Video tripods with fluid heads provide distinct advantages over standard photo tripods when shooting video, but are they always better? Chris and Jordan compare both types of tripods and demonstrate the pros and cons of each.
Very well presented tripod assessment . I used to repair Manfrotto tripods,well designed but poor quality steel and finish. Older models are a good buy though.Bit of a hobby now stripping down tripods of certain quality cleaning,lapping threads and generally give them a finished feel which you never get from a factory.Also replace adjustment knobs as the science of ergonomics is always absent.Believe it or not the best horizontal grip and turn on a middleweight tripod is a chrome tap knob properly secured to the end of the shaft. By this time its looks a little hybri but it is faster and stronger to use than the crude plastic compound ones that come out of the factory. Quality older pod are cheap to buy and easy to improve on.
One point you failed to discuss was the orientation of the quick release mount. On video tripods, the slot for the Arca-Swiss (or similar) QR plate, runs front to back. But for DSLRs that do video, the QR plate is usually mounted left-to-right-- especially if you have an L-bracket-- to more firmly and securely fit the base of the camera. That's no problem with a ball head, but with a video head, what's the easy or best way to mount a DSLR with left-to-right QR plate?
If you want to spend a couple of hundreds rather than a couple thousands I would look at Majestic tripods as well as Birns & Sawyer on eBay , vintage but still very useable
This isn't rocket science. (1) Pick any mid- to high-end legs incorporating a 75mm bowl or compatible with a 75mm bowl insert. (2) Pick any video head incorporating a 75mm half-ball base that has the features you desire. (3) Purchase an extra 75mm half-ball base. (4) Purchase the standard flat-mount ball head meeting your still photography needs and mount it on the half-ball base
Now, you have one set of legs, a video head, a stills head, and everything can be leveled easily. Best of both worlds.
I went a bit overboard. I've got both the PMG TR42L legs and the Sachtler Flowtech 75 legs. I can use my Sachtler FSB-8 on either tripod. I also have FLM, Markins and Wemberley stills heads mounted on 75mm half-ball bases that can be used with either tripod. Like I said: Best of both worlds. And no compromise in functionality with any combination.
It would have been nice to learn of a video-oriented tripod available for under $500. If the hurdle for "good" is a four or five figure price, my spouse would impale me on the darned gadget and, gleefully, watch the crows and buzzards devour my sour carcass. I'd deserve to meet Satan soon. No excuses.
Neither Chris nor Jordan could afford, out of their own pockets, such luxuries. I see no point in dreams to acquire stuff one can't really afford or would seldom use.
Based on this report, my conclusion is to use an ordinary (<$50) still photo tripod or rely on a camera's built-in 5-axis IBIS. Furthermore, the latest 360-degree cameras allow one to pan, in post, with very good stabilization and zero rolling shutter wobble.
Heck, these days most viewers' primary concern is instant sharing. Phones win.
I have not done much video but I found this to be informative and useful information. I mostly do wildlife as I find it and rarely take it inside. I thought my first tripod was pretty good at an 11 lb load limit. I rarely have more than 3 Kg. of gear on my tripod. Even so, If I toughed the camera at all when doing macro, the camera would move. I got a Sirui W-2004 with an 18 Kg. load limit. I put on a 20 Kg. load ball head. For the reasons shown in the video, I do not think it is good for video but for macro I can keep my hands on the camera all the time.
i think it was gitzo who started the quick head change system, now marketed by innorel, leofoto, induro et al. the leofoto was commented on by trubeast666 at https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58060986. you can literally 'slip' in a 75 or 100mm bowl, or you favourite ball head on a flat base. i don't know if the leg to top connection is stable enough to handle high resistance on a fluid head, but that might vary from brand to brand
Fluid heads are not necessarily stiff, and stiff does not equate to smooth. For smooth, accurate panning (and tilting) there must be just enough tension to dampen involuntary muscle motions. More important, there must be absolutely no slip-stick action and no lost motion.
Ideally, you pan by applying constant pressure to the handle, not forcing the position (any stick pilots out there?). Once you use a high-end fluid head, you find it very easy to control.
thanks ed, but i'm not sure of your prompt. personally i also prefer as little drag that will still smooth things out. but if someone dialled it right up, there would be a torsional force on the leg connection especially when the movement started. but i think these 'system' tripods are close to a dual purpose design, but the two piece leg design of video tripods would resist this torsion better. cheers
Great comparison! I got spoiled with nice fluid heads from a previous job and I find it difficult to pull the trigger on even the cheaper video stuff for personal stuff.
Once the sticker shock on video tripod cost wears off, let's talk about fluid heads.
I agree that the Manfrotto Nitro heads are a good deal, and deliver excellent performance over a wide range of loading. While not true fluid heads, they are quite smooth and adjustable, with little or no backlash. They are a real bargain in the $600-$1000 range. Like all friction heads, they are best served at room temperature. AFIK, they are the only side-loading heads in the Manfrotto line.
The sweet spot for mobile operation and medium-sized cameras (or long lenses) probably falls in the $1500 to $2000 range. Studio heads start at about $5K. In comparision, even high-end ball heads start to seem like a bargain.
That's the extreme end of it. No different from any other product category. The Sachtler tripod they show certainly is professional and - comparably - much much cheaper.
Video equipment costs more than photo equipment fairly much across the range though.
A run-and-gun camera, like a Sony FS7, weighs upwards of 20 pounds when caged and cabled. A studio Panasonic, 2/3" 3-sensor, with monitor and fiber is closer to 70 pounds. A big ARRI might be twice that. We're talking handling serious metal, lightly and smoothly.
I still occasionally use a vintage Velbon VS-3. It has a built-in L-plate which can rotate the camera 90 degrees when needed. And a video head. And a manual slider. Don‘t these things exist anymore?
Things go extinct when they don't function as promised, or meet current needs. There are still 3-way heads which flip sideways when needed. However they work best to achieve horizontal level rather than portrait orientation.
And yes, there are manual sliders - more of them than motorized versions. They are surprisingly effect in adding a little "drama" to a shot, even at fairly long distances. They are bulky and take a sturdy tripod which can handle cantilevered loads. Variations on this theme are ubiquitous in cinematic photography, but mostly disused in an era of unrestricted panning and zooming (in turn, rarely used in cinematography).
Videography is not so much what you can do, but when and where to do it.
A top turntable (panning platform) must be absolutely leveled for use, placing the horizon in the center of the image. While perfect for shooting panoramas in confined spaces, or somewhat boring scenery images, they cannot pan smoothly nor be used to follow action.
@ Ed Ingold Compromise - a$25 gadget or $200 ballhead vs $2500 for a "good" tripod. Compromised - this article for a grab bag of heads and tripods and suggesting a useful outcome. There's more to making these choices, clamp plate systems and feet, for starters.
The most expensive gadget is one which you don't use because it doesn't do what you need. There is a place for panning platforms, and I have 2 or 3 of them. They're great for stills, but useless for video. Under the head is another matter. However most still heads and all video heads have a panning base already.
Doing both photos and videos, and often while traveling or hiking, a dual purpose tripod set up is something I really struggled with.
For about 15 years I was using a mid-sized carbon fiber tripod that was not super light, but gave a good balance of weight, height, and stability. I put an Arca clamp directly onto the hub of the legs, and plates on the bottom of an Acratech ballhead, and a Velbon fluid head with Slik leveling ball. This gave me the ability to swap heads quickly, depending on what type of work I was doing. Not the perfect set up, but a good balance of size, weight, and flexibility.
I've just switched to the new PD carbon fiber tripod and so far seems to work quite well. It's not a featherweight tripod, but it folds down super compact and has good stability. Because the built-in ballhead is so compact, I carry the extra fluid head + leveler combo and clamp it onto the unextended PD ballhead when I want to do video work. So far this is working quite well for me.
I generally enjoy your videos and find them informative. With this video, it seems you could have tried some higher end equipment. For instance, KPS G5 ball head is smooth enough for hybrid shooters. http://www.focuspulling.com/kps/ When the ball head is used with a high quality leveling base such as FLM LB-15, a large majority of hybrid shooter should find it capable enough for both photo and video work. It's very smooth and is able to handle video use also. Generalizing from cheaper Chinese made equipment and saying you've tried all may not have been the best approach.
For both video and stills I used to use a third-hand, 10-lb. Manfrotto 3236 that had a prosumer fluid head. It cost me $20 on Craigslist, was very, very solid and the geared column could get the camera over crowds, but pans and tilts were not very balletic. I still use it for photos because it is solid for any reasonable purpose. I have a Miller Solo DV 20 Carbon Fiber Tripod that I got used for about $1000 from LensRentals. It's light, stiff and awesome. Despite costing 50 times what the Manfrotto cost, pans only about 10 percent smoother. Does it matter? Well, tthat 10 percent took my video from barely adequate to gorgeously professional.
The closest I've come to a dual purpose tripod is that weighs a little over 10 lbs with a 30-year-old fluid head that's pretty smooth when it wants to be. It was used by a college video deparment and I got it third hand for $20. It's old and heavy but it is extremely solid and when I need sharp photos it's the tripod I turn to.
It's a good thing you've pixelated that person's face in the intro. I think you called him "Jordan" but that must be a fake name to hide his identity. :-D
Instagram handles horizontal aspects super badly though, so if you're actually shooting specifically for Insta, which many people are (Instagram being a very popular channel for people to promote their businesses) you would want to shoot vertical. You see a lot of vertical content on Insta that would normally be shot horizontally, such as landscape photography. A vertical image on Instagram will fill most of a phone's screen, while a horizontal one will just be a tiny strip across the middle.
It's a shame Instagram still doesn't allow screen rotation, but if that's your intended platform you do need to account for that.
@Halftrack, I understand all of that, and I'm more accepting of vertical video when it stays on Instagram. The problem is it has caused many people to automatically shoot vertical video and it's appearing everywhere on platforms on which it doesn't fit.
Always fun to watch one of these, but perhaps more is made of the distinction that there really is. You can fins a photo ball head that has mechanically adjustable drag that mimics fluid damping. A leveling base to a photo tripod keeps pans level, and BTW that's what stills photographers need to take multiple shots for a panorama. And using an L-bracket answers the question. "How do it go to portrait mode on a video tripod head"? Despite my cranky comments, the points made about fluid heads, niceties like set screws, and leg flex and stability are on target. Maybe a B or even a B+.
You discount how important leveling is to video. It's not enough to level the panning action. The camera must stay level when tilting too, for which a ball head is totally inadequate.
@Ed -- The leveling base on the photo tripod leg set could be used to level the head for panning, which may be all that is needed. Your point about tilting as well as panning being important is valid, but also wrt fluid resistant action which is not available on a ball head. A good pan-tilt head with smoothly damped movements and control sticks is better than a ball head (in almost all applications) and can take the place of a fluid head "in a pinch."
@ Ed Ingold -- no quarrel - you're right. No question - if you're shooting video, a video head is superior to a photo head - perhaps even far superior.
But the article (which was about tripods, not just heads) sold photo heads a bit short by not mentioning two things that could be helpful in making a photo head work a bit better for video -- a leveling base and a head with mechanical drag. And not mentioning L-brackets for stills photographers who only have access to a video tripod was kinda a silly omission, as has been pointed out by many others.
I was thinking about that as well, because video heads are generally rated by the weight of the camera, which can determine how much drag the video head has... a light camera on a giant video head, that's build for a heavy studio camera, may not be ideal.
on the other hand, with the big sachtler tripod, you can see where he lets go of it, and the handle falls under it's own weight, at eight minutes into the video... so that particular head has enough drag adjustment range for a small camera.
but of course who wants to drag a giant tripod around, just to use with a tiny camera :-/ which I think gets back to the point that you were making.
That is an EXCELLENT POINT!!! The better fluid heads usually have a weight limit on how light of a camera they can handle smoothly—less than 2-3 kg and it can get ugly.I’ve sometimes wished I had brought weight plates when I have to shoot with just a stripped down DSLR, it’s just too jerky without enough mass.
Nice review and a great overview of the pros and cons. Thanks for the good info. It seems obvious, but you explained it well and with the right amount of detail for a good overview. Great job!
I'm going to agree with others, this isn't so much about TRIPODS, as the actual legs that make a tri-pod are pretty much interchangeable (both uses need stability, rigidity, light weight, cost is a factor.) Video has to deal with torsion and "rubberbanding" where the legs move the head back after the move is completed. Just as is mentioned on the VIDEO tripod with the flexing legs.
But you can put a video head on flat topped still legs, or a monopod, and put a leveler in between any set of legs and any ball or fluid head. So while I was interested in hearing about the difference in tripods, the video is more about video versus photo HEADS.
Also, you can use a video head and switch between landscape and portrait. Just mount the camera plate sideways and tip the head 90°. Or use an L bracket as others have mentioned.
I’m surprised that there’s no mention of L brackets, which make pan heads work for portrait format and are more stable than flipping a ball head into the side notch. And they are compact, light, and inexpensive compared to the other kit discussed.
Do not most L brackets have the ability to slide out to give space for accessing the side ports when in portrait orientation? My RRS one does, and I think my Kirk one does. Maybe not true for generic L plates.
Samsung showed off a TV that automatically rotates to portrait mode on demand at CES this year. Obviously this is going to start a new trend in vertical videos being acceptable for serious production, as soon as someone makes a cinema that can do it. (Omnimax, your time has come.)
Serious video would require rotating theater screens, or stepping up to your TV each time the aspect changed. A rotating TV is intended for home movies. Broadcast TV sidesteps the issue by keyholing cell phone videos inside a keyed background.
@Ed: suppose your subject has vertical aspect. What is the advantage of • Shooting it in Landscape mode, vs • Shooting it in Portrait mode, and rotating/scaling to fit a horizontal screen?
As far as I can see, the second option allows for a MUCH better image quality, avoids having the (possibly) distracting parts on screen, and gives much better results if the screen may be rotated to a Portrait position.
Of course, for a best result the final video stream should better have “orientation” bit or “width×height” metadata, so that in case of vertical orientation of the screen, the advantages can be realized!
(Here I suppose that the viewer audience is already USED to variable orientation — as the majority of the new generations is.)
In case anybody forgot in this age of IG video ... ... our vision is landscape (214x140 degrees to be exact). To think that a short-lived meme like IG video can overrule millions of years of evolution is just ridiculuous.
Book pages and paintings are consumed like still photos ... piece by piece. Videos are consumed immersively. If not, they act more like animated photos, consumed non immersively. But then, no advanced tripods are needed to produce them.
I have a 100 mm bowl on a series 3 Gitzo, and it looks oversized. A series 5 would be a good fit. That said, Manfrotto tripods are the equivalent of series 2 or smaller until you get into the professional video range.
That seemed to be a lot more about levelling bases (useful for photography, cheap if you don't want one that fits in a video bowl, although interesting to see the Manfrotto has set screws - many don't) and fluid heads, than actual video TRIPODS.
The primary difference as I understand it's that by splitting the legs to multiple columns at the apex plate, the tripod has a much wider base to resist twisting during panning. Photo tripods are designed to avoid vibration and lateral loads (wind and off-centre cameras), not rotation, and the width of a single leg column doesn't give much leverage. Hence the "bigger" thing.
"The primary difference as I understand it's that by splitting the legs to multiple columns at the apex plate, the tripod has a much wider base to resist twisting during panning"
They mention the need to resist twisting. They don't mention that this is the justification for the split legs, and there's a lot more about fluid heads and levelling bases. Which is fine, these are useful parts of a video stabilisation set up (and accurately tracking wildlife for stills, and panoramic stitching or quick landscapes), it's just that very little of a video about "video vs photo tripods" was actually about the tripod, or what makes one vs the other. I can get a pretty large photography tripod that would still be bad for video.
Agreed, and it's a useful summary, it just has a slightly odd emphasis and is occasionally misleading, even not speaking as a video shooter myself.
One of my tripods has a spreader. It does nothing to help torsional stability, though it might stop the legs sliding as you pan (less than leg spikes...) RRS make photographic legs with arbitrary lock angles. They also make a levelling base without the allegedly important anti-rotation screws (though I agree, which is why I have a cheap third party one that fits on all my tripods, not just the one with a video bowl). I'd really not be doing panning shots on any tripod with an extended centre column if I could avoid it. I certainly wouldn't choose video legs on the basis of them being "large".
You can be brief with a little more precision - but I do appreciate the introduction despite that.
I shoot a lot of video, professionally, but strictly outside of a studio. A dedicated video tripod, with a spreader, would make sense, were it not for the bulk and weight. I get by with various CF tripods for still cameras. They can handle the weight, and are stiff enough to stabilize panning an tilting if you have a good (i.e., $$$) fluid head, but quiver if bumped, and need re-leveling each time they're moved due to the unsupported length of the legs.
Perché non si fanno le recensioni scritte e non video molto più comprensibili per tutti coloro che non conoscono bene l’inglese, sullo scritto c’è sempre il traduttore
Gimbal mounts, if designed with good dampening can do the job of camera and video tripods. Problem though is that the centre of gravity of gimbals (most of them) can't be adjusted. It's possible to design a mount that wouldn't require axis-locks at all with good dampening and the ability to balance a camera and lens fast.
I might be failing to understand, but FWIW, RRS and Gitzo (at least) will sell you fluid gimbals. Other heads I've seen (Wimberley, the Neewer knock-off I picked up on black Friday, my Manfrotto 393...) have some ability to tighten joints to adjust tension in addition to allowing alignment to adjust balance, but lack a fluid head's ability to avoid "stick/slip" behaviour (the difference between static and dynamic friction) as it starts to move. I don't use one enough to justify the price delta myself.
RRS makes a fluid gimbal which can be balanced vertically as well as fore-and-aft. The performance is probably there with a fluid head of comparable cost ($1500). However they interfere with access to the sides of dedicated video cameras, including many controls and a flip viewfinder. They also take a lot more space in a tripod bag than a fluid head
Nikon's combined the best of its DSLR and mirrorless cameras into one tough-built body, equally well-suited for stills as it is for video. For effectively modernizing one of the brand's all-star camera lines, it receives our silver award.
It's not cheap and the initial setup is time-consuming, but the Loupedeck+ improves on its predecessor in some important ways and makes a lot of sense for those with demanding photo editing needs.
With a slew of significant updates, the Fujifilm X100V's formula remains the same as the previous models; it's stylish, engaging to use, and takes great pictures. Find out what Fujifilm's added to (and taken away from) its fifth X100-series camera in our initial review.
The S1H is a full-frame mirrorless camera designed with videographers in mind. It brings features both from the GH series and Panasonic's professional Varicam line to create the most capable video camera we've ever tested.
If you're looking for a high-quality camera, you don't need to spend a ton of cash, nor do you need to buy the latest and greatest new product on the market. In our latest buying guide we've selected some cameras that might be a bit older but still offer a lot of bang for the buck.
What’s the best camera for less than $1000? The best cameras for under $1000 should have good ergonomics and controls, great image quality and be capture high-quality video. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing under $1000 and recommended the best.
What's the best camera for travel? Good travel cameras should be small, versatile, and offer good image quality. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for travel, and recommended the best.
If you want a camera that you can pick up and use without having to page through the manual first, then this guide is for you. We've selected seven cameras ranging from compacts to full-frame, all of which are easy to operate.
What's the best camera for under $500? These entry-level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.
The project provides an unprecedented look at New York as it existed more than 100 years ago by upscaling, increasing the frame-rate and colorizing century-old video footage.
Mathieu Stern recently discovered a time capsule in his family's home that had a number of 120-year-old glass negatives inside. To bring the images to life, Mathieu developed positive prints from the negatives using the cyanotype process.
In honor of National Peanut Butter Lover's Day (yes, it's a thing—we checked), peanut butter manufacturer Jif has teamed up with GIF-hosting platform Giphy to release a limited-edition jar of peanut butter that's meant to settle the hard/soft 'G' debate once and for all.
Sony just launched its newest fast aperture wide-angle prime for its full-frame Alpha lineup, and we've been shooting planes, people and felines with it over the past few days. Read our initial impressions and check out our sample gallery. Spoiler alert: it's a near perfect optic.
Sony is adding a new wide prime to its full-frame E-mount series: the 20mm F1.8 G. It's slightly smaller and lighter than the existing FE 24mm F1.4 GM and will go on sale in March for $900.
The Kolude KD-K1 features four USB-A ports, two USB-C ports, an HDMI port, an SD card slot and a microSD card slot, all inside a slim, but full-size keyboard.
The 1.26x magnification ratio means Nikon F-mount lenses mounted to Fujifilm GFX camera systems using the adapters will keep their native diagonal field of view, albeit at the cost of 2/3 stops of light.
We did a lot of shooting with our pre-production Canon EOS-1D X Mark III, and now that the camera has official support, we've provided out-of-camera Raw files and some Raw-to-JPEG conversions for your perusal.
Sony is updating its flagship Xperia 1 smartphone with faster burst shooting, a bigger sensor in its standard camera and a time-of-flight sensor. And thanks to popular demand, the 3.5mm headphone jack is back.
Vox's seven-minute video shows how the work of photographer Lewis Hine brought attention to the brutal reality of child labor when it was at its peak in the United States at the turn of the 20th century.
We attended the recent launch of the Fujifilm X100V in London, where we had the opportunity to sit down with two senior figures within the company: Chief Designer Masazumi Imai and Senior Manager Shinichiro Udono.
The Nikon D780 is a two-trick pony: it combines the great DSLR experience of Nikon's D750 with some of the great mirrorless features found on the Z6. Does it manage to do both well? Chris and Jordan seem to think so.
Our new Nikon D780 gallery takes you to the Canadian Rockies for photos mountains, people and, of course, a couple of ducks. Because who doesn't love ducks?
UK-based company Your Perfect Wedding Photographer recently released the results from its fourth annual industry survey. They published some key takeaways.
Forgoing Silicon Valley technologists, the Pentagon's Department of Defense is actively working on measures to identify and take down small drones that are a threat.
Flowers. Snow. Trees. Beer. Birds. Dogs. Humans. Printing presses. A giant ferris wheel. We've been using Fujifilm's XF 16-80mm F4 lens to photograph a big gallery with a little bit of everything in it – check it out to see how this versatile, water-resistant zoom lens performs.
The M10 Monochrom is Leica's newest dedicated black and white rangefinder camera. Is it a street photographer's dream come true? Chris and Jordan take it to the mean streets of Calgary to find out.
Leica's new M10 Monochrom is a dedicated black and white camera with no color filter array. Combined with legendary Leica optics, it promises to deliver 41MP images in stunning detail. How much detail? Do some pixel peeping in our sample gallery.
The duo of brothers that makes up Abstract Aerial Art captures stunning images, mostly from the air. DPReview asks them about their process, advice for aspiring photographers, making money from your work and more.
Comments