Tripod Advice Please

For less than US$200, you will not get a decent carbon fiber tripod. Hence,
you should look at the aluminum tripods from Bogen/Manfrotto.

I purchased the Bogen/Manfrotto 3021BPro tripod legs (black) for US$149.95
with the 488RC4 Bogen/Manfrotto midi ball head with RC4 rapid connect for
US$95.00. It's a great combination. Of course, you will also need the
Manfrotto 3044 long strap for US$29.95 or something similar.

Gregor

"Robert R Kircher, Jr." <rrkircher RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:U9SdnZ2dnZ0baHTfnZ2dnRElht6dnZ2dRVn-0J2dnZ0@giganews.com...
>I need some advice on a tripod. My wife and I have been sharing an old
>clunky Slik 504QF (not the II) which is really made for video but it's
>worked well for us to this point. Lately we've found that one tripod just
>isn't enough so I want to buy a new one.
>
> First I'd like to spend no more then $200.00.
>
> I'm looking for something that I can attach a strap to and sling over my
> back when I go hiking so I'd like something that's relatively light weight
> and compact when folded.
> I'd like it to work low to the ground as well as at standing height.
> I believe a tilt pan or ball head will be fine but I'd like to hear some
> comparisons, advantages, disadvantages etc.
>
> I realize that my budget won't afford me the best possible option but I
> have to believe that there is something out there that comes close to my
> requirements. I'm willing to compromise a bit as needed.
>
> As to what we'll be mounting on the tripod... The wife uses primarily an
> Elan 7ne with either a 28-135 IS or a 75-300 IS. I use a 20D and a 300D
> with a 28-135 IS or a 100-400L IS
>
> Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
>
> --
>
> Rob
> "A disturbing new study finds that studies are disturbing"
>
 >> Stay informed about: Tripod Advice Please 

Call me stupid, but wouldn't weight be an advantage when supporting a
smaller camera? Not that I'd want to carry around a 50 lb tripod.


"Robert R Kircher, Jr." <rrkircher.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:U9SdnZ2dnZ0baHTfnZ2dnRElht6dnZ2dRVn-0J2dnZ0@giganews.com...
>I need some advice on a tripod. My wife and I have been sharing an old
>clunky Slik 504QF (not the II) which is really made for video but it's
>worked well for us to this point. Lately we've found that one tripod just
>isn't enough so I want to buy a new one.
>
> First I'd like to spend no more then $200.00.
>
> I'm looking for something that I can attach a strap to and sling over my
> back when I go hiking so I'd like something that's relatively light weight
> and compact when folded.
> I'd like it to work low to the ground as well as at standing height.
> I believe a tilt pan or ball head will be fine but I'd like to hear some
> comparisons, advantages, disadvantages etc.
>
> I realize that my budget won't afford me the best possible option but I
> have to believe that there is something out there that comes close to my
> requirements. I'm willing to compromise a bit as needed.
>
> As to what we'll be mounting on the tripod... The wife uses primarily an
> Elan 7ne with either a 28-135 IS or a 75-300 IS. I use a 20D and a 300D
> with a 28-135 IS or a 100-400L IS
>
> Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
>
> --
>
> Rob
> "A disturbing new study finds that studies are disturbing"
>
 >> Stay informed about: Tripod Advice Please 

