Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Gitzo 3540LS vs 3540XLS  (Read 6264 times)
trops
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 29


WWW
« on: November 05, 2007, 10:15:16 PM »
ReplyReply

In LL video journal Vol 2 Issue 8, Michael makes a good case for 4 sections versus 3 sections. Flexibility on slopes or uneven terrain. Makes good sense to me.

But Gitzo has 2 versions of their 3540 tripod I am considering: the 3540LS and 3540XLS, both 4 section leg tripods.

The 3540XLS's max height is 78 inches while the LS version's max height is 57.5 inches.

I do not need the extra length for comfort reasons because I'm only 5' 10", but if the extra length does bring added versatility and flexibility in addition to the 4 section legs then it's the one I will buy.

HOWEVER, Besides the slightly heavier weight and the slightly longer closed height of the 33540XLS, which might be an issue for air travel, are there any DOWNSIDES to the extra length? Does the extra length actually make the tripod more unwieldy, cumbersome, or clumsy to use, outweighing the versatility of the 4 section legs?

John
Logged
aaykay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 359


« Reply #1 on: November 07, 2007, 08:26:36 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
In LL video journal Vol 2 Issue 8, Michael makes a good case for 4 sections versus 3 sections. Flexibility on slopes or uneven terrain. Makes good sense to me.

But Gitzo has 2 versions of their 3540 tripod I am considering: the 3540LS and 3540XLS, both 4 section leg tripods.

The 3540XLS's max height is 78 inches while the LS version's max height is 57.5 inches.

I do not need the extra length for comfort reasons because I'm only 5' 10", but if the extra length does bring added versatility and flexibility in addition to the 4 section legs then it's the one I will buy.

HOWEVER, Besides the slightly heavier weight and the slightly longer closed height of the 33540XLS, which might be an issue for air travel, are there any DOWNSIDES to the extra length? Does the extra length actually make the tripod more unwieldy, cumbersome, or clumsy to use, outweighing the versatility of the 4 section legs?

John
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=150830\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I have the 3540LS and from my perspective, this is the perfect height for people ranging in height from around 5'8" to around 6".  In addition to the sub-4lb weight, the folded length of 21.7", is also by design and  is perfectly sized to fit into carry-on baggage.  Most Airlines have a carryon baggage length of 22".  Brilliant !
Logged
larsrc
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 173


WWW
« Reply #2 on: November 08, 2007, 08:17:51 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I have the 3540LS and from my perspective, this is the perfect height for people ranging in height from around 5'8" to around 6".  In addition to the sub-4lb weight, the folded length of 21.7", is also by design and  is perfectly sized to fit into carry-on baggage.  Most Airlines have a carryon baggage length of 22".  Brilliant !
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=151081\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

You actually get to carry-on your tripods?  I'd have thought they'd be banned as lethal weapons. Mine, while small, is solid metal in the base, and could certainly cause severe damage if wielded with force.  I haven't taken the chance to get it confiscated yet, as I can't afford a new one - especially after reading these couple of threads on tripods and heads:)

-Lars
Logged

ChrisJR
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 217


WWW
« Reply #3 on: November 09, 2007, 08:18:52 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I have the 3540LS and from my perspective, this is the perfect height for people ranging in height from around 5'8" to around 6".  In addition to the sub-4lb weight, the folded length of 21.7", is also by design and  is perfectly sized to fit into carry-on baggage.  Most Airlines have a carryon baggage length of 22".  Brilliant !
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=151081\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I also own a 3540LS with a RRS BH-55 head and it fitted perfectly into my checked luggage, which incidentally was the maximum size suitcase permitted by the airline I last used (Emirates to China). When I made enquiries Emirates wouldn't allow the tripod as hand luggage.

Also about the size, I'm 6ft 4 and with the RRS head find the size near enough ideal when the legs are fully extended. All depends on what kind of photography you want to do.
Logged
mahleu
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 577


WWW
« Reply #4 on: November 09, 2007, 08:51:38 AM »
ReplyReply

sometimes it can be useful having a tripod taller than yourself, you can always stand on something to make up the difference.
Logged

______________________________________________________________________
Anyone selling a 1DSIII or 6D cheap?
aaykay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 359


« Reply #5 on: November 15, 2007, 08:24:06 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
You actually get to carry-on your tripods?  I'd have thought they'd be banned as lethal weapons. Mine, while small, is solid metal in the base, and could certainly cause severe damage if wielded with force.  I haven't taken the chance to get it confiscated yet, as I can't afford a new one - especially after reading these couple of threads on tripods and heads:)

-Lars
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=151287\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I carry my 3540LS and prior to that, my 5540LS as carry-on baggage, whenever I needed to fly with it.  Never had a problem, except once in Amsterdam (transit) where they would not allow 2 carryon bags (main bag and laptop bag) to be taken on board....but they allowed me to carry the 5540LS onto the aircraft (in addition to the one permitted bag), by holding it openly.  Caused a lot of curious stares from my fellow travelers but I definitely could get it on board.
Logged
aaykay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 359


« Reply #6 on: November 15, 2007, 08:27:17 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I also own a 3540LS with a RRS BH-55 head and it fitted perfectly into my checked luggage, which incidentally was the maximum size suitcase permitted by the airline I last used (Emirates to China). When I made enquiries Emirates wouldn't allow the tripod as hand luggage.

There probably are different carry-on rules for the different airlines and Emirates may have a rule against carrying a relatively dangerous looking tripod  on-board.  I have never flown Emirates, however.
Logged
Chris_Brown
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 801



WWW
« Reply #7 on: November 17, 2007, 08:32:45 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The 3540XLS's max height is 78 inches while the LS version's max height is 57.5 inches.

I do not need the extra length for comfort reasons because I'm only 5' 10", but if the extra length does bring added versatility and flexibility in addition to the 4 section legs then it's the one I will buy.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=150830\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

You assume you'll never need/want to stand on a rock or chair, and never use the camera above your own eye height. This seems short-sighted to me. Get the biggest tripod you can handle. It's not about how tall you are, but about where you want to put the camera.

Quote
HOWEVER, Besides the slightly heavier weight and the slightly longer closed height of the 33540XLS, which might be an issue for air travel, are there any DOWNSIDES to the extra length? Does the extra length actually make the tripod more unwieldy, cumbersome, or clumsy to use, outweighing the versatility of the 4 section legs?
Don't assume that the camera/lenses you use now will be the same in a few years. You may fetch a telephoto lens and need serious support. Keep your options open.

As for cumbersome and unwieldy, it's not. If you shoot a lot you'll get used to working with the tool.

Back in '89 I bought my fifth tripod because my gear had expanded from a small 35mm set up to a 35mm w/ 600mm lens setup, to an 8x10 setup. I kept finding my tripod too weak, quivering every time the shutter moved. I bought the Gitzo 1570 and it put an end to all my support problems. It is still my most flexible 'pod. I can set any camera from 0" to 120" ( i.e., 10 feet) in a couple of minutes. Do I take it camping & hiking? I have, when shooting with a 4x5 or 8x10. But now that my main tool is a 1Ds2 I use a Gitzo Carbon with a max height of 80". No clumsiness at all.

Good luck with your decision.
Logged

~ CB
cricketer 1
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 32


WWW
« Reply #8 on: November 21, 2007, 02:49:57 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: trops,Nov 5 2007, 11:15 PM
In LL video journal Vol 2 Issue 8, Michael makes a good case for 4 sections versus 3 sections. Flexibility on slopes or uneven terrain. Makes good sense to me.

I stand 6' 1" in my hiking boots and a few years ago was trying to photograph an Osprey at the top of a tree using a Manfrotto 055 tripod which covers most field work for me.  Not this time, and a few similar situations since.  I could not move further back because of other tree foliage and there was nothing to stand on so I bent my knees and waited for a favourable view.  My knees have not forgiven me, so I am shopping for a taller tripod.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad