Tripod with or without center column?

[malch]

So should I purchase the Markins M20 with same brand Quick Shoe attached, or does anyone with knowledge of both products know if the RRS quick releases are better?

RRS have more clamp options. But as noted earlier the lever clamps do present a higher chance of interoperability problems.

The standard Markins (screw) clamps work just fine with my RRS and Kirk plates.

Also, I know some of these questions are crazy and redundant, but do I need to purchase a lens foot/plate for either the Sigma 70-200, Sigma 150-500? I believe they are supplied with one but not sure if they are sufficient.

I don't own either of those lenses but I would assume the standard foot is not Arca Swiss compatible. That's how it is with the Nikkors. Someone jump in and tell us if Sigma provide Arca Swiss compatible feet as standard.

In the case of some lenses (like my Nikkor 300mm f/4 AF-S) it's better to purchase an entire collar/foot/plate assembly from RRS, Kirk et al. The one that comes with the lens is just really poor. My Nikkor 300mm flapped around all over the place until I swapped the original collar for the excellent Kirk replacement.

 

[tommiejeep]

Jordan, I use Kirk and Wimberley plates. I think RSS are just as good from what everyone tells me. There were report on the Nikonians Tripod-Support Forum that the Markins plates did not work well with the RSS Lever Quick Release clamps. No personal experience and maybe this has changed since 2008, Might want to check or go with RSS plates. I shoot some big lenses and do not trust myself with the lever release but since I use the Sidekick or Gimbal not a decision.
Cheers
--
Tom
http://taja.smugmug.com/

 

[Kiawahgolf]

So I would be okay purchasing the Markins M20 with Markins QR plates and RRS L Bracket?

Is there anything else I am missing from the setup I will need (Other than Tripod of course ?

Thanks again guys!
--
Jordan

 

[Lihkin]

I would advise you to get a tripod without a center column. The center column does compromise stability (like the poster above said, you buy an expensive tripod and then mount it on a less than sturdy center column). The center column might not be an issue if you don't do macros or use telephotos. I had the Gitzo 3531 with the center column, but found it did not give me good results and so sold that and switched to the systematic version 3531S (without the column).

Cheers,
-------
Nikhil
http://www.lihkin.net

 

[geraldo]

Be careful you can spend twice the amount of money required to buy good equipment and not be able to tell the difference between the very high priced and the lower priceed but good equip.
--
geraldo

 

[copejorg1]

So I would be okay purchasing the Markins M20 with Markins QR plates and RRS L Bracket?

Sure, you would be okay, but I'll make a few comments:

• Everything about the Markins M20 is pretty much just the M10 plus 10%. Ball diameter (48mm vs 44mm), maximum load (45 kg vs 40 kg), maximum torque (220 kgf-cm vs 200 kgf-cm), etc. Considering how high the capacity figures are on the M10, I feel that there are better ways of spending the $50 cost delta between those models than by upgrading from the M10 to the M20 just to get an additional 10%. Perhaps the M20 would have a tangible advantage for use with something like a 600mm f/4 or 800mm f/5.6 or something like that -- but at that point, you'd probably want to be using a gimbal head rather than a ballhead, anyway.

http://www.markinsamerica.com/MA5/M10.php
http://www.markinsamerica.com/MA5/M20.php

• I like the RRS QR clamps better than those from Markins. They have index marks etched on them for easier indexing with the center of the camera plate, and a bubble level that can actually be used with the camera mounted on it (imagine that!). One thing that really bugs me about the design of the Markins QR clamps is that the bubble level is located down inside the dovetail slot, so you can't use the level if you've already mounted the camera. Dumb!!

http://reallyrightstuff.com/QR/03.html
http://www.markinsamerica.com/MA5/QR-60.php

• RRS has the nice lever-lock QR clamps that nobody else makes (AFAIK). However, they specifically recommend that you use the lever-lock clamp only with camera plates from RRS or Wimberly. The lever-lock clamp is not adjustable, and, according to RRS, might not clamp tightly enough with other brands of camera plate (Kirk, Arca-Swiss, Markins, etc).