"Robert R Kircher, Jr." <rrkircher.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:U9SdnZ2dnZ0baHTfnZ2dnRElht6dnZ2dRVn-0J2dnZ0@giganews.com...
>I need some advice on a tripod. My wife and I have been sharing an old
>clunky Slik 504QF (not the II) which is really made for video but it's
>worked well for us to this point. Lately we've found that one tripod just
>isn't enough so I want to buy a new one.
>
> First I'd like to spend no more then $200.00.
Bogen/Manfrotto 3021 is the one for you.
>
> I'm looking for something that I can attach a strap to and sling over my
> back when I go hiking so I'd like something that's relatively light weight
> and compact when folded.
> I'd like it to work low to the ground as well as at standing height.
> I believe a tilt pan or ball head will be fine but I'd like to hear some
> comparisons, advantages, disadvantages etc.
>
> I realize that my budget won't afford me the best possible option but I
> have to believe that there is something out there that comes close to my
> requirements. I'm willing to compromise a bit as needed.
Everybody has a budget. Everybody has to compromise somewhere.
>
> As to what we'll be mounting on the tripod... The wife uses primarily an
> Elan 7ne with either a 28-135 IS or a 75-300 IS. I use a 20D and a 300D
> with a 28-135 IS or a 100-400L IS
The 3265 ball grip head is adequate for your use. You ought to keep the
total weight at no more than 6 pounds.
If, for example, you attempt to make shots of the moon, you will probably
find (as I did) that this head will be deficient. The 3021 is none to
sturdy for this application either. Of course, you can only take shots of a
full moon during a very limited time frame.
Jim
>
> Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
>
> --
>
> Rob
> "A disturbing new study finds that studies are disturbing"
>
 >> Stay informed about: Tripod Advice Please 

On Mon, 5 Sep 2005 13:09:38 -0600, Sheldon wrote:

>> I'm looking for something that I can attach a strap to and sling over my
>> back when I go hiking so I'd like something that's relatively light weight
>> and compact when folded.
>> . . .
>> As to what we'll be mounting on the tripod... The wife uses primarily an
>> Elan 7ne with either a 28-135 IS or a 75-300 IS. I use a 20D and a 300D
>> with a 28-135 IS or a 100-400L IS
>
> Call me stupid, but wouldn't weight be an advantage when supporting a
> smaller camera? Not that I'd want to carry around a 50 lb tripod.

Extra weight would be an advantage. If you don't mind paying a
porter to carry all of the extra weight. With a light tripod, the
camera and a lens or two you're already toting the equivalent of a
bowling ball. That's enough to severely shorten most hikes, if not
have them cancelled altogether.
 >> Stay informed about: Tripod Advice Please 

On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 15:39:43 -0400, ASAAR <caught.TakeThisOut@22.com> wrote:

>On Mon, 5 Sep 2005 13:09:38 -0600, Sheldon wrote:
>
>>> I'm looking for something that I can attach a strap to and sling over my
>>> back when I go hiking so I'd like something that's relatively light weight
>>> and compact when folded.
>>> . . .
>>> As to what we'll be mounting on the tripod... The wife uses primarily an
>>> Elan 7ne with either a 28-135 IS or a 75-300 IS. I use a 20D and a 300D
>>> with a 28-135 IS or a 100-400L IS
>>
>> Call me stupid, but wouldn't weight be an advantage when supporting a
>> smaller camera? Not that I'd want to carry around a 50 lb tripod.
>
> Extra weight would be an advantage. If you don't mind paying a
>porter to carry all of the extra weight. With a light tripod, the
>camera and a lens or two you're already toting the equivalent of a
>bowling ball. That's enough to severely shorten most hikes, if not
>have them cancelled altogether.

Get married, have kids. Free porters.
And by the time they are able to carry all your gear, the gear will be
better, too!

--
Bill Funk
Replace "g" with "a"
funktionality.blogspot.com
 >> Stay informed about: Tripod Advice Please 

ASAAR <caught DeleteThis @22.com> wrote:

>On Sun, 4 Sep 2005 23:16:28 -0400, Robert R Kircher, Jr. wrote:
>
>> First I'd like to spend no more then $200.00.
>>
>> I'm looking for something that I can attach a strap to and sling over my
>> back when I go hiking so I'd like something that's relatively light weight
>> and compact when folded.
>> I'd like it to work low to the ground as well as at standing height.
>> I believe a tilt pan or ball head will be fine but I'd like to hear some
>> comparisons, advantages, disadvantages etc.
>
> The Benbo Trekker Mk II may meet your spec's.


The Benbo Trekker is nowhere near stable enough for a 300mm lens on a
35mm camera, let alone the long end of a 100-400mm zoom on a Canon
20D. That equates to the field of view of a 640mm lens on 35mm, and
the Trekker isn't remotely suitable for that.

I would recommend the Manfrotto/Bogen 055/3021 Pro, which has a
detachable center column that can be used horizontally for low shots.

The OP should also spend time learning about tripod heads. People
tend to have a strong preference for either ball heads or pan and tilt
(3-way) heads, so it is best to find which you prefer before buying.
Take your cameras and lenses to the photo store and try the available
heads with the gear you use.
 >> Stay informed about: Tripod Advice Please 

"Tony Polson" <tp.TakeThisOut@nospam.co.uk> wrote in message
news:f4roh15mnse89j9ca65jcglj78auet0mj9@4ax.com...
> ASAAR <caught.TakeThisOut@22.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 4 Sep 2005 23:16:28 -0400, Robert R Kircher, Jr. wrote:
>>
>>> First I'd like to spend no more then $200.00.
>>>
>>> I'm looking for something that I can attach a strap to and sling over my
>>> back when I go hiking so I'd like something that's relatively light
>>> weight
>>> and compact when folded.
>>> I'd like it to work low to the ground as well as at standing height.
>>> I believe a tilt pan or ball head will be fine but I'd like to hear some
>>> comparisons, advantages, disadvantages etc.
>>
>> The Benbo Trekker Mk II may meet your spec's.
>
>
> The Benbo Trekker is nowhere near stable enough for a 300mm lens on a
> 35mm camera, let alone the long end of a 100-400mm zoom on a Canon
> 20D. That equates to the field of view of a 640mm lens on 35mm, and
> the Trekker isn't remotely suitable for that.
>
> I would recommend the Manfrotto/Bogen 055/3021 Pro, which has a
> detachable center column that can be used horizontally for low shots.
>
> The OP should also spend time learning about tripod heads. People
> tend to have a strong preference for either ball heads or pan and tilt
> (3-way) heads, so it is best to find which you prefer before buying.
> Take your cameras and lenses to the photo store and try the available
> heads with the gear you use.

Thanks Tony and everyone else who answered. I'm glad some of you found my
request amusing. I wish I had more money to spend in this right now
but unfortunately I don't.

As to ball vs. pan/tilt, I've noticed that all the recommendations are for a
ball head. I've very interested in opinions as to why one would be
preferred over the other.

TIA

--

Rob
 >> Stay informed about: Tripod Advice Please 

On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 17:13:35 +0100, Tony Polson wrote:

> The Benbo Trekker is nowhere near stable enough for a 300mm lens on a
> 35mm camera, let alone the long end of a 100-400mm zoom on a Canon
> 20D. That equates to the field of view of a 640mm lens on 35mm, and
> the Trekker isn't remotely suitable for that.

It's far more than adequate, especially if the alternative is to
do without because of weight or price. Did you miss the word
"Trekker" in the name? The 3021 Pro that you prefer is a decent
tripod, but with the addition of a head you're near (for the Micro
Ball Head at $31.95) the $200 limit, or well above, as most of the
others are quite a bit more expensive, some priced several times
higher than the tripod alone. And the Trekker does weigh less.
Either one would do a good job, but as I already said, the
independent leg articulation of the Trekker makes it uniquely
suitable for ease of use in uneven terrain.
 >> Stay informed about: Tripod Advice Please 

"Robert R Kircher, Jr." <rrkircher RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote:

>Thanks Tony and everyone else who answered. I'm glad some of you found my
>request amusing. I wish I had more money to spend in this right now
>but unfortunately I don't.

Your budget is reasonable. We all have to work within a budget.

>As to ball vs. pan/tilt, I've noticed that all the recommendations are for a
>ball head. I've very interested in opinions as to why one would be
>preferred over the other.

Pan and tilt is a 2-way head, used for video. For most still
photography you need a 3-way head so you can flip the camera 90
degrees to change from landscape to portrait format.

With a 3 way head, you adjust each setting (pan, tilt, flip) one at a
time by loosening a clamp, making the adjustment and re-tightening.
With a ball head, you can adjust all three settings together at the
same time. That is basically the difference, and which one you prefer
is a very personal thing.

Some 3-way heads offer fine adjustment with a geared thumbscrew. In
my experience that is the very best type of three way head, because
there is always a danger that tightening the clamps can throw off the
setting you just made. With the thumbscrew you can make precise
adjustments very quickly. However, they are fairly expensive.

With ball heads, you get what you pay for. Cheap ball heads often go
completely floppy as you loosen the clamp. The best ball heads allow
you to make fine adjustments without fear of losing control.

Unfortunately the best ball heads (Arca, Kirk, Acratech, Wimberley)
cost more then your total budget, so you should take your cameras and
lenses with you to the store and spend a couple of hours trying the
ones that are within your budget. There is a huge variation between
makes and models - try mounting your heaviest camera/lens combination
and then try making small adjustments. With cheaper ball heads, each
individual ball head may perform very differently to others thanks to
manufacturing tolerances, so make sure that you buy the exact one you
liked, not a similar one off the shelf, one that you haven't tried.

Tripod heads to avoid include the 3-way Manfrotto 460Mg, which lacks
rigidity to the extent that it vibrates alarmingly in the wind, and
any ball head with the name Velbon on it. Velbon ball heads are made
from very soft alloy and are not sufficiently firm and stable to give
any confidence, especially when supporting expensive cameras.

Good luck!
 >> Stay informed about: Tripod Advice Please 

ASAAR <caught.DeleteThis@22.com> wrote:

>On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 17:13:35 +0100, Tony Polson wrote:
>
>> The Benbo Trekker is nowhere near stable enough for a 300mm lens on a
>> 35mm camera, let alone the long end of a 100-400mm zoom on a Canon
>> 20D. That equates to the field of view of a 640mm lens on 35mm, and
>> the Trekker isn't remotely suitable for that.
>
> It's far more than adequate, especially if the alternative is to
>do without because of weight or price. Did you miss the word
>"Trekker" in the name? The 3021 Pro that you prefer is a decent
>tripod, but with the addition of a head you're near (for the Micro
>Ball Head at $31.95) the $200 limit, or well above, as most of the
>others are quite a bit more expensive, some priced several times
>higher than the tripod alone. And the Trekker does weigh less.
>Either one would do a good job, but as I already said, the
>independent leg articulation of the Trekker makes it uniquely
>suitable for ease of use in uneven terrain.


The Trekker is superb for use with light cameras and short telephoto
lenses, and it is indeed very versatile. However, it simply isn't
stable enough for the equipment the original poster is intending to
use - not by a long way.

I like Benbo tripods. I bought my first in 1987. At various times I
owned four - a Trekker, a Trekker II, a Mark 1 and one with very short
legs which i think was a Mark 4.

The Mark 1 would be very suitable for the OP's equipment, but it is a
heavy beast and costs a lot more then the OP's budget, even without a
tripod head. It is also very bulky and is difficult to carry thanks
to the awkwardly bulky leg clamps.

The Manfrotto 3021 Pro (055 Pro) is lighter, but just as stable. It
is almost as versatile as the Benbo Mark 1 thanks to the removable
center column which can be clamped horizontally just above the
tribrach for low shooting. The legs work at four different angles
including one that is almost horizontal.

The Trekker is nowhere near as stable as the Mark 1. It has similar
overall dimensions but by comparison with the Mark 1 it is very
spindly, with lightweight legs. It is neither sufficiently stable nor
sufficiently rigid to support for a 640mm (35mm equivalent) lens.

If I still had my Trekker (I or II) I would probably restrict it to my
35mm rangefinder outfit where the maximum focal length would be 135mm.

One problem I didn't mention, which applies to any Benbo or Uni-Lok
tripod (they are similar) is that loosening the BENt BOlt suddenly
transforms a rigid tripod into a set of loosely connected components.
It is very, very easy to send an expensive camera/lens combination
crashing to the ground. Too easy.

Yes, you should always remember to hold the camera/lens firmly when
loosening the bolt. But there will always be one occasion when you
forget, or when the sudden and total lack of stability takes you
completely by surprise.

I have several friends who have used Benbo or Uni-Lok tripods at one
time or another. None of us uses Benbo now. The experience of seeing
tripod, head, camera and lens (and often the photographer) collapse to
the ground has been a major reason why. It only needs to happen once,
and it is enough to put you off Benbo for ever.
 >> Stay informed about: Tripod Advice Please 

On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 20:29:48 +0100, Tony Polson wrote:

> I have several friends who have used Benbo or Uni-Lok tripods at one
> time or another. None of us uses Benbo now. The experience of seeing
> tripod, head, camera and lens (and often the photographer) collapse to
> the ground has been a major reason why. It only needs to happen once,
> and it is enough to put you off Benbo for ever.

I suppose the theory that a child that sticks a finger in a flame
will never repeat that mistake is correct only because they're
forever put off from using anything that burns with a flame?

Thanks for the additional information and I'll carefully examine
other makes, including Manfrotto before getting my next tripod And
like the OP, I also want one both stable and portable. But
assertions such as "nowhere near as stable" and "spindly legs" are
probably over exaggerations. Even if the Manfrotto surpasses the
Benbow in these areas, more objective data is needed. As Jeremy
pointed out, even the Manfrotto model you recommended isn't (in his
opinion) sufficient for the 100 - 400L IS lens. But it may be more
than adequate for the OP's purposes, as might the Benbow. I should
point out though since the OP also wants a compact folded tripod
that the Manfrotto 3021 Pro collapses to only 25.6", vs. the 33" of
the Benbo Trekker,
 >> Stay informed about: Tripod Advice Please 

With tripods there are three critical variables...

Rigidity
Weight
Price

Low weight + low price = low rigidity
Low weight + rigidity = high price
High weight + rigidity = lowish price

If you want rigidity + lowish cost then look at Manfrotto etc. (high-ish
weight)

If you want rigidity + low weight look at Gitzo (high price)

Second hand is a good way to go... much more bang for your buck.

Guy


>ASAAR wrote:
> On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 20:29:48 +0100, Tony Polson wrote:
>
>> I have several friends who have used Benbo or Uni-Lok tripods at one
>> time or another. None of us uses Benbo now. The experience of
>> seeing tripod, head, camera and lens (and often the photographer)
>> collapse to the ground has been a major reason why. It only needs
>> to happen once, and it is enough to put you off Benbo for ever.
>
> I suppose the theory that a child that sticks a finger in a flame
> will never repeat that mistake is correct only because they're
> forever put off from using anything that burns with a flame?
>
> Thanks for the additional information and I'll carefully examine
> other makes, including Manfrotto before getting my next tripod And
> like the OP, I also want one both stable and portable. But
> assertions such as "nowhere near as stable" and "spindly legs" are
> probably over exaggerations. Even if the Manfrotto surpasses the
> Benbow in these areas, more objective data is needed. As Jeremy
> pointed out, even the Manfrotto model you recommended isn't (in his
> opinion) sufficient for the 100 - 400L IS lens. But it may be more
> than adequate for the OP's purposes, as might the Benbow. I should
> point out though since the OP also wants a compact folded tripod
> that the Manfrotto 3021 Pro collapses to only 25.6", vs. the 33" of
> the Benbo Trekker,
 >> Stay informed about: Tripod Advice Please 

Bigguy wrote:
> With tripods there are three critical variables...
>
> Rigidity
> Weight
> Price
>
> Low weight + low price = low rigidity
> Low weight + rigidity = high price
> High weight + rigidity = lowish price
>
> If you want rigidity + lowish cost then look at Manfrotto etc. (high-ish
> weight)
>
> If you want rigidity + low weight look at Gitzo (high price)
>
> Second hand is a good way to go... much more bang for your buck.
>
> Guy


Speaking of Gitzo, anybody seen an example of their Ba$alt models?


--
jer
email reply - I am not a 'ten'
 >> Stay informed about: Tripod Advice Please