Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: 3.3kg Weight, 6'4" Tall - Tripod?  (Read 4719 times)
ARD
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 293



WWW
« on: January 01, 2006, 06:36:15 PM »
ReplyReply

I've just weighed my camera, lens, flash and sliding rail, the whole lot weighs in at 3.3kg

I am around 6'4" tall.

I have been reading through the posts on here about tripods and a persons height and camera weight seem to be two deciding factors. Also, raising the centre column of a tripod seems to be a last resort as it tends to make the set up less rigid.

The above set up mentioned is one I use for macro work. I have been using a light wieght Velbron tripod but it cannot take the weight and is not high enough without raising the centre column, which makes it even more un stable.

I have read a load of reviews on different tripods, heads etc, but look for help on here.

Got a budget of around 150uk/$300US to spend.

Thanks as always for the help
Logged
Sheldon N
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 783


« Reply #1 on: January 01, 2006, 09:51:53 PM »
ReplyReply

I'd check out the new Feisol CT-3471 tripod. It's carbon fiber, extends to 5' tall without the center column, and is rated to hold 12kg, and only weighs 2.2kg. I don't know the price, but I'd bet it's within your budget.

I purchased the Feisol CT-3301N and am very happy with it, and would certainly be looking at the larger model if I needed the size.

Hope this helps!

Sheldon
Logged

situgrrl
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 342


WWW
« Reply #2 on: January 02, 2006, 09:54:58 AM »
ReplyReply

IMO having a tripod that reaches eye level (esp if you are over 6') is the least useful of attributes....I bought a really big one years and years ago and find it unwieldy and rarely use it extended past 5.5' - the tripod is best leveled on the height of the subject rather than for the comfort of the photographer!  (I'm 6')

You probably know this, but buy a decent one!  Mine isn't (80 12 yrs ago - when I was 12!) it has a centre brace which is a PITA and came with a pan head that meant I never used it because it was so slow.  I recently bought a cheap ball head and find it a heap more useable.  I'd love the weight saving of shortening it 6" and doing away with the centre column.

Charly
Logged

Jack Flesher
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2595



WWW
« Reply #3 on: January 02, 2006, 11:03:38 AM »
ReplyReply

Like most other things in life, making a tripod selection represent a tradeoff in features...

If you want lightest weight, you sacrifice rigidity and maximum height. Lightest weight coupled with best rigidity for size is always going to cost more.  Less expensive and still rigid enough for practical use, usually means heavier and/or lower overall operating height.  

Personally, I think the tripod is an essential accessory, so it pays not to scrimp on quality, so...

1) If you can increase your budget and weight limitations, the Gitzo 1325 may serve you very well.

2) If you can deal with shorter, perhaps the Feizol or Gitzo 1228 will work.

3) If you can handle more weight, then for sure you look at the 2 and 3 series Gitzo aluminum pods.

4) I know it's not what you want to hear, but if your budget is truly set at $300 for quality pod and head, then I would consider a small quality pod and do your macro work on your knees...

,
« Last Edit: January 02, 2006, 11:04:28 AM by Jack Flesher » Logged

Sheldon N
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 783


« Reply #4 on: January 02, 2006, 01:43:21 PM »
ReplyReply

For reference, the new Feisol CT-3471 is roughly equivalent in size/weight/capacity to the Gitzo 1325 or 1348 and will likely be 1/2 the cost or less.

The smaller Feisol series is the CT-3301 or CT-3401 which are similar in size/capacity to the Gitzo 1227/1228 tripod. If the larger tripod is anything like my smaller CT-3301N, it should be very impressive. Check out the spec's at www.feisol.com. They haven't posted a price for the new tripod yet, but I bet you could email and ask.
Logged

BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7523



WWW
« Reply #5 on: January 02, 2006, 05:05:04 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
2) If you can deal with shorter, perhaps the Feizol or Gitzo 1228 will work.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=55022\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

As a side comment, the 1228 was recently replaced by the 1258 that is lighter and quicker to use.

I have just recently added a new 1257 to my 1227 as a back up and lighter set up. By the way, I have always prefered the 27 to the 28 since it is quicker to unfold (3 vs 4 sections), more rigid and also goes a bit higher.

I am just back from a total of 6 days shooting with the 1257, the first half in somewhat tough conditions (heavy back packing by -10/-20 C in Alpine environment between 2000 and 2600 m), and the 1257 combined with the RRS BH-40 and a Markins central column replacement base was just perfect.

I used it both for my 4*5 camera and D2x and the results seem to be good (still waiting for the slides though), but there wasn't enough wind to really figure out though.

The 1257 + BH-40 combo is around 800 US$ though, so that it might not be a reasonnable option considering the budget you mentioned below.