• You can purchase a Markins M10 or M20 head without the clamp (saving a few bucks), and install a separately-purchased RRS clamp onto it.

http://www.markinsamerica.com/MA5/M10.php?req=nqs

If you do this, just make sure to get the correct style of RRS clamp (one with 3 mounting holes, where the center hole is tapped with a 3/8-16 thread). Examples would be the B2 LR II or the B2 Pro. Clamps made specifically for RRS ballheads (such as the B2 AS II or the B2 Pro II) could also be made to work with a Markins head, but you would also need to use a 3/8-16 to 1/4-20 female thread adapter bushing in the mounting socket of the Markins head, to accommodate the 1/4" mounting screw required by those models of clamp.

Is there anything else I am missing from the setup I will need (Other than Tripod of course ?

• As mentioned elsewhere, you will want to get an Arca-Swiss-compatible lens foot attachment for any collared lenses you might be using. As with camera plates, clamps, etc, RRS has a really good selection of these.

• Just about any ballhead you would be willing to consider (such as those from Markins) will be equipped with an integral panning base at the bottom. However, the catch is that if you really intend to use the panning base (say, for panoramas, or just to adjust composition), you probably will be better off also using a leveling base beneath the ballhead. Otherwise, you will be stuck spending excessive time and effort adjusting the levelness of the tripod -- one leg at a time -- to get a level panning plane.

• If you do get a leveling base to install beneath the ballhead, you probably will find that, in many cases, the adjustability available in the ballhead is completely superfluous. In other words, in those situations where you just need to have the camera mounted on a level surface that can be panned, the presence of the ballhead just gives you one more thing you will need to adjust to level after you already created one level surface. We call that irony.

• To address the irony noted above, I've been toying with the idea of the following setup, which does not include a ballhead (nor any other type of head) atop the tripod:

Feisol tripod, such as the CT-3442 ...

http://www.feisol.net/feisol-tournament-class-foursection-tripod-ct3442-with-tripod-p-31.html

Feisol leveling base, such as the LB-7567 ...
http://www.feisol.net/feisol-leveling-base-lb7567-p-52.html

RRS panning clamp, model PCL-1 ...
http://reallyrightstuff.com/rrs/Itemdesc.asp?ic=PCL-1&eq=&Tp=

The PCL-1 clamp can be screwed directly onto the 3/8-16 mounting stud of the Feisol leveling base (which normally would be used for mounting a ballhead, etc). This combination of components would cost a total of $625 (the same as a Gitzo 2541 tripod alone), and would be the lightest, most compact, lowest-profile and most rigid type of setup imaginable for any given tripod, for a configuration that can be easily leveled and panned without losing your level horizon.

• If you find yourself wanting to pan and tilt without losing your level horizon (say, for tracking a moving object or adjusting compositions in the horizontal and vertical directions), then you probably would be better off replacing the panning clamp in the above configuration with a pan/tilt head or a gimbal head (depending on lens size), rather than using a ballhead. Once a ballhead is loosened up to allow for vertical tilting, it will not be able to hole a level horizon.

Thanks again guys!

I hope this is helpful.

Regards,
--
Greg

 

[tommiejeep]

There have been previous discussions about your concept. I use the Feisol 3342 and 3471 with leveling bases. It is great for small adjustments when I do not want to make changes to the legs. I use it for BIF against a background but you have to get it right or as you pan it goes off the level(shot). Also I lose my hook

Your idea will not be always be very suitable for macro and other shots in that the leveling base can only move a limited number of degrees. For landscape it is probably ok but not where more elevation ,+ or -, is required. then you are going to need to adjust leg(s). If it works for what you shoot... great.

Also there are lots of types of heads!

Jordan, a RSS L will work with the Markins ballhead and clamp. I use Kirk but a lot of people use RRS.
Cheers,
Tom

http://taja.smugmug.com/

 

[copejorg1]

There have been previous discussions about your concept. I use the Feisol 3342 and 3471 with leveling bases. It is great for small adjustments when I do not want to make changes to the legs. I use it for BIF against a background but you have to get it right or as you pan it goes off the level(shot).

Hi Tom,

While I'm not surprised that my idea isn't completely original (what idea ever is?), I think you missed my point about the RRS panning clamp mounted atop the Feisol leveling base. If you level the leveling base and lock it down, and then use the panning clamp for horizontal tracking, you won't lose your level horizon in the way you described. However, if you don't lock down the leveling base, and try to use it for pan and tilt motions combined (or even for pure panning motions, in lieu of the panning clamp or panning base), then of course you are going to lose your level horizon while doing so. At that point, it's no different than (mis)using a ballhead for the same application, except with much less angular travel for the leveling base vs the ballhead. For BIF tracking, or anything similar, you would be much better off using a gimbal head or a video-type pan/tilt head (still mounted atop a leveled-out and locked-down leveling base, of course).

Also I lose my hook

Unfortunately true. I think I could work around that by drilling a horizontal hole through the tightening handle of the leveling base (perpendicular to the axis of the handle, in other words), near the bottom of the handle, and fashioning a hook from heavy-gauge wire to hang from this hole. Easier to show than to describe verbally, but if I ever make one (successfully, that is), I'll start a new thread and attach a picture.

Your idea will not be always be very suitable for macro and other shots in that the leveling base can only move a limited number of degrees. For landscape it is probably ok but not where more elevation ,+ or -, is required. then you are going to need to adjust leg(s). If it works for what you shoot... great.

Agreed. If more angular travel is required, then a ballhead or some other type of head would be required. I wasn't attempting to present the concept I described as a one-size-fits-all solution -- but rather to show it as a solution that would indeed fit many situations without the expense or operational drawbacks of ballheads, etc.

Also there are lots of types of heads!

Of course -- as I attempted to point out in my previous post. It seems many folks want to force a ballhead into every conceivable use, because they do have many positive attributes. But sometimes, there are better tools for the job at hand.

Cheers,
--
Greg

 

[ticktockdoc665530]

Not sure if i saw this question addressed. For the Sigma lens you mentioned you do want to get a lens plate. I got 1 for each as swapping out in the field can be a real pain. It winds up adding 50-60 bucks to the cost of each lens.

FWIW, I use an M10 on a Flashpoint. Been very happy with both. The M20 is "only" $50 more, but I can tell you that the 150-500 is very smooth on the M10. I've not had the opportunity to play with it on an M20 to see if there's a difference.

 

[John Fleming]

My Gitzo CF has the "short" column with a RRS BH-55 ball head on it. I like the short column because it has a hook on the bottom of it, was is good for hanging add weight for stabilization.

John

 

[Bmark]

You will not be disappointed with Gitzo. My first tripod was a gift and it was a Gitzo. I just bought my second tripod after looking at other brands and I stayed with Gitzo because they cannot be beat.

If you don't plan to go any heavier with lenses, the Gitzo 25xx series will work fine for you. I am supporting a 400 f/2.8 with a 3531 Gitzo (rated at 39 pounds).

A tripod without a center column is stronger, more stable, and less expensive. So if you can get by without one you should pass. I bought the model with the center column because I shoot a lot of macro shots of insects and am often pointed down. The center column is handy to make slight adjustments in height. With my larger lenses I do not extend the center column.
--
Thanks,
Mark

 

[Bob Moulton]

Center columns reduce the stability of the tripod. If you can shoot without using one do so. I have two gitzos, one without and one with center column. I find myself hardly ever--10-15% of my shots--using the center column.
--
Bob M

 

[Kiawahgolf]

Wow, being "new" to tripods, a lot of that just went over my head! I actually went online tonight and purchased the M20 before reading some of these posts and now I am second guessing myself that I should have just settled for the M10! I just thought for $50 I could get the M20 and never have to replace it; with the lenses I can afford anyways! I may call Markins in the morning and try to switch my order to the M10.

I also tried to purchase the RRS L plate online and had numerous problems trying to get the order to process. I finally just gave up and will call them in the morning.
--
Jordan