Regards,
Bernard

p.s.: by the way, I am 1.88 m tall, which must be around 6'3"
Logged

A few images online here!
Geoff Wittig
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1017


« Reply #6 on: January 04, 2006, 09:23:24 AM »
ReplyReply

As other posters have mentioned, you basically get what you pay for. I am 6'2" and do most of my work outdoors, often on slopes, where a tripod's apparent height is reduced. I'm also too picky about stability and quality to resort to raising the center column. After a few hours hunched over looking through a viewfinder using a tripod not quite tall enough, I need a date with a heating pad and a masseuse.
I ended up getting Velbon's "Neocarmagne 830". (The 840 has 4 leg sections instead of 3, so it folds up shorter but is a bit less stable and slower to extend.) This is a carbon-fiber tripod that is rock-solid even with an Eos-1Ds II and 500 mm f:4 mounted, and it extends to well over my head using the legs alone. This provides enough reserve for eye-level use on hillsides. I shortened the redundant center column with a hacksaw without regret. The tripod goes almost down to ground level, weighs about 3 kg., and at about $600 US at B&H undercuts the Gitzo equivalent by hundreds. I think the leg lock-collars are also easier to grip and use. Mine has withstood several years of abuse without complaint.
Logged
ARD
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 293



WWW
« Reply #7 on: January 04, 2006, 04:58:04 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for the replies

I am looking at the CF 630

CF 630

Any good?
Logged
jani
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1603



WWW
« Reply #8 on: January 05, 2006, 05:29:07 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Thanks for the replies

I am looking at the CF 630

CF 630

Any good?
See Didger's posts in the summer of 2004 in one of these forums for more info on what he thinks about the Velbon CF tripods (search for "velbon" by "didger").

I own a CF 641EL, and I'm quite satisfied so far. With a few informal tests, it appeared just as stable as a Gitzo 1227, in spite of having one more joint. I really like the neopren, makes it much more comfortable to carry and hold.

I have one minor issue with the tripod, and that is the plastic (or whatever it is ...) levers (EL models only), one of which broke on the flight to Singapore last autumn. It's not exactly flimsy, but I can't help thinking that it might have been made from a better material. Fortunately, it was easily fixed with super-glue once I got to a drier climate (Melbourne).
Logged

Jan
ARD
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 293



WWW
« Reply #9 on: January 05, 2006, 01:26:08 PM »
ReplyReply

Did a search, could not find any posts by Didger about Velbon

Who is/was Didger, I have seen him mentioned in many threads
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7523



WWW
« Reply #10 on: January 05, 2006, 01:54:43 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Who is/was Didger, I have seen him mentioned in many threads
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=55294\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Didger was a regular poster here who did unfortunately pass away in a tragic backcountry snow shoe accident last year.

Besides being one of the rare Nikon users here, he was famous for his passion for testing various gears to the limit in order to figure out whether the commonly accepted ideas where actually correct or not.

He spent a very significant amount of time testing various tripods using laser pointers to determine their vibrational behaviour in order to check the advantages of carbon. If I recall, he ended up buying Velbon and Gitzo.

This could perhaps be used as a Wikipedia definition of Didger, couldn't it?

Regards,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7446



WWW
« Reply #11 on: January 05, 2006, 10:52:42 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Didger was a regular poster here who did unfortunately pass away in a tragic backcountry snow shoe accident last year.

Besides being one of the rare Nikon users here, he was famous for his passion for testing various gears to the limit in order to figure out whether the commonly accepted ideas where actually correct or not.

He spent a very significant amount of time testing various tripods using laser pointers to determine their vibrational behaviour in order to check the advantages of carbon. If I recall, he ended up buying Velbon and Gitzo.

This could perhaps be used as a Wikipedia definition of Didger, couldn't it?

Regards,
Bernard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=55297\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
That comes close, Bernard. The one thing that is still missing is the incredible sense of presence Didger had in this forum. He had no pretense: If he didn't know something, he said so, and asked for help, very articulately. And he gave back enormously to all of us. One thing we could all stand to emulate is the passion he brought to his photography, and his solo wilderness trips, and I guess just about everything else he did.

Just my two-and-a-half Didger cents.

Eric
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
francofit
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 142


WWW
« Reply #12 on: January 06, 2006, 01:07:33 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Did a search, could not find any posts by Didger about Velbon
...
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Here is a link I got back from a (keyword/member name filter "velbon"/"didger") search:
[a href=\"http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=1533&hl=velbon]http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....=1533&hl=velbon[/url]

Pls note that several threads dated before Sept 2005 are partially damaged (and duplicated) after an unrecoverable crash occurred on this site old server-  the above mentioned thread is one example... but you still can find some Didger's comment in it.
There were many more...
too bad that crash wiped out so many past threads!


[edited to add the following]
for those interested, here are two links to the survived Didger's threads:
< topics >
and
< posts >

Didger's self snapshot:
[attachment=122:attachment]
« Last Edit: January 06, 2006, 02:19:52 AM by francofit » Logged

Franco
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad